160 files changed, 17 insertions, 25552 deletions

diff --git a/.gitattributes b/.gitattributes
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..d7b82bc
--- /dev/null
+++ b/.gitattributes
@@ -0,0 +1,4 @@
+*.txt text eol=lf
+*.htm text eol=lf
+*.html text eol=lf
+*.md text eol=lf
diff --git a/LICENSE.txt b/LICENSE.txt
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..6312041
--- /dev/null
+++ b/LICENSE.txt
@@ -0,0 +1,11 @@
+This eBook, including all associated images, markup, improvements,
+metadata, and any other content or labor, has been confirmed to be
+in the PUBLIC DOMAIN IN THE UNITED STATES.
+
+Procedures for determining public domain status are described in
+the "Copyright How-To" at https://www.gutenberg.org.
+
+No investigation has been made concerning possible copyrights in
+jurisdictions other than the United States. Anyone seeking to utilize
+this eBook outside of the United States should confirm copyright
+status under the laws that apply to them.
diff --git a/README.md b/README.md
new file mode 100644
index 0000000..f61b0b4
--- /dev/null
+++ b/README.md
@@ -0,0 +1,2 @@
+Project Gutenberg (https://www.gutenberg.org) public repository for
+eBook #69619 (https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/69619)
diff --git a/old/69619-0.txt b/old/69619-0.txt
deleted file mode 100644
index 270a96e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-0.txt
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,10621 +0,0 @@
-The Project Gutenberg eBook of Character of Renaissance Architecture,
-by Charles Herbert Moore
-
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
-www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you
-will have to check the laws of the country where you are located before
-using this eBook.
-
-Title: Character of Renaissance Architecture
-
-Author: Charles Herbert Moore
-
-Release Date: December 23, 2022 [eBook #69619]
-
-Language: English
-
-Produced by: Tim Lindell, Albert László, Karin Spence and the Online
-             Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This
-             file was produced from images generously made available by
-             The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)
-
-*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHARACTER OF RENAISSANCE
-ARCHITECTURE ***
-
-
-
-
-
-                             CHARACTER OF
-
-                       RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE
-
-  [Illustration]
-
-
-
-
-                             CHARACTER OF
-
-                       RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE
-
-
-                                  BY
-
-                         CHARLES HERBERT MOORE
-
-                AUTHOR OF “DEVELOPMENT AND CHARACTER OF
-                         GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE”
-
-
-          _WITH TWELVE PLATES IN PHOTOGRAVURE AND ONE HUNDRED
-              AND THIRTY-NINE ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT_
-
-
-                               New York
-                         THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
-                     LONDON: MACMILLAN & CO., LTD.
-
-                                 1905
-
-                         _All rights reserved_
-
-
-
-
-                           COPYRIGHT, 1905,
-                       BY THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.
-
-           Set up and electrotyped. Published October, 1905.
-
-
-                             Norwood Press
-               J. S. Cushing & Co.--Berwick & Smith Co.
-                        Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.
-
-
-
-
-                            TO MY DAUGHTER
-
-                               E. H. M.
-
-
-
-
-                                PREFACE
-
-
-In the following attempt to set forth the true character of the
-architecture of the Renaissance I have endeavoured to reduce
-mere descriptions of buildings to a minimum, and to give graphic
-illustrations enough to make the discussions clear. The illustrations
-in the text are mainly from my own drawings, for the most part from
-photographs: but in a few cases I have reproduced woodcuts from the
-works of old writers, indicating, in each case, the source from which
-the cut is derived. The photogravure plates are from photographs by
-Alinari, Moscioni, Naya, Wilson, and Valentine. The right to reproduce
-and publish them has been obtained by purchase.
-
-With the best intentions and the greatest care, it is almost inevitable
-that a writer on such a subject should make some mistakes, and I cannot
-affirm that no inexact statements will be found in these pages, but I
-believe that no fundamental errors occur.
-
-I am again indebted to my almost life-long friend, Professor Charles
-Eliot Norton, for valuable criticism, and painstaking revision; but
-Professor Norton is not responsible for anything that I have said. I am
-indebted, also, to my publishers for their courteous compliance with my
-wishes as to the style and manufacture of the book, and to Mrs. Grace
-Walden for the care and thoroughness with which she has prepared the
-index.
-
-  CAMBRIDGE, MASS.,
-    October, 1905.
-
-
-
-
-                               CONTENTS
-
-
-                               CHAPTER I
-
-                             INTRODUCTION
-
-                                                                   PAGE
-    Character of the Fine Arts of the Renaissance not hitherto
-    correctly set forth--The Fine Arts always an expression of
-    the conditions and beliefs of a people--Mediæval Christianity
-    as a source of artistic inspiration--Conditions that gave
-    character to the Fine Arts of the Middle Ages--Artistic
-    productions of the Renaissance qualified by the immoral
-    tendencies of the time--Luxury and extravagance of Florence
-    at the close of the fifteenth century--The Fine Arts made to
-    minister to sensuous pleasure--Best classic art unknown in
-    the Renaissance time--Mixed influences actuating the artist
-    of the Renaissance--The Renaissance and the Middle Ages
-    compared as to development of the individual--Lack of aptitude
-    for construction among the architects of the Renaissance--The
-    Italian genius for painting--The painter’s habits of design
-    shown in the Renaissance use of the orders--Classification of
-    architectural styles--Painting the best art of the
-    Renaissance--Yet Italian painting of the sixteenth century
-    is not all of exemplary character--Best art of the Renaissance
-    founded on the earlier Christian art--A retrospective movement
-    not a vital force in artistic development                         1
-
-
-                              CHAPTER II
-
-                         THE DOME OF FLORENCE
-
-    Exhibits a wide departure from older dome constructions--Sources
-    of the architect’s inspiration--General character of earlier
-    domes--Remarkable construction of the dome of the Florentine
-    Baptistery--It probably supplied the chief inspiration to both
-    Arnolfo and Brunelleschi--Brunelleschi’s departures from the
-    Baptistery scheme--His structural system and his own account of
-    it--No Gothic character possible in a dome--The dome of Florence
-    a daring innovation--Its general dimensions--Brunelleschi’s
-    great ability as a constructor--His achievement of the work
-    without the usual centring--Consideration of the dome as a work
-    of art--The inherent weakness of its form--This not appreciated
-    by the early Italian writers--Precautions taken for its
-    stability--Signs of disintegration--Uncertainty as to its
-    duration--Opinions of the early Italian writers as to its
-    security--Structural integrity essential to good
-    architecture--No classic character in Brunelleschi’s
-    dome--Inferior character of the classic details of the lantern   10
-
-
-                              CHAPTER III
-
-           CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE
-
-    The Pazzi chapel--Gothic character of its central
-    vault--Architectural treatment of the interior--Impropriety of
-    a classic order in such a building--Awkward result of an
-    entablature passing through an arch impost--Incongruities of
-    design and construction in the portico--Use of stucco--Sources
-    from which the façade may have been derived--Other church
-    architecture by Brunelleschi--San Lorenzo and Santo
-    Spirito--Use of the entablature block in these
-    churches--Survival of mediæval features and adjustments--Church
-    architecture of Leon Batista Alberti--The façade of Santa Maria
-    Novella--The façade of San Francesco of Rimini--The church of
-    Sant’ Andrea of Mantua--Return to Roman models in the
-    structural forms of this building--Sant’ Andrea foreshadows St.
-    Peter’s at Rome--Its west front an adaptation of the Roman
-    triumphal arch scheme--Such fronts peculiar to Alberti--The
-    designers of the Renaissance worked unconsciously on a
-    foundation of mediæval ideas                                     26
-
-
-                              CHAPTER IV
-
-                        THE DOME OF ST. PETER’S
-
-    Bramante in Rome--His early training--Character of the
-    Tempietto of San Pietro in Montorio--Its likeness to a Roman
-    temple of Vesta--Bramante’s project for St. Peter’s--Uncertainty
-    as to his scheme for the whole building--His design for the
-    great dome--Sources of his inspiration--Comparison of his dome
-    with that of the Pantheon--Structural merits and defects--The
-    architect’s probable intention to use a great order for the
-    interior of the church--Michael Angelo’s appointment as
-    architect--His scheme for the great dome--Its statical
-    defects--Its supposed Gothic character--Comparison with the
-    dome of Salamanca--Its illogical buttress system--Its ruptures
-    and the alarm which they occasioned--Commission appointed to
-    examine the fabric and report on its condition--Poleni’s
-    opinion and his binding chains--The grandiose character of the
-    dome--In following Brunelleschi, Michael Angelo went farther in
-    a wrong direction--Such a scheme cannot be safely carried out
-    without resort to extraneous means of support--The proper mode
-    of constructing a dome settled by the ancient Roman and the
-    Byzantine builders--Condition of the dome ignored by recent
-    writers--The ruptures attributed by the early Italian writers
-    to carelessness on the part of Bramante--The beauty of the
-    dome exaggerated--Its violation of structural propriety
-    incompatible with the highest architectural beauty               44
-
-
-                               CHAPTER V
-
-             CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMAN RENAISSANCE
-
-    Other parts of the church of St. Peter--Beauty of its
-    plan--This plan could not be carried out with a good result in
-    classic Roman details--Awkward makeshifts to which Michael
-    Angelo was led--The colossal order of the interior--The
-    magnitude of the structural parts of the church unavoidable--The
-    real character of the building contradicted by the external
-    order--Makeshifts which this order necessitated--The real
-    character of St. Peter’s has been rarely analyzed--Its grandeur
-    due to its magnitude and to what it derives from the design of
-    Bramante--Its incongruity and extravagance--Use of stucco in
-    the ornamentation of the interior--Extravagant laudation of the
-    building by the earlier Italian writers--Antonio San Gallo’s
-    project for St. Peter’s--Earlier examples of Roman Renaissance
-    church architecture--Sant’ Agostino a mediæval building with
-    Renaissance details--Its façade--Santa Maria della Consolazione
-    at Todi--Its attribution to Bramante--Irrational treatment of
-    its interior--Merit of the exterior in its larger features--San
-    Biagio at Montepulciano--The order of the interior--The
-    Renaissance use of a pilaster coupled with a column on the corner
-    of a building--Roman treatment of the corner--Instance of the use
-    of a corner pilaster described by Serlio--The exterior of San
-    Biagio--Its campanile and lantern--The evolution of this form of
-    tower--System of Santissima Annunziatta at Arezzo--Vignola, and
-    Milizia’s remarks on him--His book of architecture--His advocacy
-    of ancient Roman art and his disregard in practice of its
-    principles--His design for Sant’ Andrea di Ponte Molle--Its
-    derivation from the Pantheon--Vignola’s design for the church of
-    Santa Maria degli Angeli at Assisi--His design for the Gesù at
-    Rome--Aberrations of design in this work--The façade by Della
-    Porta--Palladio, and his great influence on modern art--His
-    book of architecture--His design for the church of San Giorgio
-    Maggiore at Venice--The Redentore and San Francesco della
-    Vigna                                                            66
-
-
-                              CHAPTER VI
-
-           PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE
-
-    The neo-classic ideas most extensively carried out in palatial
-    houses--Domestic architecture of the Middle Ages in Italy--The
-    Palazzo Riccardi--Its mediæval features--Its general form--Its
-    court arcades--General character of the interior--Vasari’s
-    remarks on the Riccardi--The Palazzo Pitti--The Strozzino--The
-    Strozzi--The Pazzi--The Quaratesi--The Guardagni and its
-    reasonable character--The Rucellai--Introduction of orders in
-    the façade of the Rucellai--The architect Alberti--His
-    archæological and literary tastes--Alberti’s initiative in the
-    use of the orders not immediately followed--Further neo-classic
-    innovations introduced by Baccio d’Agnolo--Milizia’s remarks on
-    these innovations--Increase in the spirit of display in
-    domestic architecture--Decline of Florentine ascendency by the
-    beginning of the sixteenth century--Artistic activities
-    transferred to Rome--Erection of sumptuous palatial houses in
-    Rome                                                            102
-
-
-                              CHAPTER VII
-
-             PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMAN RENAISSANCE
-
-    The Cancellaria--Its attribution to Bramante--Exhibits features
-    in further conformity with the Roman antique--Its pilasters in
-    pairs--Its projecting bays--Its portals--Arcades of its
-    court--The Palazzo Massimi--The functional order of its
-    portico--Treatment of the upper façade--The Palazzo
-    Farnese--Application of orders and pediments to the
-    windows--The broken entablatures of these windows--An ancient
-    example of similar treatment--Orders of the court--Awkward
-    result in the angles--Rhythmical scheme of the cloister of
-    Santa Maria della Pace--Lack of reason for this scheme--The
-    architect Sansovino--His design for the Library of St. Mark
-    at Venice--Treatment of the angles of the Doric
-    order--Free-standing column in the order of the upper
-    story--Sansovino’s design for the Loggetta of the
-    Campanile--His design for the Palazzo Cornaro--Sanmichele--His
-    design for the Porta del Palio at Verona--His design for the
-    Palazzo Canossa--The Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria--The Palazzo
-    Bevilacqua--Its singular aberrations of design--Vignola’s
-    design for the Palazzo Caprarola--Influence of its circular
-    court on De l’Orme and Inigo Jones--The civic and domestic
-    architecture of Palladio--The Portico of Vicenza--Its derivation
-    from the town hall of Padua and from the Library of St.
-    Mark--Syrian instance of the free-standing column in connection
-    with the arch--Palladio’s own estimate of the merits of this
-    design--Use of poor materials by Palladio--His versatility in
-    meaningless composition--His palace fronts--Palladio a
-    grammatical formalist--The art of Scamozzi--His use of an
-    entablature broken by an arch                                   112
-
-
-                             CHAPTER VIII
-
-         CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN NORTH ITALY
-
-    Various other phases of the architecture of the
-    Renaissance--The façade of San Bernardino of Perugia--The
-    façade of the Certosa of Pavia--Its combination of local
-    mediæval and distorted neo-classic features--The church and
-    sacristy of San Satiro--Evidence that both were designed by
-    Bramante--Santa Maria delle Grazie--Its dome--Architectural
-    treatment of its exterior--Its attribution to Bramante--The
-    chapel of St. Peter Martyr attributed to Michelozzi--The
-    Monastero Maggiore--The cathedral of Como--Evidence of
-    Bramante’s hand in the east end--Its details of mediæval
-    Lombard character mixed with neo-classic elements--The south
-    portal--The windows of the nave--Architecture of the Venetian
-    Renaissance--The church of San Zaccaria--Peculiar column of its
-    interior--The church of San Salvatore--Its piers--Attic of the
-    interior--The church of Santa Maria dei Miracoli--Architectural
-    treatment of its exterior--Excellence of its mechanical
-    execution--The façade of Santa Maria Formosa                    135
-
-
-                              CHAPTER IX
-
-         PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN NORTH ITALY
-
-    Marked local character of the palace architecture of
-    Venice--Façade of east side of court of the Ducal
-    Palace--Irregularities of its composition--North side of the
-    same court--The Giant’s stair--Façade of the Scuola di San
-    Marco--Composition of the main portal--Notable refinements of
-    execution in this portal--Façade of the Scuola di San
-    Rocco--Unique architectural character of the palaces of the
-    Grand Canal--Those of the mediæval period alone have the
-    distinctive Venetian character--Neo-classic details used
-    sparingly in the early Renaissance palaces of Venice--The
-    Palazzo Corner-Spinelli--Disposition and character of its
-    windows--Questionable propriety of the panelling of its
-    pilasters--The beauty of the façade independent of its
-    neo-classic details--The Palazzo Contarini--The varied
-    proportions of its pilasters--The Palazzo Vendramini--The
-    distinctive Venetian character altered by the application of
-    complete orders--This character largely lost in the palaces
-    of the Roman Renaissance--The Palazzo del Consiglio of
-    Verona--Its mediæval scheme--The Palazzo Comunale of
-    Brescia--The Ospedale Maggiore of Milan--Its lack of distinctive
-    character--The later palace architecture of north Italy         154
-
-
-                               CHAPTER X
-
-               ARCHITECTURAL CARVING OF THE RENAISSANCE
-
-    Little architectural character in the sculpture of the
-    Renaissance--Close imitation of Roman models--Great delicacy
-    of design and execution in much carving of the
-    Renaissance--Lack of vital beauty in this carving--Comparison
-    with Greek conventional ornamentation--Exceptional beauty of
-    foliation in the reliefs of the Lombardi--Lifeless character
-    of the scroll leafage of Filarete--Artificial convolutions of
-    Renaissance ornamental designs--Artificial and inorganic
-    composition in the works of Benedetto da Maiano--Representation
-    of artificial objects in Renaissance ornamentation--Disordered
-    composition in the borders of the Ghiberti gates--Comparison of
-    Greek leafage with that of the Renaissance--The grotesque in
-    Renaissance ornamentation                                       167
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XI
-
-            ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY RENAISSANCE IN FRANCE
-
-    The Renaissance had not the same meaning north of the Alps that
-    it had in Italy--A fundamental change in French architecture
-    effected by the Renaissance influence--Survival of the Gothic
-    style--Conditions which favoured the change from Mediæval to
-    Renaissance forms--The transformation of the feudal castle into
-    the Renaissance château--Factitious character of the French
-    Renaissance château--Peculiar mixture of pseudo-Gothic and
-    neo-classic details in early French Renaissance
-    architecture--The château of Azay le Rideau--Survival in this
-    building of the larger mediæval forms--Its ornamental portal
-    based on that of Châteaudun--Analysis of this portal--A
-    different manifestation of Flamboyant ideas in the portal of
-    Chenonceaux--The château of La Rochefoucauld--The eastern wing
-    of Blois--The staircase tower of the court--The garden side of
-    the eastern wing--The château of Chambord--Its florid upper
-    part--Fontainebleau--Écouen--Bullant’s portico--Exceptional
-    character of the château of St. Germain en Laye--Further
-    transformation of French architecture in the later sixteenth
-    century                                                         179
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XII
-
-                         LESCOT AND DE L’ORME
-
-    French architecture further changed by Lescot and De l’Orme,
-    yet still without elimination of native
-    characteristics--Lescot’s design for the Fountain of the
-    Nymphs--The sculptures by Goujon--Possible derivation of the
-    design from a drawing by Serlio--Lescot’s design for the
-    Louvre--Capricious treatment of neo-classic details in this
-    design--The traditional logic of French design ignored by
-    Lescot--Excessive ornamentation of the Louvre--The
-    architectural work of De l’Orme--Paucity of extant examples--His
-    design for the palace of the Tuileries--De l’Orme’s column--His
-    claim that this column was his own invention--Earlier instances
-    of the same--A conscious effort to be original gave rise to
-    most of the artistic aberrations of the Renaissance--Noble
-    architecture not a personal, but a communal and national,
-    product--Analysis of the façade of the Tuileries--De l’Orme’s
-    other architectural aberrations--The château of Charleval--The
-    freakish character of this design--Discussion of Viollet le
-    Duc’s comments on it--The church architecture of the French
-    Renaissance--The church of St. Eustache--Its unmodified Gothic
-    structural system--Its neo-classic details--St. Étienne du
-    Mont--SS. Gervais and Protais at Gisors--The apse of St. Pierre
-    of Caen--The Portal of St. Maclou at Pontoise                   194
-
-
-                             CHAPTER XIII
-
-              ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND
-
-                         I. _Elizabethan Art_
-
-    Derivation of the Elizabethan domestic architecture from the
-    native mediæval art--The reasonable character of the early
-    Elizabethan house in its integrity--The ostentatious character
-    and pseudo-classicism of the great English houses of the
-    sixteenth century--Use of flimsy materials in ornamental
-    details--General excellence of construction in the main body of
-    the building--Employment of foreign craftsmen in
-    ornamentation--Kirby Hall--Its lack of native English
-    character--Peculiar aberrations in the use of structural forms
-    without structural functions--Fantastic ornamentation of the
-    gables--Longford Castle--Its resemblance to Chambord--Manifold
-    forms of capricious design in Lower Walterstone Hall, Cranborne
-    Manor-House, Tixall, Stanway, and other buildings--Fantastic
-    composition of the gate at Caius College, Cambridge--Aberrations
-    of design in Wollaton Hall--Ungrammatical and tasteless misuse
-    of distorted classic elements in Elizabethan architecture
-    largely due to Flemish and Dutch workmen--No professional
-    architects in Elizabethan times--The classic orders foreign to
-    the genius and the needs of the English people                  216
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XIV
-
-              ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND
-
-                         II. _Jones and Wren_
-
-    The architecture of England in the seventeenth century
-    properly called Renaissance only by extension of the term--Jones
-    and Wren the only architects of importance at this
-    time--Walpole’s extravagant estimate of Inigo Jones--The early
-    career of Jones--His design for the Banqueting Hall of the
-    palace of Whitehall--Its lack of English character--Analysis of
-    the design--Kent’s exaggerated estimate of Jones’s genius--The
-    scheme for the whole palace--Jones’s design for the façade of
-    old St. Paul’s--Thoughtless laudation of the art of Inigo
-    Jones--Sir Christopher Wren--Artistic notions of the English
-    dilettanti in the seventeenth century--Wren’s architectural
-    training--His visit to France--The Sheldonian Theatre--Wren’s
-    project for repairs of old St. Paul’s--His commission to
-    rebuild--His first scheme for the new edifice--Sources of
-    inspiration for the great dome--Rejection of the first
-    scheme--The so-called warrant design--The existing edifice--The
-    structural system of the dome--Character of the interior of the
-    church--The masking of the buttress system--Wren’s city
-    churches                                                        226
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XV
-
-                              CONCLUSION
-
-    The architecture of the Renaissance not based on consistent
-    principles--Incorrectness of the notion that the Renaissance
-    aberrations in the use of the orders was but a free adaptation
-    of the old elements to new conditions--The ancient
-    architectural forms do not lend themselves to new
-    conditions--Adaptation involves creative changes which wholly
-    transform original elements--Influence of the writings of
-    Vignola and Palladio in recent times--Modern recognition of the
-    arbitrary character of the rules of the formalists--Genuine
-    works of art not produced from rules--A juster sense of the real
-    character of the architecture of the Renaissance shown by a few
-    recent writers                                                  247
-
-
-
-
-                       ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT
-
-
-                                                                   PAGE
-
-      1. Hagia Theotokos. From Dehio and Bezold                      11
-      2. Aachen. From Dehio and Bezold                               11
-      3. Dome of Pisa                                                12
-      4. Dome of Arnolfo                                             13
-      5. Section of the Baptistery of Florence                       14
-      6. Dissection of the vault of the Baptistery                   15
-      7. System of the dome of Florence                              17
-      8. Section of the dome of Florence. From Sgrilli               18
-      9. Part plan of the dome of Florence. From Sgrilli             18
-     10. Plan of the chapel of the Pazzi                             26
-     11. Section of the vault of the Pazzi chapel                    27
-     12. Interior of the Pazzi chapel                                28
-     13. Façade of the Pazzi chapel                                  30
-     14. Badia of Fiesole                                            32
-     15. Impost of San Lorenzo                                       33
-     16. Crossing pier of San Lorenzo                                34
-     17. Façade of Santa Maria Novella                               36
-     18. Plan of Sant’ Andrea, Mantua                                39
-     19. Façade of Sant’ Andrea, Mantua                              40
-     20. Arch of Septimius Severus                                   41
-     21. Temple of Vesta, Tivoli. From Serlio                        45
-     22. San Pietro in Montorio. From Serlio                         46
-     23. Bramante’s dome for St. Peter’s. From Serlio                48
-     24. Section of the Pantheon. From Fontana                       50
-     25. Plan of Bramante’s dome. From Serlio                        51
-     26. Michael Angelo’s model for the dome of St. Peter’s          54
-     27. Diagrams of vault construction                              56
-     28. Interior of dome of Salamanca                               57
-     29. Diagrams of vault construction                              58
-     30. Dome of St. Peter’s. From the Report of the Mathematicians  61
-     31. Plan of St. Peter’s. From Fontana                           67
-     32. Section of aisle of St. Peter’s. From Fontana and
-           Letarouilly                                               69
-     33. Pier of Sant’ Agostino                                      72
-     34. Façade of Sant’ Agostino                                    73
-     35. Exterior of Todi                                            75
-     36. Interior of Todi                                            76
-     37. Plan of San Biagio                                          77
-     38. Interior of San Biagio                                      78
-     39. Arcade. From Serlio                                         79
-     40. Exterior of San Biagio                                      80
-     41. Tower of Santo Spirito                                      82
-     42. Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo                              83
-     43. Vignola’s entablature. From Vignola                         85
-     44. Half plan of Sant’ Andrea. From Vignola                     86
-     45. Section of Sant’ Andrea. From Vignola                       87
-     46. Sant’ Andrea                                                88
-     47. Order of Santa Maria degli Angeli                           90
-     48. Plan of the Gesù. From Vignola                              91
-     49. Façade of the Gesù. From Vignola                            93
-     50. Façade of the Gesù, Della Porta. From Vignola               94
-     51. Pediment of Baalbek                                         95
-     52. Tablet from Vignola                                         96
-     53. Orders of San Giorgio                                       98
-     54. Façade of San Giorgio                                       99
-     55. The Redentore                                              100
-     56. Window-head of the Mozzi, Florence                         103
-     57. Window-head of Perugia                                     103
-     58. Court of the Riccardi                                      105
-     59. Façade of the Rucellai                                     108
-     60. Window of the Bartolini                                    110
-     61. Façade of the Cancelleria                                  113
-     62. Portico of the Massini                                     115
-     63. Window of the Farnese                                      117
-     64. Portal. From Serlio                                        118
-     65. Part of façade of the Library of St. Mark                  120
-     66. Corner of the Parthenon                                    121
-     67. Roman corner. From Serlio                                  122
-     68. Corner of Library of St. Mark                              123
-     69. Window of Palazzo Cornaro                                  124
-     70. Part of façade of the Porta del Palio                      125
-     71. Detail of Palazzo Bevilacqua                               127
-     72. Part of the Portico of Vicenza. From Palladio              129
-     73. Plan of supports, Portico of Vicenza. From Palladio        130
-     74. Arch of St. Simeon Stylites                                131
-     75. Loggia Bernarda, Vicenza                                   132
-     76. Window of Palazzo Branzo                                   133
-     77. Niche of the Basilica of Shakka                            134
-     78. Window of the Certosa of Pavia                             137
-     79. Sacristy of San Satiro                                     139
-     80. Santa Maria delle Grazie                                   141
-     81. East end of Como                                           143
-     82. Portal of Como                                             145
-     83. Porch of San Zeno                                          146
-     84. Portal of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro                        147
-     85. Window of nave of Como                                     148
-     86. Column of San Zaccaria                                     150
-     87. Plan of pier of San Salvatore                              151
-     88. Plan of pier of St. Mark’s                                 151
-     89. Façade of Santa Maria dei Miracoli                         152
-     90. Part of window of court of the Ducal Palace                155
-     91. Portal of the Scuola di San Marco.                         157
-     92. Part of the façade of the Scuola di San Rocco              158
-     93. Window of the Palazzo Contarini                            162
-     94. One bay of basement of the Ospedale Maggiore               164
-     95. Window of the Palazzo Martinengo                           165
-     96. Roman Arabesque relief                                     168
-     97. Renaissance Arabesque relief                               169
-     98. Greek coin, magnified                                      170
-     99. Arabesque by Filarete                                      171
-    100. Console of pulpit in Santa Croce                           172
-    101. Leafage from the Ghiberti gates                            173
-    102. Pilaster in the National Museum, Florence                  174
-    103. Greek leafage                                              175
-    104. Roman leafage                                              175
-    105. Leafage of Brunelleschi                                    176
-    106. Leafage of Brescia                                         176
-    107. Leafage of San Gallo                                       177
-    108. Relief of the Scala d’Oro                                  177
-    109. Grotesque mask                                             177
-    110. Cornice of Blois                                           181
-    111. Azay le Rideau                                             182
-    112. Portal of Azay le Rideau                                   183
-    113. Portal of Châteaudun                                       185
-    114. Part of the portal of Chenonceaux                          187
-    115. Part of the court façade of Blois                          189
-    116. Du Cerceau’s print of the Fountain of the Nymphs           195
-    117. Roman arch. From Serlio                                    197
-    118. Part of Du Cerceau’s print of Lescot’s Louvre              198
-    119. Plan of the Tuileries. From Du Cerceau                     201
-    120. Elevation of the Tuileries. From Du Cerceau                202
-    121. De l’Orme’s column. From De l’Orme                         203
-    122. De l’Orme’s doorway. From De l’Orme                        204
-    123. Doorway. From Serlio                                       205
-    124. Doorway of De l’Orme. From De l’Orme                       208
-    125. Façade of Charleval. From Du Cerceau                       210
-    126. Interior façade of Charleval. From Du Cerceau              212
-    127. Chimney of Burghley House                                  217
-    128. North side of court, Kirby Hall. From Gotch                219
-    129. Gable of Kirby Hall. From Gotch                            220
-    130. Window of Walterstone Hall. From Gotch                     222
-    131. Impost of Cranborne Manor-House. From Gotch                222
-    132. Portal of Wollaton Hall. From Gotch                        224
-    133. Basement of Whitehall. From Kent                           230
-    134. Front of old St. Paul’s. From Kent                         231
-    135. Section of Wren’s rejected scheme for St. Paul’s. From
-           Bloomfield                                               236
-    136. Section of the dome of St. Paul’s. From Longman            240
-    137. Vaulting of St. Paul’s                                     242
-    138. Crossing pier and impost of St. Paul’s                     244
-    139. Half section of the nave of St. Paul’s. From Longman       245
-
-
-
-
-                            LIST OF PLATES
-
-
-                                                                   PAGE
-
-       I. The Dome of Florence                                       16
-      II. Interior of Sant’ Andrea, Mantua                           38
-     III. The Dome of St. Peter’s                                    63
-      IV. The Riccardi Palace                                       103
-       V. San Bernardino, Perugia                                   135
-      VI. Ducal Palace, Venice                                      154
-     VII. Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, Venice                           160
-    VIII. Palazzo del Consiglio, Verona                             163
-      IX. Relief of the Lombardi                                    169
-       X. The Banqueting Hall, Whitehall                            228
-      XI. The Dome of St. Paul’s                                    239
-     XII. Interior of St. Paul’s                                    242
-
-
-
-
-                               CHAPTER I
-
-                             INTRODUCTION
-
-
-The great change in ideas and ideals which, after the remarkable
-intellectual and artistic life of the Middle Ages, was manifested
-in the so-called Renaissance, is not always correctly conceived or
-fairly stated; and the character and merits of the Fine Arts of the
-Renaissance, as compared with those of mediæval times, have not, I
-think, been often set forth in an entirely true light. Of the merits
-of the best Italian art of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries there
-can be no question, but the belief that this art is altogether superior
-to that of the Middle Ages will not bear examination in the light of
-impartial comparison.
-
-The Fine Arts are always an expression of the historical antecedents,
-the intellectual, moral, and material conditions, and the religious
-beliefs of the peoples and epochs to which they belong. They derive
-their whole character from these antecedents and conditions, and cannot
-be rightly understood or appreciated without reference to them. Thus a
-brief consideration of these conditions in the Middle Ages on the one
-hand, and in the period of the Renaissance on the other, may help us
-to understand the nature of the above-mentioned change, and to gain a
-more discriminating appreciation of the real character of the artistic
-productions of the latter epoch.
-
-During the Middle Ages ideas and imagination were governed by a
-religious faith which, though in many ways mistaken and misguided, was
-for the most part firm and unquestioning. Mediæval Christianity was
-a living power with the masses, and an inspiration to men of genius.
-The mediæval Christian mythology was well fitted to stimulate artistic
-invention, and the ideals which it maintained were full of beauty. It
-is true, indeed, that human conduct was not wholly governed by this
-faith; but the precepts of the Christian religion, as defined and
-interpreted by the Roman church, were generally held as of supreme
-authority, and to them most people acknowledged that they ought to
-conform. This Christianity gave the chief motive power for the best
-activities of the time, and the social relations of men were, in
-theory at least, based upon its teachings. The history of the Middle
-Ages abounds in evidence that popular habits of life were in many
-ways exemplary. Villani tells us that the citizens of Florence lived
-in sobriety and frugality, that they had loyal hearts, were faithful
-to one another, and that they required the same fidelity in the
-administration of public affairs.[1] Florence in the fourteenth century
-was alive with industry, and the open country around the city was
-prosperous with agriculture. Of such conditions her Fine Arts were an
-outgrowth and expression.
-
-But the mediæval faith began at length to weaken. The church, as an
-ecclesiastical establishment, had grown corrupt and oppressive, so
-that men of spirit were moved to reject its dogmas and to resist its
-intellectual tyranny. Independent thought began to widen the range
-of ideas, and the reading of ancient authors gave a fresh incentive
-to philosophical speculation, and awakened a spirit of scientific
-investigation, as well as a taste for ancient poetry and mythology.
-The desire for intellectual freedom, and the thirst for new knowledge,
-which were thus stimulated in the fifteenth century constitute the good
-side of the Renaissance movement, the side which has hitherto been
-most emphasized by writers, and to which the modern world is indebted
-for a strong stimulus in the direction of some of its most fruitful
-activities.
-
-But there were other conditions that must not be ignored if we would
-rightly understand the spirit of the Renaissance, by which the ideals
-and aims of this brilliant epoch were materially qualified and
-weakened. Influences were at the same time at work that were not in
-harmony with what was best. The humanist learning bred a Neo-pagan
-spirit which favoured and strengthened a growing indifference to moral
-principles and religious beliefs. The strong feeling of opposition
-to the church was in part due to this. In fact, the Renaissance was
-by no means an entirely noble movement in the interest of spiritual
-and intellectual emancipation, or an unqualified advance in ideas and
-attainments beyond those of the Middle Ages. With all of its abuses
-the church still stood for moral order and spiritual aspirations.
-The revolt against it was in part a revolt against both religion and
-morals. The animating spirit of the movement contained much that was
-unchristian and destructive of high ideals.
-
-It is true that noble, and even pious, feelings survived in the minds
-of many men, especially during the early Renaissance time. Generous
-acts were still common among the merchant princes of Florence. In
-the early part of the fifteenth century the lives of Florentine
-patricians continued to be simple, and many of them recognized the
-responsibilities which their wealth imposed.[2] But toward the close
-of that century a different spirit prevailed. Luxury and extravagance
-took the place of plainer living, the pursuit of pleasure without
-regard to justice or morality engrossed the minds of men, and vice and
-crime flourished in high places until the prophetic denunciations of
-Savonarola were called down upon the wickedness and vanity of the upper
-classes.
-
-Into the service of this luxurious and immoral life the Fine Arts were
-now called, and of the motives which animate such life they become
-largely an expression. The mediæval endeavour to embody the beauty
-of Christian ideals in works of art gave place to the desire to make
-the Fine Arts minister to sensuous pleasure and to mundane pride. In
-the height of its splendour the vicious life of Florence, the chief
-centre of literary and artistic productions, was appalling. Men now
-not only sought to escape from all forms of ecclesiastical and ascetic
-restraint; they went further, and freely proclaimed the sufficiency of
-intellectual, æsthetic, and sensuous enjoyments to satisfy the whole of
-man’s nature. They mistook the illusive pleasures of self-indulgence
-for the true joys of life. In abandoning himself to mundane pursuits
-and gratifications, the man of the Renaissance fancied that he got the
-utmost good out of this life, and took little thought of any other.
-
-In a corresponding spirit the architect now set himself to the task
-of producing a luxurious and specious style of palatial architecture,
-drawing his inspiration from the monuments of imperial Rome, and the
-sculptor and the painter sought to portray physical beauty as the
-primary and sufficient end of their art. Their conceptions of this
-beauty were in part drawn from the remains of the art of classic
-antiquity that were then accessible. But the ancient works of art known
-at that time were not those of the best periods of ancient artistic
-culture. They were, for the most part, works of the decadent Greek
-schools as represented in Roman copies. Many of these have, indeed, a
-great deal of sensuous charm, and display much technical refinement;
-but they are wanting in the nobler qualities that characterize the
-finest arts of Greece. From the Roman copies of fauns, Apollos, and
-Venuses that had been preserved in Italy, it was impossible that high
-inspiration and true guidance should be drawn.
-
-The Fine Arts of the Renaissance are in part a reflection of this
-decadent art of classic antiquity, and in part an expression of
-something quite different which was peculiar to the Italian genius at
-this time. To the man of the Renaissance the classic inspiration was
-necessarily different from what it had been to the man of antiquity.
-To the ancient Greek and Roman the pagan ideals had been real, and
-their inspiration was genuine; but to the Italian of the fifteenth
-century these ideals could not have the same meaning, or supply a true
-incentive. After the intervening centuries of Christian thought and
-experience it was impossible for men to approach the ancient themes in
-the spirit of the ancients. Thus the Neo-pagan Art of the Renaissance
-is not wholly spontaneous and sincere. It contains elements that are
-foreign to the pagan spirit, and not compatible with it. The art of
-the Renaissance is, in fact, an embodiment of heterogeneous ideas and
-conflicting aims.
-
-Much has been said of the importance of the Renaissance movement in
-developing the individual man, and it is true that one of the most
-marked characteristics of the artistic productions of this time, as
-contrasted with those of the Middle Ages, is a distinctly individual,
-or personal, stamp. This is especially marked in architecture. Whereas
-before, and during, the Middle Ages in particular, architecture had
-been a communal art, the joint product of companies of men working
-together on traditional lines, with common aims and aspirations, it
-was now become very largely an expression of the personal tastes of
-individuals working independently of each other. The architects of the
-Renaissance were scholars and artists, newly acquainted with the Roman
-antique, animated with desire to appropriate what they apprehended of
-its principles, and at the same time ambitious to achieve personal
-fame. A building of the Renaissance is thus always the product of the
-fancy of a particular designer, as a building of the Middle Ages is
-not. But architecture of the highest excellence can hardly be produced
-by an individual working independently. The noblest architecture of
-the past has always been an evolution of a people, the joint product
-of many minds, and the natural expression of many conditions. The
-importance of the opportunity for the development of the individual
-opened by the Renaissance has been exaggerated, and the conditions
-conducive to such development which had existed before have been too
-much overlooked. We are apt to forget that the mediæval communal life
-stimulated the faculties of the individual in many noble ways, and we
-do not always enough consider that individuality may be exercised in
-harmful as well as in salutary directions. The individuality that had
-been developed by the institutions and the intellectual life of the
-Middle Ages was vastly different from that which was produced by the
-influences of the Renaissance, and it was in many ways more excellent.
-The individuality of the Middle Ages was obedient to the demands
-of corporate and coöperative life, while that of the Renaissance
-was independent and capricious. Conditions favourable to individual
-development had arisen early in the Middle Ages in connection with
-organized monastic life. The cultivation of literature, philosophy, and
-the Fine Arts in the monasteries had given considerable range to the
-exercise of individual powers,[3] though in limited directions, and
-the rise of the great communal organizations tended still further to
-stimulate an admirable individual development. But the individual of
-the Middle Ages felt himself a part of an organized body from which he
-derived moral support, and with which he felt that he must coöperate.
-It was the strong communal spirit, giving unity of purpose to the
-varied faculties of individuals, that made possible the production of
-the noble arts of the Middle Ages; and it is as the expression of this
-unity of purpose coördinating the fine artistic energies of the time,
-that these arts are preëminently notable. In so far as the development
-of the individual in the period of the Renaissance differed from that
-of the Middle Ages, it did so mainly in favouring individual caprice
-at the expense of harmonious collective effort. The capricious and
-irresponsible individuality of the time, together with the confused
-complexity of ideas and aims, gave rise to most of that which is open
-to criticism in the Fine Arts of the Renaissance.
-
-Nearly all of the architects of this epoch were sculptors and painters.
-Few of them had ever had a thorough training in architectural design
-and construction, such as had been general with the members of the
-great mediæval building corporations; and hardly any of them were
-endowed with a natural aptitude for logical construction. The artistic
-genius of the Italian people has, in fact, always been essentially a
-genius for painting, and the painter’s habits of mind are constantly
-manifested in the Italian architecture of all epochs. This is
-especially noticeable in their use of the Orders, which is rarely
-based on any structural need, but is governed only by the fancy of the
-designer in seeking to produce a pleasant surface composition. Columns
-and pilasters, answering to nothing in the real structural scheme of
-a building, are disposed with no thought save for agreeable lines and
-rhythmical spacings. Thus they soon came to be used in many novel ways.
-They were set in pairs, stretched through several stories, embraced
-by pediments, and varied in countless fanciful ways. In this way the
-architecture of the Renaissance even more than that of imperial Rome,
-became a mere surface architecture differing fundamentally from all of
-the great architectural systems of ancient times, and of the Middle
-Ages. This is a consideration of capital importance of which too little
-account has been taken. The unqualified and short-sighted laudation of
-this architecture by the sophisticated writers of the sixteenth century
-has been too readily accepted, and a more discriminating judgment
-cannot fail to alter materially the esteem in which it has been held.
-
-In surveying the history of architectural design with attention to
-its fundamental principles we shall find that there have thus far
-existed in Europe but three entirely consistent and distinctive styles;
-namely, the Greek, the Byzantine, and the Gothic. All other varieties
-of architecture may be broadly divided into two classes, the one
-consisting of buildings of transitional character, and comprising all
-organic and progressive types of Romanesque, and the other composed
-of styles made up of mixed elements not in process of organic fusion.
-The first architecture of the second class is that of imperial Rome
-with its off-shoots, the Christian Roman and the numerous subsequent
-forms of the basilican type, and the second is the architecture of
-the Renaissance. When, after studying the architecture of Greece, we
-come to examine that of Rome, we are at once struck by the incongruous
-mixture of elements which it exhibits; and although we may be impressed
-by its grandeur, we are unable to give it our unqualified admiration.
-In Byzantine art we find Greek, Roman, and Oriental elements, logically
-modified in adaptation to new uses, and fused into a radically new
-and distinctive style of entire consistency and great nobility.[4] In
-the transitional art of western Europe we see the creative genius of
-Northern races gradually evolving the Gothic style, in which elements
-derived from the older systems are wholly recreated and assimilated
-in a wonderful manner, and when we turn from the beauty, and the
-structural logic, of the consummate Gothic Art[5] to the architecture
-of the Renaissance, a similar contrast is again apparent.
-
-In one branch of art, however, the best achievements of the Renaissance
-period command our unqualified admiration; namely, the art of painting.
-As before remarked, the Italian genius appears to have been primarily
-a genius for painting, and in this field the conditions all conspired
-to produce results that were without precedent for excellence, and that
-still remain unrivalled. Yet here, too, we shall need to discriminate.
-Italian painting of the sixteenth century presents a variety of phases
-that are by no means of equal merit, and the noblest forms of it
-show the least of the essentially Renaissance spirit. The Christian
-painters of the fourteenth century had laid a foundation on which their
-successors could build, and this gave a character to much of the art
-of the Early Renaissance which the dominant influences of the time
-itself could not give.[6] But the spirit of the sixteenth century was
-unfavourable to the highest ideals and the most exemplary practice,
-and, save for the works of a few exceptional men, there were no high
-achievements in painting after about 1520, except in Venice, where more
-than elsewhere natural and wholesome conditions had been maintained.
-
-Among the many influences that were stirring the artistic minds of the
-Renaissance there were two of chief importance, the Neo-pagan revival,
-and the true intellectual life of the people which was independent of
-the retrospective movement, and had been growing up through the Middle
-Ages. The most sterling qualities of the artistic products of the
-period are due to this intellectual life, and Florentine and Venetian
-painting, the two most admirable phases of the supreme art of Italy,
-are the finest expression of this. In other words, it was not the
-revival of interest in ancient thought and feeling, nor the influence
-of classic models, so much as the ripened development of the native
-Italian genius itself, that produced what is most excellent in the Fine
-Arts of the Renaissance. A consciously retrospective motive can hardly
-be a vital force in artistic development, and the direct attempt, in so
-far as such attempt was made, to shape the arts after classic models
-was an unmixed evil. The native traditions and innate tendencies of
-the Italian people were enough of themselves to give a strong classic
-quality to their art. In architecture what of classic feeling was
-natural to them needed only in the fifteenth century to be freed from
-the elements which had been misappropriated from the mediæval art of
-the North to allow it true expression in forms adapted to their needs.
-In normal human progress each successive stage of development creates
-its own appropriate forms; but peoples, like individuals, sometimes
-pass through periods of partial aberration, and while genius may
-still find scope enough, as in the Renaissance, to produce much that
-is admirable, the noblest forms of art are not an outgrowth of such
-conditions.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER II
-
-                         THE DOME OF FLORENCE
-
-
-The great dome of the cathedral of Florence marks the beginning of
-the Renaissance movement in architecture, though in its general form
-and structural character it has no likeness to ancient domes, and has
-few details drawn from the Roman classic source. It exhibits a wide
-departure from any previous forms of dome construction, and is an
-expression of the creative genius of a remarkably gifted man of great
-independence, working under inspiration drawn in part from ancient
-sources, in part from mediæval building traditions, and in still larger
-part from the new motives that were beginning to animate the artistic
-ambitions of the fifteenth century.
-
-The dome of the Pantheon and the dome of St. Sophia, the two greatest
-domes of former times, had been built on principles that did not admit
-of much external effect, and the numerous smaller ones of the Middle
-Ages, in western Europe, had been equally inconspicuous externally, if
-not entirely hidden from view, in consequence of rising from within
-a drum which reached far above the springing level. In most cases
-the whole construction was covered with a timber roof, so that from
-the outside the existence of a dome would not be suspected. This was
-a secure mode of construction, and one that for stability could not
-be improved; but it did not give the imposing external effect that
-Brunelleschi sought.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 1.--Hagia Theotokos.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 2.--Aachen.]
-
-Attempts to make the dome a conspicuous external feature had indeed
-been made before Brunelleschi’s time. The later Byzantine builders
-had raised small domes on drums resting on pendentives, and rising
-above the main roof of the building, but they had still carried these
-drums up somewhat above the springing of the dome, and had further
-fortified them with buttresses built over the supporting piers, as in
-Hagia Theotokos of Constantinople (Fig. 1). Thus in such designs the
-dome still remains partly hidden from view, the drum being the most
-conspicuous part of the composition. Among the early domes of western
-Europe is that of Aachen (Fig. 2). In this case the drum is carried
-up far beyond the springing, and is covered with a timber roof which
-completely hides the dome from external view. The same adjustment of
-the dome to its drum is, with minor variations of form (the dome being
-in some cases polygonal on plan, as at Aachen, and in some cases
-hemispherical) found in most other mediæval domes, and the timber roof
-over all is likewise common. But in a few cases a different scheme
-was adopted in which the dome is set on the top of the drum instead
-of within it. In such cases, however, the drum is low, not rising
-above the ridge of the timber roof of the nave, and the dome, being
-unprovided with abutment, is insecure except in so far as it may have a
-form that is self-sustaining as to thrusts (which removes it from the
-true dome shape, or may be secured by some kind of binding chain.[7]
-An example of such a dome occurs on a small scale over the crossing
-of the cathedral of Pisa (Fig. 3). This dome is not hemispherical,
-its sides rise steeply, and with such moderate curvature as to render
-it measurably self-sustaining as to thrust.[8] Another instance of a
-similar scheme, and on a larger scale, is that which appears to have
-formed a part of Arnolfo’s design for the cathedral of Florence. This
-dome was never executed, and our knowledge of it is derived from the
-well-known fresco in the Spanish chapel of Santa Maria Novella.[9]
-Here both the dome and the drum are octagonal in conformity with the
-plan of the part of the building which it covers. The outline (Fig. 4)
-is slightly pointed, but the sides are nevertheless so much curved in
-elevation that a structure of this form would not stand without strong
-cinctures. It is, however, not unlikely that the fresco painter has
-given it a more bulging shape than Arnolfo intended. But domes of this
-character were exceptional in the Middle Ages. The builders of that
-epoch confined their practice for the most part to the safer form in
-which the vault is made to spring from within the drum, and is thus
-necessarily, either in part or entirely, hidden from external view.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 3.--Dome of Pisa.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 4.--Dome of Arnolfo.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 5.--Section of Baptistery.]
-
-A remarkable dome of this latter class is that of the Baptistery of
-Florence, which, though the building has undergone various superficial
-transformations since its original construction at an early, though
-uncertain, epoch, has come down to us in essential integrity. This
-building on plan is in the form of an octagon, and the dome is of
-corresponding shape, and sprung from a level far below the top of the
-enclosing walls. In elevation the dome (Fig. 5) has a pointed outline,
-and is covered by a pyramidal roof of stone the upper part of which
-is incorporated with the dome itself, while beneath the lower portion
-is a void between the dome and the enclosing wall. The structure has
-an internal anatomy that is both ingenious and admirable. The span is
-about 25 metres, and the wall at the level of the springing is over 3
-metres thick. Above this the wall (_a_, Fig. 5) rises to a height
-of about 8 metres. The dome at its base is about 1 metre thick, and
-its extrados rises vertically to a height of about 2½ metres, leaving
-an open space between it and the wall of the enclosing drum of 1.26
-metres in width. Above this vertical portion the extrados is stepped
-by several courses of masonry, somewhat after the manner of the dome
-of the Pantheon. From the reëntrant angles of the octagon (_a_,
-Fig. 6) solid abutments are built up against the salient angles of
-the vault, and, between these, two secondary abutments (_b_) are
-carried up against each of its sides. These buttresses are in the
-form of cross walls dividing the space on each side of the octagon
-into three compartments, and over each of these compartments a barrel
-vault, on an axis inclined in conformity with the slope of the roof,
-is turned. The upper ends of these vaults intersect on the surface of
-the dome, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. The voids between the crowns
-of these vaults and the buttresses are filled in with masonry so as
-to form the sloping planes of the roof below where it is incorporated
-with the dome, and on these are laid the slabs that form the external
-covering. With such an effective buttress system as is here provided
-it is hard to find a reason for the chain of timbers which is inserted
-at the haunch of the dome. The constructive principle embodied in this
-monument is altogether sound,[10] and its architectural character is in
-keeping with the construction.[11]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 6.--Dissection of the vault of the
-  Baptistery.]
-
-Such were the models of mediæval dome building accessible to
-Brunelleschi when he was forming his great scheme for the covering of
-the octagon of the cathedral of Florence. But the idea of a low dome,
-or a hidden dome, could not meet the wishes of the Florentines of the
-fifteenth century. Their civic pride and large resources called for an
-imposing design which should make the dome a dominant architectural
-feature of their city. It was decided that it should be raised upon the
-top of a high drum, and the task to which Brunelleschi applied himself
-was to fulfil this requirement.
-
-Of the vast and soaring dome which he succeeded in erecting many
-opinions have been held, but all beholders are impressed with its
-grandeur. It has been common to speak as if the master had been chiefly
-inspired by the ancient monuments of Rome, and had taken the Pantheon
-as his principal model.[12] But although he came to his task fresh
-from the study of the ancient Roman monuments, and undoubtedly had
-the Pantheon much in mind, yet the dome which he produced has little
-in common with that great achievement of imperial Roman constructive
-skill. In general it follows, though with great improvements as to
-outline and proportions, the scheme of Arnolfo as illustrated in
-the fresco of the Spanish Chapel; but the model to which it most
-closely conforms, notwithstanding the obvious and essential points
-of difference, is that of the Baptistery just described. There can,
-I think, be little question that this monument supplied the chief
-inspiration and guidance to both Arnolfo and Brunelleschi. A comparison
-will show that the dome of the cathedral, with its supporting drum,
-is, in fact, little other than a reproduction of the Baptistery of San
-Giovanni in a modified form, and enlarged proportions, raised over the
-crossing.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate I
-
-  DOME OF BRUNELLESCHI
-
-  Florence]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 7.--System of the dome.]
-
-But while taking the scheme of the Baptistery as the basis of his own
-scheme, Brunelleschi was obliged to make some daring changes in order
-to give his design the external character which he sought. This great
-dome (Plate I), like that of the Baptistery, is octagonal in plan and
-pointed in elevation. It rises from the top of the octagonal drum, and
-consists of two nearly concentric shells of masonry, with an interval
-between them. Eight vast ribs of stone rise from the angles of the drum
-and converge on the curb of an opening at the crown. These ribs
-extend in depth through the whole thickness of the double vault and
-unite its two shells. Between each pair of these great ribs two lesser
-ones are inserted within the interval that divides the two shells, and
-nine arches of masonry, lying in planes normal to the curve, are sprung
-between the great ribs and pass through the lesser ones on each side of
-the polygon (Figs. 7 and 8), while a chain of heavy timbers (_a_,
-Fig. 8, and Fig. 9), in twenty-four sections clamped together at the
-ends with plates of iron, binds the whole system between the haunch and
-the springing. So much of the internal structure can be seen in the
-monument itself, but further details are described in Brunelleschi’s
-own account of what he intended to do.[13] From this we learn that
-the base of the dome, which was to be built solid to the height of 5¼
-braccia, was to consist of six courses of long blocks of hard stone
-(_macigno_) clamped with tinned iron and upon this were to be
-chains of iron.[14] Mention is also made of a chain of iron over the
-timber chain (“in su dette quercie una catena di ferro”); but no
-such chain is visible in the monument, and if it exists, it must be
-embedded in the masonry of the vault, like the chains at the base.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 8.--Section.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 9.--Part Plan.]
-
-It will thus be seen that while Brunelleschi’s scheme is essentially
-different from that of the Baptistery, its structural system is little
-more than an ingenious modification of it. The parts of the one answer
-to those of the other with singular completeness. The attic wall and
-pyramidal roof of San Giovanni are transformed into the external shell
-of the cathedral dome, the angle buttresses of the older monument
-become the great angle ribs of Brunelleschi’s vault. The intermediate
-abutments of the Baptistery are changed into the intermediate ribs of
-the great dome, and the inclined barrel vaults of the Baptistery scheme
-are represented in the cathedral dome by the arches sprung between the
-great angle ribs.
-
-It has been thought by some writers that the rib system of the dome
-of Florence gives the structure a somewhat Gothic character, and it
-is sometimes called a Gothic dome.[15] But there can be no such thing
-as a Gothic dome. It is impossible for a dome of any kind to have
-the character of a Gothic vault. The difference between the two is
-fundamental. A Gothic vault is a vault of concentrated thrusts, and
-it requires effective concentrated abutments. A dome is a vault of
-continuous thrust, and for sound construction it requires continuous
-abutments, as in the Pantheon. Whatever use the ribs of Brunelleschi’s
-vault may have, they do not, and cannot, perform the function of the
-ribs in Gothic vaulting. Their use is to strengthen the angles of the
-dome, and to augment its power of resistance to the weight of the
-lantern which crowns it. They do not support the vault as the ribs
-of a Gothic vault do. Being composed of very deep voussoirs, they
-have more strength to withstand thrusts, as well as to bear crushing
-weight, than the enclosing shells have, and thus to some extent they
-may hold these shells in. But it appears plain that the architect did
-not feel confidence in their power to perform this function without
-reënforcement by a chain, or chains, which, in his own words, “bind
-the ribs and hold the vault in” (che leghino i detti sproni e cingano
-la volta dentro). However this may be, the ribs of a dome cannot
-have any function like that of the ribs in Gothic vaulting. The
-shell of a Gothic vault is not held in by the ribs, nor is it in any
-way incorporated with them. Both shell and ribs are held in by the
-buttresses. This point will be considered further in connection with
-the dome of St. Peter’s.
-
-The whole scheme of this dome was a daring innovation of one man, and
-in this it differs from former architectural innovations, which were
-the comparatively slow outcome of corporate endeavour, progressive
-changes being so gradual that no wide or sudden departures from
-habitual modes of building were made at any one time, or by any one
-person.
-
-It was a prodigious undertaking. The span of the dome is nearly
-a hundred and forty feet, the springing level is a hundred and
-seventy-five feet above the pavement, and the height of the dome
-itself, exclusive of the lantern, is about a hundred and twenty feet.
-Such a project might well appall the most courageous of building
-committees, and we need not wonder that the Board of Works drew back in
-dismay when it was first laid before them.[16]
-
-The successful accomplishment of the work, and the stability which it
-has thus far maintained, show that the architect was a constructor
-of great ability,[17] and the fact that he managed to raise the vast
-fabric without the use of the ponderous and costly kind of centring
-that had been commonly employed in vaulting, makes the achievement
-still more remarkable. The precise manner in which he did this is not
-clear, but of the fact there appears no question.[18]
-
-The dome of Florence is indeed a remarkable piece of construction,
-and it is no less remarkable as a work of art. In beauty of outline
-it has not, I think, been approached by any of the later elevated
-domes of which it is the parent. Yet with all of its mechanical and
-artistic merit, the scheme is fundamentally false in principle, since
-it involves a departure from sound methods of dome construction. A
-bulging thin shell of masonry on a large scale cannot be made secure
-without abutment, much less can such a shell sustain the weight of a
-heavy stone structure like the lantern of this monument, without resort
-to the extraneous means of binding chains. A builder having proper
-regard for true principles of construction in stone masonry would not
-undertake such a work. For although it may be possible to give the
-dome a shape that will be measurably self-sustaining as to thrusts, as
-Brunelleschi clearly strove to do,[19] it is not possible to make it
-entirely so, and therefore if deprived of abutment it must be bound
-with chains. But a structure of masonry which depends for stability
-on binding chains is one of inherent weakness, and thus of false
-character.[20]
-
-From these considerations it appears to me that Brunelleschi led
-the way in a wrong direction, notwithstanding the nobility of his
-achievement from many points of view. And in following his example
-modern designers of elevated domes have wandered still farther, as we
-shall see, from the true path of monumental art.
-
-Moreover, when we consider that a dome set within its drum is not only
-stronger, but that it is also much better for interior effect, the dome
-of the Pantheon still remaining the grandest and most impressive arched
-ceiling of its kind in the world, the unbuttressed modern domes, with
-their manifold extraneous and hidden devices for security, appear still
-less defensible.
-
-But in the architectural thought of the Renaissance little heed was
-given to structural propriety or structural expression, and the Italian
-writers, who have largely shaped our modern architectural ideas, have
-not only failed to recognize the inherent weakness of such a building
-as the dome of Florence, but have even considered the work praiseworthy
-on account of those very characteristics which make it weak. Thus
-Sgrilli lauds Brunelleschi for having had the “hardihood to raise to
-such a height the greatest cupola which until its time had ever been
-seen, upon a base without any abutments, a thing that had not before
-been done by any one.”[21] And Milizia says, “It is worthy of special
-notice that in the construction of this cupola there are no visible
-abutments.”[22]
-
-As to the permanent stability of this dome various opinions have been
-held by the experts among the older writers.[23] Its form is, as we
-have seen, as favourable to stability as it would be possible to make
-that of any vault which could be properly called a dome. It appears
-to the inexperienced eye as stable as a crest of the Apennines. Every
-precaution as to material and careful workmanship seems to have been
-taken to make it secure. The wall of the drum on which it rests is five
-metres in thickness, and the solid base of the dome itself is built, if
-the architect’s scheme was carried out as he had stated it before the
-Board of Works, of large blocks of hard stone, thoroughly bonded and
-clamped with iron. The lower system is sufficiently strong, and appears
-to rest on a solid foundation. But nevertheless there are ruptures in
-various parts of the structure which have caused apprehensions of
-danger,[24] and its future duration must be regarded as uncertain.
-The writers who have maintained that it is secure have argued on the
-assumption that the parts of a dome all tend toward the centre.[25]
-These writers overlook the fact that the force of gravity above,
-especially when the dome is heavily weighed by a lantern, neutralizes
-the inward tendency of the lower parts and causes a tendency in those
-parts to movement in the opposite direction. This neutralizing force is
-lessened by giving the dome a pointed form, as Brunelleschi has done,
-but, as before remarked (p. 22), it can hardly be overcome entirely so
-long as any real dome shape is preserved.[26]
-
-It may be thought that the object which Brunelleschi had in view,
-of producing a vast dome that should be an imposing feature of the
-cathedral externally, justifies the unsound method of construction
-to which he resorted (the only method by which the effect that he
-sought could be attained). But structural integrity is, I think,
-so fundamental a prerequisite of good architecture that in so far
-as this gifted Florentine was obliged to ignore sound principles
-of construction in order to attain an end not compatible with such
-principles, the result cannot be properly considered as an entirely
-noble and exemplary work of art, however much beauty and impressiveness
-it may have.
-
-The example set by Brunelleschi was, in point of construction, a
-pernicious one, and bore fruit of a still more objectionable character
-in the works of other gifted men less scrupulous than he, and less
-endowed with mechanical ingenuity, as we shall see farther on.
-
-Though there is nothing whatever of classic Roman character in this
-great dome, the lantern which crowns it, built from Brunelleschi’s
-design after his death, has classic details curiously mingled with
-mediæval forms. Its eight piers are adorned with fluted Corinthian
-pilasters surmounted by an entablature, while the jambs of the openings
-have engaged columns carrying arches beneath the entablature in ancient
-Roman fashion. From the entablature rises a low spire with finials set
-about its base, and flying buttresses, adorned with classic details,
-are set against the piers. None of the classic details have any true
-classic character, nor has the ornamental carving, with which the
-composition is enriched, any particular excellence either of design or
-execution. But these details are invisible from the ground, and in its
-general form and proportions the lantern makes an admirable crowning
-feature of this finest of Renaissance domes.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER III
-
-           CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE
-
-
-No other work by Brunelleschi is comparable in merit to the great dome
-of the cathedral. None of his other opportunities were such as to call
-forth his best powers, which appear to have required great magnitude
-to bring them into full play. In his other works the influence of his
-Roman studies is more manifest, and his own genius is less apparent. In
-these other works he revives the use of the orders, and employs them
-in modes which for incongruity surpass anything that imperial Roman
-taste had devised.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 10.--Plan of the chapel of the
-  Pazzi.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 11.--Section of vault of the Pazzi
-  chapel.]
-
-The first of these works is the small chapel of the Pazzi in the
-cloister of Santa Croce. It is a simple rectangle on plan (Fig. 10),
-with a square sanctuary on the short axis, and a porch across the
-front. The central area is covered with a circular vault which by
-most writers is called a dome, but it is not a dome; it is a vault
-of essentially Gothic form, like two early Gothic apse vaults joined
-together (Fig. 11). It rests on pendentives, and is enclosed by a
-cylindrical drum, which forms an effective, though not a logical,
-abutment to its thrusts, and is covered with a low-pitched roof of
-masonry having a slightly curved outline. Whether this external
-covering is connected with the vaulting in any way above where it
-parts from the crowns of the vault cells it is impossible to discover,
-because there is no way of access to the open space between the two
-parts. Through a small opening in the outer shell, near its crown, the
-hand may be thrust into the void, but nothing can be reached. It is a
-curious form of double vault, and differs fundamentally from the great
-double dome of the cathedral. The scheme as a whole is structurally
-inconsistent; for while the inner vault has the concentrated thrusts
-of Gothic construction, these thrusts are met by the enclosing drum,
-and not by the isolated abutments that the vault logically calls for.
-The sanctuary has a small hemispherical dome on pendentives, and the
-portico is covered with a barrel vault bisected by another small dome
-on pendentives.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 12.--Interior of the Pazzi chapel.]
-
-The architectural treatment of the interior (Fig. 12) exhibits a
-wide departure from that of any previous type of design. The form of
-the building is mediæval, being, with exception of the central vault,
-essentially Byzantine,[27] but the details are classic Roman, and
-consist of a shallow order of fluted Corinthian pilasters with the
-entablature at the level of the vaulting imposts. In such a building,
-however, and used in this way, a classic order is out of place; for an
-order is a structural system designed for structural use, but the order
-here has no more structural function than if it were merely painted on
-the walls. It is used, of course, with a purely ornamental motive, but
-as ornament it is inappropriate. A proper ornamental treatment of such
-an interior would be either by marble incrusting, mosaic, or fresco,
-or else by pilaster strips, or colonnettes, and blind arches, which
-would break the monotony of the broad wall surfaces without suggesting
-an architectural system foreign to the character of the building. Such
-arcading would have an appropriate structural suggestiveness, if not an
-actual structural use; but a classic order is unsuitable for a building
-of mediæval character. The mediæval pilaster strip and blind arcade
-were designed for this use, and they have the further advantage that
-their proportions may be indefinitely varied to meet varied needs, as
-the proportions of the classic orders may not. But in their lack of a
-true sense of structural expression, and in their eagerness to revive
-the use of classic forms, the designers of the Renaissance failed to
-consider these things.
-
-A particularly awkward result of this improper use of an order is that
-the entablature passes through the arch imposts, making an irrational
-structural combination. This scheme was, however, extensively followed
-in the subsequent architecture of the Renaissance, but it is a
-barbarism for which no authority can, I believe, be found in ancient
-Roman design.[28] The nearest approach to it in Roman art is the
-entablature block resting on the capital (as in the great hall of the
-Baths of Caracalla), which was a blundering device of the later Roman
-architects. The complete entablature running through the impost, as
-in the chapel of the Pazzi, sometimes, indeed, occurs in the early
-churches of Rome and elsewhere,[29] as a result of unsettled conditions
-of design, while the architects were struggling with the traditional
-use of the entablature and the introduction of the arch sprung from the
-columns. But after the admirable logic of the mediæval arched systems
-of construction had been reached it appears strange that any designer
-should go back to this irrational combination.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 13.--Façade of the Pazzi chapel.]
-
-In the portico (Fig. 13) the incongruities of design are of a still
-graver nature because they involve weakness of construction. The order
-of the interior is, as we have just seen, but a simulated order, and
-has no structural function, but in the portico a real Corinthian order
-is made to carry the barrel vault and dome above mentioned, and an
-attic wall which encloses the vaulting. But a classic order was never
-intended for such use, and cannot properly perform it. Such an order
-is adapted only to the support of crushing weight, and has no power of
-resistance to the thrusts of vaulting. The weight of the attic wall
-tends, indeed, in some measure to neutralize the force of the vault
-thrust, but this is not enough to render the structure secure, and
-unless the order were effectively steadied by some extraneous means the
-attic load would constitute a source of danger, as with any disturbance
-of its equilibrium by thrust its weight would hasten the overthrow of
-the system. How it is actually maintained is not apparent. No tie rods
-are visible beneath the vault, such as are common in Italian vaulted
-structures, which are rarely buttressed in an effective manner. Ties
-or clamps may, however, be concealed within the attic, though they
-would be less effective so placed. But in whatever way the system is
-held together, it is bad architecture, because the parts have no proper
-adaptation to their functions.
-
-The ornamental treatment of the attic wall is worthy of notice. The
-surface is divided into panels by diminutive pilasters, and these
-panels are subdivided by mouldings in a manner which recalls the
-treatment of the attic of the Baptistery. The coupling of the pilasters
-was an innovation in the use of classic members, but it enabled the
-architect to avoid unpleasant proportions in these details. Single
-pilasters of the same magnitude would be too slender for the deep
-entablature over them, or to harmonize with the great Corinthian
-order below, while wider single ones would be stumpy and inelegant.
-The pair give good proportion in the total composition, while each
-pilaster is well proportioned in itself. Another noticeable point is
-the manner in which the central archivolt and the archivolts spanning
-the ends of the porch intersect the pilasters at the springing. This
-could not be avoided, because the pilasters cover the whole space on
-the entablature over the capitals of the columns, and leave no place
-for the archivolts. Thus the mediæval principle of interpenetration is
-carried over into the neo-classic design.
-
-It should be observed that the details of this attic are wrought
-in stucco, so that we have with the beginning of the Renaissance a
-revival of a common ancient Roman practice of architectural deceit.
-The great order, however, is necessarily of stone, and its general
-proportions are good, though the details are poor in design, and coarse
-in execution.[30]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 14.--Badia of Fiesole.]
-
-The façade of the Pazzi has been considered as showing noteworthy
-originality of design. But there are older buildings in the
-neighbourhood to which it bears enough likeness to suggest its
-derivation from them. The façade of the Badia of Fiesole (Fig. 14) is
-one of these. By substituting a free-standing colonnade for the blind
-arcade of this front, and breaking its entablature and attic wall with
-an arch, we should get the leading features of the Pazzi front. Sant’
-Jacopo Soprarno, with its attic surmounting an open portico having an
-arcade on Corinthian columns, is also strongly suggestive of the same
-scheme. The features that are peculiar to the Pazzi, the arch breaking
-the entablature, the barrel vault sprung from the order, and the dome
-bisecting this vault, do little credit to the architect as a consistent
-designer.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 15.--Impost of San Lorenzo.]
-
-Two more important examples of church architecture in Florence,
-which appear to be mainly by Brunelleschi, are San Lorenzo and Santo
-Spirito. What part Brunelleschi had in the design of San Lorenzo
-is not perfectly clear,[31] but the main scheme was probably his,
-though the work was not completed until after his death. In the old
-sacristy of this church, which appears to be the part that was first
-built, the interior design of the Pazzi chapel is reproduced with
-some modifications of proportions and details, including the celled
-vault on a system of ribs, resting on pendentives. The church itself
-exhibits a frank return to primitive basilican forms and methods of
-construction, though with modifications and some additions. The nave
-has a flat wooden ceiling, but the aisles are covered with domical
-vaulting on salient transverse ribs, and over the crossing is a
-hemispherical dome on pendentives. In the arcades, which are carried
-on Corinthian columns like those of the portico of the Pazzi, the
-entablature blocks of late Roman design are reproduced in the impost
-(Fig. 15). The revival of this meaningless feature shows again how
-little impression the logic of mediæval art had made on the Italian
-mind, and what lack of discrimination in their borrowings from the
-antique the designers of the Renaissance often show. Whatever features
-the Roman models displayed were looked upon as authoritative, and
-copied without question; and the frequency with which this superfluous
-detail was reproduced in the subsequent architecture of the Renaissance
-has given it wide acceptance in more recent times. Notwithstanding
-the intention of the designer to revive the ancient style, mediæval
-features are conspicuous in San Lorenzo, and something of the mediæval
-logic of structural adjustment occurs in some details. Not only is
-the dome over the crossing supported on pendentives, which, in their
-developed form, are mediæval features and thus foreign to classic Roman
-design, but the piers sustaining this dome are compound, and consist
-of members of different proportions adjusted in the organic mediæval
-manner. The members which take part in the support of the aisle arcades
-are necessarily short, while those which carry the great pendentive
-arches are lengthened to reach the higher level from which those arches
-spring. But all of these members have the form of fluted Corinthian
-pilasters (Fig. 16). Thus were classic members used in ways that are
-foreign to classic principles, and their proportions altered with as
-much disregard for the rules of Vitruvius as the mediæval builders had
-shown.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 16.--Crossing pier of San Lorenzo.]
-
-The church of Santo Spirito, built after the architect’s death, closely
-resembles San Lorenzo in its architectural character, though it is
-larger in scale. The entablature blocks occur in the arcades here
-also, but instead of a dome over the crossing as in San Lorenzo, there
-is a circular celled vault on converging ribs, like the vault of the
-Pazzi chapel. The interior is spacious and finely proportioned, but it
-presents no features that afford further illustration of the progress
-of neo-classic design.
-
-The retrospective movement was carried further by the Florentine
-scholar and architect Leon-Batista Alberti, who, says Milizia, is
-justly regarded as one of the principal restorers of the architecture
-of antiquity.[32] His chief designs in church architecture are found
-in Santa Maria Novella of Florence, in San Francesco of Rimini,
-and in Sant’Andrea of Mantua. The first two of these are mediæval
-structures in which Alberti’s work is confined to the remodelling of
-the exteriors, but the last was wholly designed by him, though the work
-was not completed within his lifetime, and the dome over the crossing
-is the work of another architect of a later time.
-
-How much Alberti did to the façade of Santa Maria Novella, the part of
-the building to which his work is confined is not very clear. Vasari
-speaks vaguely as if the whole front were by him,[33] but from a
-foot-note by Milanesi it would appear that he merely completed a part
-which had been left unfinished by an older architect, and the work
-remaining by the older architect is said to include all below the first
-cornice except the central portal, which is attributed to Alberti.
-Milizia says[34] that although it is common to attribute the whole
-façade to Alberti, it has too much Gothic character to be entirely by
-him, and that therefore a part of it may, with more probability of
-correctness, be assigned to Giovanni Bettini, an older architect; but
-he adds that the central portal is undoubtedly by Alberti.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 17.--Façade of Santa Maria Novella.]
-
-An examination of the monument itself would seem to show that the part
-below the first entablature, with exception of the great Corinthian
-columns and the central portal, is mediæval work (Fig. 17). The whole
-Corinthian order, with the angle pilasters and the pedestals on which
-the order is raised, look like neo-classic work, and are probably by
-Alberti. This order is wholly different in character from mediæval
-design, and quite foreign to the mixture of Pisan Romanesque and
-Italian Gothic features of the distinctly mediæval part with which
-it is associated. The columns of the order are, however, of mediæval
-proportions, being eleven or twelve diameters in height, and they
-are built of small stones in a common mediæval manner. But these
-proportions were necessitated by the older work to which the order
-had to be adjusted, and the small masonry of which they are composed
-makes them harmonize with the older parts. The central portal has a
-round arch on fluted Corinthian pilasters framing in a deeply recessed
-rectangular opening with a classic lintel and jamb mouldings. It is
-noticeable that the arch does not spring directly from the capitals
-of the pilasters, but that the entablature block is interposed, as
-in Brunelleschi’s arcades of San Lorenzo and Santo Spirito. Milizia,
-speaking of this feature in another work by the same architect, says:
-“In these arcades Alberti observed a rule always followed in the good
-ancient times, but since universally disregarded. The arches are
-not sprung from the columns, because this would be incorrect, but
-architraves [_sic_] are interposed. It would now be ridiculous
-to inculcate the importance of this rule, which is familiar to
-children.”[35] This, like other notions to which the Renaissance
-gave currency, is a mistake. In inserting the entablature block at
-the arch impost Alberti did not follow a rule always observed in the
-ancient times. This feature is uncommon in ancient Roman art. It was,
-as before remarked, introduced by the late Roman architects, who,
-being accustomed to the use of the entablature over the column in the
-trabeate system which they had borrowed from the Greeks, did not see,
-when they began to spring arches from columns, that the entablature had
-no longer any reason for existence. The radical nature of the change
-wrought in architecture by the introduction of the arch was never
-grasped by the imperial Roman designers. First framing the arch with an
-order, thus uniting two contradictory systems, they afterwards, when,
-as in the basilica of Maxentius, springing the arches of vaulting from
-columns, thought that the rules required them to crown these columns
-with bits of entablature.
-
-This façade appears to have been originally designed in the Pisan
-Romanesque style, with a tall, shallow blind arcade on pilaster-strips
-reaching across the ground story. But the Romanesque character was
-modified in some details, the portals having pointed arches, pointed
-arched niches sheltering tombs being ranged in the intervals between
-the pilaster-strips. How far the upper part of this façade had been
-left incomplete until Alberti took it in hand we have no means of
-knowing; but no mediæval features occur in it as it now stands, except
-the circular opening in the central compartment. Upon this front,
-then, Alberti appears to have ingrafted the great Corinthian order,
-placing a wide pilaster paired with a column on each angle, breaking
-the entablature into ressauts to cover the columns, which have nothing
-else to support, and replacing the central portal with the existing one
-in the revived classic style. The preservation of the greater part of
-the mediæval work in the ground story made it impossible to get in more
-than the four columns in the great order, and these are necessarily
-spaced in an unclassic way, with a narrow interval in the middle and
-very wide ones on either side. To the upper compartment the architect
-has given an order of pilasters surmounted by a classic pediment, and
-flanked by screen walls over the aisle compartments in the form of
-gigantic reversed consoles, apparently the first of these features
-which became common thereafter in Renaissance fronts. The pilasters
-of this order are again four in number, and are set in pairs on either
-side of the circular opening, the width of this opening making it
-impossible to space them otherwise. We thus have in the clerestory
-compartment of this façade a forced arrangement of pilasters, which may
-have led to that alternation of wide and narrow intervals that became
-very common in the subsequent architecture of the Renaissance. The
-attic over the ground story, which extends across the entire front and
-answers to nothing in the interior of the building, is presumably also
-by Alberti.
-
-The front of Santa Maria Novella is notable as the first mediæval one
-which was worked over by a Renaissance architect, and as a whole,
-notwithstanding that it is a patchwork of incongruous elements, it
-exhibits a remarkable unity of effect. The merit of Alberti’s work
-here consists in its quietness. The applied orders are in low relief,
-their details are unobtrusive, and the mellowing effect of age on the
-beautiful marble incrusting has fused the whole front into an exquisite
-colour harmony that is almost unmatched elsewhere.
-
-Very different is the west front of San Francesco of Rimini, in which
-Alberti has introduced a Roman composition without any admixture of
-mediæval elements. It is substantially a reproduction of the arch of
-Septimius Severus. The details are in higher relief here in conformity
-with the ancient model, and the ressauts of the entablature become
-correspondingly more salient. A ressaut of this kind is another
-feature of Roman art which has no justification on structural grounds,
-and to which there is nothing analogous in any reasonable style of
-architecture. To set a useless column in advance of an entablature and
-then make a ressaut to cover it, is irrational.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate II
-
-  SANT’ANDREA
-
-  Mantua]
-
-Alberti’s capital work in church architecture is Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-begun in 1472, the year of the architect’s death, in which he made
-a frank return to Roman models in the structural forms of the whole
-edifice, as well as in the ornamental details--a thing that was rarely
-done by the architects of the Renaissance. The plan (Fig. 18) is,
-however, cruciform, and the dome over the crossing is supported in
-the Byzantine manner on pendentives. The nave (Plate II) has a barrel
-vault on massive square piers connected by arches, the intervals
-between the piers forming side chapels, and the lower part of each
-pier having a small square chamber within it, so that it does not
-look as massive on the plan as it does in elevation. The east end has
-the strictly Roman form of a semicircular apse with a half-dome vault.
-The details of the interior consist of a single order of pilasters,
-on high pedestals, set on the angles of the piers, and of rich Roman
-coffering on the surfaces of the vaulting. The piers closely resemble
-those of the so-called arch of the Silversmiths in Rome, which it is
-not unlikely that Alberti had in mind in designing them, inasmuch as he
-was a devoted student of Roman architectural antiquities. This interior
-is, I think, one of the very finest that the Renaissance produced. The
-justness of its proportions, the simplicity of the structural scheme,
-and the quietness of the ornamental details are all admirable. With
-the given elements it is hard to see how a better composition could
-be made; but the incongruity between the structural and ornamental
-systems, the entirely superficial use of the order, and its unfitness
-as ornament where it has no structural meaning, are fundamental defects
-of this as of most other Renaissance designs. The scheme of St. Andrea
-foreshadows that of St. Peter’s, and was undoubtedly in the mind of
-Bramante when he was preparing his colossal project for Pope Julius II.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 18.--Sant’Andrea, Mantua.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 19.--Façade of Sant’Andrea, Mantua.]
-
-The west front of this church (Fig. 19) is again an adaptation of
-a Roman triumphal arch design. It is, in fact, as the plan (Fig.
-18) shows, a great porch set against the true front, and has no
-correspondence in its parts with those of the building itself. In
-outline it is an unbroken rectangle crowned with a pediment. A very
-shallow order of Corinthian pilasters divides it into a wide central
-bay and two narrow ones. A great arch over a smaller order opens into
-a barrel-vaulted recess, on the three sides of which the entablature
-is returned. A rectangular portal, with square jambs and a cornice,
-opens into the nave, and an arch reaching to the entablature opens into
-the lateral compartment on each side, and each of these compartments
-has a barrel vault with its axis perpendicular to that of the great
-central one. The entablature of the small order is carried across the
-front of each lateral bay, dividing it into two stages, and the great
-order rises through it, embracing both stages, and forming an early
-instance of the so-called colossal order that became common in the
-later Renaissance. The great order is raised on pedestals, and both
-pedestals and pilasters of this order are panelled, while the small
-order rests directly on the pavement and its pilasters are fluted. It
-is noticeable that the design of the central arch is almost exactly
-like that of the central portal of Santa Maria Novella in Florence,
-the smaller entablature being broken into shallow ressauts over the
-pilasters, giving the same character to the imposts. The front as a
-whole has the quiet and refined character that distinguishes this
-architect’s work in general.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 20.--Arch of Septimius Severus.]
-
-That Alberti derived all of these façades, and especially that of St.
-Andrea, from the Roman triumphal arch scheme a direct comparison will
-show; and the arch of Septimius Severus (Fig. 20) may, I think, be
-taken as the model that he had chiefly in mind. In Santa Maria Novella
-the mediæval scheme upon which he had to fit his work prevented such
-a disposition of the columns, and such general proportions as this
-model exhibits. He was obliged to make the lateral intercolumniations
-much wider than the central one, and to make the whole rectangle of the
-composition more oblong than that of the ancient monument; but in most
-other points he has followed the arch of Septimius Severus closely.
-As in the Roman design the entablature crowns the wall instead of the
-order, so that ressauts have to be formed to cover the columns. The
-insertion of the angle pilaster is a departure from the Roman scheme,
-and the placing of the stumpy pilaster of the attic over the great
-pilaster, instead of on the column, is another point of difference.
-But the general scheme of the ground story and attic will be seen to
-resemble that of the Roman design about as closely as the mediæval
-edifice on which it is ingrafted would allow. In San Francesco at
-Rimini the architect had a freer hand, and the order is treated in
-closer conformity with the ancient model as to the spacing of the
-columns and other details. The angles are treated precisely as they
-are in the arch of Septimius Severus, the pilasters being omitted,
-and the entablature at each end extending beyond the ressaut. The
-attic is omitted here, and the unfinished upper part of the façade is
-necessarily of different design.
-
-In St. Andrea at Mantua the use of pilasters instead of columns,
-and the absence of ressauts in the great order, as well as the
-substitution of a pediment for the attic, make a great difference in
-the general character of the design; and yet the triumphal arch idea
-is even more strongly marked in this case, because it is not confined
-to the mere façade but extends to the form of the whole porch. The
-great barrel-vaulted recess is an exact reproduction of the central
-passageway of the Roman arch, and so are the lesser arches which open
-out of this recess on either side.
-
-The triumphal arch idea applied to church fronts appears to be
-peculiar to Alberti. Most other architects among his contemporaries
-and immediate successors limit themselves to an application of the
-orders variously proportioned and disposed. In some cases the mediæval
-scheme of buttresses dividing the front into bays is retained, and
-this scheme is enriched with pilasters, or columns, and mouldings of
-classic profiling, as in the façade of the Duomo of Pienza by the
-Florentine architect Rossellino. In the later Renaissance façades,
-as we shall see, there is frequently no organic division of the whole
-front into bays by continuous members embracing its whole height, but
-superimposed pilasters and entablatures are variously disposed upon the
-surface without any suggestion, in the composition as a whole, of the
-triumphal arch idea (as in Vignola’s fronts, Figs. 49 and 50). But in
-the characteristic Palladian scheme an organic division is formed by
-a great order of columns reaching to the top of the nave compartment,
-and overlapping a smaller order of pilasters extending across the whole
-front as in Figure 54.
-
-The foregoing examples are enough to illustrate the character of
-Florentine church architecture, and that which was wrought elsewhere
-under Florentine influence, in the fifteenth century. These examples
-show us that the designers, while ostensibly striving to revive the
-antique forms, were in reality working more or less unconsciously on a
-foundation of mediæval ideas from which they could not free themselves.
-The inconsistencies of their work are largely due to the irreconcilable
-nature of the elements which they sought to unite, not appreciating
-the logic of mediæval art on the one hand, nor the true principles
-of the best art of antiquity on the other. The classic orders were
-entirely unsuited to the buildings to which they affixed them. They
-properly belong to a very different type of architecture which had been
-developed by the Greeks in ancient times, and the Greeks alone have
-used them with propriety. The Romans misapplied and deformed them,
-and the Italians of the Renaissance now surpassed the Romans in their
-misapplication and distortion. Many further illustrations of this will
-appear as we go on.
-
-Early in the sixteenth century this architecture began to assume
-another phase in which the mediæval elements became less conspicuous,
-though they were not eliminated, and the imperial Roman features were
-more rigorously reproduced, yet they were never used with strict
-conformity to ancient models. This phase of the art was inaugurated by
-the architect Bramante after his settlement in Rome. We shall consider
-the Roman work of Bramante, in the following chapter.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER IV
-
-                        THE DOME OF ST. PETER’S
-
-
-When in the year 1503 Pope Julius II came to the papal chair, the
-architect Bramante had recently settled in Rome. Born in Urbino, he
-had spent his early manhood in the North of Italy, where he had come
-under the influence of the Florentine architect Alberti at Mantua, and
-of the early Renaissance masters at Milan and elsewhere. Under these
-influences he had acquired a style that was peculiar to the North at
-that time. But since coming to Rome he had begun to form a new manner
-under the more direct influence of the Roman antique,[36] and he soon
-developed a style in which the ancient Roman forms were reproduced with
-stricter conformity to the ancient usage, and with smaller admixture of
-mediæval features than had before prevailed.
-
-An early work in Rome in which he exhibits this more rigorous classic
-tendency is the small building known as the Tempietto in the cloister
-of San Pietro in Montorio. It consists of a circular cella with shallow
-pilasters, surrounded by a colonnade of the Roman Doric order, and
-surmounted by a hemispherical dome on a high drum. It is thus in form
-like a Roman temple of Vesta with its dome raised out of the abutting
-drum and set upon its top without abutment. A glance at Figures 21
-and 22, a part section and part elevation of the temple of Vesta at
-Tivoli, and an elevation of the Tempietto, respectively,[37] will show
-how great a change Bramante made in the adjustment of the vault to
-the supporting drum, while it will show also the essential likeness
-in other points between the two monuments. In Figure 21 it will be
-seen that the vault is well abutted by the roof of the portico, and by
-stepped rings of masonry over the haunch, while in Figure 22 the drum
-is raised high above the encircling portico, and the vault is sprung
-from its top, and has no abutting rings. The architect appears to have
-realized that such a scheme would be unsafe on a large scale, for in
-the one which he prepared for the dome of St. Peter’s he took care, as
-we shall see, to provide strong abutment.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 21.--Temple of Vesta, Tivoli, from
-  Serlio.]
-
-The Tempietto is but a modified copy of an ancient model, and in no
-true sense an original design. The changes wrought by the copyist are
-not of a creative kind consistent with true principles of building.
-The pilasters, and the balustrade with which the order of the portico
-is crowned, are superfluous, and the work as a whole shows little
-of Bramante’s real ability as an architect. Such merit as it has is
-primarily due to the ancient model which he would have done better to
-have reproduced more exactly.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 22.--San Pietro in Montorio, from
-  Serlio.]
-
-But Bramante manifested his real powers in his project for the
-great church of St. Peter, his capital work, which, however, was
-never carried to completion. It is well known how Pope Julius II
-had conceived the idea of erecting a vast tomb for himself, and
-had employed Michael Angelo to prepare the design. We are told by
-Vasari[38] that the project submitted by this great artist so pleased
-the Pope that he determined to rebuild the church of St. Peter in order
-to make it more worthy to enshrine so magnificent a monument. Under
-Pope Nicholas V, half a century before, the grand old basilica, that
-had stood since the time of Constantine, had been partially demolished,
-and a new edifice on a larger scale begun by the Florentine architect,
-Rossellino. This work had not progressed very far when it was suspended
-on the death of this Pope, and operations had not been resumed until
-now, when Pope Julius resolved to demolish Rossellino’s beginning along
-with what remained of the old structure, and to make a fresh start with
-a still grander scheme, which was prepared by Bramante, who began the
-new work in the year 1506.
-
-There is much uncertainty as to the exact nature of Bramante’s design
-for the building as a whole. No authentic drawings embodying the
-definitive project are known to exist, and in the monument itself
-Bramante did not go far enough to show his whole intention. Even what
-he actually did cannot be wholly made out with clearness, because
-so many other hands were employed after his death. The exact form
-of his plan is uncertain, though there appears little question that
-it was to be in the form of the Greek cross with towers set in the
-external angles, and it is certain that a vast dome was to rise over
-the crossing.[39] The work, though considerably advanced, was not
-nearly completed when, in the year 1514, the master died. He appears
-to have built the great piers for the support of the dome, with their
-connecting arches and pendentives, but not to have begun the dome
-itself.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 23.--Bramante’s dome for St.
-  Peter’s, from Serlio.]
-
-The scheme was to be a colossal one, and the dome was to be its main
-feature. We may presume that Bramante naturally shared the universal
-feeling of admiration for Brunelleschi’s dome, and that he wished to
-rival its imposing character. But his ardent and intelligent study of
-the monuments of Roman antiquity had given him a better appreciation
-of their superior structural merits, and in his project for the great
-dome he had sought to adhere more closely than Brunelleschi had done to
-the ancient principles and ancient forms.
-
-In seeking guidance from the antique two monuments in particular
-appear to have appealed to him as offering appropriate suggestions,
-the Pantheon and the Basilica of Maxentius, then called the Temple
-of Peace. The first of these monuments gave the model for a mighty
-hemispherical vault securely suspended over a vast area, while the
-second offered an example of a stupendous system of piers and arches.
-In maturing his great scheme with these models before him, he conceived
-the idea of uniting their respective sublimities, and is said to have
-boasted that he would set the Pantheon upon the arches of the Temple
-of Peace. While it is probable that the majestic elevation of the
-dome of Florence haunted his imagination, and led him to feel that
-he must lift his dome high, he wished, at the same time, to give
-the design a more classic character, and a sounder structural form.
-In striving to accomplish this double purpose Bramante produced a
-scheme for an elevated dome of almost thoroughly Roman character, and
-at the same time of imposing external effect. The architect Serlio
-gives an illustration[40] (Fig. 23) of this project which is highly
-instructive.[41] A comparison of it with the scheme of the Pantheon
-shows a close likeness in essential forms and adjustments. The points
-of difference are mainly such as Bramante’s desire to make his dome
-externally conspicuous would require. In the Pantheon (Fig. 24) the
-dome springs from within the massive drum at a level far below the
-external cornice, so that the wall above the springing forms a solid
-and powerful abutment, reaching almost to the haunch of the vault.
-Above this a stepped mass of masonry, diminishing in thickness as
-it rises, is carried well over the haunch, effectively overcoming
-any tendency to yield to the force of thrust. A Corinthian order,
-surmounted by an attic, is carried around the wall of the interior,[42]
-while the wall on the outside is plain.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 24.--The Pantheon.]
-
-In Bramante’s project every essential feature of this ancient monument
-is reproduced, but with modifications which give a different aspect to
-the design as a whole, but do not constitute any such radical departure
-from the principles embodied in the Pantheon as those wrought by
-Brunelleschi in adapting the scheme of the Baptistery to that of the
-dome of the cathedral of Florence. In order to secure greater elevation
-for external effect, the architect has raised the springing level of
-the dome considerably, though he has still kept it below the top of
-the drum. The drum itself is of great thickness, and forms a strong
-continuous abutment at the springing, and the haunch of the vault is
-loaded with steps of masonry as in the Pantheon, though not quite so
-heavily. The lower half of the drum is a solid wall resting on the
-pendentives, while the upper part, which is less than half as thick
-(Fig. 25), is pierced with eight wide openings, and its inner and
-outer faces are each adorned with an order of pilasters alternating
-with free-standing columns in the intervals. The upper wall stands on
-the inner circumference of the massive lower ring, while an encircling
-order of Corinthian columns is ranged on its outer circumference, and
-gives an effect of lightness and elegance to the exterior, which,
-together with the lantern at the crown of the dome, goes far to
-disguise the real likeness of the whole to the Pantheon scheme.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 25.--Plan of Bramante’s dome, from
-  Serlio.]
-
-In these changes and additions Bramante was governed by a clear
-understanding of the exigencies of his project. He was obliged to
-raise the internal order from the place on the ground level which
-it occupies in the Pantheon, to the upper part of the drum, in order
-to provide a solid foundation resting on the pendentives; and this
-compelled him to eliminate the attic story of the Pantheon scheme. The
-most radical change was that of substituting the open colonnade for the
-solid wall on the outside of the drum. It is doubtful, I think, whether
-the drum thus lightened would have had enough strength to withstand the
-enormous thrusts of such a dome.
-
-Like the dome of the Pantheon, Bramante’s dome was to be hemispherical
-and to have an opening at its crown. Over this he was to set the
-lantern which in outline recalls that of Brunelleschi, though it is
-of lower proportions, in keeping with the less elevated form of his
-dome, and has a small hemispherical dome instead of a conical roof. The
-shape of the lantern accords well with the composition as a whole, and
-contributes much to the aspiring expression which was now demanded,
-without wholly contradicting the classical spirit that the architect
-was striving to maintain.
-
-The structural merit of this scheme lies in what it has derived from
-the forms and adjustments of the Pantheon. Its weakness consists in the
-increased elevation, lifting the dome away from its abutment to such
-an extent that it may be questioned whether it could have been made
-safe without chains. The thrusts of a hemispherical dome are vastly
-more powerful than those of a vault of pointed outline, like the dome
-of Florence, but if properly abutted, as in the Pantheon,[43] it is
-perfectly safe, and makes a better ceiling than a pointed vault. In
-reducing the efficiency of his abutment by raising the springing of the
-dome so high, the architect ought to have diminished the force of its
-thrust in a corresponding degree by giving it a pointed form. This
-would have made it more safe, but it would have been inconsistent with
-the classic Roman models to which he was striving to conform.
-
-As for Bramante’s intended architectural treatment of the rest of
-the building we have, as before remarked, no precise information. It
-appears, however, most probable that he meant to cover the arms of the
-cross with barrel vaulting on massive square piers and arches, with a
-single order of pilasters such as Alberti had used in St. Andrea at
-Mantua, and such as Michael Angelo actually employed, though in a way
-peculiar to himself, and probably unlike that in which Bramante would
-have done it. For Bramante would, I think, have followed Alberti’s
-example in raising the order on pedestals--the great scale of St.
-Peter’s especially calling for such treatment. Bramante would have
-realized that a single order large enough to rest directly on the
-pavement and allow the entablature to pass over the crowns of the
-arches of the great arcades, would dwarf the apparent scale of the
-whole interior, as Michael Angelo’s order actually does. But whatever
-his intention was as to these details, Bramante died before they could
-be carried out, and we are left in the dark as to what the church as a
-whole would have been had he lived to complete it.
-
-To the work of his numerous successors prior to the appointment of
-Michael Angelo, we need give no attention because their labours did
-not materially affect the final result. Their work was largely on
-paper only, and the building as it now exists is substantially Michael
-Angelo’s design, based on that of Bramante, but with extensive, and
-damaging, additions by subsequent architects.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 26.--The model.]
-
-Michael Angelo at the time of his appointment as architect, in the year
-1546, was seventy-two years of age. He professed great respect for the
-original scheme of Bramante, yet he radically changed the form and
-adjustment of its main feature, the dome. In conformity with Bramante’s
-project, he made the drum massive at the base and thinner above, but in
-place of Bramante’s external colonnade surmounted by a solid ring of
-masonry, forming a continuous abutment at the springing of the vault,
-he substituted a series of sixteen isolated buttresses, and raised the
-dome so high above them that they do not meet its thrusts at all. The
-drum is carried up above the buttresses so as to form an attic over
-the order with which the buttresses are ornamented, and from the top of
-this attic the dome is sprung. The stepped circles of abutting masonry
-at the haunch are omitted, and instead of one solid vault shell, such
-as Bramante intended, Michael Angelo’s project provided for a variation
-of Brunelleschi’s double vault, and was to include (as the model,
-Fig. 26, shows) three separate shells.[44] The inner shell was to be
-hemispherical (Michael Angelo thus showing that he appreciated the
-superior character of the dome of the Pantheon and that of Bramante’s
-scheme to the dome of Brunelleschi as to internal effect), while the
-other two were to be pointed, with diverging surfaces. Following
-Brunelleschi, he introduced a system of enormous ribs rising over the
-buttresses of the drum, and converging on the opening at the crown of
-the vault. These ribs unite the outermost two shells, extending through
-the thickness of both, and support the lantern.
-
-Of this hazardous scheme only the drum was completed when Michael
-Angelo died. But the existing dome, which was carried out by his
-immediate successors, is substantially his design, though the innermost
-shell of the model was omitted in execution, and the vault was thus
-made double instead of three-fold (Fig. 30). This dome does not,
-however, divide into two shells from near the springing, but is carried
-up in one solid mass almost to the level of the haunch. Michael Angelo
-may have thought that this would strengthen it, but the solid part
-has not a form capable of much resistance to thrust, and the isolated
-buttresses are located so far below the springing that they contribute
-practically nothing to the strength of the system, as already remarked,
-and as we shall presently see.
-
-Although this great dome has been almost universally lauded, it is
-entirely indefensible from the point of view of sound principles of
-construction. The work shows that Michael Angelo was not imbued,
-as Bramante had been, with a sense of the essential conditions of
-stability in dome building as exemplified in the works of Roman
-antiquity. He had conceived an ardent admiration for the dome of
-Florence, and in emulation of it he changed the external outline from
-the hemispherical to the pointed form, and, lifting it out of the
-buttressing drum, set it on the top.[45]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  _A_ FIG. 27. _B_]
-
-This vast dome is an imposing object, but it is nevertheless a monument
-of structural error. Not only does its form and construction render it
-much less secure than Brunelleschi’s dome, but its supporting drum is
-entirely unsuited to its function, save as to its strength to bear
-the mere crushing weight of the vault. In replacing the continuous
-colonnade, with its abutting load, of Bramante’s drum by the isolated
-buttresses, Michael Angelo ignored the true principle of resistance
-to the continuous thrusts of a dome. It has been thought that the
-rib system justifies this, that the ribs gather the thrusts upon the
-buttresses and give the dome a somewhat Gothic character. But this
-cannot be so. It is impossible for a dome to have any Gothic character.
-In addition to what has been already said (p. 20) on this point, it
-may be further remarked that, so long as the surfaces between the ribs
-remain straight on plan, as in the dome of Florence, or are segments
-of a hemisphere, or of a dome of pointed form on a circular base, like
-the dome of St. Peter’s, no ribs can be made to act in a Gothic way.
-A circular vault on Gothic principles would necessarily be a celled
-vault, more or less like the small vault of the Pazzi already described
-(p. 27). In such a vault there would have to be an arch (in a true
-Gothic vault a much stilted arch) in the circumference of the drum over
-the space between each pair of ribs. The crowns of these arches would
-reach to a considerable height, in a developed Gothic vault to nearly
-or quite the height of the crown of the vault itself. The triangular
-spaces enclosed by these arches and converging ribs would then be
-vaulted over by slightly arched courses of masonry running lengthwise
-of the triangle, or from the arches to the ribs, and approximately
-parallel with the crown of the cell (_A_, Fig. 27). Thus in
-place of an unbroken hemispherical or oval vault, we should have one
-consisting of deep cells. The drum would have to rise far above the
-springing, and the haunches would need to be loaded with a solid
-filling of masonry. The vault would thus be completely hidden from view
-on the outside. Nothing short of this would produce a circular vault
-on Gothic principles, or one in which the ribs could act in a Gothic
-way.[46] The nearest approach to such a form, in a vault that may with
-any propriety be called a dome, occurs over the crossing of nave and
-transept in the old cathedral of Salamanca in Spain (Fig. 28).[47] But
-this vault has a very different character from the imaginary one just
-described. It rises from the top of a high drum resting on pendentives,
-and is built on a system of salient converging ribs. The spaces
-between these ribs are vaulted over with courses of masonry slightly
-arched from rib to rib, and thus running in a direction perpendicular
-to that of the courses in a Gothic vault cell, as in _B_, Figure
-27. A series of hollowed gores are thus formed which give a scalloped
-instead of a plain circular plan to the vault as a whole. But such a
-vault differs fundamentally from a Gothic vault. For the line of the
-crown of each cell is the steep segmental curve _ab_ in _A_,
-Figure 29. In other words, the vault as a whole is a hemisphere with
-its surface broken into shallow hollows like the gores of a melon.
-It is obvious that in a vault with cells so shaped the thrusts are
-as great at all points in the circumference as they are in a simple
-hemispherical dome, and that such a vault can have no Gothic character.
-To develop this into any real likeness to a Gothic vault, it would be
-necessary to reduce it to an unbroken circular plan by cutting off the
-scallops at its base so that it would fit into the circular drum, upon
-the inner surface of which it would now intersect in series of small
-arches, one for each hollowed gore, with its springing at the point
-_d_ and its crown at the point _c_. Then these arches would
-have to be raised by stilting and pointing until their crowns were
-brought up to the level, or near the level, of the point _b_ as in
-_B_ of the same figure. Thus the line _dc_, which represents
-the height of the arches in the first stage of this development,
-becomes the line _ac_ in the second stage. So long as the chord of
-the arc _bc_ is a steeply inclined line, the vaulting cells cannot
-bear upon the ribs, nor can the thrusts of the vault be concentrated in
-a Gothic way.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 28.--Interior of dome of Salamanca.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  _A_ FIG. 29. _B_]
-
-The vault of Salamanca is not a Gothic vault in any sense, though its
-rib system and its hollowed cells conform with the earliest stage of
-apsidal vault development leading to Gothic.[48] It is a dome, and like
-the larger dome of St. Peter’s, it is sprung from the top of the drum;
-but unlike St. Peter’s dome, it is powerfully abutted by turrets and
-dormers built against its springing and its haunch, and it is loaded at
-the crown with a cone of masonry, so that from without it looks like a
-stumpy spire, and not like a dome.[49]
-
-But Michael Angelo’s vault has not even such remote approach to
-Gothic character as the small dome of Salamanca has. Its surface
-is unbroken by any hollowing into cells. It is a perfect circle on
-plan, and its ribs, which are embedded and not salient on the inside,
-cannot, therefore, sustain the vault in any Gothic way. This dome
-has, moreover, so much of a spherical shape as to give it a stronger
-tendency to thrust than the dome of Florence has, and the thrusts are
-exerted equally on all points in the circumference of the drum. The
-isolated buttresses are therefore illogical, and being set against
-the drum only, and not even reaching to the top of the drum, they are
-ineffectual. Thus though the dome was bound with two iron chains, one
-placed near the springing, and the other at about half the vertical
-height of the vault,[50] it began to yield apparently soon after its
-completion. Fissures opened in various parts of both dome and drum
-which at length caused such apprehensions of danger, that Pope Innocent
-XI called a council of the most able engineers and architects of the
-time[51] to examine into the extent of the damage, and ascertain
-whether serious danger existed. This council concluded that the cupola
-was in no danger of disintegration, and the Pope, in order to restore
-confidence in its safety, charged Carlo Fontana, the architect, to
-write a book on the building and prove the groundlessness of any
-fears of its collapse. Thus the matter appears for the time to have
-been dropped. But subsequently the condition of the structure became
-so alarming that three eminent mathematicians, among whom was the
-celebrated Boscovich, were, in the year 1742, commissioned by Pope
-Benedict XIV to make a further examination and submit a report with
-recommendations for its consolidation.
-
-The condition of the fabric at the time of this examination will be
-understood from Figure 30, a reproduction of the illustration subjoined
-to the mathematicians’ report.[52] They found the structure, as the
-illustration shows, rent into numerous fissures, some of which were
-large enough to allow a man’s arm to be thrust through them. In some
-places these cracks had been filled up with brick and cement, and new
-ones had opened in the filling.[53] At what time the ruptures had
-commenced could not be definitely ascertained, but the mathematicians
-express the opinion, for which they state their reasons, that they
-may have started very soon after the completion of the work.[54] That
-they were not due to any weakness in the substructure was shown by the
-fact that this remained apparently quite firm. Had the fractures been
-caused by any weakness in the piers or pendentives, the mathematicians
-say,[55] they would be wide at the base of the drum, whereas they were
-found (as shown in the illustration) to be small at the base and to
-increase in magnitude toward the top of the drum, and in the region of
-the haunch of the dome. This was thought by them to show that they were
-clearly due to weakness resulting from the form of the structure. The
-report states[56] that the weight of the lantern had caused the heads
-of the great ribs to sink, the dome to expand at the haunch and at the
-springing, and the wall of the drum to be pressed outward at the top.
-To consolidate the fabric they recommended that additional chains be
-placed at various levels, the old ones having, they thought,[57] burst
-asunder by the force of the thrusts; but this could not be verified
-because they are embedded in the masonry. They also recommended clamps
-of iron to hold in the buttresses.
-
-  [Illustration: CVPOLA DI S PIETRO
-
-  FIG. 30.--The dome with its ruptures.]
-
-The Marquis Poleni of Padua, a distinguished engineer of the time,
-was then called to examine the dome and to take such means as he might
-judge most effective to secure it against further disintegration.
-Milizia tells us[58] that Poleni, after careful examination, expressed
-the opinion that although the cupola had not the catenary outline which
-he considered the best for stability, it had nevertheless a good form,
-and was in no danger of ruin. He pronounced the fissures of no material
-consequence,[59] and attributed them to two classes of causes. The
-first of these he thought was haste in construction. The dome having
-been built in twenty-two months with materials of unequal quality,
-and not carefully laid, unequal consolidation resulted and caused
-numerous ruptures. The second class of causes he considered to consist
-in the action of heat and cold, humidity and dryness, lightning and
-earthquake. Thus far, says Milizia, the reasoning of Poleni is just,
-and worthy of his great mind, and he adds, “It would seem, then, that
-since the cupola was solid, it ought to have been left in peace, but he
-nevertheless advised five chains, which were placed under the direction
-of Vanvitelli.”[60] The first of these chains was located at the base
-of the drum, the second at the level of the attic, the third at the
-springing of the dome, the fourth above the haunch, and the fifth
-around the opening at the base of the lantern.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate III
-
-  DOME OF ST. PETER’S
-
-  Rome]
-
-Poleni, in his own book, is not wholly consistent in what he says of
-the dome. While affirming its form to be admirable and its strength
-sufficient, and attributing the ruptures to other causes than those
-inherent in the nature of the design, he yet, in another place, admits
-that they may be to some extent due to the shape of the vault which
-he here pronounces not high, or acute, enough.[61] His admiration for
-Michael Angelo makes it hard for him, as a rule, to find any radical
-defect in the composition; but this passage, and the fact that he
-caused the additional binding chains to be applied, would seem to show
-that he had misgivings, and did not consider the monument so entirely
-safe as the general tenor of his book would lead us to believe. And
-the same misgivings are betrayed in what is said by the numerous other
-writers whose opinions are cited by him, though like himself they write
-for the most part with a manifest bias in favour of Michael Angelo.
-Thus one of these writers proposes that the outer covering of lead
-should be stripped off on account of its weight, and be replaced with
-copper, to which Poleni objects,[62] affirming that the weight is an
-advantage, and tends to hold the dome together. Another writer suggests
-that the lantern be removed in order to relieve the fabric of its
-weight. Another thinks that the buttresses should be heavily weighted
-with statues. It was also proposed that additional buttresses should
-be set against the attic of the drum, and carried up against the dome
-itself; and again it was proposed that massive abutments be built up
-over each of the four great piers, but to this it was objected that
-the additional weight of such abutments would dangerously overcharge
-the substructure. The most radical suggestion was that both dome and
-drum be demolished and rebuilt in a more pointed form. All of these
-suggestions were rejected, and it was finally decided to employ the
-additional chains proposed by Poleni as already stated.
-
-The dome of St. Peter’s (Plate III) was conceived in a grandiose
-spirit, which, while it drew inspiration in part from the ancient Roman
-source, recklessly disregarded the lessons which Roman art should teach
-as to principles of construction. I have said that Brunelleschi led
-the way in a wrong direction when he set his great dome on the top
-of its drum, and had resort to clamps and chains for the resistance
-to its thrusts that should have been given by abutment. In following
-his example, Michael Angelo wandered still farther from the path of
-true and monumental art. To make a dome on a large scale a conspicuous
-object, from the springing to the crown, is a thing that cannot be
-safely done in stone masonry. To make it stand at all, resort must be
-had to extraneous and hidden means of support, and even these are of
-uncertain efficiency for any length of time. The ancient Roman and
-the Byzantine builders settled, I think, for all time the proper mode
-of constructing domed edifices. Bramante had recognized this, and
-while striving to include in his design for the dome of St. Peter’s
-as much as he could of the new character embodied in Brunelleschi’s
-dome, he tried at the same time to keep safely within the limits of
-the principles that had governed the ancient practice. He gave as much
-elevation to his dome as he thought these principles would allow, but
-even this, as we have seen, was too much, and in greatly increasing
-this elevation, so as to leave the dome entirely without abutment,
-Michael Angelo took unwarrantable risks, and lent his genius to the
-support of false principles.
-
-That this has not been generally recognized is due to the fact, already
-remarked, that the architects and leaders of taste of the Renaissance
-have made too little account of structural propriety, and structural
-expression, as a necessary basis for architectural design.
-
-Recent writers have ignored the condition of this monument. They do
-not appear to be aware of it; and although it has been fully set
-forth, and discussed at great length by the earlier Italian writers,
-few of them have found the true cause in its flagrant violation of the
-fundamental laws of stability. They attributed the alarming progress
-of disintegration, as we have seen, to accidents and circumstances
-of various kinds; and have sought to shift the responsibility to the
-shoulders of Bramante. They have affirmed that he did not take enough
-care to make his foundations secure. There appears to be some justice
-in this, though since his work was strengthened by his immediate
-successors[63] the ruptures in the dome cannot, according to the
-mathematicians, be attributed to this. The remarks of the old writers
-on Bramante must, I think, be taken with some allowance. Their bias
-against him is very marked. Thus Poleni quotes Condivi, a disciple
-of Michael Angelo, as saying, “Bramante being, as every one knows,
-given to every kind of pleasure, and a great spendthrift, not even the
-provision given by the Pope, however much it was, sufficed him, and
-seeking to expedite his work, he made the walls of bad materials, and
-of insufficient size and strength.”[64]
-
-A great deal has been said of the beauty of St. Peter’s dome. It
-has been held up as a model of architectural elegance by countless
-writers from Vasari down. But no abstract beauty, no impressiveness
-as a commanding feature in the general view of the ancient city
-that it may have, can make amends for such structural defects. Its
-beauty has, however, I think, been exaggerated. Its lack of visible
-organic connection with the substructure makes it inferior in effect
-to the dome of Florence, where the structural lines of the edifice,
-from the ground upward, give a degree of organic unity, and the
-buttressed half-domed apses, grouped in happy subordination about the
-base of the drum, prepare the eye to appreciate the majesty of the
-soaring cupola as it rises over them. The dome of St. Peter’s has
-not the beauty of logical composition. Beauty in architecture may, I
-think, be almost defined as the artistic coördination of structural
-parts. As in any natural organic form, a well-designed building
-has a consistent internal anatomy, and its external character is a
-consequence and expression of this. The dome of St. Peter’s violates
-the true principles of organic composition, and this I believe to be
-incompatible with the highest architectural beauty.
-
-
-
-
-                               CHAPTER V
-
-             CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMAN RENAISSANCE
-
-
-As for the rest of the church of St. Peter, we need give attention to
-that part only which was designed by Michael Angelo on the basis of
-the original scheme of Bramante, namely, all to the eastward of,[65]
-and including, the first bay west of the crossing. The western bays
-of the nave as it now stands were, as is well known, added at a later
-time by the architect Maderna. The plan (Fig. 31) of the earlier part
-is thoroughly fine, and if the elevation had been made consistent with
-this plan, St. Peter’s might have been one of the noblest monuments
-in Christendom. But the architects of the Renaissance rarely sought
-consistency in design; they were prone, from first to last, to mix
-incongruous elements. The essentially Byzantine plan here adopted
-could not be carried out in elevation with classic Roman details
-with a noble result; and the attempt which Michael Angelo made to
-produce an architectural effect foreign to the real structural system
-led of necessity, not only to such inconsistencies as are common in
-Renaissance motives, but to some awkward makeshifts which have not, I
-believe, been hitherto noticed by writers on this edifice.
-
-Following what appears to have been Bramante’s intention, Michael
-Angelo constructed barrel vaults over the arms of the cross,[66]
-supporting them on piers and arches which had been begun by Bramante.
-To this simple and reasonable scheme he applied a colossal order of
-Corinthian pilasters, a pair against each pier, as Alberti had done on
-a smaller scale at Mantua, and as Bramante appears to have intended in
-the great piers of the crossing, if not in all of the others. Apart
-from the superficial and purely ornamental character of the order, and
-its inappropriateness as ornament in such a system, its exaggerated
-scale dwarfs the effect of magnitude in the whole interior. The eye
-naturally estimates this magnitude by the customary proportions of a
-large classic order, and while these are by no means fixed, there is an
-approximate mean scale upon which we base our judgment. No beholder on
-entering St. Peter’s can, indeed, fail to be impressed with the unusual
-size of the order; but he is not apt to realize how far it exceeds
-the largest orders of antiquity. The order of the Parthenon is about
-forty-five feet high, and that of the portico of the Pantheon is about
-sixty feet. These are exceptionally large among the orders of Greek and
-Roman antiquity[67] but the order of St. Peter’s is one hundred feet
-high.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 31.--Plan of St. Peter’s, from
-  Fontana.]
-
-The lack of due effect of scale in this interior has been often
-remarked, and it is generally attributed to the great magnitude of the
-structural parts. The size of these parts could not, however, well be
-different from what they are. Their magnitude is determined by the
-scale of the great dome and the width and altitude of the arms of the
-cross. The piers of the crossing are masses of masonry measuring on
-their longer sides more than fifty feet on the pavement, while the
-pendentive arches are one hundred and fifty feet high, and those of
-the arms of the cross are seventy-five feet high. But with appropriate
-treatment their scale might have been made more apparent. To adorn such
-piers and frame such arches with a classic order is to destroy the
-proper effect of scale, as well as to violate the true principles of
-architectural design by using structural members without any structural
-meaning.
-
-Apart from the barbarism already remarked (p. 29) of springing a vault
-from a classic entablature, the effect of the gigantic order is unhappy
-in other respects; the great salience of its cornice cuts off from view
-the lower part of the vaulting, and this pronounced overhanging ledge,
-extending around the whole interior, breaks the continuity of the
-upright lines into the vaulting, and diminishes the effect of altitude.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 32.--Section of aisle of St.
-  Peter’s.]
-
-But not only did Michael Angelo employ this incongruous and ineffective
-ornamental scheme for the interior of St. Peter’s, he also adopted a
-corresponding design for the exterior which wholly contradicts the real
-character of the structure and led the architect into some curious
-makeshifts. For this exterior he used another gigantic order surmounted
-with an attic story. This obliged him to carry up the enclosing walls
-of the aisles to a height equal to that of the nave, and led to
-difficulties within. For the aisle vaulting was now far down below the
-top of these walls, and it therefore became necessary, unless the space
-above this vaulting was to be left open to the sky, with the enclosing
-wall standing as a mere screen answering to nothing behind it,[68] to
-construct a flat roof at the level of the attic cornice. Figure 32, a
-section through this part of the structure, will explain this and some
-other awkward expedients to which the architect was driven by the use
-of this colossal external order. Of the two compartments through which
-the line _AB_ (plan, Fig. 31) passes, one has a barrel vault
-and the other a dome, and, as each of the other corresponding parts of
-the plan are vaulted in the same way, there are four small domes in
-all. The effect of four smaller domes grouped around the great central
-one would be happy for both internal and external effect, if they were
-properly related in proportions, and the scheme were carried out in a
-structurally consistent and rational way; but such a scheme could not
-be developed here. For from the level of the aisle arches a dome, even
-on a proportionately high drum, could not be made to reach the level
-of the cornice of the enclosing wall unreasonably elevated for the
-sake of the gigantic external order. But Michael Angelo nevertheless
-constructed such a dome (_A_, Fig. 32), although it had to be sunk
-up to its crown beneath the aisle roof, and then, for external effect,
-he built another dome over it (_B_, Fig. 32). To light the lower
-dome it was necessary to sink oblique openings, _a_, through the
-massive masonry of the roof, and to light the useless vaulted chamber,
-_b_, which he was obliged to make over the barrel vault of the
-inner compartment (the crown of which is still farther down below the
-roof), the well, _c_, had to be sunk. Thus instead of making a
-reasonable design with ornamental details appropriate to its structural
-forms, Michael Angelo first conceived an ornamental scheme consisting
-of the inappropriate colossal order, and then fitted the building to
-it, filling up vacant spaces with extravagantly massive solids and
-useless voids, and resorting to other tortuous devices to piece out a
-fundamentally irrational system.
-
-Such is St. Peter’s church, which, though it has been much criticised,
-has been more generally lauded as a model of architectural greatness.
-Its real character has rarely been analyzed or rationally considered.
-That it has qualities of majesty and grandeur need not be denied; but
-these qualities are mainly due to its vast magnitude, and to what
-it retains of the design of its first, and greatest, architect. The
-manner in which the scheme of Bramante was modified and distorted
-by his successors, and chiefly by Michael Angelo, notwithstanding
-his professions of admiration for Bramante’s intentions, is far
-from admirable, as I think the foregoing account of its structural
-and artistic aberrations must show. The building as a whole is
-characterized by incongruity and extravagance, and when we consider
-further that the ornamentation of the interior is for the most
-part a cheap deception, the rich coffering of the vaulting and the
-pilasters of the great order being wrought in stucco on a foundation of
-brickwork, we get the measure of the ideals and architectural standards
-of men who, like Vasari, could write of it that, “not in Christendom,
-nor in all the world, can a building of greater magnificence and
-grandeur be seen.”[69] And this short-sighted admiration did not abate
-as time went on, as we learn from the estimates quoted by Fontana in
-his well-known book,[70] among which are the following: “Temple more
-famous than that of Solomon,” “Unique miracle of the world,” “Chief
-among the most celebrated of Christendom,” “Compendium of the arts,”
-“Basis of the Catholic faith,” “Unique edifice of the orb of earth,”
-etc., etc.
-
-Before leaving St. Peter’s a word may be said of a project for the
-building which was prepared by Antonio San Gallo the younger, Michael
-Angelo’s immediate predecessor as architect for the fabric. This
-design, no part of which was ever carried out, is embodied in a wooden
-model preserved with that of Michael Angelo in the existing edifice.
-The most meritorious feature of this model is the dome which, from
-a structural point of view, is better than the one that was built,
-since it is well abutted both at the springing and at the haunch. This
-important condition is secured, however, by an architectural treatment
-that cannot be commended, and consists of two superimposed concentric
-arcades, the lower one surrounding the drum and abutting the vault at
-the springing, while the upper one is set in retreat and fortifies the
-haunch. The architectural effect of these arcades, which are of course
-adorned with classic orders, is not happy because an arcade with a
-classic order is not an appropriate form of abutment, though it may be
-made mechanically effective, and also because the upper circle, rising
-from within the circumference of the lower one, gives the composition
-an unpleasantly telescopic effect.
-
-Our consideration of St. Peter’s has led us to an advanced phase of the
-church architecture of the Roman Renaissance, and we must now go back
-and examine a few of the earlier structures in Rome and elsewhere that
-were produced under the distinctly Roman influence.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 33.]
-
-The church of Sant’Agostino is spoken of as a building of the early
-Roman Renaissance, and is said to have been built by the architect
-Giacomo da Pietra Santa between 1471 and 1484. But it is incredible
-that such a church could have been designed by any architect of the
-Renaissance, or by an Italian architect of any time. Letarouilly says
-of it that from the thirteenth century the Augustinians had a convent
-and small church in Rome, and that two centuries later they resolved to
-enlarge the church, and employed as architects Giacomo da Pietra Santa
-and a Florentine named Sebastiano.[71] The character of the building is
-such, however, as to warrant the belief that it is a mediæval structure
-with slight interior ornamental additions of the Renaissance, which
-may be by Pietra Santa, and a façade, dating from before the close
-of the fifteenth century, by Baccio Pintelli. In general character
-the church is in the style of the Rhenish Romanesque architecture of
-the twelfth century. It has a nave with groined vaulting in square
-compartments, each embracing two vault compartments of the aisles. It
-has also the Rhenish alternate system with plain square piers, and
-archivolts of square section, originally without mouldings, and the
-main piers have each a broad pilaster-strip carried up to the springing
-of the vaults. The triforium space has no openings, and the clerestory
-has plain round-arched windows. It is thus a thoroughly northern
-Romanesque scheme, entirely logical in its simple construction and fine
-in its proportions. The Renaissance interpolations consist of a few
-ornamental details only. A stilted composite column is set against the
-pilaster-strip of each main pier (Fig. 33), this column is crowned with
-an entablature-block reaching to the level of the triforium, and upon
-it is set a short pilaster surmounted with a smaller entablature-block
-at the vaulting impost. This superfluous and irrational compound,
-breaking the reasonable and effective continuity of the mediæval
-pilaster-strip, greatly disfigures the originally noble design. The
-only other neo-classic details of the interior are mouldings at the
-arch imposts and on the archivolts, and coffering on the soffits of
-the arches. These are quiet and less injurious in effect, though
-equally superfluous and inappropriate. Thus did the sophistication
-of the Renaissance designers often blind them to real architectural
-excellence, and lead them to fancy that they could improve such an
-admirable and consistent interior by incongruous and meaningless
-features.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 34.--Façade of Sant’ Agostino.]
-
-The façade (Fig. 34) is wholly of the Renaissance, and has no mediæval
-character except in its general outline, which conforms with that of
-the building itself. It is a simple design, and foreshadows those of
-Vignola and Della Porta for the church of the Gesù, to which it is
-superior in merit, being more reasonable and quiet. Shallow pilasters
-of considerable elegance mark the divisions of the interior, the
-portals are framed with simple classic mouldings without orders, and
-the aisle compartments are surmounted with reversed consoles after the
-manner of those introduced by Alberti in the façade of Santa Maria
-Novella in Florence. These consoles are, however, so different in
-character from the rest of the façade, having their details in higher
-relief and being set a little in retreat, that they would appear to
-be later interpolations. Answering to nothing in the building, they
-are superfluous ornaments, and do not improve the composition, which
-without them is as reasonable as a composition made up of superficial
-classic details can well be. A peculiar feature of this front is the
-truncated pediment that crowns the lower division, and forms the basis
-of the clerestory compartment. The small rectangular tablets that break
-the wall surfaces are also noticeable as foreshadowing a treatment
-that was subsequently much affected by Vignola. Contemporaneously
-with the façade, and by the same architect, a dome on a drum resting
-on pendentives was built over the crossing. The present dome rising
-directly from the pendentives is an alteration of a later time.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 35.--Exterior of Santa Maria della
-  Consolazione, Todi.]
-
-In the earlier churches that were wholly built under the Roman
-Renaissance influence, the Byzantine scheme largely prevails in the
-plan and structural forms, probably because it lent itself to the most
-effective display of a high central dome. Among the first of these
-buildings is the church of Santa Maria della Consolazione outside the
-wall at Todi. The design is attributed to Bramante,[72] and it seems
-to bear enough resemblance to what we know of his work to justify the
-attribution. The arms of the cross here take the form of apses, the
-eastern one being semicircular on plan, and the others polygonal.
-The dome (Fig. 35) is raised on a high drum, and is almost an exact
-reproduction of that of San Pietro in Montorio. Its thrusts are thus
-entirely unbuttressed, but it is probably bound with chains, as was
-the custom at this time in domes constructed in this manner.[73] The
-half-domes of the apses are better adjusted. They spring from within
-the supporting walls, which are carried up high enough to give
-effective abutment, and are loaded at the haunch by stepped rings of
-masonry, as in the Pantheon. The details of the interior (Fig. 36)
-consist of two superimposed orders of small pilasters, with great
-pilasters on the angles of the crossing reaching from the pavement to
-the springing of the pendentive arches, and from ressauts of the upper
-entablature converging ribs rise against the surfaces of the vaults.
-Several further awkward results are here noticeable as a consequence
-of this application of the inappropriate classic details to the
-Byzantine structural scheme. The entablature which is carried around
-the whole interior at the springing of the vaults, has to do duty at
-once for the small order of the upper stage and for the great angle
-pilasters, and thus in so far as it is in good proportion for the one
-it cannot be so for the other. Then the true magnitudes of the piers
-and the pendentive arches are falsified by the pilasters and simulated
-archivolts which spring from them. These piers and arches really
-embrace in width both the pilasters and archivolts and the spaces of
-wall and vaulting between them and the pilasters of the smaller orders
-and ribs which spring from them. The proper and impressive massiveness
-of the essentially Byzantine system employed is thus contradicted by an
-apparent skeleton of classic orders simulating an organic structural
-scheme which has no real existence.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 36.--Interior of Todi.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 37.--Plan of San Biagio.]
-
-The exterior of this monument (Fig. 35) has much merit in its general
-form and proportions. The great central square mass, visible from the
-ground upward, gives the sense of support for the dome which the eye
-demands, and the apses with their half-domes are effectively grouped
-in subordination to the crowning feature. But this merit, which Todi
-shares with many other buildings of the Renaissance, is primarily due
-to the Byzantine scheme adopted, and cannot, therefore, be wholly
-credited to the Renaissance architect.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 38.--Interior of San Biagio.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 39.]
-
-A variation of this scheme occurs in the church of San Biagio at
-Montepulciano by Antonio San Gallo the elder, and begun in the year
-1518. Here the arms of the cross (Fig. 37) are square, with an apse
-added to the eastern arm. The interior is ornamented with a single,
-and very heavy, Doric order (Fig. 38), framing arched recesses in the
-imperial Roman manner. The use of pilasters on the angles makes the
-awkward combination of a pilaster coupled with a column necessary,
-and since the entablature is in the plane of the wall, it has to be
-broken into very salient ressauts in order to cover these members.
-Above the entablature is a low ledge in retreat, broken into ressauts
-in conformity with those of the entablature, and from these ressauts
-coffered archivolts are sprung under the ends of the barrel vaults
-which cover the arms of the cross. The Doric order is designed here,
-for the most part, in close conformity to ancient models, save for
-the pilaster on the angle, which does not generally occur in Roman
-monuments. The common Roman treatment of the angle is shown in the
-arch of Septimius Severus (Fig. 20, p. 41), where the end column of
-the order is placed at some distance from the end of the façade, which
-is left in retreat without any pilaster. But Serlio[74] describes the
-ruins of an ancient Roman building (Fig. 39) that appears to have been
-a sort of open arcade or stoa, used as a meeting place for merchants,
-on the angles of which pilasters are set together with columns,
-somewhat as they were by Alberti in Santa Maria Novella, by San Gallo
-here in San Biagio, and by many other architects of the Renaissance. He
-speaks of the treatment of the angles of this building as follows: “The
-corner pilasters are larger than the others, and were truly made with
-excellent judgment, for they strengthen the angle with good effect;
-and from this architects may learn how to design angles with columns
-and pilasters bound together, in order that the corner may be brought
-into line with the column, which gives more solidity to the angle. If
-the said angle were withdrawn into line with the middle pilasters,
-the façade, when viewed obliquely, with the round column on the angle,
-would appear imperfect, and for this ... I strongly commend this form
-of angle because it may be fully seen from all sides.”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 40.--San Biagio, Montepulciano.]
-
-Externally the composition is remarkably good in its larger features
-(Fig. 40). The dome, of slightly pointed outline, on a high drum, rises
-grandly from the substructure, and is well proportioned in relation
-to it. The wall surfaces are treated broadly, with no orders carried
-across them. They are divided into two stages, with a pediment over
-each façade. Super-imposed pilasters are set on the angles, and a Doric
-entablature, carried across the whole front, with ressauts over the
-lower pilasters, divides the two stages. The wall of the lower stage is
-entirely plain, with a severely simple rectangular portal surmounted
-by a pediment. The wall of the upper stage is divided into rectangular
-panels, as in the attic of the Pazzi chapel in Florence, the central
-panel being pierced with a square-headed window and framed with an
-order of which the capitals are Ionic and the entablature Doric. The
-cornice of the top story and the raking cornice of the pediment of
-each façade are broken into ressauts over the pilasters, and an order
-of Ionic pilasters, with a very high entablature broken into ressauts,
-surrounds the drum which supports the dome. Square detached towers
-are set in the reëntrant angles of the west side, only one of which
-was carried to completion. The completed one is in three stages, each
-adorned with a heavy order, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian respectively.
-In these orders half-columns are coupled with angle pilasters, as in
-the interior, and the entablatures have ressauts on the angles over
-these members. An octagonal spire-like lantern, with a tall drum
-adorned with an order of Corinthian pilasters and surmounted by an
-attic, crowns the tower. Small obelisks set on the tower angles and
-reversed consoles against the angles of the attic give a simulation
-of Gothic form to the neo-classic scheme, and show the strong hold
-that mediæval ideas still retained upon the minds of the designers.
-The first of these spire-like towers of the Renaissance appears to
-be that of the church of Santo Spirito in Florence, which is spoken
-of by Milizia as the most beautiful of Italian bell towers.[75] It
-was designed by Baccio d’Agnolo, who, beginning as a wood carver,
-imbibed the new enthusiasm for the antique, and after studying the
-ancient monuments of Rome[76] began the practice of architecture.
-This campanile is thus noteworthy as the first of a large class of
-modern towers with spires of which Wren’s famous steeples were the
-ultimate outcome. The scheme is based on the mediæval campanile, the
-earliest form of which is the Lombard Romanesque tower. The Lombard
-tower is characterized by its simple rectangular outline, the walls
-rising sheer from the ground to the cornice, and strengthened and
-adorned with shallow pilaster-strips, corbelled string-courses marking
-the successive stories, and by small grouped openings. The tower of
-Santa Maria Novella in Florence is designed on this model, and the
-neighbouring tower of Prato and Giotto’s famous campanile are later and
-richer modifications of the same type. In the tower of Santo Spirito
-(Fig. 41) Baccio d’Agnolo has taken the Lombard scheme and clothed it
-with a pseudo-classic dress. While his classic details have much of
-that elegance which belongs to the best Italian work, they are out of
-place in such a structure. The tall pilaster-strips of the mediæval
-tower gave an expression as of an organic skeleton running through the
-building. They had been developed out of the classic pilaster to meet
-the needs of the mediæval type of structure, and in substituting the
-superimposed classic orders for the appropriate continuous members, the
-artist did violence to the true principles of design.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 41.--Tower of Santo Spirito.]
-
-The lantern with which this tower is crowned is an adaptation of
-Brunelleschi’s lantern on the dome of the cathedral, but made more
-aspiring in form, so that the general outline is like that of a Gothic
-spire. But the form of a Gothic spire is far removed from anything that
-is proper to classic composition.
-
-Returning to San Biagio, it may be said that the orders here have a
-closer conformity with those of classic antiquity than occurs in the
-earlier monuments already mentioned, except the Tempietto of San Pietro
-in Montorio by Bramante.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 42.--Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo.]
-
-In the nave of the church of Santissima Annunziatta in Arezzo, the same
-architect produced a different design. The nave (Fig. 42), of only
-three bays, is covered with a barrel vault, and the aisles have small
-domes on pendentives. The supporting piers are square with a shallow
-Corinthian pilaster on the face of each and an entablature passing over
-the crowns of the arches. The archivolts are deep, and each one is
-moulded on the face and plain on the soffit. These are carried on plain
-pilasters with simple impost mouldings. The wall above the entablature
-is plain and unbroken, except by a round-arched window over each bay of
-the ground story, and is crowned with a heavy cornice from which the
-vaulting springs. We have here a structural system of imperial Roman
-massiveness, necessitated by the use of the great barrel vault.
-
-After the early part of the sixteenth century Italy produced few
-architects of a high order of genius. Most of the more advanced
-neo-classic art is the work of mediocre men who, while professing to be
-ardent advocates of grammatical correctness according to the ancient
-rules, were hardly less capricious in their misuse of classic elements
-than their predecessors had been. To enter upon the examination of any
-large number of buildings in this later Renaissance style would be
-tedious and unnecessary; but in addition to what we have already seen
-of it in the work of Michael Angelo in St. Peter’s, we may give some
-attention to a few characteristic works of the two leading architects
-of the later time: Vignola and Palladio.
-
-Few men did more to make the neo-classic ideas authoritative than
-Giacomo Barrozzi, called Vignola. Beginning like so many others with
-painting, Vignola was led early to the study of architecture, in which
-he strove to gain an exact knowledge of classic Roman forms by drawing
-and measuring the remains of the ancient edifices. He thus became a
-devoted partisan of the antique, and he wrote a treatise on the Five
-Orders which has been widely accepted as an authoritative guide in
-modern architectural practice. To him, says Milizia, “Architecture is
-under lasting obligations because he established it upon system, and
-prescribed its rules.”[77] And the same author tells us further that
-Vignola “purified architecture from some abuses which neither his
-contemporaries nor the ancients had perceived”; yet nevertheless, he
-adds, “his book has produced more harm than good, for to make the rules
-more general, and more easy of application, he has altered the finest
-proportions of the antique.” No system of architecture, Milizia says
-further, “is more easy than that of Vignola, but the facility of it is
-obtained at the expense of architecture itself.”
-
-In his book,[78] which is made up largely of drawings and diagrams,
-Vignola shows how the proportions of an order may be regulated by a
-module down to the smallest details. He explains how to construct Ionic
-volutes and other curves from centres, and how to describe the details
-of Corinthian and composite capitals by means of plan and elevation.
-He thus introduces a mechanical system modelled after the formulas of
-Vitruvius.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 43.--Vignola’s entablature.]
-
-But notwithstanding his ardent advocacy of the principles of ancient
-Roman art, Vignola, in his own practice, not only altered the
-proportions of the orders as Milizia says, but made many fanciful
-changes in them. He introduced details which have no counterparts in
-correct Roman design, and freely mixed those of different orders. An
-instance of this occurs in an entablature figured in his book,[79]
-which he calls his own invention. In this composition (Fig. 43) we have
-a pseudo-Doric frieze between an architrave with multiplied faciæ, and
-a cornice on modillions. In the place of triglyphs this frieze has
-consoles with two channels, like those of a triglyph, on the curved
-face of each. To such travesties of classic design did the striving
-after novelty, which was curiously mingled with their ardour for the
-antique, lead the men of the later Renaissance. For an advocate of
-classic correctness such aberrations are the more surprising as they
-are expressly condemned by Vitruvius, who warns his readers against
-them as follows: “If dentiled cornices are used in the Doric order,
-triglyphs applied above the voluted Ionic, thus transferring parts to
-one order which properly belong to another, the eye will be offended,
-because custom otherwise applies these peculiarities.”[80] The Roman
-writer might, indeed, have given a better reason why the purity of the
-orders ought to be maintained, namely, because to each of them the fine
-artistic genius of the Greeks had given its appropriate details.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 44.--Half plan of Sant’Andrea.]
-
-In designing entire buildings Vignola shows no less freedom in
-unclassic and incongruous combinations. This is manifested in the
-earliest of his church edifices, that of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle
-outside of the Porta del Popolo at Rome (Figs. 44, 45, and 46). It is a
-small, oblong, rectangular enclosure covered with a dome of oval plan
-on pendentives. The structural scheme is thus primarily Byzantine,
-but the architectural treatment is Roman. The dome is built in a
-praiseworthy form, and follows the construction of the dome of the
-Pantheon. An enclosing drum is carried up from the pendentives to a
-considerable height, and the haunch of the vault is well fortified by
-stepped rings of masonry. These rings are criticised by Milizia[81] as
-awkward and unnecessary because, he affirms, the vault might have been
-made secure without them. He probably means that it might have been
-bound with chains in the usual manner of the Renaissance. As in the
-Pantheon, the drum rises so high above the springing that but little
-of the dome is visible externally. The character of the rectangular
-substructure is puzzling to the eye of a beholder who looks for meaning
-and congruity in architectural forms. Wrought in shallow relief upon
-its façade is an order of Corinthian pilasters surmounted by a classic
-pediment, and the entablature of the order is returned on the sides
-of the building. The effect of the whole may be compared to that of a
-Greek temple with an attic supporting a dome built upon it. So awkward
-is the combination that it might be supposed to be a piece of patchwork
-in which a building of Greek temple form had been altered to gain more
-height within, were it not that we find in the architect’s own book
-the plan and section reproduced in Figs. 44 and 45, which show that
-the building as it now exists was originally designed in its present
-form.[82]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 45.--Longitudinal section of
-  Sant’Andrea, from Vignola’s book.]
-
-On reflection we discover that the scheme suggests a derivation
-from the Pantheon. Not only is the dome shaped and adjusted as in
-that ancient monument, save for its oval plan, but the rest of the
-composition is pretty clearly from the same source. To realize this it
-is necessary only to eliminate, in idea, the portico of the Pantheon
-with the exception of its pediment, and to conceive this pediment as
-drawn back into the plane of the rectangular façade. The pediment
-would then surmount the order of Corinthian pilasters which adorn this
-façade, and the resulting composition would be substantially identical
-with that of the façade of St. Andrea. The minor differences are
-unimportant, as where Vignola has placed a pair of pilasters, instead
-of only one, at each end of the façade, has given the whole order more
-shallow relief, and has omitted the fluting on the pilasters. Even the
-niches on either side of the portal are reproduced from the Pantheon,
-though Vignola has pierced them with windows.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 46.--Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle.]
-
-The likeness extends farther. The return of the entablature along
-the side walls and the cornice of the attic are the same in both
-instances; but the second pediment in the Pantheon façade Vignola has
-not reproduced. St. Andrea is thus a close, though a modified, copy of
-the rectangular part of the Pantheon, with the rectangle elongated and
-surmounted by a dome designed on the Pantheon model. It was not known
-in the sixteenth century that the ancient monument is not a homogeneous
-structure, but an awkward patchwork, the result of successive
-alterations and additions.[83] Vignola took it entire as an example
-of that ancient style which he regarded as authoritative, and based
-his design for St. Andrea upon it, just as many modern architects have
-taken motives from Vignola himself. If it were proposed to erect a dome
-upon the Parthenon, few people would fail to see that the result would
-be an architectural monstrosity, yet this would not be very different
-from what was done in St. Andrea by an architect who has been looked
-upon as a champion of classic correctness in design.
-
-M. Palustre has called attention to the fact that, in the interior
-of St. Andrea (Fig. 45), the two parts of the entablature which have
-no _raison d’être_ under a vault have been omitted.[84] But the
-impropriety of a complete entablature in connection with vaulting is
-no greater than that of any part of a classic order, which has no
-justification in such connection, as we have already remarked.
-
-The pilgrimage church of Santa Maria degli Angeli, built over the
-oratory of St. Francis at Assisi, is a more extensive monument which
-was begun by Vignola in the year 1569. Though completed by other
-architects, and extensively restored in 1832, the building as it now
-stands is uniform in style throughout, and bears the marks of Vignola’s
-manner of design. It is cruciform in plan, with a long nave and aisles,
-and a square chapel opening out of each bay of each aisle. The nave and
-transept have barrel vaulting, a half-dome covers the apse, and a dome
-on a high drum resting on pendentives rises over the crossing. The
-aisles have domical groined vaulting with transverse ribs, and the side
-chapels have barrel vaults with their axes perpendicular to that of the
-nave. These chapels thus form abutments to the inner vaulting, so that
-no external buttresses are needed. The entire fabric is of brick, but
-the details, including the orders of the interior, of the west front,
-and of the drum, are wrought in stucco. For the interior the architect
-has employed a great order of Doric pilasters, a single pilaster on
-the face of each pier, and on the sides of the piers, under the aisle
-archivolts, he has placed pairs of smaller pilasters. The soffits
-of the archivolts are very wide, and have each a pair of salient
-sub-archivolts corresponding with the pilasters. It had been common for
-the architects of the Roman Renaissance to break the entablature into
-ressauts over the columns or pilasters of the orders when used in this
-way, as San Gallo had done in Montepulciano and Michael Angelo in St.
-Peter’s. But the effect of thus breaking the continuity of the cornice
-line is unpleasing, and Vignola has avoided it here by confining the
-ressaut to the architrave, frieze, and bed-mouldings, leaving the
-corona of the cornice unbroken as in Figure 47. The great piers of the
-crossing show the influence of St. Peter’s in being splayed, and the
-forms of the pendentives lose their spherical surfaces in being fitted
-to the straight line of the splay, as they do in St. Peter’s. The
-design of the façade expresses with unusual truthfulness the divisions
-of the interior, which are marked by pilasters like those of the great
-order within, and by an arch coinciding with the curve of the vaulting.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 47.--Order of Santa Maria degli
-  Angeli.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 48.--Plan of the Gesù.]
-
-The Gesù in Rome, another large church by Vignola, and built at about
-the same time as Santa Maria degli Angeli, is a variation of the
-same scheme, and shows in a more marked degree the influence of St.
-Peter’s. A plan of this building, the intended façade which Vignola
-did not live to construct, and the existing façade by Jacomo della
-Porta are given in the addendum to the edition of the architect’s book
-on the Five Orders published in 1617 already referred to (p. 84),
-and are reproduced in Figures 48, 49, and 50. The aisles are omitted
-here so that the side chapels, which communicate with each other by
-narrow openings in the dividing walls, open directly out of the nave.
-The transept is short, and extends on either side beyond the nave
-only by the thickness of its walls. An elevated dome on pendentives,
-circular on plan within and octagonal on the outside, rises over the
-crossing, and barrel vaults cover the nave and transept arms. The
-side chapels are vaulted, with small domes on pendentives, except
-those in the angles of the crossing, which do not require pendentives
-because their supports are shaped to the circular form as shown in the
-plan, Figure 48. These supports are made heavier than the others in
-order to strengthen the crossing piers, which, in consequence of this
-reënforcement, do not need to advance so far into the space under the
-great dome as they otherwise would. In Santa Maria degli Angeli the
-aisles prevent this treatment, and the crossing piers extend far into
-the nave and narrow the spans of the crossing arches.
-
-The scheme of the interior of the Gesù is a close reproduction of
-that of St. Peter’s, though the great pilasters are of the composite,
-instead of the Corinthian, order, and other minor differences are
-noticeable. It is worthy of remark that the entablature has no
-ressauts except at the crossing, and the vaulting is raised upon an
-attic, so that no part of it is hidden from view by the cornice of the
-entablature, as it is in St. Peter’s. It is also noticeable that, while
-capricious in the use of elements derived from the antique, Vignola
-in his church architecture eliminates mediæval forms more completely
-than most architects of his time. Where in St. Peter’s, for instance,
-the apses have celled vaults on converging ribs, he employs the plain
-half-dome of Roman antiquity.
-
-  [Illustration: _Questa facciata no fu messa in opera per la
-  morte del architecto_
-
-  FIG. 49.--Façade of the Gesù, Vignola.]
-
-  [Illustration: _Facciata del Giesu come al presente si troua
-  fatta da Iacomo della Portta._
-
-  FIG. 50.--Façade of the Gesù, Della Porta.]
-
-Vignola’s design for the façade (Fig. 49) presents the familiar
-features of his style as already embodied in the earlier façade of St.
-Andrea, but with additional infractions of propriety, as well as of
-classic form in its more elaborate details. This façade corresponds in
-outline with the form of the building, except for the podium of the
-upper story (which contradicts the roof lines of the side chapels),
-and the abutting walls of curved outline over the side compartments.
-The chief aberrations of detail are the broken pediments of the
-doors and windows, and the barbaric scrollwork and hermæ, the use of
-which this architect did much to establish. How far the barbarism of
-breaking the pediment was an independent freak of the Renaissance I
-do not know. Instances of somewhat similar treatment occur in the
-Roman architecture of Syria, as in Baalbek (Fig. 51), where the middle
-part of the pediment is in retreat of the rest, so that the ends form
-ressauts. Of the complete removal of a part of the cornice I know no
-instance in the Roman architecture of antiquity. To this, however, the
-architects of the later Renaissance were, in their desire for novelty
-of design, led. But the cornice of a pediment is, like the roof of an
-entire building, suggestive of shelter for the parts below. The actual
-necessity for such shelter may be slight, but any justification which
-the raking cornice has must be for expression, if nothing more, of a
-sheltering roof to what it surmounts (unless we are to assume that
-architectural design is a matter of purely fanciful composition of
-lines with no structural meaning or expression). To cut a piece out of
-the middle of it is an architectural solecism.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 51.--Pediment of Baalbek.]
-
-The actual façade by Della Porta (Fig. 50) follows the main lines of
-Vignola’s design, but the details are much altered. The podium of the
-upper story is raised in height, reversed consoles are substituted for
-the plain curved abutments of Vignola, and the raking cornices of the
-small pediments are made whole. But other aberrations take the place
-of those which are eliminated, as that of placing one pediment within
-another over the central portal, and the ugly shapes and framings of
-the tablets and niches that break the wall surfaces. Della Porta had
-acquired these habits of design from his master, Vignola, and how far
-Vignola himself could go in such monstrosities is shown in some of the
-figures of his book already spoken of. Figure 52 from this book affords
-an instance.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 52.--Tablet from Vignola.]
-
-If Vignola did much to make authoritative the later ideas of the
-sixteenth century as to the principles of ancient art and their
-application to modern uses, Palladio did even more. By the example
-of his numerous architectural works, as well as by his writings,
-the influence on modern art of this famous neo-classicist has been
-greater than that of any other architect of the Renaissance, so that
-we have, in the principal countries of Europe, a style of architecture
-which is known as Palladian. Palladio was the first architect of the
-Renaissance who was not at any time either a painter or a sculptor.
-He begins his well-known book[85] as follows: “Guided by natural
-inclination, I began in my earliest years to devote myself to the study
-of architecture, and having been always of the opinion that the ancient
-Romans were in building, as in many other things, far in advance of all
-those who came after them, I took for my master and guide Vitruvius,
-who is the only ancient writer on this art, and I set myself to the
-investigation of the remains of the ancient edifices which, injured
-by time and the violence of barbarians, are still extant. And finding
-them much more worthy of attention than I at first thought, I began
-with great diligence to measure most minutely every part of them. I
-became so ardent an investigator, not having known with what judgment
-and fine proportion they had been wrought, that not once only, but many
-times, I visited different parts of Italy and elsewhere, in order to
-understand and delineate them completely. And seeing how far the common
-manner of building differs from what I have observed in the ancient
-edifices, and read in Vitruvius, and in Leon Batista Alberti, and in
-other excellent writers since Vitruvius, and from that new manner which
-I have practised with much satisfaction, and which has been praised by
-those who profited by my work, it has seemed to me right, since man is
-not born for himself alone, but also to be useful to others, to publish
-the drawings of these edifices, which at the cost of much time and
-peril I have gathered; and to state briefly that which has seemed to me
-most worthy of consideration in them, together with those rules which I
-have observed, to the end that those who shall read my book may profit
-by such good as may be in it, and supply that which may be wanting (for
-much, perhaps, may be) so that, little by little, we may correct the
-strange abuses, the barbarous inventions, avoid the superfluous cost,
-and (what is more important) the various and continued deterioration
-which we see in so many buildings.”
-
-The implicit confidence of the neo-classicists in the art of Roman
-antiquity as the embodiment of all true principles of architectural
-design, and their unquestioning belief that mediæval art was wholly
-false in principle and barbaric in character, have seldom been more
-naïvely expressed.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 53.--Orders of San Giorgio.]
-
-Of church architecture by Palladio we have two important buildings,
-San Giorgio Maggiore and the Redentore, both in Venice. The first of
-these stands on the island of San Giorgio, opposite the Piazzetta, and
-is a characteristic Palladian design, though some parts of the west
-front may have been added after the architect’s death. This church is
-cruciform, and has barrel vaulting with interpenetrations for light,
-and a dome on pendentives over the crossing. The piers are heavy, with
-a single engaged column of the composite order, raised on a high
-pedestal, against each one, except at the crossing, where the columns
-are coupled with pilasters, while the wide archivolts rest on pairs
-of smaller pilasters of the Corinthian order, without pedestals (Fig.
-53). Both columns and pilasters have strong entasis, and the frieze of
-the entablature is rounded in profile. In raising the great order on
-pedestals Palladio conformed more closely to ancient Roman practice
-than Michael Angelo and Vignola had done; but the pedestals have a
-clumsy effect thus ranged along the nave, and their sharp angles are
-in the way of moving crowds of people. It is noticeable, too, that
-Palladio has introduced complete orders under the archivolts, giving an
-entablature to each pair of small pilasters. The entablature had before
-been omitted in this situation. The whole scheme shows in a marked
-degree how inappropriate is the use of classic orders in a church
-interior. The application of such orders to a building with aisles and
-a high nave obliges the designer to make awkward combinations, and
-to violate true classic usage in manifold ways, as we have already
-abundantly seen. He must associate large and small orders, and give
-them relationships and adjustments that belong to mediæval, rather
-than to classic, composition. The façade of this building (Fig. 54)
-has the merit of conforming in outline to the shape of the nave and
-aisles. It is the outline of the primitive Christian Roman basilica
-without any disguises in the way of reversed consoles over the aisle
-compartments, or divisions contradicting those of the interior. Instead
-of the superimposed orders of Vignola’s west fronts, Palladio has
-here, in the nave compartment, one great order of engaged columns, on
-high pedestals, rising through the entablature of a small order of
-pilasters, which is carried across the whole front, reaching to the
-height of the aisles. The total scheme gives a suggestion of mediæval
-organic composition, but has no real organic character pertaining to
-the building.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 54.--Façade of San Giorgio.]
-
-In the façade of San Francesco della Vigna, also in Venice, and by
-the same architect, the design of San Giorgio is repeated, with some
-notable changes in detail. In this case the small order, as well as the
-larger one, consists of columns, except that on each angle a pilaster
-takes the place of a column, and both orders rise from the same level,
-the smaller one resting on a continuous podium, and the larger one
-on pedestals which are ressauts of the podium. The entablature of
-the small order is here not continuous, but is broken by the nave
-compartment, though a fragment of it is inserted in the central bay of
-this compartment over the small columns that flank the portal.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 55.--The Redentore, Venice.]
-
-The scheme of the Redentore differs from that of San Giorgio. It has
-no transept and no aisles, but in the place of aisles a series of side
-chapels. A square area in front of the sanctuary is covered with a
-dome on pendentives, while the nave has a barrel vault, and the side
-chapels have barrel vaults with their axes perpendicular to the axis
-of the nave. From the dividing walls of these chapels solid abutments
-in pairs are carried up through the lean-to roofs over the chapels to
-meet the thrusts of the nave vaulting, as shown in the general view of
-the exterior (Fig. 55). The plan of the east end is peculiar. A round
-apse opens out of the north and south sides of the square covered by
-the dome, and a colonnade on a curved plan forming the sanctuary bounds
-this square area on the east side. Beyond this is an oblong enclosure
-the eastern wall of which is on a curved plan, and the sanctuary is
-flanked by small towers. The interior has a great order of Corinthian
-columns, one against each pier, resting directly on the pavement, and
-the small pilasters under the archivolts carry entablatures which
-extend to the outer wall and from them the barrel vaults of the chapels
-spring. The entablature of the great order is not set in the wall and
-broken by ressauts to cover the columns, as in San Giorgio; but is
-carried by the columns, and thus overhangs the wall with a supporting
-corbel in the middle of each intercolumniation which forms a keystone
-to the arch beneath. The façade of the Redentore is a variation of
-that of San Giorgio with the pedestals omitted from the great order,
-as in the interior, and it has an attic behind the pediment like that
-of Vignola’s small church of St. Andrea at Rome. Such is the nature
-of Palladian church architecture. We shall see more of Palladio’s art
-when we come to the consideration of the later civil and domestic
-architecture of the Renaissance.
-
-It is unnecessary to multiply examples of the church architecture of
-the Roman Renaissance, _i.e._ that architecture which derived
-its character primarily from the influences that were active in Rome
-from the beginning of the sixteenth century. For while the churches
-of this style differ considerably one from another in details, they
-agree essentially in architectural treatment growing out of a closer
-contact with ancient monuments, though with no strict conformity to
-them. Descriptions of minor differences in the forms of such buildings,
-and in the composition of their ornamental details, are tedious, and
-enough of them have now been given. We may, therefore, in the next
-chapter, pass on to the consideration of the palace architecture of the
-Renaissance.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER VI
-
-           PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE
-
-
-While it was in church edifices that the neo-classic ideas in
-architecture were first embodied, it was in vast palatial houses that
-they were most extensively carried out. Early in the fifteenth century
-luxurious living began to prevail among the upper classes of society,
-and sumptuous private dwellings on an unprecedented scale were now
-erected in Florence. Magnificent palaces had, indeed, been built in the
-later Middle Ages which were among the chief ornaments of the mediæval
-towns; but those were civic monuments expressive of the communal spirit
-and artistic culture of their time. Such buildings as the Palazzo
-Vecchio in Florence, the Palazzo Pubblico of Siena, the Ducal Palace
-of Venice, and many others were the material manifestation of a state
-of municipal pride, and popular love of beauty and propriety in public
-monuments. Upon these buildings the best craftsmanship was lavished,
-while the dwellings of the most wealthy citizens were modest in scale,
-though often beautiful in design.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate IV
-
-  PALAZZO RICCARDI
-
-  Florence]
-
-A fine example of an unostentatious, though dignified, house of a
-Florentine Patrician of the thirteenth century still extant is the
-Palazzo Mozzi. Its broad walled front of two stories over a high
-basement, with narrow string courses of simple profile and moderate
-projection, its well-faced and finely jointed masonry, and its plain
-window openings of the characteristic mediæval Florentine form in
-which the extrados is pointed while the intrados is round (Fig.
-56), is a model of architectural simplicity, while it expresses the
-superior social station of its inmates. A few smaller houses of similar
-character as to quietness and simplicity of design, many of them suited
-to the needs of humbler citizens, have been preserved in some of the
-Italian towns. A few interesting examples of these may be found in
-Perugia. They have plain stone fronts, with simple string courses
-marking off the stories, and windows in some cases wholly round arched,
-in others having the extrados pointed with an ogee curve (Fig. 57).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 56.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 57.]
-
-But early in the fifteenth century vast structures for private use
-began to arise which rivalled in scale, and in costly splendour, the
-great civic monuments of the former time. The first of these larger
-palaces in Florence is the one now known as the Riccardi, designed
-by the architect Michelozzi for Cosimo de’ Medici in 1430. It is a
-princely edifice, and though comparatively plain in general aspect, it
-is in many ways superior in architectural character to all of those
-which followed it. Like other buildings of its class it is in plan a
-survival of the ancient Roman house, having the form of a rectangle
-enclosing an open court. In elevation (Plate IV) it has two stories
-over a high basement, and is grandly simple in design, and fine in its
-proportions. In buildings of this class there is no peculiar internal
-system which requires attention before the outside can be understood.
-The apartments have generally flat wooden ceilings, and where vaulting
-occurs, as usually in the basement and sometimes in the upper stories,
-it is of a kind that calls for no buttresses against the wall, the
-thrusts being met by the thickness of the walls, and by the weight of
-the upper stories. The façades of the Riccardi have no engaged orders,
-but the great cornice has classic profiling, and its bed mouldings have
-dentils and other classic details, while modillions of semi-classic
-form support the corona. The window openings are of thoroughly mediæval
-character in their larger features, and are each composed of a round
-arch embracing two smaller arches with a central shaft and jamb
-shafts, but the shafts have the tapering form with entasis, and the
-_congé_, of classic design. The capitals are of nondescript form,
-with a channelled bell, an ovolo with egg and dart ornament, reversed
-Corinthianesque leafage depending from its angles, and a Corinthian
-abacus in each. The openings are uniform in each story, and their
-archivolts are treated in the mediæval Italian manner, the extrados
-being struck from a higher centre than the intrados. The graduated
-heights of the stories, and the varied treatment of the wall surfaces
-by rough-faced rustication in the basement, smooth-faced rustication in
-the principal story, and smooth close-jointed masonry in the top story,
-add much to the beauty of this finest of early Renaissance palaces. It
-is worthy of notice that here, as in the Italian domestic architecture
-of the Renaissance generally, the roof is not visible in a near view of
-the building, and no dormers or chimney-stacks appear. The conditions
-of climate did not call for a high-pitched roof, nor for any of those
-features that are naturally developed in the architecture of more
-northern countries. The general outline of the edifice is thus severely
-simple, and its agreeable effect is due to its fine proportions and
-arrangement of parts. It is noticeable, too, that the reveals are
-shallow on the outside, in marked contrast to the deep reveals of
-the later Renaissance architecture. This is not only conducive to
-quietness of effect, but it has the advantage of giving to the interior
-the maximum of light--since the farther out the glass is placed the
-less will be the shadow thrown upon it, while the internal reveal,
-especially when it is splayed, reflects light into the interior.
-
-The interior court of the Renaissance palace has a vaulted arcade on
-each of its four sides beneath the overhanging upper stories. These
-arcades are, in the Riccardi (Fig. 58), supported on columns of classic
-form with capitals of a composite type, but of no great beauty. The
-arches spring directly from these capitals, and have classic profiles,
-while two string courses, with an interval forming a semblance of a
-frieze, give the effect of an entablature passing over the crowns of
-the arches.
-
-The spacious apartments of these early Florentine palaces are generally
-fine in their proportions and simple in their architectural treatment.
-They are, however, rarely well lighted. The ceilings are at a great
-height above the comparatively low windows, and the windows are
-disposed for external effect, rather than for convenience within. Thus
-while these apartments are stately, they are rarely adapted to cheerful
-indoor life, and in a northern climate they would be intolerably
-gloomy. When used, as they now often are, as galleries for the
-display of works of art, they do not serve well, very small portions
-of their vast wall spaces being well lighted, and the disposition of
-the openings often such as to produce embarrassing cross lights and
-reflections.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 58.--Court of the Riccardi.]
-
-Vasari tells us that “after Brunelleschi, Michelozzi was held to be
-the most consistent architect of his time, and the one who with best
-judgment planned either palaces, monasteries or houses.” And concerning
-the Riccardi he adds, “All the more praise is due him since this was
-the first Palace in Florence built in the modern manner, and which has
-a disposition of apartments both useful and beautiful.”[86] He does not
-explain in what the superior planning of the Riccardi consists, and it
-is doubtful whether these remarks were based on any definite idea. But
-however this may be, the building is indeed a stately and magnificent
-one, of quiet aspect, and for the most part free from meaningless
-features.
-
-Hardly any other one of the Florentine palaces of the Renaissance
-equals the Riccardi in beauty and dignity. That part of the Pitti which
-was begun by Brunelleschi in 1435, though equally free from meaningless
-features, is almost too bald to be called an architectural design. Each
-story of its long façade is as monotonous as the Claudian aqueduct
-which it closely resembles.
-
-The front of the small palace called the Strozzino is in the style of
-the Riccardi, and is attributed to the same architect. It has but one
-story above the high basement, and the treatment is even more mediæval
-in character, the window arches having the pointed form.
-
-The Palazzo Strozzi, begun in 1489 by Benedetto da Majano, follows
-the same general scheme as the Riccardi, but is less admirable in its
-proportions. Vasari tells us that Majano carried the exterior almost
-to completion, but that the court and the great cornice were the work
-of Simione Pollaiuolo, called Il Cronaca. This cornice, he says, was
-copied from an ancient model in Rome which the architect had drawn and
-measured with great exactness, but he had here enlarged the scale to
-suit the proportions of the building.[87] I think it may be said that
-he enlarged it too much, and that, in common with the cornices of most
-of these Renaissance palaces, it is too heavy. The Strozzi, more than
-any other of the palatial houses of its time, has the fortress-like
-character which indicates the turbulent condition of Florence in the
-fifteenth century. The vast basement of ponderous masonry, with no
-window openings near the ground, gives a gloomy and forbidding aspect
-to the front, and marks a survival of the savage habits of feudal life
-in this epoch of advanced Italian civilization and culture.
-
-The Palazzo Pazzi, now known as the Quaratesi, is attributed to
-Brunelleschi, and has the marks of his style in the details of the
-windows. It has the same general scheme of design as the foregoing
-houses, and its stories are proportioned with the same pleasing
-gradation in their heights that we have noticed in the Riccardi;
-but the wall surfaces are different, being uniformly overlaid with
-stucco. A series of small circular openings, with mouldings over the
-windows of the topmost full story, resembling those of the drum of the
-Pazzi chapel, seem to give further evidence of Brunelleschi’s hand.
-Still another building in this style, though of even plainer external
-character, having small undivided openings, is the Palazzo Gondi,
-designed by Guiliano da San Gallo toward the close of the fifteenth
-century. The arcades of the court of the Gondi have Corinthian columns
-of great elegance, and the arches have ornamental keystones.
-
-Another type of Florentine palace of the early Renaissance is
-exemplified in the Palazzo Guardagni, attributed to Simone Pallaiuolo.
-It has an open loggia at the top, and the portals and windows have
-the round arched form with the extrados pointed. This is a thoroughly
-reasonable and appropriate Italian style of domestic building, and
-if it had been consistently adhered to, without any admixture of the
-classic elements that were soon introduced, the domestic architecture
-of Florence in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries might have merited
-our unqualified admiration. On the simple and appropriate scheme of
-the Palazzo Guardagni there was opportunity for such variations of
-disposition, proportion, and details as utility and taste might call
-for, without any resort to neo-classic elements.
-
-The foregoing buildings, though larger and more elegant than the
-private houses of the Middle Ages, are still in their main features
-largely mediæval in character. But before the later buildings of this
-class were erected, another phase of design in palatial architecture
-arose in which the spirit of the Renaissance is more manifest in the
-application of the classic orders to the walls of the façades. This
-application, as is well known, occurs first in the Palazzo Rucellai,
-designed by the architect Alberti and built just after the middle of
-the fifteenth century. We have already (pp. 35–42) seen something of
-Alberti’s use of classic orders in church architecture, and we have
-now to consider further the influences which were guiding the public
-taste as they are reflected in the works of the man who on the whole
-did most at this early epoch to establish the new architectural ideas.
-Alberti was a scholar and a man of high social station. Like most men
-of culture in Florence he had a taste for the fine arts, but, as Vasari
-tells us, he “applied himself not only to discover the principles and
-the proportions of antiquity, but also, being naturally so inclined,
-much more to writing than to practice.”[88] The moving purpose with
-him was thus primarily archæological and literary, rather than artistic.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 59.--Façade of the Rucellai.]
-
-The Rucellai is in form substantially like the Riccardi and other
-buildings of its class, but in place of the plain wall surfaces which
-are appropriate for a building that has no structural framework, we
-have an order of classic pilasters dividing the face of each story into
-bays answering to nothing in the real system of construction (Fig. 59).
-We thus have here in domestic architecture an instance of that false
-use of the orders which in church architecture was first introduced in
-the chapel of the Pazzi. Alberti’s classic tendencies are here shown
-further in the introduction of a diminutive entablature passing through
-the smaller arches of the windows, and these arches are merely cut in
-relief on a solid tympanum (Fig. 59). It is worthy of notice, too, that
-the rustication of the masonry of this façade does not mark the true
-joints. The blocks of stone are in many cases much larger than they
-appear, channels being cut upon them to simulate joints. The arch of
-one window, for instance, which by the rustication would appear to be
-made up of fourteen voussoirs, has in reality only three. The same lack
-of conformity of the simulated jointing with the true masonry joints
-is noticeable also in many parts of the façade of the Riccardi, and I
-know not how general this treatment may be in the architecture of the
-Renaissance.[89]
-
-The initiative thus given by Alberti was not at once universally
-followed. The orders did not come into general use in the façades of
-domestic architecture until the period of the later Renaissance. The
-most important Florentine palaces of the latter part of the fifteenth
-century have, as we have seen in the Strozzi, no classic orders. The
-classic elements of these buildings are confined to details such as
-the profiling of cornices, and the introduction of dentils and other
-kindred ornaments, and to the capitals of court arcades.
-
-Early in the sixteenth century a further innovation in the treatment of
-palace fronts was made in Florence by the Architect Baccio d’Agnolo,
-whose design for the campanile of Santo Spirito we have already noticed
-(p. 82), in the Palazzo Bartolini. This consisted in framing the
-windows with small orders crowned by pediments (Fig. 60). Milizia thus
-refers to this innovation: “This was the first palace with windows
-adorned with frontispieces and with columns at the doorway carrying
-architrave, frieze, and cornice. A novelty, like most others, at first
-disapproved and then idolized. The Florentines all ridiculed Baccio for
-this new style of architecture, not only with words, but with sonnets,
-and with jesting devices attached to the building, taunting him with
-having made a church of a palace.”[90] For the rest, though Baccio
-d’Agnolo has not adorned the walls of this building with orders, he has
-marked the stories with entablatures, and placed rusticated pilasters
-at the angles.
-
-As time went on the spirit of display in domestic architecture
-increased. Buildings like the Riccardi owe their admirable character
-largely to their moderation. The well-known remark of Vasari[91]
-that Cosimo de’ Medici had rejected a scheme for that building which
-had been prepared by Brunelleschi on the ground that so sumptuous a
-dwelling for a private citizen might excite envy, indicates the more
-modest feeling and sense of fitness, which as yet held in check the
-spirit of ostentation. But the boast of Filippo Strozzi that he would
-make his great palace excel all others in magnificence betrays the
-ambition that governed the later builders of the great houses of the
-Renaissance.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 60.--Window of the Bartolini.]
-
-By the beginning of the sixteenth century the vigour of the Florentine
-Republic was spent, and its artistic ascendency was declining. Lorenzo
-de’ Medici had died, and the chief seat of artistic activity was, as we
-have already seen, transferred to Rome where the conditions were very
-different from what they had been in Florence during the earlier time.
-Ideals and aspirations were further changed, and the quest of material
-splendour was more than ever stimulated under the mundane ambitions
-of a luxurious and profligate society. Thus it was that in connection
-with the later neo-classic church architecture already considered there
-arose a corresponding movement in the erection of sumptuous palatial
-houses, though still for some time palatial architecture retained much
-of the earlier moderation in design. The great Roman houses of the
-early part of the sixteenth century have a dignity and grandeur that go
-far to redeem their incongruities. It was not, as we shall see in the
-next chapter, until men like Sansovino, Vignola, and Palladio appeared
-that the Roman influences bore their full fruit.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER VII
-
-             PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMAN RENAISSANCE
-
-
-Among the first of the great Roman palatial houses of the Renaissance
-is the so-called Cancelleria, which together with the Palazzo Girand
-Torlonia of similar design, has been attributed to Bramante. The
-building is believed, however, to have been begun before Bramante had
-settled in Rome, but it is not impossible that he may have had a hand
-in its design and construction at a later time while he was at work on
-the church of St. Peter. Some ground for belief in his authorship of
-the façade is found in some of its leading features which resemble, on
-the one hand, those which are characteristic of the early Renaissance
-architecture of the north of Italy, where Bramante received his early
-training, and on the other, the work of Alberti under whose influence
-it is reasonable to suppose that he had come while in Mantua. The north
-Italian features[92] are the windows of the principal story (Fig. 61),
-which are undivided and flanked with pilasters carrying archivolts
-surmounted with cornices on panelled spandrels, and the disks in the
-wall over the windows, while the features bearing likeness to the work
-of Alberti are the orders of pilasters applied to the walls, as in the
-Rucellai of Florence. But Bramante, if this be his design, has gone
-a step farther in conformity with the Roman antique in introducing
-a podium beneath each order, as in the Flavian Amphitheatre. He
-has also extended Alberti’s arrangement of the pilasters of the
-clerestory of Santa Maria Novella, setting them in pairs across the
-whole front instead of spacing them equally. He thus established a
-mode of treatment that was afterwards extensively followed, with many
-variations, in palatial façades. Among Renaissance innovations in the
-use of the orders this is one of the most marked. In ancient Greek
-usage the columns of an order were equally spaced, save in exceptional
-cases where the central intercolumniation is considerably widened to
-give a more ample passageway, as in the Propylæa at Athens. The Romans,
-in their triumphal arches, increased the width of the central space,
-but no other inequality of spacing is common in ancient art.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 61.--Façade of the Cancelleria,
-  Rome.]
-
-The façade of the Cancelleria has a feature that is not common in
-Italian architecture, that of a slight advance of the wall at each
-end, so as to form projecting bays, as in the pavilions of the French
-Renaissance châteaux. The salience of these bays is very slight,
-however, and is hardly noticeable in a general front view. The scheme
-of the upper façade resembles that of the Rucellai very strikingly,
-save in the points just noticed; but the basement is different, having
-no order, its rusticated wall being unbroken except by the portals, of
-which there are two, and a series of small arched window openings. Only
-one of these portals belongs to the original design. This one, shown
-in the illustration, is of stately magnitude and fine proportions. Its
-jambs and lintel are profiled with severely classic mouldings, and it
-is crowned with a cornice on consoles with a frieze between it and the
-lintel. It is an amplification of Alberti’s portals in the Rucellai,
-and is of almost Greek purity of design, though it differs from a
-Greek portal in the more pronounced character of its cornice, in the
-introduction of the frieze, in the greater development of the consoles,
-and in its vertical jambs, which in Greek design would incline inward.
-A comparison with the portal of the Erechtheum will illustrate the
-points of likeness and of difference. The other portal appears to be
-an interpolation of a later time. An order of Doric columns framing
-an arch is set against a double order of Doric pilasters, the whole
-supporting a balcony, and forming a scheme characteristic of the later
-Renaissance.
-
-The court of the Cancelleria has an arcade of two vaulted stories.
-These arcades support the overhanging upper story and attic, both of
-which are embraced by a single order of pilasters not arranged in
-pairs, as in the external façade, but evenly spaced.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 62.--Portico of the Massimi, Rome.]
-
-In Rome as in Florence many of the great palaces are without engaged
-orders dividing the wall surfaces into bays. The Palazzo Massimi,
-for instance, the next one of importance, designed by Baldassare
-Peruzzi, and dating from the early part of the sixteenth century, has
-an order on the basement story only, while the wall above is unbroken
-even by string courses. In conformity with the line of the street on
-which it stands, the façade of the Massimi is curved on plan. A wide
-recessed portico (Fig. 62) gives a reason for the introduction of a
-free-standing Doric order, and in continuation of this order, an order
-of engaged Doric pilasters is ranged along the basement wall on either
-side. Both columns and pilasters are here again placed in pairs, the
-narrow intervals being narrower than in the Cancelleria, and in the
-portico the interval on the axis, opposite the portal, is wider than
-the other wide ones, while at each end a column is necessarily paired
-with a pilaster. The plain wall of the upper stories is uniformly
-rusticated and smooth-faced. The windows of the principal story are
-framed with mouldings of quiet classic profiling, have simple cornices
-on consoles, and are ranged on a podium with a ressaut under each
-window. Above are two tiers of small oblong rectangular windows with
-cartouche frames. The details of this façade have great refinement, and
-show the influence of Alberti. The Roman Doric order of the portico has
-much simple beauty. The entasis of the columns is more moderate than
-is common in later Renaissance design, and the light falls on their
-rounded surfaces, as they stand relieved against the dark void of the
-porch, with admirable effect. The façade as a whole is monotonous, but
-it has an expression of architectural reserve that is worthy of praise.
-
-The façade of the Palazzo Farnese, by Antonio da San Gallo the younger,
-the grandest of these Roman palaces, again has its wall surfaces
-unencumbered with orders. The basement is comparatively low, and all
-three stories are in effect of nearly equal height. The walls are of
-brick with rusticated quoins of stone, and a rusticated stone portal
-in relief, of the simple early Florentine type, occupies the centre
-of the basement. The quoins suggest the influence of the rusticated
-pilasters on the angles of the Bartolini palace in Florence, and San
-Gallo has followed Baccio d’Agnolo, the architect of the Bartolini,
-further by introducing small orders with pediments to frame the windows
-of the upper stories. But for pilasters he has substituted engaged
-colonnettes on high pedestals, and in the principal story has made
-angular pediments alternate with curved ones. This mode of designing
-doors and windows has since become so common that it generally passes
-without question of its propriety. It is, however, justifiable only
-on the principle, universally accepted by the architects of the
-Renaissance, that structural members may be used for ornamental
-purposes without any structural meaning or expression in harmony with
-the character of the building to which they are applied. But this is
-a principle which finds no support in any thoroughly noble system of
-architecture--Greek, Byzantine, or Gothic. Structural members may be
-used properly enough with a primarily ornamental purpose when they have
-a character in keeping with the real structural system in which they
-are used. The blind arcades, and shafted archivolts of the portals, of
-Romanesque and Gothic architecture, are largely of this nature;[93]
-but to surround the windows of a walled structure, like the Farnese,
-with columns and entablatures applied to the surface of the wall, is an
-architectural solecism. A further barbarism occurs in the windows of
-the top story, which are said to have been designed by Michael Angelo,
-and the fact that they are like the upper windows of the church of St.
-Peter lends support to the attribution. These windows of the Farnese
-are arched, and the crowns of the arches rise above the capitals of the
-flanking colonnettes so that an entablature resting on these capitals
-cannot pass over them. Complete entablatures are therefore omitted,
-entablature blocks being set upon the capitals to support the raking
-cornices of the pediments (Fig. 63). This makes a bad composition,
-because the structural system simulated would in reality be an
-insecure one in consequence of the absence of a tying member which the
-entablature should form in such a scheme. The eye instinctively feels
-that the pediment cornices are tending to thrust so as to overthrow the
-supporting colonnettes. It is true that in the windows of the principal
-façade (the figure is taken from a window on the side of the building)
-the cornice of the entablature block is returned against the wall over
-the arch; but this is so far in retreat, and so inconspicuous, that it
-does not properly complete the pediment triangle. Precedents for many
-of these Renaissance aberrations of design may be found in ancient
-Roman art, and this particular one is foreshadowed at Baalbek, where
-in the pediment already noticed (p. 95) the entablature, as well as
-the raking cornice, is broken, the middle part being set back in the
-plane of the wall, and the parts over the supporting pilasters forming
-ressauts. But I know of no ancient instance in which the entablature
-is completely removed between the ressauts, unless the one figured by
-Serlio[94] (reproduced in Fig. 64) be ancient. He does not say that it
-is, but he describes it among other things that he calls ancient, and
-says that he found it between Foligno and Rome, and that it exhibits an
-architectural license because the architrave is broken by the arch.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 63.--Window of the Farnese.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 64.--Portal from Serlio.]
-
-In the court of the Farnese we have a frank return to the ancient
-Roman combination of arch and entablature, with a Doric order in the
-basement, an Ionic order next above it, and an order of Corinthian
-pilasters in the top story. Where engaged orders are thus used in the
-inside of a rectangle it is usual to set a section of a pilaster in the
-angle, as the architect has done here. But the treatment of the capital
-in this angle becomes a matter of difficulty which cannot be overcome
-in an entirely satisfactory manner. This is especially the case where
-the Ionic order is used, as in the principal story of this court. It
-is necessary here to have parts of two capitals, on the angle strip of
-pilaster, in order that there may be a bolster on each side parallel
-with those of the other capitals in the colonnade to which it belongs,
-and a volute on each side facing in the same direction as the others
-in the same series. Thus two volutes have to be mitred together with
-awkward effect. A further awkwardness arising from this misuse of the
-orders is that of bringing three supporting members together in the
-angles, the end column of each adjoining colonnade, and the pilaster
-set in the angle in which they meet.
-
-An earlier instance of the Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to
-a continuous arcade occurs in Rome in the cloister of Santa Maria della
-Pace, the design of which is attributed to Bramante. The upper story of
-this arcade is worthy of notice as having a rhythmical scheme, such as
-is common in mediæval design, wrought into the neo-classic composition.
-This story has no arches, but a simple entablature is carried on square
-piers rising over the piers of the ground story, with a pilaster on
-the face of each, and in each interval is a small round column rising
-over the crown of the arch below. But this alternation of large and
-small, and compound and simple, members has no meaning apart from that
-of ornamental effect. In mediæval design, the larger members would
-have the function of supporting heavier weights, and the rhythmical
-arrangement would thus have a primarily structural meaning.
-
-After the early part of the sixteenth century Italy, as before
-remarked, produced few architects of a high order of genius. The later
-architecture of the Renaissance is the work of men of little genuine
-artistic inspiration, though many of them had great enthusiasm for what
-they conceived to be the true principles of the art and unbounded zeal
-in its practice. A few typical examples of the later forms of palatial
-design by such men as Sansovino, Sanmichele, Vignola, Palladio, and
-Scamozzi will be enough for us to consider. All of these men based
-their practice theoretically, as we have seen, on the writings of
-Vitruvius and on a rigorous study of the architectural remains of Roman
-antiquity; and nearly all of them wrote treatises on their art which
-have formed the basis of most modern practice.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 65.--Part of façade of the Library
-  of St. Mark.]
-
-Jacopo Tatti, called Sansovino, went to Rome early in the sixteenth
-century in company with Giuliano de San Gallo, and there formed a
-friendship with Bramante[95] under whose influence he acquired that
-exclusive predilection for classic forms which we find reflected in
-his art. Coming to Florence, we are not told in what year, he designed
-a false front of wood for the cathedral church of Santa Maria del
-Fiore, which is said to have called forth the admiration of Pope Leo
-X.[96] This incident is significant of the spirit of the time, and such
-architectural shams were extensively produced by the architects of the
-later Renaissance. The most important works of Sansovino are in Venice,
-where he built the well-known Library of St. Mark, the so-called
-Loggia of the Campanile, the Palazzo Cornaro, and several other large
-buildings.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 66.--Corner of the Parthenon.]
-
-The façade of the Library of St. Mark has but two stories including
-the basement, and these are adorned with a Doric and an Ionic order
-respectively (Fig. 65); the first noticeable peculiarity of this design
-is its very florid character. The reveals are deep, the orders are in
-high relief, and the friezes and arch spandrels are loaded with showy
-ornamental carvings. Milizia says[97] that in the Doric order of this
-façade Sansovino attempted to solve a problem which had troubled all of
-the Italian architects, namely, how to make exactly half of a metope
-fall at the end of the frieze. The Greeks had placed a triglyph at the
-angle, but in so doing they had been obliged to sacrifice uniformity,
-since this angle triglyph fell over one side of the corner column,
-instead of over its centre as the other triglyphs of the series did
-(Fig. 66). This had made it necessary to lengthen the last metope,
-and to narrow the last intercolumniation. The Romans had set the last
-triglyph over the centre of the corner column, and had thus been
-obliged to give less than half a metope to the corner (Fig. 67), though
-they secured uniformity in all the rest of the parts. The frieze,
-however, had now an appearance of incompleteness at each end, as of a
-thing cut off arbitrarily through one of its members. The architects
-of the Renaissance appear to have disliked this narrow section of a
-metope at the end of the frieze, and to have sought a way to make it
-exactly half. This, as Milizia tells us, Sansovino did in the Library
-of St. Mark by lengthening the frieze enough to give the fragment of
-metope the width that was desired. Turning to the design itself (Fig.
-68), we find that this obliged him to set a square pier with a pilaster
-on its face at the angle. Of this device Milizia remarks that it was a
-folly.[98]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 67.--Roman corner.]
-
-In the general scheme of this façade (Fig. 65) Sansovino has followed
-that of the ancient theatre of Marcellus, with a free introduction of
-additional enrichments. In the order of the basement he has departed
-from the severe plainness of the Roman model by adding mouldings and
-keystones to the archivolts, reliefs to the spandrels, and disks to
-the metopes of the frieze. But all this is done with a commendable
-feeling for breadth of effect. To the order of the upper story he has
-made more striking additions, the most noticeable of which is the
-insertion of a small free-standing column on each side of the pier to
-bear the archivolt, an innovation which was followed by Palladio and
-many later architects. The least admirable features of the design are
-the frieze of the upper order, which is widened beyond all tolerable
-proportion, and an ornamental balustrade over the main cornice. The
-frieze is ornamented with inelegant festoons in high relief, and
-pierced with oblong windows opening into a low upper story which the
-entablature encloses. The columns of the upper order, as well as the
-free-standing colonnettes, are raised on panelled pedestals, and
-balustraded balconies are formed in front of each window opening. This
-sumptuous scheme embodies very fully the ideal to which the designers
-of the Renaissance had been tending under the Roman influence of the
-sixteenth century, and it has been extensively reproduced, with various
-minor modifications, in the civic architecture of all parts of Europe.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 68.--Angle of Library of St. Mark.]
-
-As the façade of the Library of St. Mark is based upon that of the
-ancient theatre of Marcellus, so the Loggetta of the Campanile is an
-adaptation of the scheme of the Arch of Titus extended to include three
-arches, and enriched with statues and reliefs to suit the florid fancy
-of the time. But while the scheme is plainly derived from the Arch of
-Titus, the proportions of the parts are very different, and much less
-admirable. The order is made lower and the attic higher. The Arch of
-Titus is the finest in proportions of all the Roman triumphal arches,
-and the grandest in monumental simplicity. Sansovino’s changes and
-ornamental additions spoil the composition, and do not fit the design
-for the building to which it is attached. Such a design could not have
-any proper relationship to such a building. To attach any sort of a
-Roman triumphal arch scheme to the base of a mediæval tower is an
-architectural absurdity.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 69.--Palazzo Cornaro.]
-
-In the scheme of the Palazzo Cornaro an Ionic order and a Corinthian
-order frame in the round-headed windows of the upper stories. The
-columns of these orders are set in pairs, each pair having a plinth
-and pedestal in common. On the side walls of the building these orders
-are returned to the extent of one bay, which brings four columns
-together at the angles with clumsy effect. The frieze of the uppermost
-entablature is widened, as in the Library of St. Mark, but its
-surface is plain save for a series of oval openings which light a low
-attic. The high rusticated basement, which includes a mezzanine, has
-square-headed windows framed by a rusticated Doric order resting on a
-projecting sill supported on plain consoles; and over each of these a
-low rectangular window, flanked by elongated consoles on square blocks
-set upon the entablature of the window below, lights the mezzanine.
-A curved pediment over each of the lower windows, between the blocks
-that support the flanking members of the windows above, gives further
-awkwardness to the total scheme (Fig. 69). Barbaric compositions such
-as this were now to become of frequent occurrence in the architecture
-of the later Renaissance. While the designers were eliminating the
-mediæval forms more completely than their predecessors had done, they
-were at the same time departing more widely from classic models, and
-introducing many monstrosities of composition, from the influence of
-which modern art has greatly suffered.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 70.--Two bays of the Porta del
-  Palio.]
-
-The works of Sanmichele show an equally exclusive employment of
-classic features, with the same freedom in deforming them and using
-them in novel and ungainly ways. In the Porta del Palio of Verona, a
-characteristic example of his work, he has used a pseudo-Doric order
-in which the columns are fluted after the Ionic manner with fillets
-between the channels, and are raised on heavy square plinths. The
-columns are disposed in pairs, dividing the façade into three wide
-intervals and four narrow ones (Fig. 70), and each wide space has a
-large rectangular recess spanned by a flat arch, with a sculptured
-keystone in the form of a console, under the entablature of the
-order. At the level of the soffit of this arch the wall is crowned
-by a cornice passing behind the columns. The central bay has a large
-rectangular portal without jamb mouldings, and in each lateral bay is
-a small doorway framed with classic jamb mouldings and a pediment on
-consoles. Over each of these openings is a secondary flat arch with
-deep voussoirs reaching to the soffit of the upper one. Pilasters take
-the place of columns on the angles of the façade, and the walls are
-rusticated. In the façade of the opposite side the scheme is varied,
-and is plainer. The columns of the order are disposed as before, but
-instead of being fluted they are rusticated like the walls, and have no
-bases, while a large round-arched opening, with impost mouldings and a
-plain keystone, fills each wide interval.
-
-Of Sanmichele’s palace fronts the best in Verona is, I think, that
-of the Palazzo Canossa, where over a high rusticated basement he
-has placed a shallow order of Corinthian pilasters in pairs, set
-close together, on a podium with ressauts. This order embraces both
-the principal floor and a low story above it, and has considerable
-elegance. The effect of the whole front is broad and quiet, save for
-the heavy balustrade with showy statues which crowns it. It will be
-seen, as we pass in review these different compositions, that the range
-of eccentricities of design embodied in them is as great as we find in
-the works of the earlier Renaissance, though they show fewer mediæval
-characteristics. The Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria, also by Sanmichele,
-for instance, has a Doric order over a plain rusticated basement, like
-that of the Porta del Palio, but with the columns equally spaced,
-except that the central intercolumniation is made wider than the others
-in conformity with the width of the portal beneath it, and a pilaster
-is coupled with a column on each angle. Plain round-arched windows
-occupy the intervals between the columns, and a corbel in the form
-of a sculptured head is set under the entablature of the order over
-the crown of each arch. The plain windows of the basement have clumsy
-rectangular sills on consoles.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 71.--Palazzo Bevilacqua.]
-
-A more elaborate design by the same architect is that of the front of
-the Palazzo Bevilacqua (Fig. 71). Here an order of rusticated Doric
-pilasters, supporting an entablature with channelled consoles in
-the place of triglyphs, and a cornice surmounted with a balustrade
-forming a balcony to the story above, divides the basement wall into
-alternately wide and narrow bays. A round-arched window in each bay
-has a heavy keystone in the form of a sculptured bust, which forms
-at the same time a corbel to the entablature. The unequal spacing of
-the pilasters leads to an awkward irregularity in the spacing of the
-channelled consoles which do duty as triglyphs in the frieze. One of
-them is set over the centre of each pilaster, and the spaces over the
-wide intervals each give place to three of them, while over the narrow
-intervals there is too much room for one and not enough for two. The
-designer has chosen to have but one, and the effect of the resulting
-wider spacing over the narrow bays is both unpleasant and unclassic.
-The upper story has a still more barocco character. A Corinthian order
-with columns of alternately straight and spiral channelling, spaced in
-conformity with the pilasters of the basement and raised on pedestals,
-frames in a series of round-arched windows which are alternately large
-and small in correspondence with the magnitudes of the intervals.
-The window of each wide bay nearly fills the space enclosed by the
-order, and a keystone in the arch forms a corbel to the entablature,
-while the spandrels are adorned with sculptures in high relief after
-the manner of those of the Roman triumphal arches. Over the smaller
-arch in each narrow bay the spandrels are in relief and are crowned
-with a pediment surmounted by a horizontal cornice on a shallow
-ressaut corresponding to that of the spandrels, while over all this
-a plain oblong rectangular opening lights a low top story which is
-not otherwise expressed in the composition. In these narrow bays the
-corbels are introduced under the entablature as in the wider ones, and
-carved festoons fill the spaces between them and the capitals on either
-side. It is a capricious scheme, by which the designer has sought to
-quicken the jaded sensibilities of people surfeited with architectural
-aberrations. Of course the arrangement of these elements is based on a
-certain rhythmical order which often appears to be thought a sufficient
-justification of such meaningless compositions; but order and rhythm do
-not alone constitute a fine work of art.
-
-Of the secular architecture of Vignola the Palazzo Caprarola, in the
-hill country between Rome and Viterbo, is the most important. This
-building, says Milizia, “is without doubt the grandest and the most
-beautiful work of this great artist.”[99] The building, which is
-illustrated by elaborate drawings in Vignola’s own book, has in plan
-the form of a regular pentagon enclosing a circular court. The form is,
-of course, given from pure caprice, and imposes needless difficulties,
-as if with the sole purpose of ingeniously solving them. The basement,
-with a salient fortress-like bastion on each angle, is in two stages,
-of which the lower one has a batter wall. Over this are the principal
-story of the state apartments, and two other stories containing upward
-of eighty sleeping chambers. Slightly projecting bays are formed on the
-angles, as in the Cancelleria at Rome, and each façade is divided into
-two stages by superimposed orders of pilasters on high pedestals. The
-projecting bays have rusticated quoins instead of pilasters, and the
-wall of the first story of each of these bays is rusticated. An open
-loggia with five arches in the intervals of the order, and one enclosed
-arch at each end, reaches across the main front of the principal story
-between the salient bays, and the main portal is an arched opening,
-with rusticated jambs in relief and an entablature, in the upper stage
-of the basement. This portal is reached by a double ramp mounting
-an outer terrace and the lower basement stage. Below this, giving
-access to the lower basement, is a rusticated portico with an order
-of rusticated pilasters and three open arches flanked by two narrow
-enclosed bays with niches, and crowned with a balustrade.
-
-The circular court has an open arcade of widely spaced arches in two
-stages, of which the lower one has a plain rusticated wall, and the
-upper one an Ionic order with columns in pairs, and a balustrade
-with statues crowning the entablature. This sumptuous monument was a
-source of inspiration to the later architects of the trans-alpine
-Renaissance, and De l’Orme’s oval courts of the Tuileries, and the
-circular courts of the palace of Whitehall by Inigo Jones, suggest its
-influence.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 72.--Part of the Portico of Vicenza,
-  from Palladio’s book.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 73.]
-
-But in domestic and civic architecture Palladio was more prolific
-than Vignola, and his work has had a correspondingly wider influence.
-Among the earlier civic buildings by him is the well-known portico
-of the town hall of his native city, Vicenza. This portico of two
-stories covers three sides of a building of oblong rectangular plan,
-dating from the Middle Ages, and consisting of a great hall over a
-low basement. Palladio’s scheme (Fig. 72) for this portico is plainly
-derived from the town hall of Padua to which he refers in his book
-as a most notable edifice.[100] But while basing his design on that
-of Padua, he modifies it by features drawn from other sources. In
-place of the simple arcades of the mediæval Paduan model, he has
-substituted a complicated combination of arches with large and small
-orders, in which the inspiration of Sansovino’s Library of St. Mark in
-Venice is apparent. The free-standing column under the archivolt of
-Sansovino’s upper story (Fig. 65, p. 120) is reproduced by Palladio
-in both stories of the portico of Vicenza. But instead of a single
-column, he has inserted a pair on each side of the arch, ranged in the
-direction of the thickness of the wall, as shown in the plan (Fig.
-73). The intervals between the columns of the great orders are very
-wide, because they had to conform with the spacing of the openings in
-the mediæval structure enclosed; but the arches within the intervals
-are necessarily of narrower span, since their crowns could not rise
-above the soffit of the entablature. Thus the free-standing columns
-of the small order which support these arches are set farther away
-from the pier than they are in Sansovino’s scheme. This free-standing
-column supporting the archivolt is often spoken of as an innovation of
-Sansovino and Palladio. It is worthy of notice, however, that instances
-of it occur in the Græco-Roman architecture of Syria, as in S. Simeon
-Stylites (Fig. 74); but the arch in these cases is not framed in with
-the useless order. In the ground story arcade of Padua the spandrels
-have circular perforations, and these are reproduced by Palladio in
-both stories of his portico.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 74.--Arch of St. Simeon Stylites.]
-
-From a structural point of view Palladio’s scheme is an improvement on
-that of Padua. For in Padua, as in Vicenza, both stories of the portico
-are vaulted, and the slender columns which alone bear the vaulting
-are too weak to withstand the thrusts of this vaulting, and thus both
-transverse and longitudinal tie-rods are inserted to maintain the
-stability of the fabric. But Palladio’s massive and heavily weighted
-piers are strong enough to bear the thrusts without the aid of ties,
-and it may be added that the great orders have more function here
-than they usually have in Renaissance design, since their columns act
-somewhat as buttresses. The shaft of an order has not, indeed, a proper
-form for an abutment, and has no buttress expression. Its resistance
-to thrust is slight, but it is better than nothing at all. Following
-Sansovino, the architect has introduced a balustrade in each opening of
-the arcade, and a continuous one as a crowning feature of the cornice.
-
-Palladio himself thought well of this work, and he does not hesitate to
-say in his book that it will bear comparison with the most beautiful
-buildings of antiquity. He tells us, also, that it is constructed in
-the best manner out of excellent cut stone.[101] The last remark is
-significant, for genuine stone masonry was not always employed by
-Palladio in buildings which had the appearance of stone construction.
-The use of brick and rubble with a revetment of stucco had not been
-uncommon with the builders of the early Renaissance, and such materials
-were extensively employed even by Bramante and Michael Angelo. But
-Palladio went further than his predecessors in the creation of
-architectural shams.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 75.--Loggia Bernarda.]
-
-Palladio was an earnest devotee of his art as he understood it, but
-he had what may be called a theatrical ideal of architecture. The
-superficial appearance was what chiefly concerned him. He had great
-versatility in scenic and structurally meaningless composition,
-and his numerous palace fronts in Vicenza are remarkable for their
-superficially varied character. The Palazzo Valmarana, with its
-colossal pilasters on a high podium overlapping a lesser order
-embracing the basement and mezzanine, while the great entablature is
-broken into ressauts over the pilasters; the Palazzo Colleone-Porta,
-with its basement wall rusticated over a plain dado and an Ionic order
-on the face of the superstructure; the Palazzo Porta-Barbarano, with
-its superimposed orders and elaborate ornamentation in stucco relief;
-and the Loggia Bernarda, with its gigantic composite order and balcony
-corbels in the form of Doric triglyphs (Fig. 75), are sufficient
-illustrations of this. The skin of stucco with which many of these
-buildings were originally covered has broken off in many places,
-revealing the poor materials of which they are built.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 76.--Window of Palazzo Branzo.]
-
-Palladio’s compositions are, indeed, based on order and symmetry, but
-order and symmetry of a mechanical kind. On these and other kindred
-qualities grammarians in art are prone to lay great stress, but unless
-accompanied by many others, which for the most part elude all human
-powers of analysis and description, though they are instinctively
-grasped by the true artist and appreciated by the discerning and
-sympathetic beholder, they have little value. Palladio and his
-associates were not true artists, they were grammatical formalists
-without the inspiration of genius.[102] As for Scamozzi, little need be
-said. Milizia tells us that he studied architecture with his father,
-but that his real masters were the monuments of art themselves; and
-that, stimulated by the fame of Sansovino and Palladio, he observed
-their compositions closely, and conceived the ambition to surpass
-them. His works, which do not differ materially from those of these
-masters, present no features that are worthy of special remark, unless
-a peculiar form of compound window, which occurs in the Palazzo Branzo
-in Vicenza, be an exception. In this composition, often reproduced
-in the later Renaissance architecture of all countries, two narrow
-square-headed openings, each crowned with an entablature, flank a wider
-one spanned by an arch (Fig. 76). This composition has been called
-an invention of Scamozzi’s.[103] But there had been many previous
-instances of its most noticeable feature, _i.e._ the entablature
-broken by an arch, as in the porch of the Pazzi by Brunelleschi. I do
-not know that windows had before been designed in this form in the
-architecture of the Renaissance; but the same composition occurs in the
-Roman architecture of Syria, as in the Basilica of Shakka (Fig. 77).
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 77.--Basilica of Shakka.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate V
-
-  SAN BERNARDINO
-
-  Perugia]
-
-We have thus far confined our attention to the architecture of the
-Renaissance as it was developed under the Florentine and Roman
-influences, early and late. We must now notice some of the phases which
-the art assumed under other local influences that were subordinately
-active, chiefly in the north of Italy.
-
-
-
-
-                             CHAPTER VIII
-
-         CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN NORTH ITALY
-
-
-While the architecture of the Italian Renaissance assumed the two
-principal phases that are broadly classified as Florentine and Roman,
-from the localities in which the conditions and influences that gave
-rise to them chiefly prevailed, it is also true, as is well known, that
-other influences became active in various parts of Italy, leading to
-the production of phases of design that cannot be strictly classed as
-either Florentine or Roman. No exact classification of these can be
-made, but the most marked types having distinctly local characteristics
-are those of Lombardy and Venice.
-
-But before we examine the church architecture of the Lombard and
-Venetian Renaissance, one small building of exceptional character in
-central Italy is worthy of special notice, namely, the façade of the
-church of San Bernardino of Perugia, dating from the second half of the
-fifteenth century. This work is remarkable for delicate workmanship,
-and affords a rare instance of the use of colour in the architecture
-of the Renaissance. It is made up of red and white marble, with points
-of dark green and turquoise blue, arranged with quiet harmony of
-effect. But it is a combination of members put together with no regard
-to structural consistency. The designer appears to have had not the
-slightest idea that arches and columns, pilasters and entablatures,
-have any meaning save as elements of abstract ornamental composition
-to be played about according to his fancy. The front (Plate V) is an
-upright rectangle, crowned with an entablature and a low pediment. A
-broad pilaster is set on each angle, and the space between is filled
-with a wide and deep recess having a splayed arch reaching to the
-entablature on splayed jambs. A smaller entablature at the arch impost
-crosses the entire front, breaking around the jambs and pilasters,
-and dividing it into two nearly equal parts. The smaller details
-consist of panellings and medallions in the splays of the jambs and
-archivolts, of sculptured reliefs on the tympanum and on the panels,
-and of shafted and gabled niches sheltering statues on the pilasters.
-The panels of the splays are flanked with diminutive pilasters which
-are superimposed with only a narrow fillet between those below and
-those which rest upon them, and the ornamental framing of the niches is
-made up of colonnettes carrying rectangular stilt-blocks on which small
-pediments are set. The elaborate richness of this façade is unusual in
-the Renaissance architecture of central Italy, except in the smaller
-compositions of tombs and pulpits, which in treatment it resembles. But
-profusion of ornament is a marked characteristic of the architecture
-of the Renaissance in north Italy, to which we may now turn. In Milan
-and Venice the neo-classic influences were, even more than in Florence
-and Rome, confined to ornamental details, and in these details the
-designers of the North had still less regard for classic correctness
-and consistency than those of central Italy had shown; while the larger
-structural forms of their buildings still remained essentially Lombard
-and Venetian. Much of the architecture of the North was, it is true,
-the work of architects from central Italy, but these architects were
-so far influenced by local tastes and conditions as to produce designs
-very different in character from those of Florence or of Rome.
-
-A characteristic early example of this Northern Renaissance design in
-its most florid form is the well-known façade of the church of the
-Certosa of Pavia, dating from the close of the fifteenth century. The
-effect of this front is in its larger parts much like that of a late
-mediæval Italian one, but the details are pseudo-classic with strange
-admixture of mediæval elements. The general scheme is a reproduction
-of the pseudo-Gothic façade of the neighbouring cathedral of Milan,
-having nearly the same general proportions, and being divided into
-five bays by deep buttresses. The steep gable, however, which in Milan
-embraces the whole front, is omitted, and in its stead a horizontal
-cornice crowns the three central bays, and this, together with the
-strongly marked horizontal lines below, greatly modifies the general
-effect of the composition. In the smaller details there is no likeness
-between the two façades, that of Pavia showing a survival of Lombard
-Romanesque forms with the pseudo-classic elements ingrafted on them.
-A prominent feature of the Lombard Romanesque architecture is the
-diminutive open arcade. This feature is extensively employed in the
-mediæval portions of the church to which this façade is the western
-enclosure, and it is reproduced, with neo-classic modifications, at
-the top of each of the two principal stages into which the façade is
-divided. The arches are here carried on small piers, and are framed
-with diminutive pilasters and entablatures. The portal has a pair of
-free-standing Corinthian columns on each side, bearing a ressaut of an
-entablature which spans the opening, and from these ressauts an arch is
-sprung with spandrels in relief crowned with a classic cornice. In each
-one of the other bays of the ground story a rectangular window, with
-classic mouldings and a cornice of classic profile, is subdivided in
-the mediæval manner with two small arches on a central column and jamb
-shafts. These last have a tapering form, with a profusion of carved
-ornament in high relief, and are like the shafts of candelabra (Fig.
-78). The mediæval feature of a large circular opening over the central
-portal is enclosed within a rectangle surmounted by an entablature and
-a classic pediment, while this compound is flanked on either side by
-a pair of arches opening beneath a larger arch. To all this mixture
-of Romanesque and neo-classic features a pseudo-Gothic character is
-superadded by statues set in niches of the buttresses, and spiky
-pinnacles over the lateral bays. The details of this overelaborate
-composition, the work of several successive architects, have no merit
-in themselves, and the work as a whole is trivial and unmeaning.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 78.--Certosa of Pavia.]
-
-Among the monuments of the early Renaissance in Milan are several of
-importance, and of these the church and sacristy of San Satiro are
-of special interest because they are said to have been designed by
-Bramante.[104]
-
-The church bears, I think, unmistakable marks of Bramante’s
-authorship, being a reflection on a reduced scale of St. Andrea of
-Mantua by Alberti, which there is every reason to believe had been
-studied and admired by Bramante during his travels in the north for
-improvement in his art, and a foreshadowing of the great scheme which
-he subsequently prepared for St. Peter’s in Rome. Like St. Andrea, it
-has a barrel-vaulted nave and transept, with a dome on pendentives
-over the crossing. The aisles have groined vaulting, and the piers are
-square and are faced with pilasters. The dome is raised on a very low
-drum moulded in stucco into the form of an entablature, and the vault
-surfaces are elaborately coffered in stucco. The church has no eastern
-arm, since a wall with a much-venerated painting of the Virgin is said
-to have stood so near the site that space for such an arm could not
-be had without demolishing it; and as this was not to be thought of,
-Bramante made a semblance of an eastern arm in the form of a sunk panel
-with splayed sides, on which he wrought in stucco relief the elaborate
-perspective which is so noticeable a feature of the interior.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 79.--Sacristy of San Satiro.]
-
-The sacristy (Fig. 79) was built immediately after the church, in the
-form of an octagon about eight metres in diameter. It is covered with
-an octagonal dome lighted by a circular opening in each of its sides
-just above the springing level. The walls of the interior are divided
-into two stages, the lower one having segmental niches alternating
-with shallow rectangular recesses, one on each side of the polygon
-except that of the entrance, while the stage above has a gallery, like
-a triforium, in the thickness of the wall, with a pair of round-arched
-openings in each bay. The dome is enclosed within a drum of brick which
-is covered by a low-pitched timber roof.
-
-The ornamental details of the interior are all of stucco, and consist
-of two superimposed false orders of pilasters set in the angles,
-and broken on plan so as to fit them, the entablature of each order
-having a ressaut over each pilaster, and the surfaces of the friezes
-and pilasters being profusely enriched with ornaments in relief. But
-these details are said to have been extensively worked over in later
-times, so that it is doubtful whether any correct idea of the original
-character of this interior can now be formed, except as to its larger
-features.
-
-The monument is a diminutive adaptation, in simplified form, of a local
-mediæval type of building of which San Vitale of Ravenna appears to
-have been the original example, and San Lorenzo of Milan an offshoot.
-There are points of similarity between the sacristy of San Satiro and
-the church of the Consolazione of Todi (Fig. 36, p. 76) that go far to
-determine their common authorship. The superimposed pilasters broken
-into the angles of a polygon, the niches in the lower bays, and the
-ribs on the surfaces of the vault rising from the pilasters[105] are
-similar in both.
-
-A curious domed structure of the early Renaissance in Milan is the
-east end of the church of Santa Maria delle Grazie. The dome is
-hemispherical, and is raised on a drum resting on pendentives over
-a square area. The most noticeable part of the composition is the
-exterior, which completely masks the inside. The drum (Fig. 80) is
-a polygon of sixteen sides, and is in two stages, the lower one of
-which is solid, and rises above the springing of the vault, while the
-upper stage, in the form of an open arcaded gallery, with an attic in
-retreat, reaches far above the haunch of the dome which is covered with
-a low-pitched roof of timber crowned with a lantern. The lower stage
-has an order of pilasters with a nondescript entablature, having an
-enormously high frieze ornamented with an engaged balustrade. A pair of
-square-headed windows with mullions, surmounted with pediments, opens
-through each face of the polygon, except the four which fall over the
-piers of the interior. Against each of these sides a turret rises,
-forming an abutment. A panelled podium crowns the entablature of this
-lower stage, and upon it the shafted arcade of the top story rests. The
-north and south sides of the square beneath have each a low apse, while
-on the east is a rectangular choir with an apse like the other two.
-
-The architectural treatment of this exterior is not expressive of the
-inside. The square parts are divided into four stages answering to
-nothing within, and the lower three of these stages are carried around
-the apses. The wall surfaces are broken into rectangular panellings by
-mouldings and pilasters, every alternate pilaster in the third stage
-having a tapering ornamental member, like the window shafts of the
-Certosa of Pavia, worked in relief on its face; and the panels are
-adorned with disks and medallions. Like most of the early Renaissance
-architecture of Milan, this building is entirely of brick with
-ornaments of terra-cotta.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 80.--Santa Maria delle Grazie.]
-
-The design is attributed to Bramante,[106] and it has features that
-lend support to belief in this authorship. The encircling arcade at
-the top suggests the encircling colonnade of the same architect’s
-subsequent design for the dome of St. Peter’s. It may not be unlikely
-that this arcade, wrought while the author was under the influence of
-the local Lombard Romanesque, suggested the idea of the encircling
-colonnade after he had come under the severer classic influence in
-Rome. The alternation of pilasters in the top story of the apses, with
-the two intercolumns over each interval in the stage below, corresponds
-to the design of the interior of the sacristy of S. Satiro.
-
-In the chapel of St. Peter Martyr of the church of Sant’Eustorgio,
-attributed to the Florentine architect Michelozzi, we have a circular
-celled vault on salient ribs, like Brunelleschi’s vault of the Pazzi.
-This vault is enclosed within a drum carried on pendentives, and is
-lighted by a circular opening in the drum under each alternate vault
-cell. The drum is polygonal on the outside, is carried up far above the
-haunch of the vault, and is covered with a low-pitch roof of timber
-crowned with a tall lantern. The lower walls of the interior of the
-square beneath this vault have an order of pilasters, and over the
-entablature of this order are arched windows, one on the north and the
-other on the south side, each of which has a mullion and jamb shafts
-of the Certosa tapering type, and pseudo-Gothic tracery. Most of the
-details of this interior are of stone, which give it a more monumental
-character than the buildings before noticed have. The outside is of
-brick, the square part being plain, with simple angle buttresses, and
-crowned with a cornice of classic profiling. Pinnacles made up of
-neo-classic details rise from the angles, and the drum is adorned with
-an order of pilasters, and with moulded circular panels alternating
-with circular openings. The building as a whole has the moderation of
-the works of the early Florentine Renaissance, and is in noticeable
-contrast to the more florid designs of this region already noticed.
-
-A somewhat later example of ecclesiastical architecture of the
-Renaissance in Milan is the church of the Monastero Maggiore, dating
-from the beginning of the sixteenth century, and said to have been
-designed by Dolcebono, a pupil of Bramante. This is a rectangular
-structure without aisles, having round-arched pseudo-Gothic vaulting,
-and divided into two parts by a screen across the middle, and into two
-stories by superimposed orders of pilasters. In each bay of the ground
-story is a deep round-arched rectangular recess in the thickness of
-the wall, and over each of these an open gallery with two colonnettes
-and two small jamb pilasters carrying an entablature over each of the
-lateral spaces so formed, and an arch over the central one, an early
-instance of a form of compound opening that was much used in the
-architecture of the later Renaissance.[107]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 81.--East end of Como.]
-
-The cathedral of Como affords further illustration of the style of
-early Renaissance design that is peculiar to north Italy. The building,
-however, has parts which belong to different periods ranging from
-1396 to the early part of the eighteenth century. The features most
-worthy of attention are chiefly those of the exterior,--the east end
-and the sides of the nave. It is said that Bramante worked here also,
-and certainly as viewed from the east the composition bears a striking
-likeness to the church of the Consolazione at Todi (pp. 74–77). It is,
-however, in the larger features alone that the likeness holds. The
-details of Como are not, as at Todi, of purely neo-classic character;
-they are mediæval Lombard modified by neo-classic elements. Instead
-of superimposed orders of pilasters we have here (Fig. 81) Lombard
-Romanesque buttresses reaching from the ground to the cornice. The
-cornice has the neo-classic profiling, and is broken into ressauts over
-the buttresses, and at a lower level a subordinate band of mouldings is
-carried along the wall and around the buttresses, the whole forming a
-likeness to an entablature. The traditional Lombard features peculiar
-to this region are further reproduced in the arcades of each bay just
-beneath the pseudo-entablature; but instead of mediæval colonnettes
-these small arches are supported by diminutive pilasters. The walls
-are divided into three stages by string courses of classic profiling,
-and a rectangular window with plain classic jambs and lintel opens in
-each bay of the middle stage, while the basement wall is unbroken by
-openings. Disks, one in each bay, adorn the frieze of the simulated
-entablature, and a sculptured figure is worked on the corresponding
-part of each buttress. The bases of the half domes over the apses are,
-as at Todi, treated like attics, but the central dome, with its high
-drum, is not by Bramante. It is of a later period, and has a more
-advanced neo-classic character. The scheme of the Lombard buttresses
-is extended along the walls of the nave, but the details of the window
-openings, and of the portals here are very different from anything in
-the apses, and are in a more florid style.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 82.--Portal of Como.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 83.--Porch of San Zeno, Verona.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 84.--Portal of San Pietro in Cielo
-  d’Oro, Pavia.]
-
-The ornaments of these openings are composed in a manner which appears
-to be peculiar to this region. The portal (Fig. 82) of the south side,
-for instance, has the mediæval scheme of a shafted round arch of two
-orders reproduced in neo-classic details, with an entablature for a
-lintel passing through the imposts, and another entablature with a
-pediment placed over the crown of the arch on spandrels in relief. To
-associate the entablature with the arch in any way is unreasonable, but
-to put one entablature under the arch and another one over it in this
-manner is childish composition. Yet illogical and puerile as the scheme
-is, I believe it is derived from a common form of Lombard Romanesque
-porch which is entirely reasonable in design. A comparison of this
-portal with the porch of San Zeno of Verona (Fig. 83) will illustrate
-this. In San Zeno we have a sheltering porch and a portal, and each is
-reasonable in itself, while they are equally reasonable in combination.
-But if the porch were eliminated, with exception of its façade, and
-this façade were drawn back into the plane of the wall, so as merely
-to frame in the portal, the result would resemble, in composition of
-lines, the portal of Como, and would be as illogical. The first, or
-encompassing, order of the portal of Como is like the façade of such
-a mediæval porch wrought in relief against the wall as an ornamental
-framework. For the Lombard columns the Renaissance designer has
-substituted pilasters, for the plain lintel an entablature, and for the
-mediæval gable a classic pediment with an entablature.
-
-A curious instance of a somewhat similar composition of lines in a
-Lombard Romanesque portal without an overhanging porch occurs in the
-façade of the San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro in Pavia (Fig. 84). Here the
-arched opening is flanked by tall engaged shafts which carry a narrow
-string course surmounted by a gable over the crown of the arch, while
-another string course, on short colonnettes resting on the capitals
-of the larger shafts, passes over the apex of the gable. But in this
-case it is only the childish association of members without structural
-meaning that offends the eye. There is no introduction of forms, like
-the classic pilasters and entablatures of the portal of Como, that are
-foreign to the architectural system.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 85.--Window of nave of Como.]
-
-This scheme, with various modifications, became a characteristic one in
-the Lombard and Venetian Renaissance, and was extensively applied to
-windows, as in the nave of the same cathedral of Como. The windows of
-this nave are splayed, and are flanked with pilasters from the capitals
-of which their archivolts spring, while in some of them diminutive
-pilasters rise from the same capitals and carry an entablature and
-pediment over the crown of the arch (Fig. 85).
-
-A variety of forms occur in these openings of the cathedral of Como,
-like so many experiments in fanciful composition without any basis
-of reason. The window, for instance, of the bay adjoining that here
-represented, seems to show that the designer felt dissatisfied with the
-small pilaster set upon the larger one, and accordingly omitted it, a
-moulding on the edge of the spandrel, profiled like the lower member
-of the crowning entablature, taking its place. But again, as if he now
-felt that the entablature required a more architectural support, he
-has in another window reproduced the small pilaster, but instead of
-a large single one below he has employed two narrow ones, thus giving
-separate support to the arch and the entablature. The doorway on the
-north side of the nave presents a further modification of the scheme.
-Here the jambs and the arch are splayed as before, and a tall column
-of the ornamental tapering form, already noticed in the windows of
-the Certosa of Pavia and in the chapel of St. Peter Martyr, is set on
-either side of the composition. This portal, like the one on the south
-side, has two entablatures with an arch between, and these columns
-reach to the upper entablature of which they carry ressauts. No great
-pediment crowns this doorway, but a tall niche, framed in with an order
-of diminutive pilasters and surmounted with a small pediment, rises
-over the centre of the upper entablature. This niche shelters a statue
-of the Virgin, and is flanked by a statue on either side. Many variants
-of this ornamental scheme for door and window occur in Lombardy and
-Venice, and it was reproduced in many other parts of Italy, occurring,
-as we have seen, even in Rome as in the palace of the Cancelleria and
-the Palazzo Torlonia.
-
-In the fifteenth century, as in the Middle Ages, the architecture of
-each principal locality developed peculiarities of style in accordance
-with its peculiar tastes and conditions. Thus the Renaissance design of
-Venice has a general character of its own, though it drew some of its
-materials from Florentine and Lombard sources. Michelozzi had followed
-the exiled Cosimo de’ Medici to Venice, and Vasari tells us[108] that
-he made there many drawings and models for private dwellings and public
-buildings. On the other hand a family of architects and sculptors from
-Lombardy, known as the Lombardi (Pietro Lombardo and two sons, Santo
-and Tullio), had come to Venice in the fifteenth century and introduced
-features from the Lombard Renaissance.
-
-Among the churches of the Venetian Renaissance San Zaccaria is one of
-the earliest, and its interior exhibits a singular mixture of those
-mediæval and pseudo-classic forms of which the Italian architects
-produced such an astonishing variety. To an apse with a half dome and
-pseudo-Gothic substructure is joined a nave of three square bays, the
-first of which is covered with a dome on pendentives, while each of
-the others has a plain groined vault. These vaults spring from an
-entablature which crowns the great arcade, and is returned on the ends
-of the building, with ressauts on corbels at the imposts. The aisles
-have oblong groined vaults on pointed transverse arches springing from
-corbels on the wall side, and tied with iron rods. The main proportions
-conform with those of the so-called Italian Gothic churches, the
-great arcades of the nave, and consequently the aisle vaulting, being
-relatively very high. The most singular feature of this interior is
-the column (Fig. 86) of nondescript character, and a variant of the
-tapering Lombard Renaissance shaft of Pavia and Como. It consists of a
-shaft of pseudo-Corinthian form raised on a high octagonal pedestal,
-with a very wide and richly moulded base.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 86.]
-
-The church of San Salvatore, dating from the close of the fifteenth
-century, and attributed to the architect Tullio Lombardo, though begun
-by Spavento,[109] has a modified Byzantine structural scheme applied
-to a long nave with three domes on pendentives separated by short
-sections of barrel vaulting. The supports (Fig. 87) of this vaulting
-are peculiar, and are like the piers of the nave of St. Andrea of
-Mantua modified by piercing them both transversely and longitudinally
-so as to leave four slender solid parts at the angles (two of which are
-engaged in the aisle wall), the void being covered with a diminutive
-dome on pendentives. The plan of the structure as a whole suggests
-this comparison with St. Andrea, but the character of the supports
-suggests their derivation from the piers of the church of St. Mark.
-These last are square masses of masonry pierced longitudinally and
-transversely so as to leave four heavy solids as in Figure 88, the void
-in this case being covered with a diminutive groined vault. In San
-Salvatore the solids are greatly reduced in volume, and are faced with
-neo-classic pilasters, above which the pier is solid, and is faced with
-an entablature surmounted by an attic from which the vaulting springs.
-The use of an attic in an interior, and especially as a support for
-vaulting, is one of those architectural aberrations with which the
-Renaissance has made us familiar. I know not when or where it first
-occurred, but there can be few earlier instances than this. It was not
-seldom introduced by the architects of the later Renaissance, and, as
-we shall see, by Sir Christopher Wren in St. Paul’s cathedral. It is
-worthy of notice that the system of San Salvatore is that of the church
-of St. Mark modified by lightening the piers in the way that we have
-seen, and by the application of neo-classic details.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 87.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 88.]
-
-The nearly contemporaneous church of S. Fantino has the same general
-character, except that groined vaulting takes the place of domes on
-pendentives in all but the easternmost compartment of the nave, and the
-attic story is omitted.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 89.--Santa Maria dei Miracoli,
-  Venice.]
-
-No work of the early Renaissance in north Italy exhibits more
-refinement in its details than the small church of Santa Maria dei
-Miracoli in Venice, the design of which is ascribed to Pietro Lombardo
-(Fig. 89). The plan is a simple rectangle with a rectangular sanctuary.
-The plain walls of the nave are covered with a round timber roof,
-and the sanctuary has a small dome on pendentives. The interior
-is richly incrusted with marble and relief carvings of the utmost
-delicacy, and of unusual beauty of design. The walls of the exterior
-are divided into two stages by superimposed orders of pilasters on
-podiums. The pilasters of the upper order carry archivolts instead
-of an entablature, thus recalling the mediæval Lombard blind arcade,
-and the walls above this are crowned with an entablature. Over the
-portal a curved pediment is set against the entablature of the lower
-order, and the whole façade is crowned with a semicircular pediment
-pierced with a large round opening and five smaller ones ranged on
-its semicircumference. The wall surfaces are incrusted with marble
-panelling set with disks and lesser panels of cruciform and rectangular
-shapes in faintly coloured marbles, and the whole building is a
-marvel of excellence in mechanical execution. But the use of the
-inappropriate superimposed orders falsifies the design by giving it the
-appearance of two stories while in reality it has only one.
-
-The façade of Santa Maria Formosa exhibits another phase of early
-Renaissance design in Venice. This façade is noticeable as reproducing
-some of the larger features of Alberti’s west front of St. Andrea of
-Mantua with details having the character of the works of the Lombardi.
-The great central arch of St. Andrea is omitted here, and the existing
-portal is an alteration of a later time in a style that does not agree
-with the rest of the design. The three compartments into which the
-front is divided are treated as sunk panels flanked by half pilasters
-set against the larger ones, over which last the entablature is broken
-into ressauts. In each lateral compartment over a podium connecting
-the high pedestals on which the pilasters are raised is an opening of
-the Lombard type. The main lines of the composition correspond with
-the internal divisions of the building, except that the entablature of
-the order, which is carried across the entire front, divides the nave
-compartment into two stages.
-
-The foregoing examples are enough to show the leading characteristics
-of the church architecture of the early Renaissance in north Italy. In
-the later period the local peculiarities give place for the most part
-to the measurably uniform style of which Vignola and Palladio were
-the leading masters, and which has been already considered under the
-heading of Church Architecture of the Roman Renaissance.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER IX
-
-         PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN NORTH ITALY
-
-
-The palace architecture of the Renaissance in north Italy which has
-the most marked local character is that of Venice. We have already, in
-the preceding chapter, noticed several buildings here by Sansovino,
-but these belong to the later Roman Renaissance style, and are thus
-not so distinctly Venetian. Several civic monuments, however, and
-many houses of the Grand Canal and elsewhere, exhibit the peculiar
-Venetian type. Among the earliest and most noteworthy of these is the
-east side of the Court of the Ducal Palace by the architect Antonio
-Riccio of Verona.[110] This richly ornamental scheme is wrought upon
-a foundation of earlier work to which the architect was obliged
-to conform, and this appears to have given rise to the irregular
-magnitudes and spacings of the openings of the upper stories, which
-are so noticeable, and are in marked contrast with the symmetrical
-regularity of Renaissance design in general. The long façade is in two
-walled stories above a basement in two stages of open arcading, with
-the so-called giant’s stairway giving access to the upper arcade. The
-ground story has splayed round arches on piers of corresponding section
-adorned with pilasters of neo-classic form, while the stage above has
-a pointed arcade on compound shafted supports of mediæval Venetian
-character (Plate VI). The upper stories are marked by entablatures,
-and the round-arched windows are flanked by pilasters reaching, in the
-principal story, to the arch impost, and then stilted to carry curved
-pediments worked in relief against the entablature that crowns this
-story. The top story is divided into two parts of nearly equal length,
-but of different height, and different design. The part extending from
-the middle to the sea side of the court is the lower, and has its
-windows flanked by pilasters reaching to the crowning entablature.
-These pilasters are raised on pedestals forming ressauts to a podium,
-and some of the windows are grouped in pairs, some in double pairs,
-and some are single. In the taller part the windows are taller, and
-show considerable differences of design. One group, consisting of
-a double pair, has flanking pilasters reaching only to the impost,
-with a stilt-block rising from the capital of each to the crowning
-entablature, while Corinthian colonnettes, with strongly marked
-entasis, support the archivolts--both pilasters and shafts being raised
-on low pedestals. Separated from this by a considerable interval is
-another window group of the same design, but consisting of a single
-pair, while in the intervening space, and along the rest of the wall
-toward the church of St. Mark, are unequally spaced single windows
-with pilasters supporting the archivolts, and other pilasters flanking
-these, all raised on high pedestals connected by a continuous podium.
-In the upper stage of the basement, at the head of the giant’s stair,
-the pointed arcade is interrupted by a group of three round arches
-on grouped pilasters. The wall surfaces are everywhere elaborately
-panelled and enriched with arabesques, and the friezes, spandrels,
-and podiums have panelled disks, festoons, and arabesque ornaments in
-tiresome profusion.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate VI
-
-  FAÇADE OF COURT, DUCAL PALACE
-
-  Venice]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 90.]
-
-The north side is also in the Renaissance style, but here is only
-one enclosed story, and this is on the level of the upper arcade of
-the east side. The architectural scheme of this part is different,
-except that its entablature is a continuation of the lower one of the
-eastern façade. The work here appears to have been wholly new, and the
-regularly spaced windows are each framed with a pseudo-Corinthian order
-in high relief, the shafts of this order being raised on ornamented
-round pedestals resting on corbel-blocks (Fig. 90). The walls are
-incrusted with large slabs of veined marble, and an ornamental disk in
-relief is set in each interspace.
-
-The finest thing in this court is the giant’s stair. Few architectural
-works of the Renaissance are so reasonable and so free from superfluous
-and unmeaning features. The steps, broken about midway by a landing
-stage, are enclosed by balustrades of severely simple design starting
-from square newels; and the sides are plainly panelled in marble,
-with delicate mouldings and arabesque carvings on the surfaces of the
-framing members. The mechanical execution of the whole is superb, no
-settlement or fracture appearing in any part.
-
-The façade of the Scuola di San Marco, begun in 1485 and attributed to
-the architect Martino Lombardo, is a marvel of delicate workmanship
-resembling in many of its features the small church of the Miracole
-(p. 151) while including details of a different character. It is in
-two stories, and is divided into two parts, answering to an internal
-division, one of which, embracing the main portal, is larger and richer
-than the other. An order of Corinthian pilasters embraces both parts of
-each story, and these pilasters are unequally spaced in conformity with
-the proportions of the respective parts and their openings. The main
-division, which is on the spectator’s left as he faces the building,
-has three bays of which the central one is the wider. The main portal
-(Fig. 91) is in this bay, and has two arch orders on pilasters flanked
-with larger pilasters, also in two orders, reaching to the entablature
-which passes over the arch. A free-standing Corinthian column on a high
-pedestal is set in front of each pilaster of the greater suborder, and
-from ressauts of the entablature over these columns an archivolt in
-high relief is sprung against the wall of the upper story. The shafts
-of the flanking columns are unusually short, the pedestals being about
-half the total height from the ground to the entablature. Comment on
-the unreason of such compositions becomes wearisome, and criticism may
-appear like captiousness. But if the reader will consider the character
-of a Greek portal, with its jamb mouldings and cornice, as reasonable
-and appropriate as they are simple, of a true Gothic doorway with its
-consistent arch orders, but with no superfluous or unmeaning features,
-he can hardly fail to feel the childishness of this Renaissance design
-in comparison.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 91.--Portal of the Scuola di San
-  Marco, Venice.]
-
-The other division of this front has a smaller and more simple doorway
-in its central bay, with an unbroken wall above, and a narrow arched
-window, framed with pilasters and a gabled pediment in each upper
-lateral bay, while the lateral compartments of the ground story are
-adorned with remarkable carvings in very low relief which present
-an extreme instance of that tendency to pictorial treatment that
-distinguishes the relief sculpture of the Renaissance. The main
-cornice, embracing both divisions of the front, is crowned with a
-series of arched pediments, varying in span with the bays beneath,
-which recall those of the façade of the church of St. Mark. Those over
-the main division of the façade are raised on ornamental attics of
-which the middle one is in two stages.
-
-The details of this composition are in very low relief, and the
-entablatures are broken into slight ressauts over the pilasters. The
-wall surfaces are incrusted with marble slabs, with simple panellings
-and small disks introduced sparingly, and the archivolts of the main
-portal, and of the crowning pediments, are adorned with arabesques and
-with small statues and finials.
-
-The merit of this composition as a whole lies solely in the ordering
-of the component details which the designer has employed in a purely
-fanciful way without any proper architectural meaning; but the
-refinement of execution, and the beauty of the marbles, with their
-pearly colours subdued and harmonized by time, make the monument one of
-the most notable in Venice.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 92.--Part of the Scuola di San
-  Rocco.]
-
-Another characteristic example of early Renaissance design in Venice
-is the Scuola di San Rocco (Fig. 92). The façade of this building is
-again in two divisions each of two stories, the main division having
-three bays and the other but two. These bays are marked by superimposed
-pilasters which are carried across both divisions, and in the main
-division a free-standing Corinthian column is set in front of each
-pilaster. In each story the columns are raised on pedestals connected
-by a podium, and each one is wreathed with a band of ornamental
-foliage. The entablatures are in the plane of the wall, and are broken
-into very salient ressauts which in the main cornice are unpleasantly
-conspicuous against the sky. Both the columns and the ressauts are
-meaningless, the columns having nothing but the ressauts to carry,
-and the ressauts having no function but to cover the useless columns.
-The lesser details of this façade are of mixed character. The main
-portal has splayed jambs adorned with pilasters, and an archivolt of
-corresponding section. This portal is framed by an order of smaller
-Corinthian columns, on high polygonal pedestals, with a pediment over
-the entablature. The side bays of the basement of the main division
-have each a wide arched window subdivided by a central colonnette
-and jamb shafts carrying two small arches, with a tympanum pierced
-with a circle and triangles in mediæval fashion. The great arches of
-these windows have spandrels in relief crowned with cornices in the
-Lombard Renaissance manner. In the upper story each bay has a pair of
-arched windows framed by a pseudo-Corinthian order of colonnettes on
-ornamented round pedestals resting on corbels, the entablature of this
-diminutive order being surmounted by a pediment. In the window of the
-central bay the pier between the openings is wider than the piers of
-the side windows, and has a pair of colonnettes on its face instead of
-only one.
-
-But the most characteristic architecture of the Renaissance in Venice
-is that of the private palaces of the grand canal. The princely
-dwellings ranged along this unique waterway are unmatched by anything
-else in the world. The finest of them are, however, those of the later
-mediæval period. These alone have the thoroughly distinctive Venetian
-character; but a few of the palaces of the early Renaissance retain the
-fine proportions, the quiet outlines, and the expression of refined
-opulence that belong to the buildings of the preceding epoch. In the
-best of them the neo-classic details are used sparingly, though not
-without strange new inconsistencies of form and adjustment.
-
-The Palazzo Corner-Spinelli (Plate VII), attributed to Pietro Lombardo,
-is one of the most characteristic. Its broad-walled basement, and the
-well-ordered subdivisions of the upper stories, are exceedingly fine,
-though the basement is high and the principal story rather low. No
-complete orders occur in this façade, but superimposed pilasters are
-placed on the angles, and an entablature is carried across each of the
-upper stories, while only a narrow string course crowns the basement.
-The windows are disposed in the manner of those of the mediæval
-Venetian palaces, a pair of them being set together in the middle, and
-a single one occupying the centre of each lateral bay in conformity
-with the divisions of the interior. These windows are wide, and are
-composed in the mediæval manner, with a dividing shaft and two small
-arches encompassed by a larger arch, as in the Scuola di San Rocco. A
-noticeable peculiarity of detail in these windows is the incomplete
-circle in the tympanum space, which intersects the smaller arches so
-as to form sinuous curves like those of Flamboyant Gothic tracery.
-The archivolts are carried by small pilasters, and the spandrels are
-framed with mouldings. The windows open on corbelled balconies with
-balustrades in Renaissance form of great refinement and elegance, and
-the balcony rails are carried as string courses along the walls. The
-panelling of the pilasters, as in this design and many others that we
-have noticed beginning with Alberti’s façade of St. Andrea of Mantua,
-is of questionable propriety, for supporting members need to have
-an expression of concentrated strength with which such treatment is
-hardly compatible. The surface of a pier or pilaster may be enriched by
-any kind of fluting or chasing that does not materially diminish its
-substance, but to sink panels in such supporting members is to destroy
-in a measure the expression of homogeneous compactness. The classic
-details in this building show the same disregard for correct classic
-forms and proportions that we find in the art of the Renaissance
-generally. The superimposed pilasters on the angles are of uniform
-width, though they differ greatly in height, and those of the various
-openings are of still different proportions and sizes. This association
-of members of the same kind, but of many different magnitudes,
-is proper to the organic mediæval architectural systems, under the
-influence of which these designers were unconsciously working; but
-it is foreign to the principles of the classic art. The beauty of
-the Corner palace, is, however, quite independent of the neo-classic
-details which are sparingly ingrafted upon it, and belongs to the
-larger forms and proportions of the mediæval Venetian style.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate VII
-
-  PALAZZO CORNER-SPINELLI
-
-  Venice]
-
-Other Venetian palaces of the early Renaissance exhibit other
-peculiarities which it would be tedious to describe at length, but
-it may be well to notice a few of them. The Palazzo Contarini, for
-instance, has its three principal interior divisions marked by
-superimposed pilasters in addition to the pilasters on the angles. The
-basement order is raised on a podium, and both the basement and the
-principal story have an entablature, while the top story is crowned
-with a low cornice with modillions and no complete entablature. The
-arched portal is flanked with pilasters in two orders, both crowned
-with entablature blocks, but no entablature spans the opening under the
-arch, and the spandrels are framed with mouldings and crowned with a
-cornice. The windows are narrow and round arched, and have no dividing
-members. Four of these are grouped together in the central bay of each
-upper story, and those of the principal story are framed in with a
-Corinthian order of five columns surmounted by a pediment, the whole
-composition having exactly the form of a diminutive temple front. Each
-lateral bay above the basement has two single windows, those of the
-principal floor being each framed with a Corinthian order like that of
-the central group, and crowned with a pediment. The windows of the top
-story are flanked by very slender pilasters of equal height with those
-of the main order, and smaller pilasters carry the archivolts. The end
-windows of the central group and the inner ones of the lateral bays
-come close to the pilasters of the main order, thus giving on each side
-a group of pilasters of three different proportions and magnitudes,
-as in Figure 93. The front as a whole is good in its proportions, and
-quiet in effect. The neo-classic details add nothing to it of value,
-and the composition would be better without them.
-
-The Palazzo Vendramini has full orders in all three stories, and the
-distinctive Venetian character is materially altered by them. The
-usual scheme of the Venetian palace front, in which a wide central
-bay wholly occupied by openings is flanked by lateral bays each with
-a solid wall on either side of an opening, is indeed retained, but
-the effect of it is much obscured by the prominence given to the
-orders, which are in high relief, and extend across the whole front.
-The openings have the mediæval form of two shafted arches beneath an
-embracing arch with a circle in the tympanum space. Three, instead
-of two, of these compound openings are grouped within the unusually
-wide central bay, and each one fills an intercolumniation of the
-order. In each lateral bay the columns of the order are unequally
-spaced in conformity with the narrow strips of solid wall, one on
-either side of the opening, which they enclose, giving a wide central
-intercolumniation and two narrow ones. The cornice of the basement
-entablature is widened, and supported on corbels from the frieze, in
-front of the windows of the principal story, and balustrades are set on
-these projecting ledges so as to form balconies. To give emphasis to
-the topmost entablature as the crowning feature of the façade, it is
-made so high as to be out of all proportion to the order of which it is
-a part.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 93.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate VIII
-
-  PALAZZO DEL CONSIGLIO
-
-  Verona]
-
-Of the later palace architecture of Venice it is unnecessary to give
-any extended analysis because it is less distinctly Venetian, and
-belongs more fully to the so-called Roman Renaissance style which is
-essentially uniform in character in all parts of the country. In these
-later palace fronts the main divisions of the typical Venetian scheme
-persist indeed, but they are so slightly emphasized, and so overladen
-with heavy orders, that they lose their proper effect. In Sansovino’s
-Palazzo Cornaro, for instance, already described (p. 124), these main
-divisions of the front are hardly noticeable in a general view. The
-general effect is of evenly spaced pairs of columns in each of the
-upper stories. It is not until we examine the composition closely that
-we perceive the narrower proportions of the three middle openings. The
-same is true of the façade of the Palazzo Grimani by Sanmichele, though
-in this case the grouping is different, the columns being set in pairs
-in the lateral bays only. Even in the still later and heavy rococo
-design of the Palazzo Pesaro by the architect Longhena, which is based
-on the scheme of the Library of St. Mark, the unequal main divisions of
-the Venetian palace type are still preserved.
-
-Among examples of north Italian Renaissance palace architecture outside
-of Venice the well-known Palazzo del Consiglio of Verona (Plate VIII)
-presents a mediæval broletto scheme dressed out in Renaissance details
-which it would be better without. The building has but one story over
-an open arcaded basement. The arcade is in two divisions of four
-arches each, the arches springing from short columns raised on square
-pedestals, and the pedestals connected by a balustrade. A central
-pier and a pier at each end enclose these divisions, and on the face
-of each pier is a shallow pilaster supporting a narrow entablature
-which extends across the whole front, with a corbelled capital over
-the central column of each division to support the entablature in
-the long intervals between the pilasters. The upper story is divided
-into four equal parts by pilasters set over the pilasters and corbels
-of the basement. These pilasters are on ressauts of a podium over
-corresponding ressauts in the entablature below, and the crowning
-entablature is likewise broken with ressauts. A twin-arched opening
-with central colonnette, flanked by pilasters and crowned with an
-entablature and curved pediment, occupies the middle of each division
-of this story, and the walls are incrusted with elaborate marble inlay.
-The general form and proportions of this monument are exceedingly
-fine, but in respect to these qualities it belongs to the Middle
-Ages and not to the Renaissance. To the simple arcade and plain
-walled superstructure the neo-classic details are inappropriate and
-meaningless.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 94.--One bay of basement of the
-  Ospedale Maggiore.]
-
-Another northern Renaissance building of the broletto type is the
-Palazzo Comunale of Brescia, in which we have a basement arcade of
-three arches on heavy piers, with an engaged Corinthian order adjusted
-in the Roman manner, and over this a single story in retreat divided
-into three wide bays by pilasters carrying a heavy entablature. A
-square-headed window in each bay is framed by an order of smaller
-pilasters the entablature of which reaches to the soffit of the
-crowning entablature. In those parts of the Ospedale Maggiore of
-Milan which were designed about the middle of the fifteenth century,
-by the Florentine architect, Antonio Filarete, the larger features
-are of mixed and debased mediæval character with no application of
-classic orders. The building is of brick with elaborate ornaments
-of terra-cotta, and has but two stories including the basement. The
-basement has a blind arcade of round arches on stumpy columns with
-Corinthianesque capitals, and a compound opening of two pointed
-arches under a larger pointed arch is set in each bay (Fig. 94).
-The faces of the jambs and archivolts of these openings are heavily
-adorned with mouldings and foliate ornaments in terra-cotta relief,
-while the archivolts of the arcade above have more simple neo-classic
-profiling, and more refined and conventional foliate ornamentation.
-The window-sills are on coupled corbels of heavy and inelegant form,
-and the whole arcade is raised on a high base with ressauts under the
-columns. Medallions with busts in high relief are set in the tympanums
-of the windows and in the spandrels of the arcade, while a wide frieze
-somewhat like an entablature crowns this part of the composition. The
-upper story has a plain brick wall with windows like those of the
-basement enclosed within rectangular panels.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 95.]
-
-Other peculiarities of design are found in some of the early
-Renaissance palaces of Bologna, where in the Palazzo Bevilacqua the
-windows of the principal story have the mediæval form of two small
-arches under a larger arch, modified by the omission of the central
-shaft which gives the middle of the tympanum the form of a pendant. But
-it is not worth while to follow these aberrations of early northern
-Renaissance design further. The palace architecture of the later
-Renaissance in north Italy has no distinctive character that calls
-for particular comment. It is for the most part based on the art of
-Palladio and Vignola which we have already enough considered. While
-it exhibits many more of those misadjustments of structural members,
-and other vagaries of design, in which Italian architects have been
-at all times fertile, it has no great importance to justify special
-remark. To point out in detail many such meaningless caprices as those
-introduced by Pellegrini in the court of the Palazzo Brera in Milan,
-where the arches of the superimposed arcades are sprung from pairs of
-columns connected by short entablatures, making it necessary to double
-the transverse arches of the vaulting behind them, or such novelties
-as occur in the windows of the basement of the Palazzo Martinengo
-of Brescia, which are adorned with small Doric columns carrying
-architraves without the other parts of an entablature, while an upright
-block with a ball on it rises over each column (Fig. 95), would be
-tiresome and profitless. We may therefore pass on in the next chapter
-to a brief consideration of the carved ornament of this architecture,
-before taking up the architecture of the Renaissance in France and
-England.
-
-
-
-
-                               CHAPTER X
-
-               ARCHITECTURAL CARVING OF THE RENAISSANCE
-
-
-All effective sculpture on buildings, including that of the human
-figure, is architectural carving; but it is in Gothic art only
-that sculpture of the human figure, as well as that of subordinate
-ornamentation made up of the other elements, has at once an appropriate
-architectural character and a high degree of excellence in the
-development of form. In the best Greek art the carving of the human
-figure has, indeed, a grandly monumental quality; but the Greek
-sculptor did not seek primarily to give his work an architectural
-expression. He wrought it with a kind of perfection that is not
-compatible with the fullest measure of such expression. Greek
-sculpture, though placed on a building, is in a measure independent of
-it, and thus it not only loses nothing, but may even gain in value,
-when taken from its place on the building and set up in a museum where
-it can be viewed by itself.
-
-In the art of the Renaissance the human figure in the full round is
-treated so independently as to lose nearly all monumental expression,
-while for strictly architectural carving we have reliefs on pilasters,
-friezes, and capitals, made up of scrolls and meanders with leafage,
-grotesque animal life, and a great variety of objects, including the
-human figure, represented more or less fantastically as ornament.
-Renaissance sculpture of the human figure thus having so little proper
-architectural character, we shall not consider it here, but confine
-our attention to the relief carving, which has a closer architectural
-connection, if not a much truer architectural expression.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 96.--Roman Arabesque.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate IX
-
-  RELIEF OF THE LOMBARDI
-
-  Venice]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 97.--Renaissance Arabesque.]
-
-A great deal of this carving is in close imitation of Roman models,
-as a comparison of a fragment of Roman arabesque from the Museum of
-Florence (Fig. 96) with a fragment of Renaissance arabesque from
-the Ducal Palace of Gubbio (Fig. 97) will show. But in elegance,
-delicacy, and subtlety of line and surface, the best carving of the
-Renaissance is superior to that of ancient Rome. The linear basis
-of such design is highly artificial, consisting of formal scrolls
-and meanders, and the leafage and other forms introduced are treated
-artificially without being finely conventionalized. The conventions of
-this art are not the natural result of a true sense of ornamental
-abstraction, of architectural fitness, and of the nature of materials.
-They do not manifest a fine appreciation of the beauty of the object
-conventionalized. They are factitious conventions which often do
-violence at once to the forms of nature, and to the true principles
-of design. The ear of barley, and the flower stalks, in Plate IX, a
-characteristic work of the Lombardi in the church of Santa Maria dei
-Miracole in Venice, illustrate this. The rigid parallel straight sides
-and the square end of the barley ear, and the flaccid sinuousness
-of the flower stalk, are expressive of no architectural or material
-conditions to which the artist had to conform. They express nothing
-but the designer’s insensitiveness to the character and beauty of
-the natural forms. Compare the ear of barley (Fig. 98) from an
-ancient Greek coin in the British Museum.[111] Though severely
-conventionalized, this representation finely expresses the true
-character of the real object. Such details as the rectangular barley
-ear and nerveless flower stalk in Plate IX would seem to indicate an
-incapacity on the part of the designer to appreciate those elements
-of beauty in plant life which may be made effective in ornamental
-carving, were they not associated with other details that manifest
-a fuller sense of vital character. The foliation of the scrolls in
-the same relief (Plate IX) has a character which makes us wonder how
-a designer who could so finely render the nervous life of leafage
-could associate with this leafage the lifeless details just noticed,
-and the further monstrosities of the axial composition including the
-characterless grotesque animals out of which the scroll leafage issues.
-The symmetrical Arabesque scheme of the whole, and the nonsensical
-details of the central part, are from the Roman source,[112] while the
-leafage, though also cast in the Roman form, owes much of its best
-quality to the inspiration of Gothic art. The qualities that give their
-subtle charm to such conventionalized forms elude complete analysis
-and definition, but they are based on the proportions, curvature, and
-relations of lines and surfaces that belong to the organic forms of
-nature.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 98.--Greek coin, magnified.]
-
-Such subtle beauty of leafage is exceptional in the ornamental design
-of the Renaissance. The carver of the fifteenth century generally
-misses the vigour of line, the finer surface flexures, and the
-expression of organic structure shown in the supremely fine details of
-the reliefs by the Lombardi. The convolutions of Renaissance design
-are apt to be more formal and the leading lines less springy. In some
-cases the finer qualities of curvature are wholly wanting, as in the
-scrolls that border the bronze door-valves of St. Peter’s in Rome by
-the Florentine sculptor Filarete (Fig. 99). In these scrolls the heavy
-and lifeless character of the poorest Roman models is reproduced. The
-finish of these carvings, in the better examples, is usually elaborate,
-and in such work as that of the Lombardi in Venice it is exquisite.
-But in many cases it is mere surface smoothing without expressive
-character, as in the leafage of Benedetto da Maiano in the pulpit of
-Santa Croce of Florence, where the expression of the beautiful leaf
-anatomy is almost wholly polished out.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 99.--Arabesque by Filarete, Rome.]
-
-It is a fundamental weakness of this style of ornamentation that it is
-so largely made up of artificial convolutions and formal symmetries.
-Reduced to its linear elements, it mainly consists either of an axial
-line with scrolls and weak curves set symmetrically on either side of
-it, or of a formal meander with alternating scrolls. The wearisome
-repetition of these two schemes of composition is a characteristic of
-the art of the Renaissance. Many changes are wrung on these primary
-motives, but no possible variation of them can relieve their dulness.
-That they are derived from an ancient source does not justify their
-use. They are not, however, drawn from the best ancient source. In
-Greek art elements of a kindred nature had been treated in a finer way,
-with exquisite moderation of curvature and vitality of line. But the
-ornamental designers of the Renaissance drew their inspiration from the
-Græco-Roman travesties of Greek ornamentation, such as the tiresome
-arabesques that were painted on the walls of Pompeian houses.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 100.--Console of pulpit in Santa
-  Croce.]
-
-The arrangements, as well as the treatment, of the details drawn
-from plant life that are associated with this style of design are
-often most artificial and inorganic, as in the pulpit of Santa Croce
-before mentioned, where on the side of a console (Fig. 100) fruit
-and leafage issue from a nondescript receptacle of ungraceful shape,
-having a clumsy fluted stalk bound with a fluttering ribbon ending in
-a tassel. Such unnaturally composed details are unknown in the pure
-Gothic art which the men of the Renaissance thought so barbaric. The
-introduction of objects like the singular cornucopia and the ribbon of
-this design is common in Renaissance ornamentation. Without affirming
-that artificial objects may never enter into an ornamental composition,
-I think it may be said that such objects, if used as conspicuous
-features, ought to have some beauty of form,[113] and certainly every
-group of objects, of whatever kind, should be composed so as to
-produce an effect of organic unity. Each detail ought to have a place
-and a posture which should make it a part of some system of related
-ornamental lines. This is, of course, elementary, and the principle is
-usually carried out in the ornamentation of the Renaissance, though in
-a highly artificial way. But in the design on the triangular panel of
-this console there is no fine system of related lines. The fruit and
-leafage have a disjointed arrangement, and the wriggled ribbon has no
-beauty of line or surface.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 101.--Leafage from the Ghiberti
-  gates.]
-
-Instances of such disordered composition are conspicuous in the borders
-of the famous Ghiberti gates of the Florentine Baptistery, where
-the bosses of leafage set at regular intervals are composed in the
-same inorganic way (Fig. 101), and the bunches are bound with spiral
-fluted fillets. It is noticeable that the details are here elaborated
-with a minute naturalistic completeness that is incompatible with
-architectural effectiveness. The possibilities of the bronze material
-in which the design is wrought are developed to the utmost in the
-rendering of leaf veinings, serrations, and surface textures. This
-tendency to combine excessive naturalism with extremely artificial
-composition is a curious characteristic of both Roman and Renaissance
-art.
-
-We find in the ornamental carving of the Renaissance not only a formal,
-and often a disjointed, scheme of composition, with artificial objects
-of no beauty or meaning introduced among elements derived from natural
-forms, but numerous instances occur where the design is made up
-entirely of such objects, as in a pilaster in the National Museum of
-Florence (Fig. 102). Such value as this design has lies wholly in its
-childish symmetry of arrangement of the ugly elements about an axis.
-It contains nothing else on which the eye can rest with pleasure. I
-think it may be taken as a true principle that architectural ornament
-cannot be good unless it be an expression of the kind of beauty that we
-find in organic nature. I do not say that the elements of such ornament
-must be directly, or consciously, drawn from nature; but every quality
-of line and surface that, in a healthy state of mind, we feel to be
-beautiful is exemplified in organic nature, so that however abstract
-or conventional a piece of good carving may be, its forms will have a
-correspondence with those of natural objects.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 102.--Pilaster in the National
-  Museum, Florence.]
-
-The finest forms that occur in the carvings of the Renaissance are
-those of foliation such as we have already noticed (p. 170). But even
-these are rarely of real excellence. An appreciation of the vital
-beauty of leafage has in general not been manifested by the Italians,
-whether ancient or modern. The leafage of Roman art is as inferior
-to Greek leafage as that of the Renaissance is to the foliation of
-the French Gothic carvers. Take, for instance, the crisp acanthus
-leaves of the capital from Epidaurus (_A_, Fig. 103) in the National
-Museum of Athens, with their strong nervous life notwithstanding their
-severely conventional treatment; or the leaf _B_ in the same figure,
-from another Greek capital in the same museum, with its spiky cusps and
-its exquisite systems of radiating lines--at once true to nature and
-effective as ornament; and compare with these any examples of Roman, or
-Græco-Roman, leafage, as _A_ and _B_ (Fig. 104). Observe in _A_, from
-a composite capital in the Naples Museum, the excessive convolution
-of the leaf ends, the obtuse rounded cusps, the lack of radial
-relationship in the lines of depression, and the unmodelled flatness of
-the surfaces between the furrows. And notice in _B_, from a Corinthian
-capital supposed to have belonged to the so-called Temple of Jupiter
-Stator, the immoderate and artificial undulations of line and surface.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 103.--Greek leafage.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 104.--Roman leafage.]
-
-Turning now to the Renaissance leafage of capitals, we may take,
-first, any one of the portico of the Pazzi chapel by Brunelleschi. The
-obtuseness shown here (Fig. 105) to the fine qualities of natural forms
-that may be made effective as architectural ornament is really amazing.
-The treatment is of the Roman kind with emphasis on the artificial
-conventions of Roman art. The rigid lines and rectangular sections of
-the furrows, each ending abruptly in a straight line across the bottom,
-and the unmodelled flatness of the intervening surfaces indicate a
-surprising lack of appreciation of those elements of beauty which
-distinguish really fine ornamental carving. Such leafage is, indeed,
-exceptionally poor, yet instances of a kindred sort are not seldom met
-with, as in the capitals of the doorway of the sacristy of Santa Croce
-in Florence by Michelozzi.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 105.--Leafage of Brunelleschi.]
-
-The more characteristic Renaissance leafage is, however, sometimes
-beautiful, as in the capitals of the municipal palace of Brescia (Fig.
-106). Nevertheless, a curious, and singularly artificial, convention is
-noticeable here in the fillet-like form, and abrupt angular termination
-of the upper end, of the ridges which mark the subdivisions of the leaf
-surface. This peculiar detail is of almost constant occurrence in the
-acanthus foliation of the Renaissance, and is in marked contrast with
-the finely rounded and more natural treatment of the corresponding
-parts of the Greek leaf forms as in Figure 103. This unnatural detail
-sometimes takes another form, as in a capital by Giuliano da San Gallo
-in the Palazzo Gondi, where its edges (Fig. 107) are less angular, its
-surface grooved lengthwise, and the upper end is rounded. But whatever
-beauty this Italian leafage may have, the design is rarely more than
-a recast of Roman models, with little manifestation of that fresh
-inspiration from nature that gives such charm to Gothic foliation.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 106.--Leafage of Brescia.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 107.--Leafage of San Gallo.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 108.--Relief of the Scala d’Oro.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 109.]
-
-The grotesque, which enters largely into these ornamental
-compositions, is uniformly weak and characterless. This has been
-already noticed (p. 170) in the work of the Lombardi. It is equally
-marked in all other neo-classic representations of imaginary
-creatures. The southern genius appears never to have been capable of
-conceiving the grotesque in an imaginative way. That power appears
-to have belonged exclusively to the northern races. The monster of
-the Renaissance, like his Roman ancestor, has no organic life, no
-suggestion of reality, and therefore no impressiveness comparable to
-that of the grotesque creature of the Gothic carver. And not only is
-the grotesque of the Renaissance unimaginative and insipid, but its
-forced monstrosities not seldom have a repulsive vulgarity, as well as
-a structureless incoherence. Take, for instance, the silly creatures
-in the relief of the Scala d’Oro in the Ducal Palace of Venice by
-Sansovino (Fig. 108). These nondescript monsters, without anatomy, and
-without point or meaning of any kind, are merely disgusting when we
-attend to anything more than the ornamental lines in the abstract, and
-even these lines are without any fine qualities. The masks ending in
-leafage (Fig. 109), from a pilaster in the church of the Miracole in
-Venice, are fantastical, but neither witty nor effectively grotesque;
-and the _Putti_ treated in the same way, so frequently introduced,
-are equally pointless, and without particular merit as design.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XI
-
-            ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY RENAISSANCE IN FRANCE
-
-
-On the north of the Alps the Renaissance had not the same meaning that
-it had in Italy, and in France, where its influence was first felt, the
-art naturally assumed a different character. The term “Renaissance” is
-not, in fact, properly applicable here, for the French people had not
-had a classic past, and the adoption of architectural forms derived
-from classic antiquity was not at all natural for them. Through the
-developments of a noble history they had acquired and perfected a
-peculiar genius which had found expression in forms of art that were
-radically different from those of ancient times; and in now departing
-from the principles of this art they did violence to their own native
-traditions and ideals.
-
-It has been often affirmed that French architecture was but
-superficially changed by the Renaissance influence, and that its
-essential character survived beneath the Italian dress.[114] This
-is not wholly true. The Italian influence did effect a fundamental
-change in this architecture by giving it, as we shall presently see,
-a factitious, in place of a natural, character. This point has been
-overlooked by those writers who have maintained that the French
-artistic genius suffered no loss of integrity while yielding to the
-Renaissance movement.
-
-But it must not be forgotten that the native art had lost its best
-character long before the Italian influence supervened. The finest
-Gothic impulse was spent before the close of the thirteenth century,
-and the feeble spirit and florid extravagance of the Flamboyant style
-which now prevailed betrayed a weakened condition of the national
-artistic mind which made it an easy prey to the foreign innovations.
-
-Until the sixteenth century the Gothic style survived in its decadent
-forms. Yet in some quarters before this time an interest in the
-arts of antiquity was gaining foothold, and a few Italian artists
-had come into France and wrought some small architectural works in
-the neo-classic manner. But the way appears to have been opened for
-a more general movement in the new direction when the French upper
-classes began to construct fine houses adapted to the requirements of
-luxurious life. This movement was favoured by the changed conditions
-of the times. Concomitant with the cessation of feudal turmoil and the
-need for fortified castles was a great increase of material wealth,
-far exceeding that which France had enjoyed at any former time in
-its history. Life and property were now secure, population grew,
-the towns enlarged their borders, and the resources of the king and
-the nobles were correspondingly enlarged.[115] These conditions had
-found expression in architecture during the fifteenth century in such
-palatial houses as that of Jacques Cœur at Bourges, and the Hôtel Cluny
-in Paris. These houses, though retaining the irregular character of
-mediæval French castles, have no defences, and are abundantly lighted
-on all sides by large window openings. They are the forerunners of the
-Renaissance châteaux.
-
-To understand the early French Renaissance château it is necessary
-to recall the character of the feudal castle of the Middle Ages out
-of which it was evolved. The plan of the feudal castle was generally
-irregular and its outline picturesquely broken. But its irregularity
-and picturesqueness were not the result of any purpose on the part of
-its builders to produce a picturesque effect. It was a consequence
-of the natural conformation of the rugged site to which the building
-had to shape itself, of the need for defensive towers, and of the
-conditions of climate calling for high-pitched roofs, more or less
-broken by dormers and chimney-stacks.
-
-The earlier palatial residences of the open country were in many
-cases the older castles remodelled or enlarged, and opened, by great
-windows cut through their massive walls, to the light and air.[116] And
-although there was no longer need for such defences as would withstand
-the siege of a feudal army, it was still for some time necessary to
-provide for security against roving bands of marauders which continued
-to move about, and thus the surrounding fosse and the drawbridge were
-retained for a considerable time after the loopholes and embattled
-towers of the Middle Ages had become unnecessary.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 110.--Cornice of Blois.]
-
-In cases where the château was a wholly new building, it was generally
-placed on even ground, and the plan became symmetrical. Yet still the
-outline remained broken with the steep gables, chimneys, and dormers
-that are proper to a northern climate; and even the towers, turrets,
-and other features of feudal architecture were largely retained. The
-French château, as has been often remarked, was never transformed
-into any likeness to the Italian villa; but it was, nevertheless,
-so radically changed as to lose that admirable logic of design
-which distinguishes the French architecture of the Middle Ages. The
-composition of the Renaissance château is factitious in the sense
-of being artificially made up; it is not, like the mediæval castle,
-an outgrowth and expression of natural conditions and actual needs.
-Thus while it is still peculiarly French in character, it is not an
-expression of the French genius in its integrity. The French genius in
-its integrity has not been manifested in architecture since the Middle
-Ages.
-
-The earliest palatial houses of the Renaissance in France are
-ornamented with debased Gothic details almost exclusively. The
-neo-classic elements are introduced sparingly, and are hardly
-noticeable in the general effect. An illustration of this is afforded
-in those parts of the château of Blois which were built under Louis
-XII. Here the egg and dart scheme is worked on the lower members of
-the cornice, while elsewhere the mediæval details are retained. This
-cornice (Fig. 110) is a curious medley, though of no exceptional kind.
-Against a flat lower member is a corbel-table (a Romanesque feature)
-treated in a Flamboyant way, the small arches being splayed and having
-the three-centred form. The crowning mouldings have approximately
-true Gothic profiling, while a Flamboyant parapet of elaborate design
-surmounts the whole.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 111.--Azay le Rideau.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 112.--Portal of Azay le Rideau.]
-
-Of the distinctive early French Renaissance architecture, which took
-form during the reign of Francis I, a fine example is the château of
-Azay le Rideau (Fig. 111). This building was an entirely new structure,
-not a mediæval one remodelled. It is of moderate dimensions, and,
-although it has considerable beauty, it well illustrates the hybrid
-and factitious character of early French Renaissance design. There was
-no need of defences, yet round towers are set on the angles simulating
-those of feudal times, and each one of these is crowned with a low
-overhanging story supported on corbels, and having a superficial
-resemblance to the mediæval machicolated gallery. This overhanging
-attic is carried along each side of the building, and its numerous
-small square windows are so spaced as to give the intervening wall
-solids somewhat the appearance of battlements, while steep gables,
-crowned with spiky pinnacles, and high dormers and chimneys make up a
-total composition of great picturesqueness. The larger features are all
-of mediæval form, but the windows are flanked with classic pilasters
-and crowned with entablatures. The most elaborate, and least admirable,
-feature of this building is an ornamental bay (Fig. 112), not seen in
-the general view here shown (Fig. 111), which embraces the main portal.
-This bay is worthy of analysis because it is a highly characteristic
-example of French Renaissance design in which distorted neo-classic
-details are worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme. The composition is
-plainly derived from the neighbouring castle of Châteaudun, which was
-built at the beginning of the sixteenth century, and ornamented in the
-Flamboyant Gothic style. In Châteaudun (Fig. 113) a staircase tower
-rises over the main portal of the south façade in four stories. The
-front of this tower, which is flush with the wall of the façade, is
-treated as an enriched bay, the upper two stories of it reaching above
-the main cornice, and being flanked by round turrets overhanging the
-wall, which is corbelled out to support them. The portal is double, and
-each upper story of the bay has a pair of large openings. All of these
-openings have the Flamboyant depressed arches, and the whole bay is
-flanked by buttresses, while a smaller buttress is set against a middle
-pier that rises through the composition. All of these parts have the
-characteristic Flamboyant forms and ornamental details. The openings
-are splayed, and their profilings have the sharp Flamboyant arrises.
-The buttresses have the multiplicity of angular members set obliquely,
-with the simulated interpenetrations, and the niches and canopies, of
-the latest Gothic style.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 113.--Châteaudun.]
-
-Returning now to the portal of Azay le Rideau (Fig. 112), we find
-this scheme substantially reproduced, but with greatly altered
-details. In place of the buttresses we have a remarkable combination
-of columns, pilasters, and other neo-classic ornaments put together
-so as to produce a pseudo-Flamboyant Gothic effect. The portals and
-windows are flanked with pilasters and crowned with entablatures, and
-the whole is bounded right and left by superimposed columns broken
-by highly ornamented niches, and banded by the string courses and
-entablatures. On the first floor over the portal the window pilasters
-are made to appear as hidden behind tall ornamental niches, composed
-of many neo-classic and nondescript elements, arranged in the manner
-of the details on Flamboyant buttresses. Only small portions of the
-base mouldings of the pilasters appear beneath this filigree overlay.
-In the story next above, the central pilaster only is hidden in this
-way, but here a part of the capital, instead of the base, comes into
-view. The manner in which the pseudo-Gothic features are adjusted to
-the neo-classic elements of the composition is curious in other ways.
-The pilasters of the several superimposed orders are, of course, of
-equal length in each story, and their entablatures make strongly marked
-horizontal lines. But the nondescript ornaments laid over these orders
-are carried up to unequal heights, all of them crossing the middle
-entablature, and the finial of the central one reaching above the
-architrave of the top entablature, while the lateral pilasters of this
-upper order are wholly exposed to view, except that the finials of the
-canopies over the niches below cover parts of their bases. The mixture
-of neo-classic and pseudo-Gothic forms is carried out in the details
-of these superimposed ornaments. Under the base of each niche are two
-diminutive pilasters, set obliquely so as to present an arris in front,
-like the angular members in Flamboyant buttresses, as in Châteaudun,
-and between these is a small shaft supporting a corbel which forms
-the base of the niche. The niche is flanked by slender pilasters set
-obliquely in conformity with those below, but these pilasters are
-almost entirely hidden from view by very salient nondescript ornaments
-worked on the face of each. The mouldings of the grouped bases, which
-are of different magnitudes, interpenetrate in Flamboyant fashion, and
-the canopies over the niches are made up of miniature entablatures on
-curved plans ornamented with filigree, and each of them is surmounted
-by a group of minute niches with statuettes, and crowned by a finial.
-The windows have the depressed arches of the Flamboyant style, with
-panelled dadoes beneath, as in Châteaudun; but their profilings are
-pseudo-classic, and they have keystones at their crowns. The total
-scheme is more mediæval than classic, notwithstanding the free use of
-neo-classic orders. To produce a continuity of upright lines, and thus
-emphasize the Gothic effect, the entablatures are broken into ressauts
-over the pilasters, and are carried around the lateral columns, as
-before remarked. The double portal is the only part of the composition
-that is quite free from mediæval elements. The order and the arches are
-here combined in the ancient Roman manner, as they are, indeed, in the
-upper stories; but here the arches have the Roman semicircular form,
-and the order is not overlaid with other ornaments. Classic proportions
-are not at all observed. The pilasters are short, and are raised on
-high pedestals, which are necessary to the composition in order to give
-the effect of adequate foundation for the superstructure. The design
-as a whole has no reason on structural grounds, nor has it any logic
-of simulated structure. Such merit as it has is of a purely abstract
-ornamental kind entirely extraneous to the building. Apart, however,
-from its factitious general character, and its incongruous details, the
-château of Azay le Rideau has a thoroughly French character, and is one
-of the finest monuments of the early Renaissance in the country.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 114.--Part of the Portal of
-  Chenonceaux.]
-
-Among other châteaux contemporaneous with Azay le Rideau, and of
-similar character, are Chenonceaux and La Rochefoucauld. Of Chenonceaux
-the portal (Fig. 114) is worthy of notice as an instance of a different
-manifestation of the survival of Flamboyant ideas in the treatment of
-neo-classic details. In this portal we have again the three-centred
-form of arch, with a keystone and continuous imposts.[117] The jambs
-and archivolt are in three planes, or orders, of shallow projection,
-with simple mouldings of semi-Flamboyant effect. No entablature
-surmounts this portal, but a corbelled cornice supporting a heavy
-balcony passes over the arch. This balcony has a curved ressaut at
-each end carried on a massive corbel in graduated rings of overhanging
-masonry, with a compound support beneath consisting of a stout pilaster
-and two small shafts. The Flamboyant idea running through this
-nondescript scheme is shown in the depressed form of the arch, and by
-the simulated interpenetrations at the imposts of the pilasters.
-
-In La Rochefoucauld we have an instance of a mediæval fortified castle
-transformed into a palatial residence. The most noticeable features
-here are the superimposed arcades of the court. In these arcades we
-have orders of pilasters used in the Roman way to frame in the arches,
-but these arches have the Flamboyant three-centred form. In the top
-story the number of arches is doubled, and the entablature over them
-is crowned with an ornamental parapet and finials. The vertical lines
-of the superimposed pilasters, made continuous by ressauts in the
-entablatures and carried up through the parapet by the finials, give a
-semi-Gothic expression to the ancient Roman scheme.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 115.--Part of the court façade of
-  Blois.]
-
-In those parts of the vast châteaux of Blois and Chambord that were
-built in the time of Francis I a richer phase of this early French
-Renaissance architecture is found. The eastern wing of Blois, which
-had been begun by Louis XII, illustrates this. On the side facing the
-court the walls are panelled, not as they sometimes were in the earlier
-buildings, as at La Rochefoucauld, by interpenetrating mouldings of
-Flamboyant profiling, but by three superimposed orders of pilasters,
-in which a continuity of upright lines is given by shallow ressauts
-in the entablatures (Fig. 115). The pilasters are here irregularly
-spaced in conformity with the window openings of the work that had
-been begun, and considerably advanced, under the preceding reign;
-and have the novel addition of ornamented bead mouldings set on the
-edges of the pilasters, and along the under edges of the entablatures,
-while in each of the panels thus framed the salamander and crown are
-carved in relief. In the deep and elaborate cornice, dentils and
-modillions and the egg and dart are worked in with Gothic gargoyles and
-a corbel-table; while a rich parapet crowns the whole, and dormers of
-picturesque form, with pseudo-classic orders surmounted by gables and
-pinnacles, rise against the vast high-pitched roofs which are further
-broken by ornamented chimney-stacks. A survival of the later Gothic
-habit of design is further shown in the continuity of upright lines
-obtained by the ressauts already remarked. But the most remarkable
-feature of this façade is the great polygonal staircase tower that
-rises through it. Four vast piers like buttresses, reaching from the
-ground to the main cornice which is carried out so as to crown them,
-are treated like colossal pilasters with rich Corinthianesque capitals,
-and are banded above the middle with mouldings of classic profiling.
-Yet on the face of each of these members is a corbelled niche, with a
-rich canopy and statue in late Gothic style. These piers are connected
-by three stages of ramps with panelled parapets elaborately ornamented
-with small pilasters, carvings in relief, and gargoyles issuing from
-their base mouldings. The whole composition is crowned with a dormer
-having a square opening on each side, grouped pilasters on the angles,
-an entablature with compound ressauts over the pilasters, and with
-gargoyles reaching from the cornice, and a balustrade over all.
-
-The reader should consider well the meaning of all this, and observe
-how the persistence of the native French habits of design, without the
-logic of the former time, was still giving a largely mediæval aspect
-to works in which details from the Italian Renaissance, modified
-and combined in strangely new ways, were being more and more freely
-introduced.
-
-On the garden side this wing of Blois has a different design, and shows
-a survival of the Flamboyant depressed arch in the window openings
-necessitated by the form of the earlier façade, which is incased
-in that of Francis I.[118] The windows of this earlier façade were
-spaced and proportioned so as to make wide and narrow voids and solids
-alternate in a very irregular manner. In the work of the sixteenth
-century, which overlays this, superimposed pilasters are set in pairs
-on the wider solids, and single ones adorn the narrow piers. The
-pilasters of the lower order rest on tall pedestals supported on spurs
-rising out of the batter wall of the basement, while the upper order
-is set on plinths resting on the entablature of the order beneath.
-This upper order has a plain corbel-table in place of an entablature,
-with a simple cornice, and gargoyles over the pilasters. Over this is
-the novel feature of an open gallery covered by an extension of the
-main roof which is held up by columns of no distinct order, with a
-balustrade in each interval. Similar galleries were afterward in some
-instances produced by extending the roofs over originally uncovered
-terraces below the eaves, supporting the extension on wooden posts--as
-at La Rochefoucauld.
-
-The walls of Chambord, the next vast château of the early French
-Renaissance, are adorned with pilasters as at Blois, though the design
-below the cornice is much simpler. Above the cornice, however, it is
-the richest of all the great French châteaux, and with its steep roofs
-and manifold dormers, chimneys, and central lantern, it presents an
-aspect which for multiplicity of soaring features resembles a late
-Gothic building. It is not worth while to give an extended analysis
-of its redundant details which, with its vast chimneys adorned with
-free-standing orders, niches, panelled surfaces, and pinnacles; its
-dormers with overlaid orders of pilasters, pediments, scrolls, and
-endless filigree ornaments; and its great lantern with inverted
-consoles on entablatures forming flying-buttresses (where there is
-nothing to be buttressed), make up a bewildering complex without
-structural meaning or artistic merit. Viollet le Duc has well remarked
-that “Chambord est au château féodal des XIII^e et XIV^e siècles ce que
-l’abbaye de Thélème est aux abbayes du XII^e siècle: c’est une parodie.”
-
-The same general character, though in less florid development, marks
-those parts of Fontainebleau which are contemporaneous with Blois and
-Chambord. This is true also of Écouen, where the architectural scheme
-is comparatively simple. Instead of superimposed orders the walls of
-Écouen are adorned with continuous pilasters banded by the mouldings of
-entablatures that crown each of the stories. These details are in very
-shallow relief, the wall spaces enclosed by them are not panelled as at
-Blois and Chambord, and the windows have no framing members. Even the
-dormers have a marked sobriety of design, though they are framed with
-small orders, and crowned with fantastic pediments made up of classic
-elements and filigree ornaments.
-
-The architect Bullant, who appears to have had a large part in the
-design of Écouen, was among the first French architects of the
-Renaissance to travel in Italy. In Rome, as he tells us in his
-book,[119] he had measured some of the ancient monuments, and in
-the great portico of the court he reproduced the order of a Roman
-temple.[120] This portico embraces both stories of the building, and
-is, I believe, the earliest example in France of the reproduction of
-an ancient order without any admixture of mediæval details, or Italian
-corruptions. In the main body of the building it was natural that the
-architect should modify and adjust his neo-classic details in the
-prevailing manner of his time; but this colossal portico gave him an
-opportunity to carry out fully the classic Roman ideas which he appears
-to have imbibed during his Roman sojourn. It was impossible, however,
-to make any organic connection between this ancient scheme and the
-building to which it is attached, and it stands against the façade as
-an utterly foreign interpolation.
-
-An exceptional building of the early French Renaissance is the château
-of St. Germain en Laye. The top story of this building is vaulted, and
-to meet the vault thrusts a series of deep buttresses is ranged along
-each façade. These buttresses are connected by arches at the level of
-the floor of the principal story[121] and beneath the main cornice,
-and entablatures, which crown the basement and the principal floor,
-break around them. They are adorned with pilaster-strips of Romanesque
-proportions, connected by small blind arches, capped by ressauts of the
-main cornice, and pierced with water-ducts ending in gargoyles. The
-arched windows are in pairs (one pair in each story between each pair
-of buttresses), and are framed with pilaster-strips and entablatures
-surmounted with pediments. The balconies formed by the ledges over
-the lower arches are enclosed with balustrades, and balustrades
-connect the buttresses over the main cornice. The roof is very low and
-invisible, thus there are no dormers, but large chimneys ornamented
-with blind arcading break the sky line.
-
-Such is the early Renaissance architecture of France. Notwithstanding
-its factitiousness, and its ornamental incongruities, it still has,
-as I have said, a distinctly French expression, though it has not
-the reasonable character of the native art of the Middle Ages in its
-integrity. But the departure from their own ideals and traditions
-was destined to be carried further, and at length to reach results
-which should still more profoundly contradict the true native spirit.
-This further transformation was wrought during the second half of the
-sixteenth century under the influence of several noted architects who
-stand in relation to the French Renaissance very much as Vignola,
-Palladio, and their followers stand in relation to that of Italy. The
-art of these men will be considered in the next chapter.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XII
-
-                         LESCOT AND DE L’ORME
-
-
-Among the architects of the later French Renaissance Pierre Lescot and
-Philibert De l’Orme were preëminent. The change which they effected
-gave the French architecture a more marked neo-classic dress, yet
-still without wholly eliminating its native character. This change was
-of course analogous to that which had been wrought in Italy by the
-later designers of that country, but the resulting forms in France
-were different from those of the Italian art, and were to the last
-peculiarly French, though, as before remarked (p. 179), not expressive
-of the French genius in its integrity. This was entirely natural.
-The architecture of a people inevitably retains much of its original
-character while yielding to foreign influences. It had been so with
-the Italian art of the Middle Ages when it was subjected to the Gothic
-influence, and it could not be otherwise with the French art of the
-sixteenth century when the later Renaissance wave swept over it.
-
-Lescot and De l’Orme came strongly under the influence of Vignola
-and Palladio, their Italian contemporaries, and they fully accepted
-the Italian belief in the superiority of the neo-classic principles
-of design to those which had given rise to what they considered the
-architectural barbarisms of the Middle Ages. Lescot, says Berty,[122]
-“was one of the first French architects to employ the ancient style in
-its purity,” and De l’Orme, according to Milizia,[123] “exerted all his
-industry to strip architecture of her Gothic dress and clothe her in
-that of ancient Greece.”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 116.--Du Cerceau’s engraving of the
-  Fountain of the Nymphs.]
-
-Lescot is said to have designed the Fountain of the Nymphs, now known
-as the Fountain of the Innocents,[124] in Paris, in collaboration
-with Goujon, the sculptor. In this work there is nothing whatever
-of mediæval character. In its present condition it is, indeed, very
-different from what it was originally. It first (1550) stood on the
-corner of two streets with a façade of two bays on one street and a
-return of one bay on the other. In 1788 it was taken down and reërected
-in the square of the Innocents on a square plan, a fourth façade
-being then added. Figure 116, from an engraving by Du Cerceau,[125]
-illustrates the original design, each bay of which is nothing more
-than a reproduction of the scheme of a Roman triumphal arch, with a
-short pediment over the attic. The whole structure is raised on a
-high basement of plain character with lions’ heads for water-spouts.
-Such pure imitation of the antique does the architect little credit
-as a designer, and it is hard to understand how such works could have
-been regarded as monuments of a regenerating art. The sculptures by
-Goujon which adorn this structure have, in my judgment, no monumental
-qualities, nor any notable merits of design. Their movements are
-awkward, and their lines ill composed. The influence of the decadent
-Italian art is marked in them, without any new qualities that should
-entitle them to distinction.
-
-Little is known of the early training of Lescot beyond what is told
-in a poem by Ronsard,[126] from which we learn that in his youth he
-had occupied himself with painting and geometry, and that at the age
-of twenty he began the study of architecture. He does not appear to
-have visited Italy, and his knowledge of ancient art must, therefore,
-have been acquired at second hand; very likely in great part through
-Serlio’s book which had been published in 1537. A woodcut (Fig. 117) on
-page 127 of this book,[127] giving the design of an ancient Roman arch
-in Verona, might have served as a model for the Fountain of the Nymphs.
-He must also have come in contact with Serlio himself, who in 1541 had
-been called into the service of the French king.
-
-The capital work of Lescot was the early part of the new Louvre, begun
-about 1546 on the site of the old castle of Philippe Auguste which
-Francis I had demolished in order to rebuild in the new style. The
-new scheme was apparently intended to cover almost precisely the same
-area that had been occupied by the mediæval structure, and the old
-foundations were to be utilized in the new building. Thus in conformity
-with the older castle Lescot’s design embraced a square court; but only
-a part of this project was actually carried out, namely, the wings
-on the south and west sides. And of these the south wing afterward
-suffered a damaging alteration by the architect Lemercier who enlarged
-the court to about four times the area that Lescot had intended. Thus
-the only part of Lescot’s work which has survived substantially intact
-is that part of the existing west side which extends from the southwest
-angle to the great western pavilion. This portion is figured by Du
-Cerceau,[128] and save for some alterations in the timber roof the
-existing fabric agrees with his print.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 117.--Roman arch, Serlio.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 118.--Part of Du Cerceau’s print of
-  Lescot’s Louvre.]
-
-In this design (Fig. 118) there is no survival of the character of a
-mediæval stronghold, though the rectangular pavilions, which break the
-long façades, and the high pitched roofs are feeble echoes of the
-mediæval French traditional forms. It is worthy of notice that Lescot’s
-projecting bays have no meaning apart from their æsthetic effect in
-the external architectural scheme. In the feudal castle the towers had
-of necessity to stand out beyond the curtain walls in order from their
-loopholes and battlements to defend them. But the salient pavilions of
-the Louvre have no function; they do not even materially enlarge the
-interior, but are purely ornamental features. The scheme includes two
-stories and an attic, each of which is adorned with a classic order. In
-the basement and in the principal story the orders consist of fluted
-Corinthian pilasters on pedestals, while in the attic short pilasters,
-with their surfaces panelled in the Lombard Renaissance manner, are
-used. The principal orders only have complete entablatures, the order
-of the attic having only a cornice with a frieze which takes in the
-capitals, and this cornice is surmounted by a parapet with filigree
-ornamentation. In the intercolumniations of the basement order arches
-are sprung beneath the entablature in the Roman fashion, each arch
-embracing a narrow window with a segmental head concentric with the
-arch, while the window openings of the upper stories are rectangular,
-those of the principal floor having alternately round and angular
-pediments on consoles.
-
-In the pavilions we have in each story a variation of the scheme of
-the Fountain of the Nymphs. The imitation of Serlio’s cut (Fig. 117
-above) is closer, Corinthian columns being used instead of pilasters
-as in Serlio’s design. But in the basement the architect has made
-marked changes in the central bay, omitting the arch, and cutting
-out a portion of the entablature. This last device, of which, as
-we have seen, the later Renaissance architecture of Italy affords
-many instances, is not only a violation of the principles of classic
-design which these architects were professing to restore, but it is
-a barbarism, because it breaks the continuity of those lines which
-in such a composition should have the expression of binding the
-parts together. In the story above the entablature is not completely
-broken; the architrave and frieze only are cut in order to insert a
-tablet. In the attic, however, the cornice is cut out completely, and
-a segmental arch is sprung over the opening to form a pediment as a
-crowning feature of the pavilion. The traditional logic of French
-design is thus completely ignored by Lescot, and he abandons himself
-to capricious methods of composition as completely as the Italians
-had done. It is surprising not only to find the French people thus
-following the Italians in their irrational misuse of structural forms
-in ornamentation, but also to find them, after having produced in the
-Middle Ages the most living and beautiful forms of foliate sculpture
-that the world has ever seen, resorting to the heavy and formal
-festoons of decadent Roman art, as Lescot has done in these friezes of
-the Louvre.
-
-Another noticeable characteristic of this phase of Renaissance design
-in France is its excessive profusion of ornament. The wall surfaces
-are embossed with reliefs, or set with niches, disks, or tablets until
-no broad plain surfaces remain. Such extravagance of ornament is
-characteristic of later Roman, and debased Gothic, but it is foreign to
-the finest classic, and the pure Gothic, art.
-
-Of the architectural work of De l’Orme little is now extant, and the
-most of that which has survived has suffered such alterations that we
-can form from the monuments themselves but an imperfect idea of their
-original aspect. We have, however, in the fragments that remain, in Du
-Cerceau’s prints, and in the illustrations to his own writings, enough
-to show that he was a man with little artistic genius, though he had an
-ardent passion for architecture as he understood it.[129] He was among
-those architects of his time who went to Rome to study the antique, and
-he tells us in his book[130] that he dug about their foundations, and
-made drawings and measurements. His most important work was the palace
-of the Tuileries, begun in 1564. Of this gigantic scheme only a small
-part, the central part on the garden side, was completed by De l’Orme,
-and this was much altered by successive architects before the building
-was destroyed in 1871. The plan, as given by Du Cerceau (Fig. 119), is
-symmetrical, but it is broken by projecting bays and angle pavilions
-more pronounced than those of the Louvre. These features, survivals of
-the mediæval plan, distinguish the French Renaissance architecture from
-that of Italy to the last.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 119.--Plan of the Tuileries, from Du
-  Cerceau.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 120.--Tuileries, from Du Cerceau.]
-
-The external façade (Fig. 120) has a single story with an attic of
-broken outline, and in it the architect made use of a peculiar form of
-Ionic column of which he speaks[131] as follows: “I make here a short
-digression to speak of the Ionic columns which I have employed in the
-above-mentioned palace of her Majesty the Queen Mother.[132] ... The
-said columns are sixty-four in number on the side facing the garden,
-and each one is two feet in diameter at the base. They are not all of
-one piece, since I could not find so large a number of such height as
-was necessary.... I have fashioned them as you see (Fig. 121), and
-with suitable ornaments to hide the joints; which is an invention that
-I have never yet seen in any edifice either ancient or modern, and
-still less in our books of architecture. I remember to have made nearly
-the same in the time of his late Majesty Henry II, in his château of
-Villers Cotterets, in the doorway of a chapel which is in the park,
-and it was very graceful, as you may judge from the figure which I
-give.” Further on he proposes that this shall be called the French
-order, saying: “If it was allowable for the architects of antiquity, in
-different nations and countries, to invent new columns, as the Romans
-invented the Tuscan and the Composite, the Athenians the Athenian,
-and, long before the said Romans, those of Doris the Doric, of Ionia
-the Ionic and Corinthian, who shall forbid us Frenchmen from inventing
-some, and calling them French, as those might be called which I have
-invented and used in the porch of the chapel of Villers Cotterets?” Of
-this column De l’Orme, in his book, gives several variants, showing how
-the salient drums, or rings, may be variously ornamented or left plain,
-or may be varied in their proportions; and he gives also a design for a
-doorway (Fig. 122)[133] in which he employs a Tuscan order treated in
-this way.
-
-It is hard to conclude what to think of De l’Orme’s claim to this
-column as his own invention, and of his statement that he had never
-seen one of its kind in any building, or in any book of architecture;
-for such a column was not a new thing, though it may not before have
-been used in France. Several examples of practically the same column
-occur in Serlio’s book, which was published in 1537 when De l’Orme
-was but twenty-two years of age,[134] one of which, in a design for a
-doorway, is here (Fig. 123) reproduced.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 121.--De l’Orme’s column.]
-
-Of this doorway Serlio says: “Although Doric doorways may be designed
-in other ways, yet most men are pleased with novelty, and with that
-which is not too common, and they have satisfaction especially from
-that which, though being mixed, still retains its character, as in this
-doorway where, although the column, the frieze, and other members are
-broken, and covered with rustic work, nevertheless the form is seen
-well defined in all its proportions.”[135] He does not affirm that this
-novelty was his own invention, but he seems to imply that it was.
-However this may be, he was writing long before De l’Orme could have
-produced such a column as his design shows. The château of Villers
-Cotterets built for Henry II, in which De l’Orme remembered to have
-made columns somewhat like those of the Tuileries, could not have been
-begun before 1547, the year of Henry’s accession, and ten years after
-Serlio’s book was published.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 122.--De l’Orme’s doorway.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 123.--Doorway, Serlio.]
-
-An ancient adumbration of this form of column occurs in the Porta
-Maggiore in Rome, where it has the appearance of an unfinished work,
-the drums being roughly shaped to be finished after they were set
-up, in the customary ancient manner. Such an example may well have
-suggested to the architects of the Renaissance the idea embodied in
-Serlio’s cut. Sansovino made use of this form of column in the façade
-of the Zecca in Venice, which was commissioned by the Council of Ten
-in 1535, and at Genoa, in the wall that was built to enlarge the
-circuit of the city, there is a portal bearing the date 1553, in which
-the scheme figured by Serlio is carried out. This peculiar column had
-therefore undoubtedly been in existence, both in a book of architecture
-and in actual monuments, before De l’Orme was writing. It is, of
-course, quite possible that he may have devised his scheme in ignorance
-of the Italian examples, but whether he did or not is for us a matter
-of little importance. It is, I think, an architectural monstrosity, and
-reflects little credit on its designer.
-
-It may be further remarked concerning De l’Orme’s claim to this column
-as his own invention, that it expresses an idea which was at the
-bottom of most of the architectural misconceptions and mistakes of
-the Renaissance, the idea that architectural excellence may result
-from independent personal effort to be original. I think it may be
-said that the artistic aberrations of the Renaissance arose largely
-from this false notion. The conscious effort to be original in
-architecture is inevitably disastrous. The personal contributions of
-individuals in architectural development consist of little more than
-small improvements on lines of endeavour common to large bodies of men.
-The aggregate of such improvements finally become conspicuous, and
-mark fundamental changes of architectural styles; but the part of any
-individual in such changes is hardly noticeable. Noble architecture has
-always been, and must, I think, always be, mainly a social, communal,
-and national, not a personal product. De l’Orme failed to consider that
-the ancient orders were not inventions of individual designers, but the
-outcome of a process of evolution toward which the ingenuity of large
-numbers of men through long periods of time had contributed. He thought
-that he might himself invent a new order, and call it French. He ought
-rather to have called it by his own name, for it was not French in the
-sense of being a product of the collective French genius. Had he and
-his contemporaries had more discernment, they might have realized that
-a true French order was already in existence in that very Gothic art
-which they vilified, that the shaft and its load of the twelfth-century
-national style was such an order, a true evolution out of the ancient
-orders superbly adapted to new conditions.[136]
-
-As for De l’Orme’s façade for the Tuileries, as an architectural
-composition, little in the way of praise can, I think, be said.
-The basement arcade (Fig. 120, p. 202) is but an adaptation of the
-wearisome Roman scheme of pier and arch overlaid with an order in
-which the Roman form of column gives place to the peculiar one just
-described and called his own invention. This deformed column has an
-Ionic capital, and De l’Orme tells us that he employed the Ionic
-order here because it had been as yet little used, and “because it
-is feminine, having been invented after the proportions of women and
-goddesses,”[137] and is therefore suitable for the palace of a queen.
-In this façade the monotony of the long range of arches with their
-orders is partly relieved by a ressaut in the entablature over every
-fourth bay, and this ressaut only is supported by columns, pilasters
-of similar character being used in the intervening bays. The attic
-story reproduces with variations some of the architectural vagaries
-of Vignola and his followers. Tall, rectangular dormers alternate
-with oblong panels crowned with broken pediments, and flanked with
-coupled hermæ. In this composition the native French characteristics
-of design survive in hardly anything more than the broken outline of
-the attic, and the steep roof behind it.[138] That such architecture is
-shaped on mathematical proportions, and has an orderly and rhythmical
-distribution of parts, does not make it good architecture. Proportion
-and rhythm of this mechanical kind cannot, as I have before said, make
-a fine work of art.[139]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 124.--Doorway of De l’Orme.]
-
-What we know of other important works by De l’Orme, as the châteaux
-of Anet and Saint Maur, shows the same lack of a fine artistic sense.
-The lay-out of these vast pleasure-houses may be well adapted to the
-requirements of the courtly life of the time. De l’Orme understood the
-needs of this life, and was ingenious in providing for them, but such
-ingenuity constitutes but a small part of an architect’s equipment,
-and may exist without any artistic aptitude. It is only in so far
-as such ingenuity is accompanied by a genuine artistic sense that a
-fine work of art can be produced. De l’Orme undoubtedly worked with a
-steady regard for what he considered artistic design, but his works
-show, I think, that he was devoid of true artistic genius. If further
-illustration of this be desired, it may be abundantly found in the
-numerous architectural projects published in his book, of which the
-doorway (Fig. 124) is a fair example.[140] Of this composition the
-author remarks as follows: “I give you here following another form of
-doorway being square and straight in its covering, and having pilasters
-at the sides, in which one sees only the plinths of their bases under
-the said pilasters, which are larger at the top than at the bottom;
-which is the contrary of the columns and pilasters made according to
-measure [_i.e._ according to neo-classic proportions?] which
-are narrower at the top than at the bottom. But such an invention is
-produced according to the suggestion and fancy that presents itself,
-like many others; which, provided the proportions are well observed,
-are always found to have a pleasing effect, which is an easy thing to
-do by those who have experience and skill in architecture. You see how
-in this design which I figure, in place of capitals mutules in the
-form of consoles carry the soffit of a tympanum or frontispiece, which
-is cut out, as is seen, and has its cornices above and ornaments on
-acroteria, as may be seen in the figure with all the other ornaments,
-and pieces cut out which make the covering of the doorway, and above
-a tablet with another tympanum and other ornaments. To describe all
-in detail would require too much time, but you can easily understand
-from the drawing, which is of a Doric doorway having three steps which
-are well shown, as in the other doorways, when they are raised above
-the ground.” These remarks, like the drawing itself, show clearly
-that design with De l’Orme was a matter of purely capricious fancy,
-regulated only by a mechanical system of proportions. If the rules of
-proportion be “well observed,” he thinks that such a crazy composition
-as this, with its foolishly deformed members, may have a “pleasing
-effect.”
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 125.--Façade of Charleval, Du
-  Cerceau.]
-
-It is not worth while to follow this phase of the French Renaissance
-art much further, but Du Cerceau gives one other design that is worthy
-of a moment’s attention for its freakish irrationality and, I will not
-hesitate to say, ugliness, the project for the château of Charleval,
-begun for Charles IX, but not far advanced in construction at the
-time of his death, and never completed. The exterior façade of the
-_basse-court_ is divided into a long series of bays (Fig. 125) by
-colossal rusticated pilasters of two orders, embracing the two stories
-into which the elevation, above the basement, is divided. Each pilaster
-is crowned with a section of an architrave and frieze, in the form of a
-ressaut of two orders, which interpenetrates the bed mouldings of the
-continuous cornice. Since the architrave and frieze are not carried
-along the intervening walls, the pilasters have no real entablature to
-support even in appearance. Another unmeaning freak of design in this
-façade is the kind of variation of the details of the several bays
-which it exhibits. The rectangular windows are in one bay surmounted
-with round archivolts, in the next with curved pediments, in another
-with angular pediments above and curved ones below, in another with
-curved pediments above and round archivolts below, in still another
-with curved pediments above and a single one embracing both windows
-below; and so on with continued change with no purpose but that of mere
-change.[141] Viollet le Duc[142] commends the architect of this façade
-for seeking what he calls a grand disposition without abandoning the
-logical principles of his predecessors. But the great French master
-appears to me to err in his reasoning here, as frequently elsewhere in
-his discourse on the architecture of the Renaissance. The great order
-of Doric pilasters used in this façade fills, he says, exactly the
-function of buttresses, and he then proceeds to defend the whole scheme
-by saying that, “Taking the order as a buttress it is possible, without
-violence to reason, to cut it by a floor” (_i.e._ to divide the
-space between the pilasters into two stories). But there is no sense
-in taking the order as a buttressing system, for there is nothing in
-the structure to require buttressing; and if there were, the pilasters
-of an order, even though doubled, as in this case, would not form an
-effective buttress system. It is in nothing but the general arrangement
-of the main lines that such a composition can be said to bear any
-resemblance to an organic mediæval system in which buttresses have a
-function, and are shaped so as to express it.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 126.--Interior façade of Charleval,
-  Du Cerceau.]
-
-The interior façade of the same building (Fig. 126) presents a
-different scheme. The great order here has fluted pilasters, and
-the division of the building into two stories is not expressed on
-the outside. Viollet le Duc remarks on this façade as follows: “The
-architect wished here not only to accent the great order more clearly,
-but also to hide entirely the floor of the upper story;[143] and
-in adopting this scheme, contrary to the logical principles of the
-architects of the Middle Ages, he has carried it out with remarkable
-skill. The line of the floor, naturally placed at the level _A_,
-is cut by arched niches, so that the eye does not suspect its
-existence, and is forced to embrace the whole front as if it were one
-stage.” And he adds: “C’était là l’œuvre d’un artiste consommé.”[144]
-Thus in one case the architect is lauded for employing the order like
-a buttress system to justify its embracing two stories, while in the
-other he is praised for giving a deceptive appearance of only one
-story; so that this part of the design may, as the writer says in
-another place, be in better scale with the order. But the distinguished
-author betrays embarrassment in dealing further with these
-architectural incongruities of Renaissance design, and after remarking
-that the architects of this time have resorted to various devices
-for overcoming the difficulties arising from the lack of harmony
-between design and construction (“entre la mode d’architecture et les
-convenances”), which, he says, have occasioned them much torment, he
-exclaims (p. 376): “Voilà cependant où conduit l’oubli des principes
-vrais.” It is indeed far into devious paths that the architect is led
-by departure from the true principles of design.
-
-A few remarks on the church architecture of the French Renaissance may
-be added here. It was natural that in church architecture the mediæval
-structural forms should largely survive. The French people could not
-adopt those semi-classic basilican forms of building that were natural
-to Italy. Thus, while now professing to despise their own noble Gothic
-art, they still retained through the sixteenth century the later
-Gothic structural system with no essential modification. This is well
-illustrated in the church of St. Eustache in Paris, which was begun
-as late as 1532. It is a very large cruciform Gothic structure, with
-double aisles and a range of side chapels, overlaid with Renaissance
-details. Pilasters and entablatures, variously distorted in order to
-fit them to the Gothic proportions and functions, take the place of
-vaulting shafts and string courses in the interior of the nave, while
-on the outside similar members are used with less distortion because
-of a different division of the stories giving proportions more nearly
-agreeing with those of classic art. The chapels opening out of the
-outer aisles have only half the height of these aisles, and thus the
-exterior has two stories where there is but one inside. An entablature
-crowns each of these stories, and the upper one has a pseudo-Doric
-character. The buttresses above the chapels have two superimposed
-orders of pilasters, and are crowned with urns on pedestals. Thus was
-a frankly Gothic structure made agreeable to the French taste of the
-sixteenth century by a barbarous misapplication of mixed and distorted
-classic details.
-
-The persistence of Gothic structural forms is shown further in the
-church of St. Etienne du Mont, begun in 1517. In the parts belonging
-to the original construction almost no classic details occur. It is
-Flamboyant Gothic of a peculiar type in which vaulting of almost true
-Gothic form is sustained by plain cylindrical columns of unusual
-height. The church has no triforium, but the columns are connected
-by arches at the usual triforium level, and these arches carry a
-balustraded passageway. The archivolts of this arcade have classic
-profiles and keystones, and the balustrade is of neo-classic form.
-In the west front, begun in 1620, neo-classic features are adjusted
-to Gothic outlines, and the central portal, in the form of a Roman
-triumphal arch, is furnished with columns modelled after those of De
-l’Orme which he claimed as his own invention.
-
-The church of SS. Gervais and Protais at Gisors has a Flamboyant west
-front in parts of which Renaissance features have been inserted in
-different degrees of compromise with Gothic forms and adjustments. The
-north tower below the cornice has no such features, but the south tower
-has been completely masked by a late Renaissance covering in three
-stories of pseudo-classic orders of which the uppermost is incomplete.
-The main portal is flanked by pilasters, and has splayed jambs and
-a splayed archivolt, with an entablature at the impost. A segmental
-arch over this supports a ledge on which is set a tabernacle of three
-arches, faced by a Corinthian order having no continuous entablature
-but only entablature blocks, and an attic over the central arch crowned
-with a curved pediment. It is unnecessary to analyze this west front
-further; it presents one of the most confused jumbles of incongruous
-elements anywhere to be met with.
-
-A different manifestation of Renaissance caprice is found in the florid
-exterior of the apse of St. Pierre of Caen, which is made up of details
-of a sixteenth-century Lombard character applied to a Flamboyant
-structural scheme. The round arch and the complete circle take here the
-place of the pointed forms, and pilasters against the angles have short
-Flamboyant buttresses set against them, the faces of these buttresses
-being treated like Lombard Renaissance pilasters.
-
-One of the most remarkable designs to be found in the Renaissance
-church architecture of France is that of the portal of the north
-transept of St. Maclou of Pontoise. It belongs to the early period, and
-is much like what we have seen in the portal of the château of Azay le
-Rideau (p. 182). The opening is round-arched and has a narrow splay. It
-is flanked by pilasters and crowned with an entablature surmounted with
-a fanciful pediment of broken outline, ornamented with a tablet and
-death’s-head, and flanked by finials of nondescript design. This portal
-is again flanked by colossal pilasters, rising from pedestals almost as
-high as the arch impost, and reaching to the cornice at the level of
-the aisle roof. Against each of these pilasters a short, fluted column,
-with a capital of pseudo-composite form, rises from a pedestal engaged
-with the pilaster pedestal. The portion of the pilaster that rises
-above this column is treated like a niche, with a base resting on the
-capital of the column, and with an ornamental canopy above that rises
-through the capital of the pilaster.
-
-It is unnecessary to extend further these tiresome descriptions. The
-foregoing examples are enough to show how irrational was the use
-made of neo-classic details in the church architecture of the French
-Renaissance, and how they were engrafted on a Gothic structural scheme.
-It was in this manner that the French architects of the time sought to
-“reform the Gothic and bastard styles.”
-
-
-
-
-                             CHAPTER XIII
-
-              ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND
-
-                         I. _Elizabethan Art_
-
-
-When the need for feudal strongholds had passed, and the conditions
-of life in the open country had become peaceful, a type of domestic
-architecture arose in England which assumed its most characteristic
-form in the early Elizabethan Age. The best features of this
-architecture were of native growth out of the humbler forms of
-mediæval domestic building, the feudal castle, and the latest phase
-of Perpendicular Gothic. These features are mainly the rectangular
-plan, with plain enclosing walls in long blocks broken by projecting
-bays, and with large mullioned windows, high-pitched roofs, and tall
-chimney-stacks. The better form of early Elizabethan dwelling on a
-large scale had the plain, external character of the traditional
-yeoman’s house. It was planned with some regard for convenience, was
-admirably suited to the climate, and was expressive of that pleasant
-and dignified home life which is peculiar to England. It is picturesque
-and cheerful in aspect, but has little other architectural character
-than such as results from adaptation to needs, straightforward logic
-of construction, and generally good proportions. It embodies the
-essentially English idea, as expressed by Lord Bacon, that, “Houses
-are built to live in, and not to look on.”[145] And while this remark
-may seem to ignore architecture as such, _i.e._ the fine art of
-beautiful building, it expresses a fundamental principle; for to build
-a house to live in, shaped for the needs of civilized human life, is
-to secure the primary condition of good architectural effect. And no
-domestic architecture in Europe has had more genuine charm for the
-eye than that of England of the Elizabethan time in its integrity,
-as it may be seen, for instance, in the greater parts of Haddon
-Hall; St. Johns, Warwick; Hambleton Old Hall, Rutland; North Mymms,
-Hertfordshire, and others.[146]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 127.--Burghley House.]
-
-But, unhappily, English life among the upper classes in the sixteenth
-century was not without sophistication. Many of the great houses were
-built, not for convenience and propriety, but to gratify a spirit of
-ostentation and pedantry. False notions of symmetry were allowed to
-control design at the expense of fitness, and classic details, even
-more grotesquely disfigured than in Italy and France, and combined
-with elements of nameless character, began to overlay the walls, and
-break the sky-lines. The formal regularity and awkward composition of
-Hardwick, and the ludicrous pseudo-classicism of Burghley House, with
-its chimneys (Fig. 127) in the form of Doric orders, are among the
-numerous instances of this. All that offends the eye in the English
-palatial architecture of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is
-due to these sophistications, which largely subverted the native
-good sense and sound craftsmanship. “This was,” says Cunningham,
-“a style of architecture strangely compounded, and neither in the
-weak wildness of its combinations, nor in the flimsy variety of its
-materials, was it made to endure. Plaster, terra-cotta, paint, tiles,
-wood, iron, and brick, even when united with all the skill of the most
-exquisite art, cannot long resist the rapid wear and tear of such a
-humid climate as ours. Those unsubstantial structures, with all their
-dazzling incrustations, are passed or passing from the earth: nothing
-is lasting but hard massive stone, impenetrable cement, and scientific
-combinations.”[147] It ought to be said, however, that whatever
-flimsiness of material entered into the composition of these buildings
-was confined to ornamental details, and chiefly to the interiors. The
-main body of the Elizabethan structure was of solid and well-executed
-masonry. Mr. Bloomfield points out that these houses were built by
-Englishmen and ornamented by foreigners.[148] And it is certainly true
-that in plan and outline they have little foreign character. Most of
-the plans of the native architect, John Thorpe,[149] appear, indeed, to
-show a French influence, but in the larger features of the elevation
-they are English. It is thus in the ornamental details chiefly, which
-seem to have been wrought in part by foreigners and in part by native
-craftsmen striving to conform to foreign ideas, that we find the
-strangest aberrations of design. A few examples will serve to show the
-character of this art.
-
-The façade of the north side of the court of Kirby Hall, for instance,
-is divided into bays by colossal pilasters of hybrid style, which have
-not even a semblance of structural meaning, since they carry only
-ressauts of an entablature, the total height of which is less than the
-diameters of the pilasters. From each of these ressauts rises a slender
-pedestal, against a low attic wall, surmounted by finials resting upon
-the cornice (Fig. 128). The central bay, enclosing the entrance to the
-court, is wider than the others, and the pilasters here are panelled,
-and have arabesques in relief, while the others are fluted. The façade
-is in two stories, their division being marked by an entablature; the
-lower story has an open arcade, while the upper one has a rectangular
-window in each bay crowned with a pediment.[150]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 128.--North side of court, Kirby
-  Hall.]
-
-The general scheme has no English character, and it so nearly resembles
-that of the court of Charleval, in France, (cf. p. 212) as to suggest
-that its designer may have been influenced by the French composition.
-The effect of the scheme, as a whole, from the point of view of
-structure, is curious with its great pilasters of unusual projection,
-which have the function of supporting nothing but miniature pedestals
-and finials. In a general view the low attic wall has somewhat the
-effect of an entablature, though it is behind, and not over, the
-pilasters; but considered as an entablature its frieze is encumbered
-with the pediments of the windows which rise against it. The windows
-are, however, an alteration, and the original scheme may be better
-judged of from the opposite, or south, side of the court. Here the
-attic has distinctly the appearance of an entablature of somewhat
-suitable proportions for the order; though, here too, it is behind the
-pilasters, and does not rest upon them. The façade on this side is in
-one story, with a tall mullioned and transomed window in each bay. With
-a proper entablature the scheme would not be a bad one. The wall being
-almost wholly eliminated by the great window voids, the order would
-have the true function of upholding the roof if a true entablature and
-the roof were where they ought to be. But not only is the attic wall,
-substituted for an entablature, in retreat of the pilasters, but the
-roof rises from behind the attic, so that this last becomes a parapet.
-
-At the centre of this façade of one story is a porch of two stories
-with a tall attic and a gable of ogee outline flanked by finials. This
-porch has an order of fluted Ionic pilasters in the ground story, an
-order of Corinthian columns above, and a small order of Corinthian
-columns in the attic. The pilasters and columns of the first and
-second stories respectively, are in pairs on each side of an opening,
-and the entablature in each of these stories has a ressaut over each
-pair. The pilasters of the ground story are raised on a panelled
-podium, while the columns of the upper story, and of the attic, are
-carried on consoles. The attic has no openings, and the columns of the
-small order here are equally spaced, with narrow intercolumniations,
-and an entablature block over each column in place of a continuous
-entablature. The ground story opening has a plain, round arch, while
-that of the upper story which is arched also, is framed with a stilted
-order, and crowned with a broken pediment of curved outline. The scheme
-is a variation of Lescot’s Louvre pavilions, and thus appears to show
-further that its designer had either studied in France, or had borrowed
-ideas from the plates of Du Cerceau’s book.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 129.--Gable of Kirby Hall.]
-
-The southwest angle, with its curved bays, in two stories and attic,
-is more English in character. No neo-classic elements occur here,
-except the entablature bands which crown the stories. The gables (Fig.
-129) of fantastic outline with strap-work scrolls, are, I suppose,
-of Flemish, or Dutch, origin; but they became common features of the
-more showy Elizabethan architecture. Longford Castle,[151] another
-design by John Thorpe, is triangular on plan with a round tower at each
-angle. Though the building has been more or less altered in some of its
-details, the main features tally with Thorpe’s elevation, preserved in
-the Soane collection, and reproduced by Gotch (vol. 1, p. 20). French
-influence is marked here in the general disposition of the principal
-façade, and in some of the more conspicuous details. This façade, in
-the relation of the central block to the angle towers, bears a striking
-resemblance to the east front of Chambord. The towers have nearly the
-same form and proportions, but the central block is longer in Longford
-than in Chambord. The architectural scheme of this block, though not
-a reproduction of that of Chambord, has enough similarity to provoke
-comparison. Both are divided into three stories, and both have open
-arcades framed with orders. But in Longford the arcades are confined
-to the centre of the block, and to the first two stories, while in
-Chambord, above the ground story, they are differently disposed,
-and occur in all three stories. The long block of Longford has two
-projecting pavilions which are connected by the arcades, while the
-front of Chambord is all in one plane; but in a general front view the
-effect is not greatly different. In the orders of his pavilions Thorpe
-has employed De l’Orme’s pilaster of the Tuileries, and in the attics
-which he has set at intervals over his main cornice, other features, as
-the hermæ supporting the pediments of the Tuileries, are reproduced in
-modified form.[152]
-
-The caprice of design shown in the Elizabethan neo-classic
-ornamentation assumes an astonishing variety of forms, of which it may
-be well to give a few further examples. A window in the entrance front
-of Lower Walterstone Hall has a lintel in the form of an architrave
-supported on short sections of pilasters carried on brackets, while
-over this a pediment is inserted in the wall with an interval between
-it and the lintel, the whole forming the semblance of an entablature
-beneath the pediment, with its frieze in the wall plane (Fig. 130).
-In the porch of Cranborne Manor-House an entablature over an arcade
-is broken into ressauts resting on corbels in the shape of lions’
-heads projecting from the arch spandrels (Fig. 131), and over this
-entablature is a blind attic adorned with strap-work. The angles of
-the façade in which this porch occurs are furnished with buttresses
-in three stages with deep offsets, like those of Gothic art. The
-outer face of each stage is ornamented with a pair of pilasters on
-tall pedestals, with an entablature in ressauts, and over the topmost
-pair are two obelisks as finials. The pilasters are each broken in
-the middle by a larger block of stone after the manner of De l’Orme’s
-columns.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 130.--Window of Walterstone Hall.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 131.--Cranborne Manor-House.]
-
-The gatehouse at Tixall[153] has a plain front of three stories with a
-projecting bay over the portal, and angle towers. The window openings
-are all of the broad mullioned Elizabethan type, and the façade as a
-whole would be admirable if it had nothing more. But the Renaissance
-ideas led the designer to crown each story with an entablature, and to
-set a pair of classic columns on either side of the central bay, and
-in each tower angle. To cover these useless columns the entablature
-has to be broken into deep ressauts, and the three superimposed pairs
-carry nothing but a pedestal block above the main cornice, the several
-pedestal blocks being connected by a balustrade.
-
-The gatehouse of Stanway[154] has a portal with a four-centred
-arch framed with a shallow Doric order, having a pilaster with a
-free-standing column in front of it on either side. The entablature
-has a double ressaut over each of these compound members, and a curved
-pediment over the entablature is likewise broken into ressauts.
-A rectangular tablet with an escutcheon, surmounted by a smaller
-pediment, breaks through the middle of the larger pediment, and
-acroteria are set on its sides, while a keystone in the arch carries a
-shallow ressaut in the entablature. The front of Westwood Park[155] is
-for the most part free from foreign elements, but it has a porch in the
-form of a Roman triumphal arch with three openings, and a Corinthian
-order of almost correct ancient proportions.
-
-A remarkable illustration of the architectural taste of this time is
-afforded by the well-known Gate of Honour at Caius College, Cambridge.
-A triumphal arch scheme with an Ionic order, a Tudor arch, no openings
-in the lateral bays, and no attic, is surmounted with a Greek temple
-front of an engaged Corinthian order raised on tall pedestals connected
-by an engaged balustrade. This embraces in width only the central bay
-of the substructure, and solid abutments of concave outline are carried
-up over the side bays. A plain attic over the pediment of the temple
-forms the base for a square pyramid intersected by a tall hexagon,
-surmounted with a hexagonal dome. No voids, except the central opening
-under the Tudor arch, break the solid mass, but the wall surfaces are
-ornamented with disks, niches, entablatures, and small pediments in
-relief; and the pedestals of the temple order are carried on corbels
-and ressauts in the lower entablature.
-
-Of the many English houses built at the close of the sixteenth century,
-few are more tasteless and pretentious than Wollaton Hall,[156] built
-by Sir Francis Willoughby “at great expense, it was said, for a foolish
-display of his wealth.” An order of coupled pilasters, broken in the
-middle by salient blocks, adorn each story, while vacant niches in the
-upper stories break the narrow wall surfaces between the pilasters on
-either side of the large mullioned windows. The chimney-stacks are, as
-in Longford Castle, shaped in the semblance of pseudo-Doric columns,
-and the square angle pavilions have their cornices adorned with false
-pediments of capricious outline and strap-work ornamentation, flanked
-by obelisks on tall pedestals. One other feature of this remarkable
-design is perhaps worthy of notice, namely, the portal of the north
-front. This portal has a low arch, and is sheltered by a porch in
-the form of a massive free-standing Doric order, the shafts of which
-are broken in the middle by a salient drum, and the middle of the
-entablature is supported by a heavy console which forms, at the same
-time, a monstrous keystone to the arch (Fig. 132).
-
-It is unnecessary further to multiply examples. While one great
-house of the period differs from another in unimportant ways, those
-in which ornaments are extensively applied are without exception
-disfigured by them. The Elizabethan architectural ornamentation is at
-once pretentious and grotesquely ugly. It was only in so far as they
-held to a straightforward provision for domestic needs, and avoided
-architectural pretensions, that the English people of the Elizabethan
-Age produced really good domestic architecture.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 132.--Portal of Wollaton Hall.]
-
-Toward the close of the sixteenth century many Flemish and Dutch
-ornamental workers had come into England, and had brought in the
-tasteless forms of design that had been current with them. The
-ungrammatical and inelegant misuse of the orders, and the meaningless
-barocco scrollwork, with which the Elizabethan houses were overloaded,
-may be largely due to them. But these modes of design were readily
-assimilated by the native English workmen, and approved by the
-aristocratic English taste. The architect, in the more modern sense,
-did not yet exist. The design and execution of these buildings were in
-the hands of the master builders. No complete drawings were prepared
-in advance. Only the general scheme in rough sketches of plans and
-elevations was furnished, and these were freely modified, and the
-details developed, as the work proceeded under the direction of the
-master mason. It was a survival of the mediæval system, and no better
-system could be devised so long as the workmen were suitably trained to
-their craft, worked together on traditional lines, and were governed by
-a common understanding, common aims, and a strong feeling of artistic
-fellowship. But the Elizabethan workmen were not thus associated and
-governed. The older traditions of design had been largely lost, and
-the builders were attempting to use architectural forms which they
-did not understand. The aberrations that resulted from the efforts of
-these craftsmen to use the classic orders were ludicrous, as we have
-abundantly seen. The orders were entirely foreign to the genius and
-to the requirements of the English people, and were altogether out of
-place in English house building. Their departure from their own proper
-traditions and architectural habits at length weakened the building
-craftsmen, so that they finally lost their occupation with the rise of
-the modern professional architect, who first appeared in England in the
-person of Inigo Jones, whose work we may consider in the next chapter.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XIV
-
-              ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND
-
-                         II. _Jones and Wren_
-
-
-It is only by extension of the term that the architecture of England
-in the seventeenth century may be properly called Renaissance. But
-if, in architecture, we understand by Renaissance a revival of the
-use of classic details, such extension is justifiable, for in this
-architecture the use of classic details is becoming established,
-and the art of Jones and Wren stands in relation to the Elizabethan
-architecture as the art of Vignola and Palladio does to that of the
-early Renaissance in Italy, and that of Lescot and De l’Orme to the
-early French Renaissance.
-
-Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren were the only English architects
-of great importance at this epoch. It was their genius that determined
-the character of modern English architecture, and we may therefore
-confine our attention to their works.
-
-Of Jones, Horace Walpole thus speaks in his _Anecdotes of
-Painting_:[157] “Inigo Jones, ... if a table of fame like that in
-the _Tatler_ were to be framed for men of indisputable genius
-in every country, would save England from the disgrace of not having
-her representative among the arts.... Vitruvius drew up his grammar,
-Palladio showed him the practice, Rome displayed a theatre worthy of
-his emulation, and King Charles was ready to encourage, employ, and
-reward his talents.” This famous architect began his artistic career
-in the early part of the seventeenth century. Nothing is known of
-his early education, but in youth he appears to have manifested an
-inclination for drawing, and to have acquired some skill in landscape
-painting.[158] He does not seem to have had any systematic training in
-architecture, but in early life he travelled in Italy,[159] where he
-studied the ancient monuments and read the works of Palladio and other
-Italian authors. In a book entitled _Stonehenge Restored_,[160]
-he says: “Being naturally inclined in my younger years to study the
-arts of design, I passed into foreign parts to converse with the great
-masters thereof in Italy, where I applied myself to search out the
-ruins of those ancient buildings which, in despite of time itself, and
-violence of barbarians, are yet remaining. Having satisfied myself
-in these, and returning to my native country, I applied my mind more
-particularly to the study of architecture.” For a quick-witted man with
-architectural aptitudes no training could be better, except that of
-growing up in an atmosphere of building activity, as the craftsmen of
-the Middle Ages did.
-
-In his first practice Jones appears to have worked in a mixed style.
-The mongrel Elizabethan art was still in full vogue, and with this
-style, says Cunningham, “Inigo compounded, and for some time persevered
-in what the wits of the succeeding age nicknamed King James’s Gothic.”
-The well-known porch of St. Mary’s church, Oxford, if it be by Jones,
-may furnish an example of this earlier style. But he soon sought to
-free himself from the vagaries of the Elizabethan craftsman, and strove
-to introduce a rigorous use of Palladian forms. He had learned the
-grammar of the orders as formulated by the architects of the later
-Renaissance, and had apparently conceived a sincere belief that the
-Palladian canons embodied all that was most excellent in architectural
-design. He saw in the Elizabethan art only its manifold infractions
-of the rules of order and proportion, and its grotesque distortions
-of classic forms. To reëstablish these rules and restore these forms
-appeared to him the way to regenerate English art.
-
-First among his extant works that can be certainly identified is the
-well-known Banqueting Hall built in 1619, for King James I, as a part
-of the projected palace of Whitehall, for which he had prepared the
-plans on a vast scale. The first remark prompted by this design is that
-it is not at all English. Every form and feature of the native art
-is eliminated. The Elizabethan house, however overlaid with foreign
-elements, was English in its primary forms and expression. But here
-Inigo Jones swept away everything English, and substituted a Palladian
-scheme that is foreign to England in every particular. The low-pitched
-roof, the plain rectangular outline, and the narrow undivided
-window openings are as Italian as the orders with which the façade
-is overlaid. But such was the state of taste among the influential
-classes that these features were approved, and the design was applauded
-with acclamation. “It spread,” says Cunningham, “the love of classic
-architecture far and wide, and there was soon a growing demand for
-works which recalled Athens to the learned, and presented something
-new to the admiration of the vulgar.”[161] The learned had then small
-knowledge of Athenian architecture, and even now many learned people
-fail to consider that there was never in Athens anything at all like
-Palladian design.
-
-The façade of the Banqueting Hall (Plate X) is in two stories on a
-low basement, and has a rusticated wall of smooth-faced masonry,
-with an engaged order in each story, and a parapet with a balustrade
-over the main cornice. The central part of this façade has its wall
-slightly advanced, and in each story the orders, Ionic and Corinthian
-respectively, have engaged columns against the projecting middle part,
-and pilasters on either side, a pair of them being set together at
-each end. These pilasters taper and have strong entasis, so that parts
-of those on the angles overreach the end walls. The entablatures are
-carried by the walls, and thus have to be broken into ressauts to
-cover the columns and pilasters. The structural function of all these
-superimposed columns and pilasters is therefore only that of carrying
-the ressauts of the parapet. The rectangular windows, of severely
-classic design, have pediments, alternately curved and angular, in the
-lower story, and flat cornices only in the story above, while a frieze
-below the main entablature is adorned in Roman fashion with masks and
-festoons.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate X
-
-  BANQUETING HALL, WHITEHALL
-
-  London]
-
-It is surprising that such a mechanical reproduction of a foreign
-style should ever have called forth high praise from Englishmen.
-The design exhibits no invention, no creative adaptation of foreign
-elements to new conditions, and therefore no reason for the use of
-such elements. The low-pitched roof (wholly invisible from any near
-point of view) is unsuited to the English climate, and the parapet
-and balustrade are equally inappropriate. Yet of this design Walpole
-remarks[162] that “it stands as a model of the most pure and beautiful
-taste.” And an earlier expression of the feeling which prevailed among
-the dilettanti of the time is found in the text which accompanies
-Kent’s well-known book of Jones’s designs[163] as follows: “If the
-reputation of this great man doth not rise in proportion to his merits
-in his own country, ’tis certain, in Italy, which was his school, and
-other Parts of Europe, he was in great esteem; in which places, as well
-as in England, his own works are his monument and best Panegyrick;
-which, together with those of Palladio, remain equal Proofs of the
-Superiority of those two great Masters to all others.”
-
-The whole scheme for the palace of Whitehall is fully illustrated
-by Kent.[164] The plan is a vast rectangle measuring 874 by 1151
-feet, and comprising seven courts, of which the central one toward
-the park encloses a circular gallery. The long blocks are broken by
-rectangular pavilions, one on the axis of each of the four sides, one
-at each angle, and others at intervals between. It is thus French in
-character, rather than Italian, and suggests a derivation from De
-l’Orme’s plan of the Tuileries. It is not worth while to examine the
-architectural character of the elevation fully in detail; but, in
-addition to the Banqueting Hall already noticed, it may be well to
-examine several other parts which further illustrate the art of Inigo
-Jones. The axial pavilions are flanked with rectangular towers in
-three stages, each stage adorned with an order, and surmounted with an
-octagonal cupola. On the Westminster front the basement has a Doric
-order with a modification of De l’Orme’s column, in which the larger
-stones are square. This basement (Fig. 133) has a mezzanine marked by
-an entablature which is cut in the middle by the keystones of a flat
-arch over a window beneath. The great entablature in this case is
-borne by the columns, and the order has thus a structural character
-(though it has no structural reason for being) which the orders of
-the Banqueting Hall do not have. The only other feature of Whitehall
-that need be mentioned is the façade of the circular court enclosed by
-the king’s apartments. This is a _bizarre_ design in two stages,
-with a so-called Persian order below and an order of caryatids above.
-The bearing members of these orders stand out beyond the entablatures,
-and thus support nothing but ressauts, while a balustrade with statues
-crowns the whole.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 133.--Basement of a part of
-  Whitehall.]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 134.--Front of old St. Paul’s by
-  Inigo Jones.]
-
-With all his zeal for reform by a stricter conformity to classic
-models, the designs of Inigo Jones were never truly classical, and they
-often exhibit ludicrous aberrations. He had no true conception of the
-principles of classic art, as no architects of the Renaissance ever
-had. The Palladian architecture, which he mainly strove to follow, was
-itself, as we have seen, far from true to classic design. Some of these
-aberrations are strikingly shown in the west front which he built to
-the nave of old St. Paul’s cathedral. In attempting to apply classic
-details to such a building he was obliged to depart widely from
-classic principles. His scheme, as shown in Kent’s print (Fig. 134)
-is as incongruous a mixture as was ever produced by the Elizabethan
-craftsmen. This front, in its main outline, has to follow the form of
-the Mediæval structure, with its high nave and low aisles. To this
-mediæval form the architect has affixed a variety of features derived
-from Roman, Renaissance, and even Egyptian sources. He has crowned the
-wall with a pseudo-classic cornice surmounted by a steep gable, he has
-set obelisks on Roman pedestals over the buttresses, affixed reversed
-consoles to the clerestory walls, and built a Corinthian portico with a
-balustrade upon its entablature, and completed the scheme with flanking
-towers crowned with lanterns. It is a thoroughly barbarous composition,
-which even Walpole complains of as follows: “In the restoration of
-that cathedral he made two capital faults. He first renewed the sides
-with very bad Gothic, and then added a Roman portico, magnificent and
-beautiful indeed, but which has no affinity with the ancient parts that
-remained, and made his own Gothic appear ten times heavier.”[165]
-
-The art of Inigo Jones has been thoughtlessly lauded in more recent
-times. “His special strength,” says Mr. Bloomfield, his latest
-panegyrist, “lay in his thorough mastery of proportion, his contempt
-for mere prettiness, and the rare distinction of his style. His own
-theory of architecture was that, in his own words, ‘it should be solid,
-proportional according to the rules, masculine and unaffected.’[166]
-Was Inigo Jones a master of proportion? Does he not in this declaration
-betray a fundamental misconception of the true meaning of proportion?
-Is any genuine work of art “proportional according to the rules,”
-_i.e._ the mechanical formulas of Vitruvius or Palladio on which
-he professed to base his practice? And did Jones ever carry out in
-practice his avowed theory that architecture should be unaffected? Can
-an art be unaffected which is so frankly copied from a foreign style?
-I have characterized the spirit of much of the architecture of the
-Renaissance as theatrical; that of Inigo Jones is preëminently so,
-and it is significant that he was extensively employed, in his early
-career, in designing architectural backgrounds for the stage.
-
-The artistic career of Sir Christopher Wren, the most justly
-famous architect of the belated English Renaissance, began
-after the Civil War. Inigo Jones had prepared the way for him,
-and a body of aristocratic dilettanti, ardently devoted to the
-neo-classic propaganda, had arisen. The artistic notions of these
-people are instructively set forth in the following passage from
-_Parentalia_:[167] “Towards the end of King James I’s Reign, and
-in the Beginning of his Son’s, Taste in Architecture made a bold step
-from Italy to England at once, and scarce staid a moment to visit
-France by the way. From the most profound Ignorance in Architecture,
-the most consummate Night of Knowledge, Inigo Jones started up, a
-Prodigy of Art, and vied even with his Master Palladio himself. From
-so glorious an Out-set, there was not any Excellency that we might not
-have hoped to obtain; Britain had a reasonable Prospect to rival Italy,
-and foil every Nation in Europe beside. But in the midst of these
-sanguine Expectations, the fatal Civil War commenced, and all the Arts
-and Sciences were immediately laid aside.”
-
-Before turning his attention to architecture Wren had been a
-distinguished scholar at Oxford, where he was appointed Professor of
-Astronomy in the year 1657. It was not until mature manhood that he
-began the practice of architecture, and thus, like so many others who
-have achieved distinction in this art, he never had a special and
-systematic preliminary training for it. His father, Dr. Christopher
-Wren, Dean of Windsor, is said to have been skilled in all branches of
-mathematics and in architecture,[168] and this, together with his own
-native aptitudes, appears to have made it easy for him, by observation
-and practice, to acquire the necessary preparation for such work as he
-was to do. His opportunities for study of the architectural monuments
-of the Continent were small. He never visited Italy, but he spent some
-months in Paris, and while there wrote, in a letter to a friend, as
-follows: “I have busied myself surveying the most esteem’d Fabricks
-of Paris, and the Country round; the Louvre for a while was my daily
-Object, where no less than a thousand Hands are constantly employ’d
-in the Works; some in laying mighty foundations, some in raising the
-stories, columns, entablements, &c., with vast stones, by great and
-useful Engines; others in Carving, Inlaying of Marbles, Plastering,
-Painting, Gilding, &c., which altogether make a school of Architecture,
-the best probably, at this Day in Europe.” The Italian architect
-Bernini was working on the Louvre at the time, and in the same letter
-Wren writes: “Mons. Abbé Charles introduc’d me to the acquaintance of
-Bernini, who shew’d me his Designs of the Louvre, and of the King’s
-Statue.... Bernini’s Design of the Louvre I would have given my skin
-for, but the reserv’d Italian gave me but a few Minutes View; it was
-five little Designs on paper, for which he hath receiv’d as many
-thousand Pistoles; I had only time to copy it in my Fancy and Memory.
-I shall be able by Discourse, and Crayon, to give you a tolerable
-Account of it.”[169]
-
-He appears to have made the most of his time while in France, but he
-naturally confined his attention to the modern works of that country,
-which alone were then thought worthy of notice. The great châteaux
-of Fontainebleau, St. Germain, Chantilly, and many others, he speaks
-of in the same letter as having “surveyed that I might not lose the
-impressions of them.”
-
-Wren’s first architectural work appears to have been the Sheldonian
-Theatre in Oxford, which is thus referred to in _Parentalia_:
-“This Theatre, a work of admirable Contrivance and Magnificence, was
-the first publick Performance of the Surveyor,[170] in Architecture;
-which, however, had been executed in a greater and better style, with
-a view to the ancient Roman Grandeur discernable in the Theatre of
-Marcellus at Rome, but that he was obliged to put a Stop to the bolder
-strokes of his Pencil, and confine the Expense within the Limits of a
-private Purse.”[171] But his great opportunity occurred after the fire
-of London, when he was commissioned to prepare plans for the rebuilding
-of the city, including the cathedral of St. Paul and all the city
-churches. Before the great fire he had been ordered to submit designs
-for the restoration of the old cathedral of St. Paul, the grand old
-Norman structure, with additions in the early English style, which,
-notwithstanding the repairs and additions of Inigo Jones, was still
-thought to be in a dangerous condition. Wren made a careful survey,
-and worked out a plan, elevation, and section of the old structure,
-and expressed surprise at what he considered the negligence of the old
-builders. “They valued not exactness: some Inter-columns were one inch
-and a half too large, others as much, or more, too little. Nor were
-they true in their levels.”[172] He thought that the whole fabric was
-alarmingly insecure, except the portico built by Jones, which, he said,
-“being an entire and excellent piece, gave great reputation to the work
-in the first repairs.”[173]
-
-He prepared plans for a thorough restoration, but these were not
-approved, and he set off for France. Then came the great fire and put
-an end to all thought of repairs on his part, though the commissioners
-appear still to have clung to the idea of restoration until they were
-satisfied, by fruitless effort to utilize what remained of the old
-work, that such a course was impracticable.[174]
-
-An entirely new structure was now decided on, and Wren was directed
-to “contrive a Fabrick of moderate Bulk, but of good Proportions;
-a convenient Quire, with a Vestibule and Porticoes, and a Dome
-conspicuous above the Houses. A long Body with aisles was thought
-impertinent, our Religion not using Processions.”[175]
-
-It is difficult from the statements in _Parentalia_ clearly to
-identify Wren’s different drawings which have been preserved, and to
-reconcile either the statements or the drawings with what is said by
-more recent writers, who do not always agree among themselves. The
-drawings embody widely different schemes which were the results of so
-many attempts to meet the wishes of the king and court on the one hand,
-and those of the citizens on the other. Of these there are two sets
-which may be considered as the principal ones.
-
-The first of these has a novel plan based on that of the Greek cross,
-but having the reëntrant external angles filled out to segmental curves
-struck from the corners of a square enclosing the whole. A great dome
-on a circular drum supported by eight piers rises over the crossing, a
-small dome on pendentives covers each of the spaces between the great
-circle and the curved enclosing walls; while the northern, southern,
-and western arms of the cross have each a square groined vault. The
-form of the vaulting over the eastern arm is not indicated on the plan,
-but the choir enclosure is shown in the form of a circle cut out on the
-east to open into the sanctuary, and on the west to communicate with
-the nave. The dome (Fig. 135) is in two shells of masonry, the inner
-one being hemispherical with a circular opening in its crown, and the
-outer one a pointed oval supporting a lantern. The drum is thick, and
-although the vault springs from very near the top, a strong continuous
-abutment in the form of a solid ring of masonry, with concave outline,
-is built up against it. The dome is kept solid up to the haunch of the
-inner shell, so that this inner shell is abundantly secured, while the
-outline of the outer shell, from the point where it clears the solid
-mass below, has a form that would exert a minimum of thrust, though it
-would hardly be secure without a binding chain. It is noticeable that
-the inner face of the drum is not vertical, but inclined inward in the
-form of a truncated cone, which considerably strengthens it against any
-tendency to yield to the force of thrust in the dome.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 135.--Section of Wren’s rejected
-  scheme for St. Paul’s.]
-
-The scheme was clearly based on the model of St. Peter’s in Rome,
-to which frequent reference is made in _Parentalia_ as having
-been in the mind of the architect as he developed his idea. The dome
-partakes of the character of Bramante’s design on the one hand, and
-of that of Michael Angelo, as finally constructed, on the other. The
-likeness to Bramante’s scheme (Fig. 23, p. 48) is in the form of the
-inner shell, and its adjustment to the supporting drum. The likeness
-as to adjustment is not, indeed, very close; for Wren has raised the
-springing so that it is almost at the top of the drum, but he has
-fortified it with a continuous abutment which, though of different
-outline, has substantially the same structural effect. The likeness
-to St. Peter’s is further shown in the encircling order of the inner
-face of the drum, which occurs in both Bramante’s scheme and in that
-of Michael Angelo. There can be little doubt that Wren had studied
-Bramante’s design in Serlio’s book, and had appreciated its structural
-merits. But he wished, in emulation of Michael Angelo, to make his
-dome externally more imposing, and he therefore raised its springing
-level as we see, and adopted from Michael Angelo’s scheme the idea of
-a double dome. The external outline from the top of the drum to the
-haunch of the vault is too nearly the same as the corresponding part of
-Michael Angelo’s design to be considered as an accidental coincidence.
-The structural difference between the two is indeed great, since the
-concave portion in Wren’s design is a continuous ring, while in that
-of Michael Angelo it is an isolated and insignificant abutment. Wren’s
-scheme is thus superior in point of constructive merit, since it
-provides continuous resistance to continuous thrust. It will be seen
-that the two shells of Wren’s projected dome correspond to the inner
-and outer shells of Michael Angelo’s model (Fig. 26, p. 54), and thus
-in reproducing the main idea of this model Wren merely omitted the
-middle shell. He thus gave a wider divergence to the two vaults as they
-rise than occurs in the actual dome of St. Peter’s. He also omitted the
-well which in St. Peter’s connects the two shells at the crown.
-
-A single order of pilasters adorns both the interior and the exterior
-of the church itself, the one on the outside being raised on a high
-basement and crowned with a plain attic; and a portico in the form of a
-temple front, with its order raised on high pedestals, gives emphasis
-to the west façade.
-
-This design appears to have been rejected, to Wren’s great chagrin, as
-we learn from the following passage in _Parentalia_: “The surveyor
-in private conversation, always seem’d to set a higher value on this
-design, than any he had made before or since; as what was labour’d with
-more study and success; and, (had he not been over-rul’d by those,
-whom it was his duty to obey), what he would have put in execution
-with more Cheerfulness, and Satisfaction to himself.... But the
-Chapter, and some others of the Clergy thought the Model not enough of
-a Cathedral-fashion; to instance particularly, in that, the Quire was
-design’d circular, &c.... The Surveyor then turn’d his Thoughts to a
-Cathedral-form, (as they call’d it) but so rectified, as to reconcile,
-as near as possible, the Gothick to a better Manner of Architecture;
-with a Cupola, and above that, instead of a Lantern, a lofty Spire, and
-large Porticoes.”
-
-I think that had the first design been accepted Wren would not have
-carried it out without material modifications. For he was too good an
-engineer not to have seen that the form and adjustment of the dome were
-seriously defective from a structural point of view. However this may
-be, the dome which he actually built is, as we shall see, fundamentally
-different in character (though it is not very different in either
-internal or external shape), and it is different in a way that no
-outside influences could have compelled.
-
-The most noticeable feature of the second design is that part which
-rises over the crossing, and consists of a vast frustum of a dome
-supporting a tall buttressed drum, which in turn is surmounted by
-a smaller dome of oval outline, from the crown of which rises a
-telescopic spire of six stages with a strongly marked cornice to each.
-It was in this design that he is said to have sought to “reconcile the
-Gothic to a better Manner.” What he meant by this I do not know. Wren
-can hardly have supposed that he was effecting such a reconciliation
-by this remarkable combination of dome and spire. But in the actual
-cathedral of St. Paul we shall find some features that may, in part,
-explain his meaning.
-
-It is noticeable that the west façade of this design is a close copy,
-with modifications of proportions and minor details, of the façade
-by Inigo Jones (Fig. 134, p. 231), which the fire had weakened or
-destroyed, and which Wren had much admired. This design was approved,
-and the king’s warrant for its execution was issued May 1st, 1675. But
-it is said that “the king was pleased to allow him the liberty in the
-prosecution of his work, to make some variations, rather ornamental
-than essential, as from time to time he should see proper.”[176] The
-actual building shows how largely Wren availed himself of this liberty.
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate XI
-
-  DOME OF ST. PAUL’S
-
-  London]
-
-The cathedral of St. Paul as it now stands was never embodied in any
-set of drawings. Starting with a few rough sketches the scheme was
-developed as the work proceeded, the master being always present to
-direct the work. Wren was at the start what would now be called an
-amateur, but by degrees he learned his art in the best possible way,
-not in the office or drawing-room, but on the scaffold in close contact
-with the works. It was thus that Brunelleschi had worked on the dome of
-Florence, and Michael Angelo on St. Peter’s.
-
-The plan of the existing St. Paul’s has no beauty comparable to that of
-St. Peter’s (Fig. 31, p. 67). It has a long nave with a short transept
-near the middle, a semicircular apse, and two western towers. Both
-nave and transept have side aisles, and in the angles formed by the
-towers, which project beyond the aisles in the manner that is common
-in the mediæval churches of England, are a consistory court and a
-morning chapel, while in the angles of the crossing three vestries and
-a stair-turret are set. Thus the Greek cross plan which Wren appears
-to have first intended, “a long body with aisles” having been “thought
-impertinent, our religion not using processions,” was widely departed
-from in conformity with the popular feeling that the first plan
-“deviated too much from the old Gothick form of Cathedral Churches,
-which they (the people) had been used to see and admire in this
-country.”
-
-In the elevation a great dome, in outline not very unlike the one first
-intended, rises over the crossing; the nave and aisles are vaulted
-with small domes on pendentives of peculiar form, and the piers of the
-interior are faced with a great Corinthian order of pilasters. That
-Wren worked with constant reference to St. Peter’s as the main source
-of his inspiration, is clearly enough manifested in the general scheme,
-though there are many points of difference between the two monuments,
-apart from the great difference of scale. Other sources of influence
-are, however, also apparent.
-
-The most interesting feature of St. Paul’s cathedral is, of course,
-the great dome (Plate XI), which is one of the most remarkable of the
-series of modern domes that began with the dome of Brunelleschi. In
-general external form it recalls Bramante’s diminutive circular temple
-of San Pietro in Montorio, and it is not unlikely that Wren derived
-the idea from the woodcut of that design in Serlio’s book, or in that
-of Palladio. Wren has, of course, altered and amplified the scheme in
-adaptation to his vast scale and lofty proportions, but the general
-composition of the two is substantially the same, though the internal
-structure is entirely different. The leading features of the exterior,
-the encircling order crowned with the balustrade, and the dome rising
-over it surmounted by the lantern, are those of Bramante’s design.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 136.--Section of the dome of St.
-  Paul’s.]
-
-The structural system of this dome (Fig. 136) is peculiar. From eight
-piers arches and pendentives are turned, forming the circular bed
-from which the drum rises to a great height, and from a level far
-below the top of this drum a dome of masonry, of slightly oval form is
-sprung. The drum is double, and the inner wall, which carries the dome,
-inclines inward, as in the rejected design, up to the springing level,
-and above this it rises vertically against the haunch of the dome. From
-the haunch a hollow cone of masonry is carried up far above the crown
-of the dome, where it is cut off and covered with a small segmental
-dome surmounted by a tall lantern of stone. The system is devised
-with a view to stability. The cone shape of the inner drum gives it
-resistance to the dome thrusts, and these thrusts are further fortified
-by a solid filling of masonry between the smaller cone above and the
-vault reaching more than halfway from the springing to the crown.
-The outer drum is a solid wall up to a level but little higher than
-the apex of the timber roof of the nave, where it forms a stylobate
-for the encircling Corinthian order. But the two drums are connected
-by heavy abutments across the interval between them, one behind each
-column of the encircling order, with a heavier buttress filling every
-fourth intercolumniation (Plate XI). The inner drum rises in diminished
-thickness above the entablature of the outer one in the form of an
-attic with an order of pilasters and square openings between. From this
-attic rises a false dome of timber, surrounding and concealing the
-great cone which is the real support of the lantern.
-
-This remarkable scheme embodies the last notable attempt to solve
-the great dome problem with which the architects of the Renaissance
-had struggled from the time of Brunelleschi. But the problem is
-incapable of a satisfactory solution. It is impossible to make a large
-unbuttressed dome stand securely except by the extraneous means of
-binding chains. Wren has not attempted to do such a thing. He was too
-good an engineer to follow in the footsteps of Brunelleschi and Michael
-Angelo. His dome is well buttressed, but it is therefore necessarily
-hidden from view. To raise another dome of masonry from the cornice
-of the drum for external effect, and to crown such a dome with a
-stone lantern fifty feet high, he saw to be impossible with safety.
-A semblance of such a dome was, however, necessary to his scheme. He
-had been charged to make a dome “conspicuous above the houses,” and he
-therefore surrounded the cone, the true support of the lantern, with a
-wooden counterfeit of a dome upon which he makes the beholder believe
-that the lantern rests. The system is thus a monstrous architectural
-deceit. We have criticised Michael Angelo for springing a great dome
-from the top of a drum, but he cannot be reproached for deception.
-His dome is a real dome of masonry, and does carry the lantern as it
-appears to, though, as we have seen, insecurely, except for so long
-as the binding chains can be made to save it from collapse. Wren would
-not build a dome in this inherently weak manner. He preferred to design
-his masonry construction on sound principles, which would not allow
-an external dome, and to enclose this within the wooden counterfeit.
-And it may here be remarked that most modern domes, modelled after St.
-Peter’s and St. Paul’s, are wooden constructions and carry lanterns of
-wood. They are thus entirely safe, but they have not the monumental
-character of great architectural works.
-
-In general external effect the dome of St. Paul’s has much merit, if it
-does not justify the extravagant remark of Mr. Loftie that it is the
-“noblest dome in Christendom.”[177]
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 137.--Vaulting of St. Paul’s.]
-
-  [Illustration:
-
-  Plate XII
-
-  INTERIOR OF ST. PAUL’S
-
-  London]
-
-The proportions of the interior of the church (Plate XII) are
-admirable, and give a better effect of scale than the larger scheme of
-St. Peter’s. But the details exhibit more of those aberrations that are
-inherent in the architecture of the Renaissance. The vaulting of the
-nave (Fig. 137) is in oblong compartments with their long axes running
-transversely, and the small domes, which are low spherical segments
-instead of hemispheres, therefore leave considerable intervals at
-each end of each compartment, over which segments of barrel vaulting,
-of a form generated by the elliptical lunettes of the clerestory, are
-turned. The pendentives thus have a peculiar shape, and are segments
-of a hemisphere cut by four vertical planes coinciding with the sides
-of the vault compartment, by a horizontal plane at the base of the
-dome, and by the interpenetrating barrel vaults. The compartments are
-separated by transverse ribs, and these, together with the groins
-formed by the meeting of the pendentives and the interpenetrating
-lunette vaults, give a somewhat mediæval effect to the vaulting conoid.
-In other words the lines of the groins and the lunette arches form a
-combination not unlike that of Gothic vaulting. This may have been one
-of the points in which Wren fancied that he could “reconcile the Gothic
-to a better manner.”
-
-In the great order Wren has departed from the scheme of St. Peter’s
-in giving only one pilaster to each pier of the nave, though in the
-larger piers under the great dome he has set them in pairs. Under
-the archivolts of the great arcade and under the aisle vaulting the
-smaller pilasters are coupled, while in St. Peter’s they are single.
-With the details of these orders the architect took great liberties
-in utter disregard of the canons of Vitruvius and the neo-classic
-authorities. The crowns of the great arches reach high above the
-capitals of the pilasters, so that a complete entablature cannot pass
-over them. It would not, of course, do to allow the archivolts to cut
-into an entablature, and Wren has therefore omitted the architrave
-and frieze in the intervals of the order, and has included them only
-in a ressaut over each pilaster, the cornice alone being carried over
-the arch. To give the vaulting its admirable elevation without unduly
-magnifying the great order, as Michael Angelo did in St. Peter’s, an
-attic is interposed, but to spring a vault from an attic wall is an
-architectural barbarism; though it is perhaps no greater one than to
-spring it from an entablature, as the architects of the Renaissance
-had done from Brunelleschi down. In the small order of the aisles the
-entablature is simplified, and has only an architrave and cornice;
-while a member, like a diminutive attic, in retreat of the cornice, is
-interposed at the impost. It looks as if this had been done in order to
-raise the springing of the arches so that no part of them would be cut
-off from view by the salience of the cornice; and it was apparently in
-part for the same reason that the attic was interposed in the nave.
-The motive is commendable. The effect of vaulting rising directly
-from a salient cornice Wren may justly have felt to be a bad one, but
-to avoid it while using classic details necessitates these strange
-inconsistencies.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 138.--Crossing pier and impost, St.
-  Paul’s.]
-
-Among numerous other aberrations of this pseudo-classic scheme is the
-treatment of the segmental archivolts of the small half domes that
-open out of the oblique sides of the great octagon at the crossing.
-The orders of the crossing piers have complete entablatures (Fig.
-138), and the archivolts in question are in two parts answering to the
-frieze and cornice of these entablatures, which they intersect in the
-awkward manner shown in the figure. To have mitred the cornice of the
-archivolt to that of the order would have left the pilaster beneath
-with an incomplete entablature, and the architect preferred to run the
-cornice through the archivolt in this unsightly way. Such were some
-of the further makeshifts to which the designers of the Renaissance
-had to resort in their efforts to apply the classic orders to uses for
-which they were not adapted. But all such aberrations in the use of
-classic elements are superficial and open. A more radical violation of
-architectural veracity is found in the manner in which the buttress
-system is concealed. The thrusts of the nave vaulting are met by a
-series of flying buttresses carried over the aisle roof in Gothic
-fashion (Fig. 139). But it would not do to have flying buttresses
-appear in an ostensibly classic system, and Wren accordingly hid them
-from sight by a screen wall made to look like an upper story in the
-general view of the exterior. It is not until one mounts to the terrace
-of the drum, and looking down finds the space between the clerestory
-and outer wall open to the sky, that he discovers the buttresses
-there, and realizes the deceitful character of the architectural
-scheme. Perhaps this illustrates another point in which Wren “sought to
-reconcile the Gothic to a better manner.” A similar treatment occurs
-in that part of the nave of St. Peter’s which was built by Maderno.
-Michael Angelo’s great external order had obliged him, as we saw (p.
-68), to carry up the aisle wall to the height of the clerestory, but
-he filled up the space over the aisle with his small embedded dome
-(Fig. 32, p. 69). In Maderno’s part the dome is omitted, and the space
-over the aisle vaulting is left open to the sky as in St. Paul’s. But
-the buttresses of St. Peter’s are solid cross walls with no suggestion
-of Gothic form. In the vaulting of the apse Wren has followed the
-quasi-mediæval form adopted by Michael Angelo in the apse of St.
-Peter’s, dividing it into three shallow cells on converging ribs rising
-from the stumpy pilasters of the attic.
-
-  [Illustration: FIG. 139.--Half section of the nave of
-  St. Paul’s.]
-
-Of the architectural treatment of the exterior as a whole little need
-be said further than that it has no relation to the real form of the
-building. The masking of the buttress system by the false wall, and
-the application of orders without any structural use or expression
-in harmony with the real structure, are entirely in keeping with the
-spirit the Renaissance.
-
-Wren’s other churches exhibit a medley of elements from spurious Gothic
-to pseudo-classic in manifold irrational combinations, such as can
-be found in the works of few other architects. These churches with
-their vaultings of wood and plaster--whether in the form of domes on
-pendentives, sprung from the entablatures of classic orders, as at St.
-Stephen’s, Walbrook, or with Welsh vaulting on simulated cross ribs
-of plaster, as at St. Bride’s, Fleet Street, or with barrel vaulting
-on an attic, as at St. Peter’s, Cornhill,--it would be superfluous,
-as well as tiresome, to examine in detail. Nor is it worth while to
-analyze the spires of these churches. Spires made up of superimposed
-stories with classic entablatures in telescopic adjustment, like St.
-Bride’s, or temples of Vesta crowned with flying buttresses holding up
-neo-classic tabernacles surmounted by obelisks, like St. Mary-le-Bow,
-are hybrid compositions of utterly barbaric character, notwithstanding
-the excellent portions for which they have been justly admired.
-
-
-
-
-                              CHAPTER XV
-
-                              CONCLUSION
-
-
-I think it must be clear, in the light of the foregoing considerations,
-that the architecture of the Renaissance is an art without consistent
-principles. We have seen that it assumed a great variety of phases at
-different times and in different localities; but that it was never
-either really classic or structurally truthful. While professing to
-aim at restoring the “good ancient manner,” the neo-classic designers
-rarely conformed to any ancient standards save, at most, in some
-details of their compositions. They designed for the most part, as we
-have seen, on a basis of mediæval forms, and overlaid their structures
-with a facing of details derived, indeed, from classic sources, but
-altered, mixed, and misapplied in all manner of unclassic ways. Of true
-classic art, _i.e._ Greek art of the best time of Greek culture,
-they had, as before remarked (p. 4), no knowledge. By the “good ancient
-manner” they meant the imperial Roman manner. But even this they
-did not faithfully follow. The wide departure from ancient modes of
-design so constantly manifested in the neo-classic architecture has
-not escaped notice by modern writers, who are wont to speak of it as
-showing that the revivalists were not servile copyists, but inventive
-designers adapting the ancient elements to new conditions. But there is
-no justification for this view. As to essential forms of building there
-were no new conditions to be met. In seeking to change architecture
-superficially by an application of classic details the neo-classicists
-erred. They ought to have seen that classic details do not lend
-themselves to new uses. Their very perfection for classic use unfits
-them for any other. To distort and misadjust them, as the architects of
-the Renaissance did, is not to adapt them. There was no true adaptation
-of classic elements in Renaissance design. Such adaptation involves
-creative modifications which so transform original elements that to a
-superficial view they are not recognizable in the resulting forms. The
-mediæval architects, through a long series of logical changes, growing
-out of their remarkable structural evolution, magnificently transformed
-the classic orders in a creative way. This the neo-classicists failed
-to perceive, and because the mediæval details and adjustments did
-not conform with those of Roman antiquity, they felt justified in
-calling them barbaric, while it was they themselves who were guilty of
-architectural barbarism.
-
-The architects of the Renaissance were strangely inconsistent. While in
-practice constantly violating the principles of classic design, they
-were in theory ardently advocating these principles; and finding strict
-canons of proportion laid down in the writings of Vitruvius, they
-attached, as theorists, great importance to such canons. Thus arose the
-elaborate systems of rules for the orders embodied in the writings of
-Vignola, Palladio, and many others.
-
-The influence of these short-sighted and mechanical Italian rules
-has been great in modern times. The formidable body of architectural
-dogma, contained in the literature of the Renaissance on this subject,
-has been so widely accepted as authoritative that modern art has
-been largely shaped by it. The so-called Palladian style of the
-seventeenth century was derived mainly from the Italian books, and
-the more recent teaching has been so implicitly based on the writings
-of Vignola and Palladio that few architects of academic training have
-thought of questioning the belief that the formulas of these writers
-constitute the only true basis of correct design. Yet the fact that
-these rules are arbitrary, and not in accord with the true principles
-of ancient art, has occasionally been recognized. Thus in a book of
-the eighteenth century, devoted in the main to the inculcation of the
-Palladian doctrines,[178] the following remarks occur: “As it was
-from the works of the antient architects that the several orders were
-deduced, those who had studied and found their different characters
-then became desirous of establishing from the same source their
-proportions.... Perceiving consummate beauty in what they saw, they
-sought to build upon that perfection certain fixed and invariable
-rules, by the observing of which others might be sure of attaining the
-same excellence.... But when they came to examine more of those works,
-they found the antients had not confined themselves to any such laws;
-and therefore that it was impossible to build such rules upon their
-works.... The young student is confused by reading a variety of authors
-on the subject. Among a number of the best of these each delivers what
-he esteems to be the most true and perfect proportion, but in each this
-differs. All have founded their maxims upon something in the antique,
-but, some having taken in the same order one piece, and some another,
-these proportions vary extremely; for the antients so varied in their
-works. Palladio is understood to be the best and greatest of these
-authors, we shall therefore deliver his as the general and received
-proportion in each order; but upon a general review of the several
-remains in which that order is preserved, we shall add what is the
-mean or middle proportion of the several parts, calculating from them
-all. The modern architects too strictly and scrupulously follow these
-antients; they did not so closely or servilely copy one another.”[179]
-Such recognition of the difference between the theorists’ rules of
-the orders and the ancient orders themselves is rare in the modern
-literature of architecture. But the remedy proposed to relieve the
-student from the confusion arising from the perusal of different
-authors each of whom “delivers what he esteems to be the most true and
-perfect proportion” is of little efficacy in practice; for the mean or
-middle proportion would still impose a fixed rule, and the true artist
-does not work by rules of any sort. The proportions of a genuine work
-of art are determined by a sense of proportion that is governed by laws
-too fine to be formulated, and which no rules can reach. It is his
-natural sense of proportion, developed by observation and exercise,
-that more than anything else makes an artist. Prescription may serve
-in mechanical processes, but not in the production of works of art.
-We may get Palladian formalism by rules, but no architecture of vital
-character. A system of proportions that may be good in one case cannot
-be good in any other, and therefore it is that “the antients” so varied
-in their works. That rules are useless to an artist the Italian writer
-Baldinucci, in his book on the proportions of the human figure,[180]
-has well remarked. He says on this point: “It is true that all these
-proportions, whether in painting or in sculpture, must be subject to
-the correction of the eye, so that proportions ought to be adopted
-always with its approval, notwithstanding all fixed rules, seeing that
-this has been the custom of all the best artists, confirmed by the
-memorable saying of the great Buonarroti that it is necessary for the
-master to have the compass in his eye.”[181]
-
-In the light of what we have seen I think it must appear that the
-claims which have been advanced for the architecture of the Renaissance
-as the only architecture of correct principles since that of classic
-antiquity, and as an architecture in comparison with which the Gothic
-art of the Middle Ages should be considered as the barbarous product
-of an unenlightened age, are without justification. The mistaken
-notions of the Italian writers of the fifteenth and sixteenth
-centuries (labouring under strange misapprehension of the principles
-of classic art on the one hand, and ignorance of the true Gothic on
-the other) have been too much inculcated in our own time; and the
-belief that classic art offers suitable models for modern uses, and
-that the architecture of the Renaissance embodies classic principles,
-has been accepted with too little examination of its grounds. A few
-of the most competent modern authors, while in the main disposed,
-by force of custom, to take a favourable view of the architecture
-of the Renaissance, have occasionally shown a juster sense of its
-real character. Thus the recent Italian writer Melani says:[182] “We
-always admire the beautiful productions of the art of the Renaissance,
-because we are accustomed to value the good wherever it is found; but
-when we think of the absurdity of this art, and still worse, of the
-consequences to which it has given rise, we cannot but deplore so much
-ill-directed energy.”
-
-
-
-
-                               APPENDIX
-
-                 CONDITION OF THE DOME OF ST. PETER’S
-
-
-The mathematicians, after describing the dome and its supports, make
-the following statement of the condition in which they found it:[183]--
-
-       *       *       *       *       *
-
-1. La base esteriore A del tamburo si vede piena di spaccature, molte
-delle quali corrono unite in sù per tutto il tamburo medesimo, e per
-tutto l’attico, fino a nascondersi in _nd_ sotto i piombi non
-ancora scoperti. Da dette spaccature si diramano continui peli, che
-infrangono una quantità grandissima di travertini.
-
-2. Esse spaccature al fondo son piccolissime, e in sù van sempre
-crescendo. Piegano dagli arconi in giù verso i piloni.
-
-3. Nel Corridore CB, che gira dentro tutta la base si vedono sul muro
-esteriore BE molte aperture, che parimente venendo in giù piegano verso
-i piloni.
-
-4. Nello stesso muro esteriore pure dentro il corridore si vedono
-raddoppiate aperture orizontali verso il fondo B, che nell’alzarsi
-il pavimento sopra gli arconi, si seppelliscono sotto al medesimo,
-vedendosi ivi più che altrove lo stesso pavimento separato dal muro
-esteriore; qual disunione è generale per tutto il corridore.
-
-5. Dette aperture orizontali passano tutta la grossezza BA del muro
-esteriore della base, come si vede nelle porte, che metton fuora,
-rialzandosi tutto il muro dalla parte interiore verso B, e rimanendo l’
-appoggio solamente verso A; anzi verso B tra una spaccatura orizontale
-e l’ altra in qualche luogo si levano colle mani senza sforzo
-considerabile i mattoni non più premuti.
-
-6. Delle spaccature verticali se ne vede una sola nel muro interiore C.
-
-7. La volta E del medesimo corridore è tutta spaccata in mezzo con una
-generale apertura, che gira attorno da per tutto.
-
-8. Essa apertura passa tutta la grossezza EF della volta, vedendosi
-generalmente nel mattonato F sotto gli archetti de’ contraforti, e
-per tutto attorno il ripiano, per cui si gira il tamburo; e perche vi
-pioveva giù nel corridore, detto mattonato fu rassettato non è un’ anno.
-
-9. Nel luogo di tal rassetto si vedono nuovi distacchi de’ mattoni
-rimessi; anzi in qualche sito si vedono rotti i mattoni nuovi sopra l’
-apertura antica, e in qualche luogo di nuovo piove giù nel corridore.
-
-10. I sedici contraforti FG si vadon rotti con moltissime aperture, che
-nel salire piegano in dentro; le medesime rompono per mezzo gran numero
-di travertini di essi contraforti e quelli del cornicione _m_.
-
-11. Sopra l’archetto F sono assai più tenui, e nell’andare in sù
-crescono notabilmente.
-
-12. Molte di queste aperture, si vede, che sono state stuccate,
-essendosi poi riaperte le stuccature, e dilatate, e molte altre vi
-sono, dove non vi è vestigio di stuccatura.
-
-13. In due archetti verso la cima de’ muri dritti F, che li sostengono,
-si vede la parte superiore venuta in fuora notabilmente, e in un di
-essi in modo particolare il muro FG distaccato nella cantonata più
-sensibilmente dal tamburo. Simil moto orizontale di alcuna parte venuta
-un poco più in fuora, si vede anche nel muro esteriore A della base.
-
-14. Gli architravi _r_ delle sedici finestre son rotti tutti a
-riserva di uno, o due, ma dove è intero l’architrave, è rotto uno
-stipite. In tutte poi son rotte le cornici sopra l’architrave, e i
-travertini de’ muri sopra, e sotto le finestre, e a lato verso i
-contraforti hanno moltissime aperture, e peli, che li infrangono.
-
-15. In uno stipite di finestra _a_ è degna di considerazione
-un’apertura verticale, che cominciando al basso nella faccia voltata
-all’altro stipite, piega un poco in dentro.
-
-16. Tutte le scale a lumaca, per cui si sale dentro al tamburo, sono
-affatto dissetate, vedendosi rotti e distaccati gli scalini. In una di
-queste, per cui si sale ordinariamente ben rassettata, si vedono molti
-stangoni di ferro, e paletti, che reggono gli scalini rotti.
-
-17. Entrando fra le due Cupole per il corridoretto K, si vedono delle
-aperture verticale negli spicchi fra’ muri T de’ costoloni, e si
-seppelliscono sotto K, dove le due Cupole son unite; le medesime anche
-rompono gli architravi e soglie delle porte e finestre. Lo spicchio che
-corrisponde sopra il pilone della Veronica, principalmente verso il
-mezzo delle scale T, è dissestato molto. Di tali aperture ci vien detto
-da chi le ha contate tutte con diligenza, trovarsene 37 nella Cupola
-esteriore, 39 nell’interiore.
-
-18. Sotto il Cupolino nel corridoretto O si vedono rotte le faccie de’
-muri de’ costoloni, seguitando per essi muri le spaccature orizontali
-OP, dove più alte, dove più basse, e continuando in alcun luogo fra lo
-spicchio della Cupola esteriore e il muro del costolone.
-
-19. Pure nella volticella di esso corridore si vedono delle aperture,
-che passano verso _u_ sotto gli archetti de’ contraforti del
-Cupolino, e in alcune delle finestre del collo della Cupola si vedono
-rotti gli architravi, con degli altri movimenti nel muro interiore.
-
-20. I medesimi contraforti in Q hanno molte aperture, che terminano
-verso il mezzo delle finestre.
-
-21. Tutti i pilastrini di dentro tra le finestre in R a mezza altezza
-in circa si vedono rotti, e alcuni in due luoghi orizontalmente,
-restando con detta generale apertura tutto il Cupolino diviso
-orizontalmente per mezzo.
-
-22. Passando ora alla parte interiore della Cupola, in tutti i sedici
-spicchi si vedono de’ peli, o delle aperture verso S nelle cornici
-tonde de’ Serafini di mosaico e nelle bislunghe degli Angeli, molte
-delle quali aprono considerabilmente i mosaici stessi.
-
-23. Nello spicchio sopra il pilone della Veronica si vede una
-grandissima apertura S_q_YZ. Essa passa sotto il cornicione Z nel
-fregio, dove è assai tenue; và sempre dilatandosi fino all’impostatura
-della Cupola in q, indi di nuovo si ristringe morendo in cima sotto il
-Cupolino stesso. Sopra il pilone del Longino, che resta in faccia, vi
-è un’altra simile spaccatura assai sensibile, anche a guardarla giù
-dalla Chiesa. Sopra gli altri due piloni pure, benche alquanto minore
-è tale, che dalla Chiesa vi passa un vento assai gagliardo, e in varj
-altri spicchi pur sene vedono. Dette aperture dividono, e distaccano le
-figure de’ mosaici, fino a farne cader qualche pezzo.
-
-24. Gli architravi di quasi tutte le finestre in X sono rotti.
-
-25. Ne’ Pilastri del tamburo si vedono delle aperture orizontali, in
-_b_, per cui s’aprono le commessure de’ travertini de’ quali sono
-incrostati.
-
-26. Ne’ mosaici sopra il cornicione Z si vedono alcuni leggieri peli
-orizontali, benche non troppo sensibili.
-
-27. I due arconi attorno al pilone della Veronica anno sulla cima in
-mezzo un leggier pelo, senza però che si discosti una parte dall’altra,
-o l’una scenda sotto l’altra; e sotto il cornicione tra l’arco de’
-SS. Simone e Giuda, e il pilone della Veronica scende un pelo, che
-muore assai prima di giungere all’arco. Detto pelo si vede dalla parte
-di fuori sopra la volta della Chiesa nel muro del tamburo inalzato
-sull’arco stesso, e parimente i peli de’ due arconi nella parte
-superiore de’ medesimi si riscontrano, ma tenuissimi.
-
-28. In varj luoghi tanto di fuora, quanto fra le due Cupole si vedon
-rotti, o distaccati alcuni pezzi di marmo a coda di rondine messi in
-questi ultimi anni attroverso alle spaccature per vedere se la fabrica
-faceva moto.
-
-29. I paletti de’ cerchi L che cingono la Cupola interiore, si vedono
-in alcuni luoghi rimossi dal sito verticale per più once.
-
-30. Di fuora nell’ordin’ Attico da _m_ fino ad _n_ si vedono
-in più siti delle aperture orizontali nelle commessure de’ travertini
-rialzati un tantino, e un simil moto si riscontra in alcuni stipiti
-delle finestre esteriori nel corridoretto K, che gira tra le due Cupole.
-
-31. Questo è ciò, che abbiamo veduto cogli occhi nostri. Di più
-fatti esaminare i pilastri _b_ col piombino si è trovato, che
-sbilanciano in fuora, altri tre once, altri due e mezza, ed altri
-meno, e altrettanto in circa sbilanciano pur’ in fuora i pilastri
-de’ contraforti G, che stanno attaccati al tamburo. Ma de’ pilastri
-esteriori de’ medesimi contraforti alcuni sbilanciano un tantino in
-dentro, altri stanno a un di presso a piombo.
-
-32. La gran spaccatura sopra il pilone della Veronica sul cornicioncino
-dell’Attico in _h_ è di quattro once, e vene sono due vicinissime,
-in cui essa diramasi di un’oncia e mezza fra tutte due. Quella in
-faccia sopra il Longino è di due once e mezza. Ivi le spaccature in
-giro sono in numero 27, e tanto grosse, che messe insieme si trovano di
-22 once, e poco più sù di 24.
-
-
-
-
-                                 INDEX
-
-
-    Aachen, dome, 11 (cut).
-
-    Abutments, lack of, in the dome of Florence cathedral, 22, 23;
-      of dome of St. Peter’s, 50 (cut), 53.
-
-    Agnolo, Baccio d’, his work on the Palazzo Bartolini, Florence,
-        109;
-      his innovation in framing window openings, 109, 116.
-
-    Aisles, treatment of façade over the, in ch. of Santa Maria
-        Novella, Florence, 37;
-      in ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 74.
-
-    Alberti, Leon Batista, said by Milizia to be regarded as one of the
-        principal restorers of the architecture of antiquity, 35;
-      his use of the Roman triumphal-arch design as a model for his
-          façades, 38, 39–43 (cuts);
-      applied himself to writing on, rather than practising
-          architecture, 107, 108;
-      his influence seen in Bramante’s works, 112;
-      ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 35, 41, 42;
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 38–42 (cut and plate), 53;
-      Palazzo Rucellai, Florence, 107, 108 (cut).
-
-    Angelo, Michael, 90;
-      design for the tomb of Pope Julius II., 46;
-      his work on St. Peter’s, 53–65 (cuts), 237;
-      date of his appointment as architect of St. Peter’s, 53;
-      his alterations of Bramante’s plan, 53, 70;
-      his admiration for the dome of Florence cathedral, 55;
-      quoted on the Pantheon dome, 55;
-      defects in his scheme, 63, 64;
-      his makeshifts, 66;
-      windows of Palazzo Farnese, Rome, 116, 117 (cut).
-
-    Angle, Roman treatment of the, 79 (cut);
-      pilasters on the, 78–81 (cut).
-
-    Arabesque, Renaissance in imitation of Roman, 167 (cuts).
-
-    Arcades, of the court of Palazzo Farnese, use of Roman combination
-        of arch and entablature, 118;
-      cloister of Santa Maria della Pace, Rome, 119;
-      château of La Rochefoucauld, France, Flamboyant arches framed
-          with pilasters, 188.
-
-    Arch, the radical nature of the change wrought in architecture by
-        the introduction of, was never grasped by the imperial Roman
-        designers, 37;
-      the Roman triumphal, used as a model of Renaissance façades, 38,
-          39–43 (cuts);
-      the Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to a continuous
-          arcade, 118, 119;
-      of Flamboyant depressed or three-centred form, 184, 188.
-
-    Architectural carving of the Renaissance, 167–178 (cuts).
-      _See_ Carving, Architectural.
-
-    Architectural shams, use of, in the Renaissance, 32, 121, 132.
-
-    Architecture, the communal and individual spirit in, 4, 5;
-      its division into three distinctive styles and two classes, 6, 7;
-      proper meaning of the term, 15^2;
-      structural integrity a fundamental prerequisite of good, 24;
-      use of structural members without structural meaning violates the
-          true principles of architectural design, 68;
-      mechanical rules cannot reach the law of the proportions of a
-          genuine work of art, 133, 207, 249;
-      conscious effort to be original in, is inevitably disastrous,
-          206;
-      the noblest, has always been mainly a social, communal, and
-          national, not a personal product, 206.
-
-    Arezzo, church of Santissima Annunziatta, 83;
-      nave, 83 (cut).
-
-    Arnolfo, his design for the dome of Florence cathedral, 13 (cut),
-        16.
-
-    Artificial elements in architectural ornamentation, use of, 172.
-
-    Assisi, church of Santa Maria degli Angeli, 89;
-      date, 89;
-      general plan, 89;
-      chapels, 90;
-      orders, 90 (cut);
-      piers, 90 (cut);
-      ressauts, 90;
-      influence of St. Peter’s in, 90;
-      façade, 90.
-
-    Athens, the Propylæa, spacing of the columns of the order, 113;
-      National Museum, leafage of capital from Epidaurus, 174 (cut).
-
-    Attic wall, use in an interior as a support for vaulting, 151, 243;
-      of the façade of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 31;
-      of Michael Angelo’s dome of St. Peter’s, Rome, 54.
-
-
-    Baalbek, Pantheon of, 29^2;
-      entablature, 29^2;
-      breaking of the pediment, 94, 95 (cut), 117;
-      ressauts, 95.
-
-    Baccio d’Agnolo, architect of tower of Santo Spirito, Florence, 82.
-
-    Balconies, with balustrades, 160.
-
-    Baldinucci, _Lettera di Filippo Baldinucci Intorno al modo di dar
-        Proporzione alle Figure_, etc., 249^2;
-      quoted on rules of proportion in art, 250.
-
-    Barley, ear of, in Renaissance and in Greek carving compared, 169
-        (plate and cut).
-
-    Barrozzi, Giacomo. _See_ Vignola.
-
-    Beltrami, Luca, _Il Pantheon_, 89^1.
-
-    Benedict XIV, Pope, his inquiries as to the safety of the dome of
-        St. Peter’s, 60.
-
-    Bernini, Wren’s meeting with him at Paris, 233.
-
-    Berty, Adolphe, _Les Grands Architectes Français de la
-        Renaissance_, 194^1, 200^1;
-      quoted on Lescot, 194, 196^1;
-      quoted on De l’Orme, 200^1.
-
-    Bettini, Giovanni, his work on the church of Santa Maria Novella,
-        Florence, 35.
-
-    Blind arcade, forms proper decoration for mediæval interiors, 29.
-
-    Bloomfield, Reginald, _A History of Renaissance Architecture in
-        England_, 218, 232^2;
-      quoted on Inigo Jones, 232.
-
-    Bologna, Palazzo Bevilacqua, 165;
-      window openings of mediæval form without central shaft, 165.
-
-    Bourges, house of Jacques Cœur, a forerunner of the Renaissance
-        châteaux, 180.
-
-    Bramante, his birth and early work, 44;
-      the Tempietto of San Pietro in Montorio, 44–46 (cut), 239;
-      his work on St. Peter’s, Rome, 47–53 (cuts), 63, 64, 70, 236;
-      his use of the Pantheon and Basilica   of Maxentius as models,
-          49–52 (cuts);
-      alteration of his scheme by others, 49^3, 53–55, 64, 70;
-      weakness of his scheme, 52;
-      accused of poor workmanship, 64;
-      ch. of Santa Maria della Consolazione at Todi, 74–77 (cuts);
-      his work on the cathedral of Como, 144;
-      ch. of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan, 140, 142;
-      ch. of San Satiro, Milan, 138 (cut);
-      cloister of Santa Maria della Pace, Rome, 119;
-      Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, 112–114 (cut).
-
-    Brescia, Palazzo Comunale, 163,
-      of the broletto type, 163,
-      window openings, 164;
-      Palazzo Martinengo, peculiar and meaningless style of window
-          opening, 166 (cut);
-      Palazzo Municipale, leafage of capitals, 176 (cut).
-
-    Brunelleschi, the dome of Florence cathedral, 10–25, 22, 48, 50,
-        54, 55;
-      his own account of the dome quoted, 18^1, 22^1;
-      his great ability, 21;
-      his scaffolding, 21^3;
-      why he led the way in a wrong direction, 22, 25, 63;
-      character of his work in general, 26;
-      his use of the orders, 26;
-      the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 26–32 (cuts), 175;
-      ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence, 33;
-      ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence, 33;
-      the Pitti palace, Florence, 106;
-      Palazzo Pazzi or the Quaratesi, Florence, 106;
-      leafage of capital, 175 (cut).
-
-    Bullant, _Reigle Géneralle de Architecture_, 192^1;
-      his reproduction of the order of a Roman temple in the portico
-          of the château of Écouen, 192.
-
-    Buttresses, in support of domes, 10, 53;
-      of St. Peter’s, Rome, 53 (cut), 55, 56, 59;
-      of a circular Gothic vault, 57^1;
-      concealing of, in St. Paul’s, London, 244, 245 (cut).
-
-    Byzantine architecture, 6, 7;
-      term loosely applied, 29^1;
-      the dome on pendentives is the distinguishing structural feature
-          of, 29^1;
-      their domes were properly constructed, 63;
-      scheme prevails in Renaissance architecture, 74.
-
-
-    Caen, church of St. Pierre, exterior of apse with Lombard
-        Renaissance details applied to a Flamboyant structural scheme,
-        214.
-
-    Cambridge, England, Caius College, gate of honor, neo-classic
-        features, 223.
-
-    Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance, 167–178 (cuts):
-      Sculpture of the human figure on Renaissance buildings has little
-          proper architectural character, 167;
-      Relief carving, 167–178 (cuts);
-        pictorial treatment of, 158;
-        a great deal is in close imitation of Roman models, 167 (cut),
-            171, 172;
-        the best is superior to that of ancient Rome, 168, 170, 176;
-        conventionalization of forms, 169 (plate and cut);
-        formal convolutions of, 170, 171;
-        the finish, in many cases, mere surface smoothing, 170, 171;
-        two schemes which are used with wearisome repetition, 171;
-        arrangement of composition and treatment of details often
-            artificial and inorganic, 172 (cut), 173 (cuts);
-        the finest forms those of foliation, 170, 174;
-        leafage of capitals, 175–178 (cuts);
-        artificial convention of the ridges which mark the subdivisions
-            of the leaf surface, 176 (cuts);
-        the grotesque is uniformly weak and characterless, 176–178
-            (cuts);
-        _Putti_ are without particular merit as design, 178.
-
-    Casati, _I Capi d’Arte di Bramante da Urbino nel Milanese_, 138^1,
-        142^1.
-
-    Cecchini, _Opinione Intorno lo Stato della gran Cupola del Duomo di
-        Firenze_, 24^1;
-      cited on the stability of the dome of Florence cathedral, 23^3,
-          24^1.
-
-    Celled vault, a Gothic circular, 20, 21;
-      nature of its construction, 56–59 (cuts).
-
-    Chains, binding, 12, 22, 74;
-      of the dome of Florence cathedral, 19, 24^1;
-      of St. Peter’s, Rome, 59, 60.
-
-    Chambers, Sir William, _Treatise on the Decorative Part of Civil
-        Architecture_, 134^1.
-
-    Chimney-stacks in shape of Doric columns in Elizabethan houses, 217
-        (cut), 223.
-
-    Church, the, in Middle Ages and Renaissance period, 1–3.
-
-    Church architecture, of the Florentine Renaissance, 26–43 (cuts);
-      of the Roman Renaissance, 66–101 (cuts);
-      of the Renaissance in North Italy, 135–153.
-
-    Clamps, metal, used in masonry, 22^2;
-      of St. Peter’s dome, 60.
-
-    Classic inspiration in the Renaissance, 4, 97, 119.
-
-    Classic models, the classic style which was followed in the
-        Renaissance was that of the decadent Greek schools as
-        represented in Roman copies, 4, 247;
-      misuse of, 33, 84.
-
-    Claudian aqueduct, 106.
-
-    Coffering, Roman, in interior of church of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-        39.
-
-    Colonnade of Bramante’s scheme for St. Peter’s dome, 51, 56.
-
-    Columns, small, free-standing, placed by Sansovino on each side of
-        the pier to bear the archivolt, 123, 130;
-      often spoken of as an innovation of Sansovino and Palladio, but
-          instances of it occur in Græco-Roman architecture of Syria,
-          131 (cut);
-      peculiar form of, claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-          201–206 (cut);
-      practically the same column occurs in Serlio’s book, 203 (cut);
-      an ancient adumbration of this form occurs in the Porta Maggiore,
-          Rome, 205;
-      other Italian examples of the same column, 205, 206;
-      mention of its use in England, 221, 222, 229;
-      notion that the Ionic order was designed after female
-          proportions, 207.
-
-    Communal spirit of the Middle Ages, 4, 5.
-
-    Como, cathedral, 144–149 (cuts);
-      description of exterior, 144;
-      details are mediæval Lombard modified by neo-classic elements,
-          144;
-      portals, illogical use of arch and entablature in, 144, 145
-          (cuts), 149;
-      window openings, variety of illogical forms in, 148 (cut);
-      tapering jamb shafts, 149.
-
-    Consoles, reversed over the aisle compartments of an exterior, 37,
-        74, 95.
-
-    Constantinople, Hagia Theotokos, dome, 10 (cut);
-      church of St. Sophia, dome mentioned, 10.
-
-    Conventionalization of forms in relief carving of the Renaissance,
-        168 (cut).
-
-    Corinthian capitals, 84.
-
-    Corner pilasters, 78–81 (cut).
-
-    Cornice, of St. Peter’s, Rome, dwarfs the effect of altitude, 68,
-        92;
-      breaking of, 93–95 (cut).
-
-    Cosimo de’ Medici, 103, 110.
-
-    Court, circular, of Vignola, influences De l’Orme and Jones in
-        building the courts of the Tuileries and Whitehall, 130, 131.
-
-    Cunningham, _The Lives of the Most Eminent British Painters,
-        Sculptors, and Architects_, 217^2, 226 ff.;
-      quoted on the unsubstantial structures of the Renaissance in
-          England, 217.
-
-
-    De l’Orme, Philibert, _Le Premier Tome de l’Architecture_, 200^2
-        ff., 209;
-      a man with little artistic genius, 200, 209;
-      overestimated by Viollet le Duc, 200^1, 207^3;
-      Adolphe Berty on, 200^1;
-      studied the antique in Rome, 200;
-      his work on the Tuileries, 200–207 (cut);
-      peculiar form of column claimed by him as his own invention,
-          201–206 (cut);
-      his doorway, with use of the peculiar column, 203 (cut);
-      description of doorway quoted from his book, 209 (cut).
-
-    Delaborde, Viscount, quoted, 7^3.
-
-    Della Porta, 73;
-      façade of ch. of the Gesù, Rome, 95 (cut).
-
-    Dolcebono, architect, Church of Monastero Maggiore, Milan, 142,
-        143.
-
-    Domes, construction of early, 10–15;
-      hidden externally by drum and timber roof, 10, 11 (cut);
-      Byzantine, on pendentives, 10 (cut), 29^1;
-      polygonal, 12, 24^3;
-      pointed in outline, 12, 14, 16, 52;
-      octagonal, 13, 14, 16;
-      hemispherical, 24^3, 52;
-      Arabian, 12^1;
-      binding chains, 12, 241;
-      the thrust, 15^1, 24, 52;
-      why a dome cannot have the character of a Gothic vault, 20, 21,
-          56–59 (cuts);
-      proper mode of constructing, settled by the ancient Romans and
-          Byzantines, 63;
-      attempt of the architects of the Renaissance to solve the great
-          dome problem, 241, 242;
-      most modern domes modelled after St. Peter’s and St. Paul’s are
-          wooden constructions, 242;
-      of Hagia Theotokos, Constantinople, 10 (cut);
-      of Florence cathedral, 10–25, 65,
-        design of Arnolfo, 13,
-        modelled on dome of Baptistery, 16,
-        details of construction, 16–20,
-        magnitude of the work, 21,
-        stability of, 23;
-      of Florence Baptistery, details of construction, 14 (cut),
-        dome of Florence cathedral derived from, 16, 20;
-      vault of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, not a dome, 27 (cut),
-          28, 56;
-      ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence, 34;
-      vault of ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence, 34;
-      St. Paul’s, London, rejected scheme, 235 (cut),
-        likeness to Bramante’s scheme for St. Peter’s, Rome, 236 (cut),
-        likeness to Michael Angelo’s scheme, 237,
-        present structure, 239 (plate),
-        recalls Bramante’s San Pietro in Montorio, Rome, 239,
-        structural system of, 239–242 (cut);
-      ch. of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan, 140 (cut);
-      vault of the chapel of St. Peter Martyr, ch. of Sant’Eustorgio,
-          Milan, like vault of chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 142;
-      ch. of San Biagio at Montepulciano, 81 (cut);
-      Pisa cathedral, 12 (cut);
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, 86;
-      Antonio San Gallo’s design for St. Peter’s, Rome, 71;
-      Tempietto, Rome, 44 (cut);
-      cath. of Salamanca approaches the nature of a Gothic vault, 57–59
-          (cut);
-      Todi, 74 (cut), 77.
-
-    Domestic architecture. _See_ Palace architecture.
-
-    Doorway, of De l’Orme, 203 (cut);
-      of Serlio, 203 (cut).
-
-    Drum, of a dome, raised above the springing of the dome, 10–14, 23;
-      dome set on the top of, 12;
-      of the dome of Florence cathedral, 16;
-      the central vault of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 27 (cut);
-      the Tempietto of San Pietro in Montorio, Rome, 44;
-      St. Peter’s, Rome, 50 (cut), 53.
-
-    Du Cerceau, engraving of the Fountain of the Innocents, Paris, 195
-        (cut);
-      work of Lescot on the Louvre, 197 (cut);
-      work of De l’Orme on the Tuileries, 201 (cut), 221^2;
-      project for the château of Charleval, 209.
-
-    Durm, _Die Dom Kuppel in Florenz_, 19^1;
-      _Die Baukunst der Renaissance in Italien_, 20^1;
-      cited on domes, 20^1.
-
-
-    East end of the Redentore, Venice, 100, 101.
-
-    Elizabethan Art, 216–225 (cuts).
-      _See_ Renaissance in England.
-
-    England, Renaissance in, Architecture of the, 216–246 (cuts).
-      _See_ Renaissance in England.
-      Burghley House, chimneys in the form of a Doric order, 217 (cut);
-        Cranborne Manor-House, porch and façade illustrate Elizabethan
-            neo-classic ornamentation, 221, 222 (cut);
-        Hardwick Castle, mention of, 217;
-        Kirby Hall, façades of the court, 218–220 (cut),
-          pilasters supporting nothing but miniature pedestals, 219,
-          window openings said to have been inserted by Inigo Jones,
-              218,
-          porch, description of, 220,
-          its scheme a variation of Lescot’s Louvre pavilions, 220,
-          gables of Flemish or Dutch origin, 220 (cut);
-        Longford Castle, 221;
-        French influence in, 221;
-        resemblance to château of Chambord, France, 221;
-        Lower Walterstone Hall, window illustrating Elizabethan
-            neo-classic ornamentation, 221 (cut);
-        Stanway House, gatehouse portal, neo-classic features, 223;
-        Tixall Castle, gatehouse, neo-classic ornamentation, 222;
-        Westwood Park, porch in the form of a Roman triumphal arch, 223;
-        Wollaton Hall, neo-classic ornamentation, 223,
-          chimney-stacks in the semblance of Doric columns, 223,
-          portal, 224.
-
-
-    Entablature, passing through the arch impost, 29, 30 (cut);
-      in Roman art, 29, 30, 37;
-      springing of a vault from, 29, 68;
-      Vignola’s, 85 (cut);
-      removing of, between the ressauts, 117 (cut);
-      Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to a continuous arcade,
-          118, 119;
-      breaking of, 134 (cut), 199 (cut);
-      used with the arch illogically in the portals of north Italy,
-          144, 145 (cuts);
-      ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo, 83 (cut);
-      the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, running through the impost, 29
-          (cut);
-      façade of ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 40 (cut);
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, the two parts which have
-          no _raison d’être_ under a vault have been omitted, 89 (cut);
-      ch. of San Biagio, Montepulciano, Rome, 78 (cut);
-      the Gesù, Rome, has no ressauts except at the crossing, 92;
-      ch. of St. Paul outside the wall, Rome, 30^1;
-      St. Peter’s, Rome, interior, dwarfs the effect of its altitude,
-          68;
-      façade of ch. of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice, 100;
-      of ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, placed above small
-          pilasters of the archivolts, 98;
-      The Redentore, Venice, 101;
-      Todi, 75, 76 (cut).
-
-    Entablature block, in Roman art, 30, 37;
-      in ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence, 33 (cut);
-      in façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 36 (cut);
-      in nave of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72 (cut).
-
-    Entasis of columns in church of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, 98.
-
-
-    Façades, of the Badia of Fiesole, 32 (cut);
-      chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 30 (cut);
-      ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 35 (cut);
-      old St. Paul’s cathedral, London, incongruous mixture of, 230–232
-          (cut);
-      Whitehall, London, banqueting hall, 227 (plate),
-        Westminster front, 229 (cut),
-        circular court, 230;
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 39–42 (cut);
-      ch. of the Gesù, Rome, Vignola’s, 92–95 (cuts),
-        Della Porta’s, 95 (cut);
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, 86–88 (cut), 92;
-      ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 74 (cut);
-      Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, description of, 112–114 (cut),
-        projecting bays at each end, 113,
-        portal of almost Greek purity of design, 114;
-      Palazzo Massimi, Rome, 114–116 (cut);
-      ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, 99 (cut);
-      Scuola di San Marco (Venice), 156–158 (cut);
-      ch. of Santa Maria dei Miracole, Venice, a marvel of excellence
-          in mechanical execution, 151, 152 (cut).
-
-    Fiesole, church of the Badia, façade, 32 (cut);
-      likeness to chapel of the Pazzi, 32.
-
-    Filarete, Antonio, Ospedale Maggiore, Milan, 164 (cut);
-      window openings, 165 (cut);
-      arabesque on door-valves of St. Peter’s, Rome, 170 (cut).
-
-    Fine Arts, of an epoch, the expression of its conditions, 1, 3;
-      of the Renaissance, spirit of, 3, 4, 6;
-      of the Middle Ages, spirit of, 2, 5.
-
-    Flamboyant Gothic style of Castle Châteaudun, 184 (cut).
-
-    Florence, condition in Middle Ages and in Renaissance, 2, 3;
-        Board of Works of Florence cathedral, 21, 22^1.
-      Badia, façade, 32 (cut).
-      Baptistery, dome, details of construction, 14 (cut);
-        forms inspiration for dome of the Florence cathedral, 16, 20;
-        entablature, 30^1;
-        attic wall, 31;
-        Ghiberti gates, inorganic composition with over-naturalism in
-            details, 173 (cut).
-      Cathedral of, dome, 10–25;
-        design of Arnolfo, 13 (cut);
-        modelled on the dome of the Baptistery, 16, 20, 50;
-        details of construction, 16–20;
-        its rib system gives it nothing of Gothic character, 20;
-        shell, 16, 54;
-        rib system, 16 (cuts), 55;
-        binding chains, 19, 22;
-        magnitude of the work, 21, 22;
-        deliberations of the Board of Works, 21^1, 22^1;
-        scaffolding, 21^3;
-        is fundamentally false in principle, 22, 23, 24;
-        stability of, 23;
-        lantern, 25;
-        has nothing of classic Roman character, 25;
-        its octagonal form, 55^1;
-        its fine features, 65.
-      Chapel of the Pazzi, 26–32 (cuts);
-        its central vault, 27 (cut), 56;
-        interior, 28–30 (cut);
-        Byzantine in form, 29;
-        orders of, 29, 31, 32;
-        entablature, 29, 30 (cut);
-        portico, 30 (cut), 134;
-        panelled attic wall, 31, 81;
-        false use of the orders, 109;
-        leafage of capitals, 175.
-      Church of Santa Croce, pulpit, carving of, 171, 172 (cut);
-        leafage of capitals, 176;
-        _see_ Chapel of the Pazzi.
-      Church of Sant’ Jacopo Soprarno, 32.
-      Church of San Lorenzo, 33;
-        celled vault, 33;
-        mediæval features, 34;
-        piers, 34 (cut).
-      Church of Santa Maria del Fiore, false front of wood mentioned,
-          120.
-      Church of Santa Maria Novella, 35;
-        façade, 35–38 (cut), 42;
-        orders, 35 (cut), 112;
-        mediæval features, 35, 38;
-        portal, 36 (cut), 41;
-        tower, 82.
-      Church of Santo Spirito, 33;
-        spire-like tower of, 81 (cut);
-        pseudo-classic details, 82;
-        lantern, 83.
-      Museum, Roman arabesque used as model for Renaissance, 167 (cut);
-        pilaster with carving of a meaningless and artificial
-            composition, 173 (cut).
-      Palazzo Bartolini, 109,
-        window openings, 109 (cut), 116;
-        Palazzo Gondi, 107,
-          arcades of the court, 107,
-          leafage of capitals, 176 (cut);
-        Palazzo Guardagni, 107;
-        Palazzo Mozzi, 102;
-        the Pitti palace, its façade as monotonous as the Claudian
-            aqueduct, which it resembles, 106;
-        the Quaratesi, 106;
-        Palazzo Riccardi, 103 (cut and plate),
-          moderation shown in, 103, 110,
-          façade, 103,
-          window openings, 103,
-          arcades of interior court, 104;
-        Palazzo Rucellai, 107, 108 (cut),
-          application of classic orders, 108, 112,
-          window openings, 109,
-          rustication of the masonry, 109,
-          resemblance between Palazzo Cancelleria and, 112, 114;
-        Palazzo Strozzi, 106,
-          cornice, 106,
-          fortress-like character, 106;
-        the Strozzino, 106;
-        Palazzo Vecchio, 102.
-
-    Florentine Renaissance, church architecture of the, 26–43 (cuts and
-        plate);
-      palace architecture, 102–111 (cuts and plate);
-      _see_ Renaissance architecture.
-
-    Foliation, the finest feature of Renaissance architectural carving,
-        174.
-
-    Fontana, Carlo, cited on dome of Pisa, 13^1;
-      cited on stability of Florence dome, 23^3;
-      quoted on Michael Angelo, 55^1, 24^1;
-      cited on safety of St. Peter’s dome, 59;
-      _Il Tempio Vaticano e sua Origine_, etc., Discritto dal Cav.
-          Carlo Fontana, etc., 71^2;
-      cited on short-sighted admiration of St. Peter’s, 71;
-      cited on binding chains, 74.
-
-    France, Châteaux of, _see_ Renaissance in France.
-      Castle Châteaudun, portal and bay in the Flamboyant Gothic style,
-          184 (cut).
-      Château of Azay le Rideau, 182–187 (cuts);
-        general description, 182–184;
-        portal and bay of characteristic French Renaissance design in
-            which neo-classic details are worked into a pseudo-Gothic
-            scheme, 184–187 (cut);
-        window openings, 186;
-        one of the finest monuments of the early Renaissance in the
-            country, 187;
-        portal, 214.
-      Château of Blois, cornice with neo-classic and mediæval elements
-          combined, 182, (cut);
-        court façade, 188–190 (cut);
-        superimposed orders of pilasters of the court façade ornamented
-            with bead mouldings, 188 (cut);
-        polygonal staircase tower, 190 (cut);
-        garden façade, 190;
-        open gallery of, 191.
-      Château of Chambord, its multiplicity of soaring features
-          resembles a late Gothic building, 191;
-        resemblance of Longford Castle, England, to, 221.
-      Château of Charleval, 209–213 (cuts);
-        exterior façade, pilasters which have no entablature to
-            support, 210;
-        unmeaning variation of the detail of the several bays, 210;
-        interior façade, the division of the building into two stories
-            not expressed on the outside, 211;
-        court of Kirby Hall, England, resembles, 218.
-      Château of Chenonceaux, portal where Flamboyant idea is treated
-          in neo-classic details, 188 (cut).
-      Château of Écouen, architectural scheme is comparatively simple,
-          191;
-        in the portico of the court is reproduced the order of a Roman
-            temple without admixture of mediæval details or Italian
-            corruptions, 192.
-      Château of Fontainebleau follows the general character of early
-          French Renaissance, 191.
-      Château of La Rochefoucauld, arcades of the court where
-          Flamboyant arches are framed with pilasters, 188;
-        open gallery, 191.
-      Château of St. Germain en Laye, 192, 193;
-        buttresses, 192;
-        window openings, 192.
-      Villers Cotterets, column claimed by De l’Orme as his own
-          invention, 202 (cut).
-
-    French architecture, Renaissance influence upon, 179.
-
-    French Renaissance. _See_ Renaissance in France.
-
-    Frieze, problem of the arrangement of metope and triglyph at the
-        end of, 121, 122 (cuts);
-      of library of St. Mark, Venice, 123 (cut).
-
-
-    Galleries, open, covered by extension of the main roof in French
-        châteaux, 191.
-
-    Genoa, portal containing columns claimed by De l’Orme as his own
-        invention, 206.
-
-    Geymüller, Baron H. von, _Die ursprünglichen Entwürf für Sanct
-        Peter in Rom_, 47^2, 49^2.
-
-    Gisors, Church of SS. Gervais and Protais, the west front
-        Flamboyant Gothic with incongruous Renaissance details, 214.
-
-    Gotch, _Architecture of the Renaissance in England_, 217^1;
-      cited on Kirby Hall, England, 218^3;
-      on Longford Castle, England, 221;
-      on Tixall Castle, 222;
-      on Stanway, Westwood Park, Wollaton Hall, 223.
-
-    Gothic, King James’s, 227.
-
-    Gothic architectural carving, has at once an appropriate
-        architectural character and a high degree of excellence in the
-        development of form, 167, 172;
-      foliation, 176;
-      the grotesque, 177.
-
-    _Gothic architecture, development and character of_ cited, 7^1;
-      cited on dome of Salamanca, 57^2, 59^2;
-      cited on early stage of apsidal vault development, 59^1.
-
-    Gothic architecture, one of the three distinctive styles of
-        architecture, 6;
-      beauty and structural logic of, 7;
-      use of wooden ties, 22^2;
-      why a dome cannot have the character of a Gothic vault, 20, 21,
-          56–59 (cuts);
-      variety which arises through some new constructive idea, 211^1;
-      French Renaissance châteaux in which distorted neo-classic
-          details are worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme, 184;
-      Wren’s scheme to reconcile the Gothic to a better manner, 238,
-          243, 245.
-
-    Gothic art forms a new French order, a true evolution out of the
-        ancient orders superbly adapted to new conditions, 206.
-
-    Goujon, sculptures of the fountain of the Innocents, Paris, 196.
-
-    Greek architectural carving, vitality of, 169 (cut), 171, 174
-        (cut);
-      beauty of leafage, 174, 176 (cuts).
-
-    Greek architecture, the classic style which was followed in
-        Renaissance architecture was that of the decadent Greek schools
-        as represented in Roman copies, 4, 247;
-      the only proper use of the classic order made in, 43.
-
-    Greek coin (of Metapontum), conventionalized ear of barley on,
-        compared with Renaissance carving, 169, 170 (cut).
-
-    Greek sculpture on buildings is in a measure independent of the
-        building on which it is placed, 167.
-
-    Grotesque, the, in architectural carving, the northern races only
-        capable of conceiving it in an imaginative way, 177;
-      in Renaissance architecture uniformly weak and characterless,
-          176, 177 (cuts).
-
-    Guasti, _Santa Maria del Fiore_, 13^2;
-      quoted on Brunelleschi’s account of the dome of Florence, 18^1.
-
-    Gubbio, his work on the ducal palace, Venice, arabesque after Roman
-        model, 167 (cut).
-
-
-    Hermæ, of façade of the Gesù, Rome, 93;
-      of the Tuileries, Paris, 207.
-
-    Human figure, in sculpture, on buildings, 167;
-      has little proper architectural character in the Renaissance,
-          167.
-
-
-    Impost, continuous, 188^1.
-
-    Individuality, element of, in Renaissance architecture, 4;
-      as developed by Middle Ages and by Renaissance, 5.
-
-    Innocent XI, Pope, his inquiries as to the safety of the dome of
-        St. Peter’s, 59.
-
-    Intellectual movement in the Renaissance, 2, 8.
-
-    Ionic volutes, 84.
-
-    Italian domestic architecture, 102;
-      unwise admixture of classic elements in, 107, 109;
-      spirit of display in, 105, 110.
-
-    Italian genius for painting, 6, 7.
-
-
-    Jamb shafts, tapering, 137 (cut), 142, 149, 150.
-
-    Jones, Inigo, his work on Kirby Hall, England, 218^3;
-      influence of Vitruvius and Palladio on, 226, 227;
-      travel and study in Italy, 227;
-      _Stonehenge Restored_, 227;
-      Whitehall, 227–230 (plate and cut);
-      Banqueting Hall, London, 227 (plate);
-      had no true conception of the principles of classic art, 230;
-      old St. Paul’s west front, 230–232 (cut);
-      the spirit of his architecture theatrical, 232.
-
-    Julius II, Pope, the building of St. Peter’s, 44, 46.
-
-
-    Kent, William, _The Designs of Inigo Jones, consisting of Plans and
-        Elevations for Publick and Private Buildings_, 229^2;
-      scheme for the palace of Whitehall, London, 229;
-      old St. Paul’s cathedral, west front, 231 (cut).
-
-
-    Lantern of Florence dome, 25;
-      St. Peter’s, Rome, Bramante’s plan, 52 (cut);
-      ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence, 83.
-
-    Leafage, Greek and Roman compared, 174–176 (cuts);
-      Renaissance, 175.
-
-    Lescot, Pierre, 194;
-      Fountain of the Innocents, Paris, 194–196 (cut);
-      influence of Serlio, 196;
-      west wing of the Louvre, 196–200 (cut).
-
-    Letarouilly, _Edifices de Rome Moderne_, 72^1;
-      cited on ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72.
-
-    Loftie, W. J., _Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren_, 242^1.
-
-    Lombard blind arcade recalled in the ch. of Santa Maria dei
-        Miracole, Venice, 151 (cut).
-
-    Lombard Romanesque architecture, towers, 82.
-
-    Lombard Romanesque, style modified by neo-classic elements mark the
-        Renaissance architecture of northern Italy, 144;
-      a porch which forms a model from which an illogical Renaissance
-          portal is derived, 145 (cuts).
-
-    Lombardi, the, 149;
-      architectural carving of, 169 (plate).
-
-    Lombardo, Martino, Scuola di San Marco, Venice, façade, 156.
-
-    Lombardo, Pietro, 149;
-      ch. of Santa Maria dei Miracole, Venice, 151 (cut);
-      Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, Venice, 160 (plate).
-
-    Lombardo, Tullio, 149;
-      ch of San Salvatore, Venice, 150.
-
-    London, St. Paul’s cathedral, west front of old structure by Inigo
-        Jones, 230, 232 (cut);
-        Wren ordered to submit designs for the restoration of, 234;
-        his drawings for the new structure, 235–238 (cuts);
-        rejected scheme with details of its dome, 235, 236 (cut);
-        likeness of dome to Bramante’s scheme for St. Peter’s, 236;
-        likeness to Michael Angelo’s scheme, 237;
-        façade of the second design a close copy of Inigo Jones’s, 238;
-        present structure never embodied in any set of drawings, 239;
-        plan has no beauty comparable to that of St. Peter’s, 239
-            (cut);
-        comparison of, with St. Peter’s, 236, 239, 241, 243, 245;
-        plan and elevation, 239;
-        dome, 239–242 (plate);
-        recalls Bramante’s San Pietro in Montorio, 239;
-        structural system of, 240 (cut);
-        vaulting of the nave has somewhat the effect of Gothic
-            vaulting, 243;
-        use of attic wall in support of vaulting, 243;
-        neo-classic orders of the interior, 244, 245 (cut);
-        intersecting of archivolt and entablature, 244;
-        concealing of the buttresses, 244, 245 (cut);
-        vaulting of the apse, 245.
-      Whitehall, Banqueting Hall, 227 (plate);
-        of Palladian design, 228;
-        orders of the façade, 228;
-        scheme for the palace illustrated by Kent, 229;
-        plan is French in character rather than Italian, 229;
-        order of the basement has a structural character, 229 (cut);
-        façade of circular court, orders of, 230.
-      Church of St. Stephen’s, 246;
-        ch. of St. Bride’s, 246;
-        ch. of St. Mary-le-Bow, 246;
-        ch. of St. Peter’s, Cornhill, 246.
-
-    Longhena, architect, Palazzo Pesaro, Venice, 163.
-
-
-    Maderna, the western bays of St. Peter’s, Rome, 68.
-
-    Majano, Benedetto da, the Palazzo Strozzi, Florence, 106.
-
-    Mantua, church of Sant’ Andrea, 38–42 (cut and plate);
-      erected and ornamented on Roman models, 38;
-      nave, 38 (plate);
-      piers, 38, 39, 53;
-      its interior one of the finest of the Renaissance, 39;
-      its scheme foreshadows that of St. Peter’s, 39, 53;
-      façade, 39–42 (cut);
-      early use of so-called colossal order, 40 (cut), 53, 66;
-      resemblance of central arch to that of ch. of Santa Maria
-          Novella, Florence, 41;
-      panelled pilasters, 41, 160;
-      reflection of, seen in Bramante’s church of San Satiro of Milan,
-          138.
-
-    Martin, _Hist. de France_, 180^1.
-
-    _Mathematici, Parere di tre, sopra i danni che si sono trovato
-        nella cupola di S. Pietro, etc._, 60^1.
-
-    Mathematicians’ report on the condition of St. Peter’s dome in
-        1742, 60.
-
-    Mediæval art, structural forms of, formed, for the most part, the
-        basis of Renaissance design, 43, 247;
-      considered false and barbaric by the neo-classicists, 97, 248;
-      its architects transformed the classic orders in a creative way,
-          248.
-
-    Melani, _Architettura Italiana_, 150^1, 154^1, 250^2;
-      quoted on architecture of the Renaissance, 250.
-
-    Metope, problem of making half a metope fall at the end of the
-        frieze, 121, 122 (cuts).
-
-    Michelozzi, The Riccardi, Florence, 103;
-      praised by Vasari, 105;
-      the Strozzino, Florence, 106;
-      chapel of St. Peter Martyr, ch. of Sant’Eustorgio, Milan, 142;
-      his work in Venice, 149.
-
-    Middle Ages, conditions of the, 1;
-      spirit of, and that of the Renaissance, 2, 5–6;
-      individuality of, 5.
-
-    Middleton, _Ancient Rome_, 52^1;
-      cited on the dome of the Pantheon, 52^1.
-
-    Milan, church of Sant’Eustorgio, chapel of St. Peter Martyr, 142;
-      circular celled vault, 142.
-      Church of San Lorenzo mentioned, 140.
-      Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie, 140 (cut);
-        description of exterior, 140;
-        dome, 140;
-        its encircling arcade suggests the encircling colonnade of the
-            dome of St. Peter’s, 142.
-      Church of Monasterio Maggiore, 142;
-        compound window openings, 143.
-      Church and sacristy of San Satiro, 138–140 (cut);
-        reflects ch. of St. Andrea of Mantua, 138;
-        orders of the interior of the sacristy, 139 (cut).
-      Ospedale Maggiore, 164;
-        larger features are of mixed and debased mediæval character
-            with no application of classic orders, 164;
-        window openings, 165 (cut).
-      Palazzo Brera, arches sprung from pairs of columns connected by
-          short entablatures, 166.
-
-    Milanesi, cited, 34^1, 35.
-
-    Milizia, _Memorie degli Architetti_, etc., quoted, 23^2, 84^1;
-      cited on Alberti, 35, 44;
-      cited on use of entablature block, 36;
-      cited on safety of the dome of St. Peter’s, 58^4;
-      cited on the strengthening of the dome of St. Peter’s, 62;
-      on ch. of Consolazione at Todi, 74;
-      on spire-like tower of ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence, 81;
-      cited on Vignola, 84;
-      on dome of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, 86;
-      on window openings framed with orders, crowned with pediments,
-          109;
-      quoted on Sansovino, 119, 121;
-      quoted on Vignola, 128;
-      quoted on De l’Orme, 194.
-
-    Montalembert, cited, 5^1.
-
-    Montepulciano, church of San Biagio, 77–83 (cuts);
-      interior, 78–80 (cut);
-      ressauts, 78, 90;
-      Doric order, 78;
-      use of pilasters on the angles, 78, 81;
-      exterior, 81–83 (cut);
-      dome, 81;
-      façade, 81;
-      panels of upper story, 81;
-      orders, 81, 83;
-      towers, 81.
-
-
-    Naples museum, composite capital showing Roman leafage, 175.
-
-    Nave of ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo, 83 (cut);
-      Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 38 (plate);
-      ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72;
-      ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, 97, 98.
-
-    Nelli, _Discorsi di Architettura_, 21^3;
-      quoted on Brunelleschi’s scaffolding, 21^3;
-      cited on stability of Florence dome, 23^3, 24^1.
-
-    Neo-classicists, their confidence in the art of Roman antiquity as
-        the embodiment of all true principles of architectural design,
-        97.
-
-    Neo-pagan spirit of the Renaissance, 2, 4, 8.
-
-    Nicholas V, Pope, rebuilding of basilica of St. Peter, 47.
-
-    Norton, C. E., _Church Building in the Middle Ages_, 21^1;
-      cited on building of the dome of the Florence cathedral, 21^1.
-
-
-    Openings, mediæval Florentine form, 102 (cut);
-      of domestic architecture in Perugia, 102;
-      reveals are shallow in earlier buildings, 104;
-      cathedral of Como, variety of illogical forms in, 148 (cut).
-      _See_ Window openings.
-
-    Order and symmetry of a mechanical kind seen in Renaissance
-        architecture, 133.
-
-    Order, colossal, so-called, early use of, 40.
-
-    Order, classic, use of without structural meaning in Renaissance
-        architecture, 6, 29, 43, 244;
-      Brunelleschi’s use of, 26;
-      unsuitable for a building of mediæval character, 29, 43;
-      disposition of, in various Renaissance façades, 42;
-      misapplication and distortion of by Italians of the Renaissance,
-          43;
-      used with propriety by the Greeks alone, 43;
-      the usual size of, compared with that of St. Peter’s, Rome, 67;
-      Vignola’s treatise on the Five Orders, 84;
-      the proportions of the, altered by Vignola, 85;
-      Vitruvius quoted on maintaining the purity of, 86;
-      inappropriate in a church interior, 98;
-      application of, in palace architecture, 107, 109;
-      Renaissance innovation in spacing the columns of, 112, 114;
-      podium introduced beneath, 112;
-      where the columns of, act somewhat as buttresses, 131;
-      aberrations and makeshifts made necessary by efforts to apply the
-          classic orders to uses for which they were not adapted, 244;
-      transformed by the mediæval architects in a creative way, 248;
-      De l’Orme’s claim of having invented a new order, which he called
-          the French order, 202 (cut), 206.
-      Of the Parthenon, Athens, 67;
-        the Temple of the Sun at Baalbek, 67^1;
-        chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 29, 30 (cut);
-        ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 35, 42 (cut);
-        Palazzo Rucellai, Florence, 108, 109 (cut);
-        St. Paul’s, London, interior, difficulties of combining
-            neo-classic style of, with the high vaulting, 243, 244;
-        Whitehall, banqueting hall, London, 228 (plate), 229 (cut),
-            230;
-        ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 40 (cut), 42;
-        ch. of San Biagio at Montepulciano, 78, 81 (cuts);
-        Duomo of Pienza, 42;
-        St. Peter’s, Rome, interior, 53, 66,
-          dwarfs the effect of magnitude in the interior, 67,
-          size compared with that of the Parthenon and Pantheon, 67,
-          diminishes the effect of altitude of the vaulting, 68;
-        Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, podium introduced beneath, 112,
-          innovation in spacing the columns of, 113;
-        court of Palazzo Farnese, Rome, treatment of the capital, 118;
-        ch. of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice, 100;
-        ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, raised on pedestals, 98,
-            101,
-          placed under the archivolts, 98;
-        library of St. Mark, Venice, 122, 123 (cuts);
-        Palazzo Contarini, Venice, 161;
-        Palazzo Vendramini, Venice, full orders in all three stories of
-            façade, 161, 162,
-          arrangement in lateral bay of façade, 162;
-        town hall portico of Vicenza, the columns of, act somewhat as
-            buttresses, 130, 131.
-      _See_ Columns.
-
-    Ornamentation, architectural, use of artificial elements in,
-        172–174 (cuts);
-      use of forms drawn from organic nature, 174.
-      _See_ Carving, architectural.
-
-    Oxford, St. Mary’s Church, porch, mentioned, 227;
-      Sheldonian theatre, Wren quoted on, 234.
-
-
-    Padua, town hall, Palladio’s scheme for town hall of Vicenza
-        derived from, 130, 131.
-
-    Painting, Italian genius for, 6, 7;
-      most Renaissance architects were painters and sculptors, 6, 7,
-          84, 96.
-
-    Palace architecture of the Renaissance, Florentine, 102–111 (cuts
-        and plate);
-      Roman, 112–134 (cuts);
-      of North Italy, 154–166 (cuts);
-      Venetian, 154–163 (cuts).
-      _See_ Renaissance architecture.
-
-    Palladian architecture, 95;
-      introduced into England by Jones, 227;
-      far from true to classic design, 228, 230;
-      rules are arbitrary and not in accord with the true principles of
-          ancient art, 248.
-
-    Palladio, _Quattro libri dell’Architettura di Andrea Palladio_,
-        96^4;
-      his influence greater than that of any other architect of the
-          Renaissance, 95, 248;
-      quoted on his study of architecture, 96, 97;
-      quoted on his admiration of his own work, 131^1;
-      his compositions based on order and symmetry of a mechanical
-          kind, 133;
-      concerned with the superficial appearance in architecture, 133;
-      ch. of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice, 100;
-      ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, 97–100 (cuts);
-      ch. of the Redentore, Venice, 100 (cut);
-      Palazzo Valmarana, Venice, 133;
-      Loggia Bernarda, Vicenza, 133 (cut);
-      Palazzo Colleone-Porta, Vicenza, 133;
-      Palazzo Porta-Barbarano, Vicenza, 133;
-      the portico of the town hall, Vicenza, 130–132 (cut).
-
-    Pallaiuolo, Simone, Palazzo Guardagni, Florence, 107.
-
-    Palustre, Leon, _L’Architecture de la Renaissance_, 89^2;
-      quoted on the entablature of St. Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, 89.
-
-    Paris, Church of St. Etienne du Mont, of Flamboyant Gothic form,
-        with neo-classic west front and central portal, 213, 214;
-      portal with columns modelled after those claimed by De l’Orme as
-          his own invention, 214.
-      Church of St. Eustache, a Gothic structure overlaid with
-          Renaissance details, 213.
-      Fountain of the Innocents, 194–196 (cut);
-        a reproduction of the scheme of a Roman triumphal arch, 196.
-      Hotel Cluny, a forerunner of the Renaissance châteaux, 180.
-      Louvre, Lescot’s work on the west wing, 196–200 (cut);
-        orders, 198, 199;
-        the salient pavilions, have no function, 198;
-        breaking of the entablature in, 199;
-        sculptured festoons heavy and formal, 199.
-      Palace of the Tuileries, work of De l’Orme, 200–207 (cuts);
-        peculiar form of column claimed by De l’Orme as his invention,
-            201–206 (cut);
-        basement arcade, 207;
-        attic story, 207.
-
-    Parthenon, metal clamps in masonry, 22^2;
-      effect of a dome erected on, 89.
-
-    Pavia, Church of the Certosa, general description of façade,
-        136–137;
-      Lombard Romanesque forms with pseudo-classic elements engrafted
-          on them, 137;
-      window openings, 137 (cut).
-      Church of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro, portal framed by structural
-          members without structural meaning, 148 (cut).
-
-    Pazzi, Chapel of the. _See_ Florence.
-
-    Pediment, breaking of the, 93–95 (cut), 117 (cut);
-      one placed within another, 95 (cut);
-      of Baalbek, 95 (cut).
-
-    Pellegrini, Palazzo Brera, Milan, 166.
-
-    Perugia, domestic architecture, 102.
-      Church of S. Bernardino, general description of façade, 135
-          (plate);
-        affords a rare instance of the use of colour in Renaissance
-            architecture, 135.
-
-    Peruzzi, Baldassare, his plan for St. Peter’s, Rome, 47^2;
-      Palazzo Massimi, Rome, 114–116 (cut).
-
-    Piers, pierced transversely and longitudinally, 38, 39, 150 (cuts);
-      ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo, 83 (cut);
-      ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence, 34 (cut);
-      château of Blois, France, polygonal staircase tower, 190 (cut);
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 38, 39 (plate);
-      ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, alternate system, 72;
-      St. Peter’s, Rome, 53, 66, 68;
-      Todi, 75, 76 (cut);
-      ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, 97, 98 (cut);
-      ch. of St. Mark, Venice, 150 (cut);
-      ch. of San Salvatore, Venice, 151 (cut).
-
-    Pietra Santa, Giacomo da, said to have built the ch. of
-        Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72.
-
-    Pilaster strips, form proper decoration for mediæval structures,
-        29, 82.
-
-    Pilasters, coupling of, 31;
-      use of, in the treatment of the angles of buildings, 78–81 (cut);
-      the panelling of, 160;
-      of Kirby Hall, England, support nothing but miniature pedestals,
-          219;
-      portico of the chapel of the Pazzi, 31 (cut);
-      façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 37, 38;
-      National Museum, Florence, meaningless and artificial design in
-          carving, 173 (cut);
-      château of Azay le Rideau, France, combination of pseudo-Gothic
-          and neo-classic forms, 186 (cut);
-      façade of ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua, 41 (cut);
-      San Biagio, Montepulciano, use of, on the angles in interior, 78
-          (cut);
-      Palazzo Contarini, Venice, grouping of those of three different
-          proportions and magnitudes, 161 (cut).
-
-    Pisa cathedral, dome, 12.
-
-    Pisan Romanesque architecture, of façade of Santa Maria Novella,
-        Florence, 37.
-
-    Poleni, _Memorie Istoriche delle Gran Cupola del Tempio Vaticano_,
-        59^3;
-      his strengthening of the dome of St. Peter’s, 62, 63;
-      quoted on poor work of Bramante, 64.
-
-    Pollaiuolo, Simione, called Il Cronaca, court and cornice of
-        Palazzo Strozzi, Florence, 106.
-
-    Pontoise, church of St. Maclou, remarkable Renaissance north
-        portal, 214.
-
-    Porches, church of San Zeno of Verona, a model from which an
-        illogical form of Renaissance portal is derived, 146 (cut);
-      Cranborn Manor-House, England, illustrates Elizabethan
-          neo-classic ornamentation, 221, 222 (cut);
-      Kirby Hall, England, 220;
-      resemble Louvre pavilions, 220.
-
-    Portals, from Serlio, in which the entablature is removed between
-        the ressauts, 117, 118 (cut);
-      illogical use of arch and entablature in the portals of north
-          Italy, 144, 145 (cuts);
-      illogical Renaissance portal derived from the porch of San Zeno
-          of Verona, 146 (cut);
-      unreason of Renaissance portals compared with those of Greek or
-          Gothic art, 156;
-      of cath. of Como, illogical use of arch and entablature, 144, 145
-          (cut), 149;
-      Stanway House (England) gatehouse, neo-classic features, 223;
-      Wollaton Hall, England, illustrates Elizabethan neo-classic
-          ornamentation, 224 (cut);
-      ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 36 (cut), 41;
-      château of Azay le Rideau, France, neo-classic details worked
-          into a pseudo-Gothic scheme, 184;
-      château of Chenonceaux, France, Flamboyant and neo-classic forms
-          combined, 188 (cut);
-      ch. of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro, Pavia, 148 (cut);
-      Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, of almost Greek purity of design, 114;
-      Scuola di San Marco, Venice, 156 (cut);
-      Porta del Palio, Verona, 125 (cut).
-
-    Portico, château of Écouen, the order of a Roman temple is produced
-        without admixture of mediæval details or Italian corruptions,
-        192.
-
-
-    Raphael, plans for St. Peter’s, Rome, 47^2.
-
-    Ravenna, ch. of San Vitale mentioned, 140.
-
-    Relief carving of the Renaissance, _see_ Carving, Architectural, of
-        the Renaissance.
-
-    Renaissance, conditions of, 1;
-      intellectual movement in, 2, 8;
-      neo-pagan revival in, 2, 8;
-      its spirit as manifested in its fine arts, 3, 4, 6, 8;
-      its architects were sculptors and painters, 6;
-      art of painting in, 7.
-
-    Renaissance architecture, element of individuality in, 4, 6;
-      the classic style which was followed was that of the decadent
-          Greek schools as represented in Roman copies, 4, 247;
-      architects were generally also painters and sculptors, 6, 96;
-      a surface architecture, 6;
-      little heed given to structural propriety, 23, 64, 66, 116;
-      use of the classic order, 29;
-      passing of the entablature through the arch imposts, 29;
-      use of stucco, 32;
-      alternation of wide and narrow intervals, 38;
-      misapplication of the classic orders, 43, 247;
-      the designers worked on a foundation of mediæval ideas from which
-          they could not free themselves, 43, 247;
-      use of Roman models, 43, 117, 119, 247;
-      breaking of the pediment, 93 (cut), 117;
-      use of structural members without structural meaning, 116, 133,
-          135, 156, 165;
-      entablature removed between the ressauts, 117;
-      later architecture the work of men of little genuine artistic
-          inspiration, 119, 133;
-      architectural shams extensively produced by later architects,
-          121, 132;
-      attempt to make half a metope fall at the end of the frieze,
-          121–122 (cut);
-      barbaric compositions of frequent occurrence in later, 124;
-      based on order and symmetry of a mechanical kind, 133;
-      independent personal effort to be original at the bottom of most
-          of the mistakes of, 206;
-      no architects of, had a true conception of the principles of
-          classic art, 230;
-      theatrical in its spirit, 232;
-      no true adaptation of classic elements in Renaissance design,
-          247;
-      great influence of short-sighted and mechanical Italian rules in
-          modern times, 248, 250;
-      claims advanced for it as the only architecture of correct
-          principles since that of classic antiquity are without
-          justification, 250;
-      sculpture of, _see_ Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance.
-
-    Renaissance architecture, in England, 216–246 (cuts);
-      Elizabethan art, 216–225 (cuts);
-        its best features were of native growth out of the mediæval
-          feudal castle and the latest phase of perpendicular Gothic,
-          216, 225;
-        use of classic details, 217, 218–225 (cuts);
-        flimsiness of material in interiors and ornamental details,
-            217, 218;
-        buildings have little foreign character in plan and outline,
-            but neo-classic forms are confined to ornamentation, 218,
-            221;
-        strange aberrations of design wrought by foreigners and native
-            craftsmen, 218–225 (cuts);
-        fantastic gables features of the more showy architecture, 220;
-        Flemish and Dutch ornamental workers, 220, 224;
-        the design and execution of the buildings were performed by
-            building craftsmen, 224, 225.
-      Work of Jones and Wren, 226–246 (plate and cuts);
-        use of classic details becoming established, 226, 228;
-        acceptance of neo-classic style by the people, 228, 232, 233.
-
-    Renaissance architecture, Florentine; church architecture, 26–43
-        (cuts);
-      palace architecture, 102–111 (cuts and plate).
-      _See_ also Renaissance architecture and Florence.
-
-    Renaissance architecture, in France, early, 179–193 (cuts);
-      the French Renaissance château, conditions which gave rise to,
-          180;
-      evolved from the feudal castle of the Middle Ages, 180, 201;
-      factitious in composition, 179, 181, 211^3;
-      distorted neo-classic details worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme,
-          184, 190;
-      a survival of later Gothic habit of design is shown where the
-          continuity of upright lines is obtained in the use of
-          superimposed pilasters with ressauts in the entablatures,
-          188, 190;
-      has a distinctly French expression, 179, 193, 194;
-      later French Renaissance given a more marked neo-classic dress by
-          Lescot and De l’Orme, 194–215;
-      misuse of structural forms in ornamentation, 199;
-      excessive profusion of ornament, 200;
-      church architecture, Gothic structural forms largely entwined
-          with a misapplication of classic details, 213–215.
-
-    Renaissance architecture, Lombard, 135, 136–149;
-      neo-classic influences confined largely to ornamental details,
-          136;
-      illogical scheme of openings which became characteristic of,
-          144–149 (cuts).
-
-    Renaissance architecture, North Italian, profusion of ornament a
-        marked characteristic of, 136;
-      Lombard Romanesque forms modified by neo-classic features mark
-          the character of, 144;
-      church architecture of the, 135–153 (cuts);
-      mixture of mediæval and pseudo-classic forms, 149;
-      palace architecture of the, 154–166 (cuts);
-      later architecture of the, based on the art of Palladio and
-          Vignola, 165.
-      _See_ Renaissance architecture.
-
-    Renaissance architecture, Venetian, 135;
-      church architecture, 149–153;
-      palace architecture, 154–163 (cuts);
-      its most characteristic architecture is that of the palaces of
-          the grand canal, 159;
-      the usual scheme of the front that of a wide central bay wholly
-          occupied by openings flanked by lateral bays with a solid
-          wall on either side of an opening, 162, 163;
-      neo-classic influences confined largely to ornamental details,
-          136;
-      illogical scheme of openings which became characteristic of,
-          144–149 (cuts);
-      drew some of its material from Florentine and Lombard sources,
-          149;
-      later architecture follows the measurably uniform style of
-          Vignola and Palladio, 153, 162;
-      overlaying with heavy orders the typical unequal main divisions
-          of the palace fronts, 162, 163.
-
-    Ressauts, irrational use of, 38;
-      of façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, 37;
-      of San Francesco of Rimini, 38;
-      of ch. of Santa Maria degli Angeli, Assisi, 89.
-
-    Rhenish Romanesque style of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72.
-
-    Ribs, system of, in Florence dome, 16–19, 55 (cuts);
-      in Gothic vaulting have nothing of the character of dome ribs,
-          20, 21, 56;
-      of St. Peter’s dome, Rome, 55, 56, 59;
-      of cath. of Salamanca, 57, 58.
-
-    Riccio, Antonio, his work on east side of the court of the Ducal
-        Palace, Venice, 154 (plate).
-
-    Rimini, San Francesco of, church of, 35;
-      façade, 38, 42;
-      modelled on the arch of Septimius Severus, 38, 42;
-      ressauts, 38.
-
-    Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to a continuous arcade,
-        118, 119.
-
-    Roman architecture, furnished models for Renaissance architecture,
-        38, 40, 43, 97;
-      use of entablature block in, 37;
-      use of the arch in, 37;
-      the ressaut, 38;
-      triumphal arch design a model for Renaissance façades, 38, 39–43
-          (cut);
-      treatment of the angle, 79 (cut).
-
-    Roman architectural carving, furnished models for Renaissance work,
-        167;
-      tasteless and meaningless designs, 170^1;
-      leafage of, compared with Greek leafage, 174 (cuts).
-
-    Roman Renaissance, church architecture of the, 66–101 (cuts);
-      palatial architecture, 112–134.
-      _See_ Renaissance architecture and Rome.
-
-    Romanesque architecture, 7;
-      Rhenish Romanesque style of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72.
-
-    Rome, its monuments the inspiration of Renaissance architecture, 3,
-        43, 247.
-      St. Peter’s, rebuilding and demolishing of the old basilica, 47;
-        work of Rossellino, 47;
-        work of Bramante, 47–53 (cuts), 63, 64, 70;
-        date of the beginning of building, 47;
-        general plan, 47, 53, 66 (cut);
-        the plans of Raphael and Peruzzi, 47^2;
-        work of Michael Angelo, 54–65 (cuts), 66;
-        work of Maderna, 66, 245;
-        short-sighted admiration of, 71;
-        design of Antonio San Gallo, 71;
-        influence of, seen in other churches, 90, 92;
-        arabesque on door-valves, 170 (cut);
-        Wren’s scheme for St. Paul’s based on the model of, 236, 237;
-        comparison of, with St. Paul’s, 236, 239, 241, 243, 245.
-        Dome, 44–65 (cuts);
-          use of the Pantheon and the Basilica of Maxentius as models,
-              49–52 (cuts);
-          drum, 50 (cut), 53;
-          abutments, 50 (cut), 53;
-          colonnade, 51, 56, 142;
-          lantern, 52;
-          piers, 53, 66, 68;
-          buttresses, 53 (cut), 55, 56, 59;
-          design of Michael Angelo, 53–65 (cuts);
-          his alterations of Bramante’s scheme, 53–55, 64;
-          attic, 54 (cut);
-          vault shells, 54 (cut), 55;
-          ribs, 55, 56, 59;
-          binding chains, 59, 60, 62;
-          ruptures in, 59, 60–63 (cut), 64;
-          mathematicians’ report of the condition of the structure in
-              1742, 60 (cut);
-          violation of laws of stability in, 64, 65;
-          strengthening of Bramante’s work, 64^1;
-          its beauty exaggerated, 65;
-          likeness of Wren’s scheme of St. Paul’s to, 236.
-        Exterior, 68–70 (cut);
-          makeshifts necessitated by the use of the colossal order,
-              68–70 (cut);
-          aisle walls carried to the height of the clerestory, 68, 245;
-          domes over the aisles, 68–70 (cut), 245.
-        Interior, Bramante’s scheme, 53, 66;
-          Michael Angelo’s work, 53, 66–70;
-          piers, 53, 66, 68;
-          effect of magnitude dwarfed by the colossal order, 53, 67,
-              68;
-          great size of the structural parts, 68;
-          part of the vault hidden by the cornice, 68, 92;
-          its ornamentation a cheap deception, 71;
-          ressauts, 90, 92.
-      Church of the Gesù, 91–95 (cuts);
-        Vignola’s plan given in his book on the Five Orders, 92;
-        interior, general scheme, 92;
-        orders, 92;
-        entablature, 92;
-        façade, 92–95 (cuts);
-        broken pediments of, 93, 95;
-        scroll work and hermæ, 93;
-        reversed consoles, 95;
-        tablets, 95 (cut).
-      Church of Sant’Agostino, 72–74 (cuts);
-        its architects, 72;
-        date, 72;
-        the general style is Rhenish Romanesque, 72;
-        nave, 72;
-        Renaissance ornamental details, 72 (cut);
-        façade, 73, 74 (cut);
-        truncated pediment, 74;
-        tablets in wall surface, 74;
-        dome, 74.
-      Church of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, 86–89 (cuts);
-        dome, 86;
-        façade, 86–88 (cut), 92, 101;
-        likeness to the Pantheon, 87;
-        entablature, 89 (cut).
-      Church of San Biagio, entablature, 78 (cut).
-      Church of Santa Maria della Pace, cloister arcade, 119.
-      Church of St. Paul outside the wall, entablature, 30^1.
-      The Tempietto, 44–46 (cut);
-        the dome and its drum, 44, 74;
-        resemblance to the temple of Vesta, 44, 45;
-        orders, 45, 83;
-        dome of St. Paul’s, London, recalls, 239.
-      Arch of Septimius Severus used as model of façades by Alberti,
-          38, 39–43 (cut);
-        treatment of angle in, 79.
-      Arch of the Silversmiths, 39.
-      Arch of Titus, scheme of, used by Sansovino in the Loggetta of
-          the Campanile, Venice, 123.
-      Basilica of Maxentius, columns and arches, 37;
-        as model for St. Peter’s, 49.
-      Baths of Caracalla, entablature, 29.
-      Pantheon, 10, 15^1, 87;
-        said to be taken as model for dome of Florence cathedral, 16;
-        grandeur of, 23;
-        as model for Bramante’s dome of St. Peter’s, 49, 52 (cuts);
-        its internal character, 52^1;
-        abutments, 49 (cut), 52;
-        not a homogeneous structure, 89.
-      Porta Maggiore, form of column similar to that claimed by De
-          l’Orme as his own invention, 205.
-      Temple of Peace. _See_ Basilica of Maxentius.
-      Theatre of Marcellus, its façade followed by Sansovino for the
-          library of St. Mark’s, 122.
-      Palazzo Cancelleria, façade, 112–114 (cut);
-        window openings, north Italian, 112, 149;
-        podium introduced beneath each order, 112;
-        spacing of the columns of the order, 112, 114;
-        projecting bays at each end, 113;
-        portal of almost Greek purity of design, 114;
-        court, 114.
-      Palazzo Farnese, 116–118;
-        window openings framed by structural members without structural
-            meaning, 116, 117 (cut);
-        removal of entablature between ressauts over window openings,
-            117 (cut);
-        court, treatment of columns, 118.
-      Palazzo Girand Torlonia, 112;
-        window opening, north Italian, 112, 149.
-      Palazzo Massimi, façade described, 114–116 (cut);
-        wall above basement unbroken by pilasters or string courses,
-            114;
-        portico, 114, 115;
-        spacing of columns and pilasters of basement, 114;
-        window openings, 115.
-
-    Ronsard, his poem on Lescot cited, 196.
-
-    Roof, timber, built over early domes, 10, 11.
-
-    Rossellino, his use of the orders in the Duomo of Pienza, 42, 43;
-      his work on the basilica of St. Peter, Rome, 47.
-
-    Ruptures, in the dome of Florence cathedral, 23, 24;
-      in the dome of St. Peter’s, Rome, 59, 60–63 (cut);
-      not necessarily alarming in a properly constructed vault, 62^2.
-
-    Rustication of masonry, 109.
-
-
-    Salamanca, cathedral of, dome, how it approaches and differs in
-        nature from a Gothic vault, 57–59 (cuts).
-
-    San Gallo, Antonio, the elder, 90;
-      his work on ch. of San Biagio, Montepulciano, Rome, 78–83;
-      ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo, 83.
-
-    San Gallo, Antonio, the younger, his design for St. Peter’s, Rome,
-        71;
-      Palazzo Farnese, Rome, 116.
-
-    San Gallo, Giuliano da, designed Palazzo Gondi, Florence, 107, 176;
-      leafage of capital, 176 (cut).
-
-    San Giovanni, Florence Baptistery, 14, 16.
-
-    Sanmichele, Porta del Palio, Verona, 125 (cut);
-      Palazzo Canalla, Verona, 126;
-      Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria, Verona, 126;
-      Palazzo Bevilacqua, Verona, 126, 127 (cut).
-
-    Sansovino (Jacopo Tatti), his predilection for classic forms, 119,
-        120;
-      library of St. Mark, Venice, 121 (cut), 130;
-      his attempt to make half the metope fall at the end of the
-          frieze, 121, 122;
-      small free-standing column placed on each side of the pier to
-          bear the archivolt, often spoken of as an invention of, 123,
-          130, 131 (cut);
-      Loggetta of the Campanile, Venice, 123;
-      his use of a form of column claimed by De l’Orme as his own
-          invention, 205.
-
-    Scaffolding said to have been employed by Brunelleschi, 21^3.
-
-    Scamozzi, 133, 134;
-      peculiar form of compound window, sometimes called his invention,
-          134 (cut).
-
-    Scrollwork, of façade of the ch. of the Gesù, Rome, 93.
-
-    Sculpture, on buildings, has in Gothic art only an appropriate
-        architectural character, and a high degree of excellence in the
-        development of form, 167;
-      Greek, is in a measure independent of the building on which it is
-          placed, 167;
-      of the human figure in Renaissance art, has little proper
-          architectural character, 167;
-      relief carving of the Renaissance, 167–178 (cuts).
-      _See_ Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance.
-
-    Sebastiano, architect of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, 72.
-
-    Serlio, _Regole Generali di Architettura di Sebastiano Serlio_,
-        44^2, 196^2;
-      cited on the work of Bramante on St. Peter’s, Rome, 47^2, 49;
-      quoted on corner pilasters, 79;
-      cited on the removal of the entablature between the ressauts, 117
-          (cut);
-      influence on Lescot, 196;
-      his column practically the same as that claimed by De l’Orme as
-          his own invention, 203 (cut).
-
-    Sgrilli, _Descrizione e Studj dell’Insigne Fabbrica di S. Maria del
-        Fiore_, quoted, 23.
-
-    Siena, Palazzo Pubblico, 102.
-
-    Soane Museum, John Thorpe’s drawings, 218^2, 221.
-
-    Spavento, church of San Salvatore, Venice, 150.
-
-    Spire, Gothic, far removed from anything proper to classic
-        composition, 83.
-
-    Steeples, Wren’s, 246;
-      are the outcome of the Renaissance spire-like towers, 82.
-
-    Strozzi, Filippo, 110.
-
-    Stucco, use in Renaissance architecture, 32, 132, 133.
-
-    Syria, St. Simeon Stylites, use of the free-standing column under
-        the archivolts, 131 (cut);
-      Basilica of Shakka, form of window opening reproduced in
-          architecture of the Renaissance, 134.
-
-
-    Tablets, rectangular in façade surface, 74;
-      ugly shapes of, in the façade of The Gesù, Rome, 95 (cut);
-      of Vignola, 95 (cut).
-
-    Tatti, Jacopo. _See_ Sansovino.
-
-    Thorpe, John, his plans show a French influence, 218, 220;
-      little is known of him, 218^2;
-      Kirby Hall, England, 218–220 (cuts);
-      Longford Castle, 221.
-
-    Thrust, the, of a dome, 15^1, 24, 52.
-
-    Ties, wooden used in Gothic buildings, 22^2.
-
-    Tivoli, temple of Vesta, resemblance of the Tempietto, Rome, to,
-        44, 45 (cut).
-
-    Todi, church of Santa Maria della Consolazione, 74–77 (cuts);
-      the scheme is Byzantine, 74, 77;
-      dome, 74, 75, 77;
-      interior, 75 (cut);
-      orders, 75–77 (cut);
-      piers, 75, 76;
-      exterior, 77 (cut);
-      similarity between the sacristy of San Satiro, of Milan, and,
-          140;
-      between cath. of Como and, 144.
-
-    Towers, spire-like, of the Renaissance, 81;
-      scheme based on the Lombard Romanesque tower and the mediæval
-          campanile, 82;
-      of ch. of San Biagio at Montepulciano, 78, 81 (cuts);
-      of ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence, 81, 82 (cut);
-      Giotto’s, 82.
-
-    Triglyph, problem of the arrangement of, at the end of the frieze,
-        121, 122 (cuts).
-
-    Triumphal arch used as a model of Renaissance façades, 38, 39–43
-        (cuts).
-
-
-    Vanvitelli, his placing of binding chains around the dome of St.
-        Peter’s, Rome, 62.
-
-    Variety, unmeaning, different from that which results from an
-        active inventive spirit, 211^1.
-
-    Vasari, _Le Opere di Giorgio Vasari_ quoted, 16;
-      cited on Brunelleschi’s account of the dome of Florence, 18^1,
-          22^1;
-      cited, 33^1, 110;
-      cited on Alberti’s work, 35, 44, 107;
-      cited on rebuilding St. Peter’s, Rome, 47;
-      his short-sighted admiration of St. Peter’s, 71;
-      quoted on Michelozzi, 105, 149;
-      cited on the Palazzo Strozzi, Florence, 106.
-
-    Vault, Gothic, why a dome cannot have the character of a, 20, 21,
-        56–59 (cuts).
-
-    Vaults, the nature of the construction of a circular-celled vault
-        on Gothic principles, 56–59 (cuts);
-      of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, 27, 28, 56;
-      ch. of San Spirito, Florence, 34;
-      chapel of St. Peter Martyr, ch. of Sant’Eustorgio, Milan, 142.
-
-    Venetian Renaissance. _See_ Renaissance, Venetian.
-
-    Venice, church of The Redentore, general scheme, 100 (cut);
-      east end, 100, 101;
-      orders, 101;
-      façade, 101.
-      Church of S. Fantino, 151.
-      Church of San Francesco della Vigna façade, 100.
-      Church of San Giorgio Maggiore, 97;
-        nave, 97, 98;
-        piers, 97, 98 (cut);
-        orders raised on pedestals, 98, 99;
-        placed under the archivolts, 98;
-        entablature, 98, 99, 101;
-        façade, 99 (cut), 101.
-      Church of Santa Maria Formosa reproduces features of St. Andrea
-          of Mantua with details of the character of the Lombardi, 153.
-      Church of Santa Maria dei Miracoli, 151 (cut), 156;
-        refinement in details, 151;
-        façade a marvel of excellence in mechanical execution, 151, 152
-            (cut);
-        Lombard blind arcade recalled in decoration of the façade, 151;
-        carving of ear of barley and flower stalks, 169 (plate);
-        carved mask from a pilaster, 178 (cut).
-      Church of St. Mark, piers pierced longitudinally and
-          transversely, 150 (cut).
-      Church of San Salvatore, 150, 151;
-        peculiar pier supports of the barrel vaulting, 150 (cut);
-        use of an attic as support for vaulting, 151;
-        its system is that of the ch. of St. Mark, 151.
-      Church of San Zaccaria, general description of interior, 149,
-          150;
-        singular column of nondescript character, 150 (cut).
-      Palaces of the grand canal, finest are those of the later
-          mediæval period, 159.
-      Palazzo Contarini, 161;
-        details of façade, 161;
-        window openings, 161 (cut);
-        grouping of pilasters of three different proportions and
-            magnitudes, 161 (cut).
-      Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, 160 (plate);
-        window openings, mediæval features, incompleted circle in the
-            tympanum space, 160;
-        pilasters, panelling of, 160.
-      Palazzo Cornaro, description of the front, 124;
-        unequal main divisions of the front overladen with heavy
-            orders, 162.
-      Ducal Palace, east side of the court, 154 (plate);
-        façade described in detail, 154, 155;
-        window openings described, 154, 155;
-        north side of court, window openings, 155 (cut);
-        giant’s stair, fine execution of, 156;
-        arabesque after Roman model, 167 (cut);
-        grotesque creatures in the relief of the Scala d’Oro, 177
-            (cut).
-      Palazzo Grimani, façade, 163.
-      Palazzo Pesaro, 163.
-      Palazzo Valmarano, 133.
-      Palazzo Vendramini, 161;
-        full orders in all three stories, 161, 162;
-        grouping of mediæval window openings, 162;
-        balconies, 162;
-        disproportion of topmost entablature, 162.
-      Library of St. Mark, 121 (cut);
-        arrangement of the metope in the frieze, 121, 122 (cuts);
-        orders, 122;
-        frieze and balustraded balconies, 123;
-        free-standing column under the archivolt in the order of the
-            upper story, 123, 130.
-      Loggetta of the Campanile, 123.
-      Scuola di San Marco, description of façade, 156–158 (cut);
-        portal, described, unreason of its composition, 156 (cut);
-        carvings, 157.
-      Scuola di San Rocco, façade described, 158 (cut);
-        portal, 159;
-        window openings with mediæval features and others with
-            pseudo-Corinthian colonnettes, 159 (cut), 160.
-      The Zecca, form of column claimed by De l’Orme as his own
-          invention, 205.
-
-    Verona, church of San Zeno, porch and portal, 146 (cut).
-      Palazzo Bevilacqua, description of façade, 126, 127 (cut).
-      Palazzo Canalla, 126.
-      Palazzo del Consiglio, 163 (plate);
-        presents a mediæval broletto scheme dressed out in Renaissance
-            details, 163;
-        in respect to its finest qualities it belongs to the Middle
-            Ages, 163.
-      Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria, 126.
-      Porta del Palio, description of façades, 125 (cut), 126.
-
-    Vicenza, Town hall portico by Palladio, 130–132 (cut);
-        use of free-standing columns under the archivolts, 130;
-        columns of the great orders act somewhat as buttresses, 131.
-      Palazzo Colleone-Porta, 133.
-      Palazzo Porta-Barbarano, 133.
-      Palazzo Valmarano, 133.
-      Loggia Bernarda, 133 (cut).
-
-    Vignola, _I Cinque Ordini d’Architettura_, 84, 85, 92;
-      entablature which he calls his own invention, 85 (cut);
-      his unclassic and incongruous combinations, 86, 95;
-      eliminates mediæval forms, 92;
-      tablet from, 95 (cut);
-      great influence of his writings, 248;
-      ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, 86–89 (cuts), 92;
-      ch. of Santa Maria degli Angeli, Assisi, 89;
-      ch. of the Gesù, Rome, 91–95 (cuts);
-      Palazzo Caprarola, near Viterbo, 128.
-
-    Violette-le-Duc, _S. V. Château_, 171^1, 181^1;
-      _Entretiens sur l’Architecture_, 207^3;
-      quoted on French architects of the Renaissance, 179^1;
-      quoted on château of Chambord, 191;
-      quoted on De l’Orme, 200^1;
-      his genius more scientific than artistic, 200^1;
-      quoted on the château of Charleval, 211, 212;
-      errs in his reasoning in his discourse on Renaissance
-          architecture, 211–213.
-
-    Villani, quoted, 2.
-
-    Villari, cited, 3^1.
-
-    Viterbo, Palazzo Caprarola, near Viterbo, general description of,
-        128–130;
-      a source of inspiration to later architects of trans-alpine
-          Renaissance, 130.
-
-    Vitruvius, 85;
-      quoted on the orders, 86;
-      taken by Palladio as his master, 96, 97;
-      later Renaissance architects based their practice on the writings
-          of, 119;
-      cited on meaningless Roman ornamental designs, 170^1;
-      notion that the Ionic order was designed after female
-          proportions, derived from, 207^1.
-
-
-    Walpole, Horace, _Anecdotes of Painting_, 226;
-      quoted on Inigo Jones, 226, 229;
-      quoted on faults of Jones’s façade of old St. Paul’s, London,
-          231, 232.
-
-    Ware, Isaac, _A Complete Body of Architecture_, 248^1, 249^1;
-      quoted on the rules of ancient architects, 248, 249.
-
-    Wenz, Paul, _Die Kuppel des Domes Santa Maria del Fiore zu
-        Florenz_, 20^1.
-
-    Willis, his term “continuous impost” used, 188^1.
-
-    Window openings, framed by structural members without structural
-        meaning, 116;
-      a peculiar form of compound, sometimes called an invention of
-          Scamozzi, 134 (cut), 143;
-      the same form occurs in the basilica of Shakka, 134 (cut);
-      tapering jamb shafts, 137 (cut), 142, 149;
-      illogical scheme of, which became characteristic of Lombard and
-          Venetian Renaissance architecture, 148 (cut);
-      mediæval form of those in Venetian palaces, 159 (cut), 160, 162;
-      Lower Walterstone Hall, England, illustrates Elizabethan
-          neo-classic ornamentation, 221 (cut);
-      château of Azay le Rideau, France, Flamboyant Gothic and
-          neo-classic forms combined, 186 (cut);
-      château of Charleval, France, unmeaning variation of details,
-          210, 211 (cut);
-      Palazzo Bartolini, Florence, 109 (cut);
-      Palazzo Guardagni, Florence, 107;
-      the Quaratesi, Florence, 106;
-      the Riccardi, Florence, mediæval in their larger features, but
-          with tapering jamb shafts, 103;
-      Palazzo Rucellai, Florence, 109 (cut);
-      Ospedale Maggiore, Milan, 165 (cut);
-      of the Certosa of Pavia, tapering jamb shafts, 137 (cut);
-      Palazzo Cancelleria, 112 (cut);
-      of Palazzo Farnese, Rome, framed by structural members without
-          structural meaning, 116 (cut);
-      Ducal Palace, Venice, east side of court, 154;
-      north side, pseudo-Corinthian order of, 155 (cut);
-      Palazzo Contarini, Venice, grouping of the pilasters, 161 (cut);
-      Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, Venice, mediæval features, incomplete
-          circle in the tympanum space, 160;
-      Palazzo Corneri, Venice, 124 (cut);
-      Palazzo Vendramini, Venice, grouping of, in the bays of the
-          façade, 162;
-      Scuola di San Rocco, Venice, with mediæval features and with
-          pseudo-Corinthian colonnettes, 159 (cut);
-      Palazzo Bevilacqua, Verona, 126, 127;
-      Palazzo Branzo, Vicenza, a peculiar form of compound window,
-          sometimes called an invention of Scamozzi, 134.
-
-    Wren, Sir Christopher, _Parentalia, or Memoir of the Family of the
-        Wrens_, 232^3 ff.;
-      professor of astronomy at Oxford, 233;
-      quotations from a letter written during his visit to Paris, 233;
-      quoted on his Sheldonian theatre, Oxford, 234;
-      ordered to submit designs for the restoration of old St. Paul’s
-          cathedral, London, 234;
-      his drawings of plans for the new structure, 235–238 (cuts);
-      building of the present structure, 239–245 (cuts);
-      his scheme to “reconcile the Gothic to a better manner,” 238,
-          243, 245;
-      he learned his art on the scaffold in close contact with the
-          works, 239;
-      his churches other than St. Paul’s exhibit a medley of elements
-          from spurious Gothic to pseudo-classic in irrational
-          combinations, 245, 246;
-      his spires are hybrid compositions of barbaric character, 246.
-
-
-
-
-           Development and Character of Gothic Architecture
-
-                       By CHARLES HERBERT MOORE
-
-
-Second Edition, Rewritten and Enlarged. With Ten Plates in Photogravure
-              and more than 200 Illustrations in the Text
-
-                _8vo.      Cloth.      $4.50,      net_
-
-
-The new edition embodies a large amount of fresh material gathered
-at first hand from the monuments. A considerable number of early
-Gothic buildings of great importance, hitherto little known, have been
-examined; and much new light has thus been thrown upon the interesting
-subject of the early Gothic development. A new chapter on the sources
-of Gothic art has been inserted; the other chapters have been rewritten
-and much new matter incorporated. The work is thus much improved both
-as an exposition of the nature and character of Gothic art, and a
-comparative illustration of the various pointed systems of the Middle
-Ages.
-
-Many new illustrations in the text, and a considerable number of
-full-page plates, executed in the best manner of photographic
-reproduction, will be included.
-
-
-   THE NATION _says of the new edition_:
-
-“The treatise has evidently been remade from beginning to end, the old
-material being retained only so far as it was found to meet entirely
-the new demands.
-
-“As to the illustrations, they also have been minutely reconsidered,
-and the improvement in this respect is even more striking than in the
-text....
-
-“Those who have found the first edition of Mr. Moore’s work valuable
-will find it still more important to possess the second.”
-
-
-“We welcome Mr. Moore’s book with unalloyed satisfaction ... as of
-very great importance and value.... A book so comprehensive, so
-compact, so clear in statement, and so interesting in the treatment
-of its great subject is well suited not only to increase the general
-knowledge of Gothic architecture, but to become a text-book for special
-students.”--AMERICAN ARCHITECT AND BUILDING NEWS.
-
-
-“It is without question the most noteworthy work upon architecture yet
-written in America, as well as by one of the foremost contributors to
-the literature of the subject which has appeared in any country....
-
-“Mr. Moore’s book is an honor to American scholarship and
-investigation, and deserves the widest circulation among readers who
-possess any interest in what he succeeds in making a most interesting
-subject.”--BOSTON DAILY ADVERTISER.
-
-
-“While the more appreciative readers of this volume will be found among
-students of architecture, no reader of taste or culture will find its
-pages without interest.”--THE TRANSCRIPT, BOSTON.
-
-
-“A very intelligent and sufficiently lucid discussion of fundamental
-principles ... distinguished by a clear, logical precision of
-statement, and by a boldness, and not unfrequently by an originality of
-deduction, such as cannot be found in the works of European scholars
-... lucid enough to commend themselves even to readers unfamiliar with
-the technical side of the subject. To such readers, also, the orderly
-development of the argument, the frequent, graphic illustrations, ...
-and above all, the exhaustive index, cannot fail to serve at once as an
-invitation to enter upon a charming field of study, and an inducement
-to stay until the last words are said.”--THE ATLANTIC MONTHLY.
-
-
-                         THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
-
-                     64–66 Fifth Avenue, New York
-
-
-
-
-                         European Architecture
-
-                          A HISTORICAL STUDY
-
-                                  BY
-                RUSSELL STURGIS, A.M., Ph.D., F.A.I.A.
-
- _President of the Fine Arts Federation of New York; Post-President of
- the Architectural League of New York; Vice-President of the National
-                       Sculpture Society; etc._
-
-                        8vo. Illustrated. $4.00
-
-
-                                OUTLOOK
-
-“To the literature of architecture no American is better qualified to
-make a contribution of lasting value than Mr. Russell Sturgis.”
-
-
-                 THE ARCHITECTS’ AND BUILDERS’ REVIEW
-
-“Mr. Sturgis tells his readers exactly what the purpose of his book is,
-and raises no expectations that are not fully realized.... It cannot
-be too widely known or too carefully studied.... Nothing Mr. Sturgis
-can say on the subject of architecture can fail to be interesting and
-instructive.... It is not too much to say that this single work forms
-the best introduction to the serious study of European architecture
-ever published.”
-
-
-                            THE INDEPENDENT
-
-“In Mr. Sturgis’s ‘European Architecture’ rare good taste, simple
-truth, and great knowledge combine to satisfy eye and mind.”
-
-
-                         THE MACMILLAN COMPANY
-
-                     64–66 Fifth Avenue, New York
-
-
-
-
-               A DICTIONARY OF ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING
-
-               Biographical, Historical, and Descriptive
-
-                    By RUSSELL STURGIS, A.M., Ph.D.
-
-           _Fellow of the American Institute of Architects_
-
-  And many Architects, Painters, Engineers, and other expert Writers,
-                         American and Foreign
-
-          IN THREE OCTAVO VOLUMES--SOLD ONLY BY SUBSCRIPTION
-
-      Cloth, $18.00 net per set Half morocco, $30.00 net per set
-
-
-                        _COMMENTS OF THE PRESS_
-
-“Ambitious in scope and ample in bulk, the present work bids for
-wide acceptance among the general as well as the technical public.
-It is practically the only considerable effort to supply encroaching
-demands for a compendium which shall be at once convenient as
-to form and complete in the matter of contents. The aim of its
-compilers has evidently been to strike an average between that which
-is popular and that which is for the specialist, and in this they
-have shown sagacity. Edited under the direct supervision of Mr.
-Russell Sturgis,--who has contributed a momentous proportion of the
-material,--the work has enlisted the services of some sixty current
-authorities.”--CRITIC.
-
-
-“Mr. Russell Sturgis is the editor of this important work, and has had
-the coöperation of such men as Dr. Cleveland Abbe, Edward Atkinson, E.
-H. Blashfield, Henry Van Brunt, ... and others, each of them eminent
-in some department of knowledge rendering his aid valuable. It is
-somewhat remarkable that there is in English no other dictionary of
-architecture, excepting a work in eight volumes said to have been begun
-about 1850 and to have been completed only ten years ago. There is
-room, therefore, for a modern, scholarly, and reasonably complete work
-of this class.
-
-“The present volume, the first of the three proposed, covers the
-letters A to E, inclusive. It is comprehensive, concise, although
-sufficiently full, untechnical, and easily used. The desirable line
-between too scrupulous terseness and too much elaboration of definition
-or description has been drawn ordinarily with great success. There
-is no hesitation to give space for desirable comment, as in what is
-written under ‘Builder,’ for instance, but brevity has been kept in
-view throughout the work, and its cross-references facilitate its use.
-The titles are in heavy type and at once catch the eye. Illustrations,
-numerous and appropriate, some of full-page size, abound, and all in
-all the work will meet very satisfactorily a real and important public
-need.”--CONGREGATIONALIST.
-
-
-“Thanks to Mr. Russell Sturgis and a corps of competent assistants, we
-now have in ‘A Dictionary of Architecture and Building: Biographical,
-Historical, and Descriptive’ a much more valuable work than could have
-been hoped for.... Several things are at once noticeable about this
-work--the terseness and lucidity of its articles and definitions; the
-extraordinary range of its subjects, from the arch of Septimius Severus
-to modern apartment houses and tenements, and from St. Paul’s, London,
-and the Doge’s palace in Venice, to a crib for hay such as one finds
-in rural England, and a peasant’s hut in Asia Minor; the beauty of the
-illustrations, and particularly the readiness with which they elucidate
-the accompanying definitions and accounts; and the elaborate system of
-cross-references, through which a glance at an article on any phase of
-a given subject points the way at once to accounts of other related
-terms and their uses.
-
-“Perhaps the thoroughly modern spirit which dominates and inspires the
-whole work is the feature that distinguishes this book most strongly
-from the works in other languages which the seeker for definitions
-hitherto has perforce consulted. The writers of these articles are
-scholarly men, but they are something more than scholars. They are not
-living in the past; they are doing their work in the world to-day,
-and their point of view and their tone is a most satisfactory and
-practical mixture of culture with the recognition of the needs of
-the average American. An important feature of this work will be the
-series of articles on the typical architecture of different countries.
-Some of those in the present volume deal with the architectures of
-Australia, Denmark, and England, while, to judge from cross-references,
-the one in the final volume on the architecture of the United States
-will be ambitious, elaborate, and inclusive. The connection of this
-work with modern building is shown by the two long articles on the
-‘Apartment House’ and ‘Electrical Appliances.’ Modern edifices are as
-seriously considered as the ancient monuments described and pictured
-by Viollet-le-Duc.... Now that it has appeared, this dictionary, many
-of whose articles extend to the dimensions of those in encyclopædias,
-becomes indispensable in its field.”--BOSTON HERALD.
-
-
-          THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, 64–66 Fifth Avenue, New York
-
-
-FOOTNOTES:
-
-[1] _Cronica di Giovanni Villani_, bk. 6, chap. 69.
-
-[2] Cf. Introduction to Villari’s _Niccolo Machiavelli and his
-Times_, London, 1878.
-
-[3] Cf. Montalembert, _Les Moines d’Occident_, vol. 2, p. 488
-_et seq._
-
-[4] Cf. my _Development and Character of Gothic Architecture_, pp.
-304–306.
-
-[5] The Gothic of northern France of the twelfth and early thirteenth
-centuries, the only true Gothic art, is here meant.
-
-[6] The Viscount Delaborde, in his book _La Gravure en Italie avant
-Marc-Antoine_, Paris, 1883, p. 32, remarks on this with admirable
-discrimination as follows: “Certes, sous le pinceau de Botticelli,
-de pareils sujets [subjects drawn from Classical Mythology] gardent
-un caractère d’élégance tendre et de mélancolie presque analogue à
-la physionomie des scènes où figurent l’Enfant-Dieu et la Madone. Il
-y a loin de cette manière d’interpréter la Fable aux panégyriques
-violemment ou galamment licencieux que les hôtes les plus mal famés
-de l’Olympe obtiendront dans les siècles suivants; il y a loin des
-gracieuses inventions de Botticelli aux _lascivie_ brutales de
-Jules Romain et d’Augustin Carrache ou aux gamineries mythologiques
-de Boucher et de ses pareils, et l’on a quelque peine aujourd’hui, en
-face d’aussi chastes tableaux, à comprendre la véhémence des reproches
-fulminés jadis par Savonarole.”
-
-[7] The elevated domes of Arabian architecture are in many cases
-constructed of wood and stucco. When of masonry they are, I believe,
-either weighted within where the thrusts fall, or are bound with chains.
-
-[8] I have not examined the dome of Pisa closely on the spot, but I
-suppose it is bound with a chain, as we know was the custom at a later
-time. Cf. Fontana, vol. 2, P. 363.
-
-[9] There can be little doubt that the dome represented in this
-fresco embodies the original project of Arnolfo, though this has been
-questioned. Cf. Guasti, _Santa Maria del Fiore_, etc., Florence,
-1887, pp. lx-lxi.
-
-[10] This needs to be qualified. The thrusts of the dome being
-continuous logically call for continuous abutment, as in the Pantheon,
-but the intervals between the abutting members are so small that the
-resistance is practically continuous.
-
-[11] By its architectural character, I mean its character as a work of
-art. By the term “architecture” we properly mean not building merely,
-but the fine art of beautiful building.
-
-[12] This has been based on the affirmations of Vasari, who states
-that it was Brunelleschi’s purpose to “restore to light the good
-[_i.e._ the ancient Roman] manner in architecture,” and that he
-had “pondered on the difficulties” involved in vaulting the Pantheon.
-Cf. _Le Opere di Giorgio Vasari_, Milanesi edition, Florence,
-1880, vol. 2, p. 337.
-
-[13] A copy of this document is said to have been preserved for some
-time in the archives of the Board of Works, but it seems to have
-disappeared subsequently. It is given, however, by several writers,
-Vasari and Guasti among them. There are slight differences of wording
-and of measurements between the transcripts of these two authors. That
-of Guasti is the most intelligible, and seems to agree best with the
-monument. It reads as follows: “In prima: la cupola, dallo lato di
-dentro lunga a misura di quinto acuto, negli angoli sia grossa nella
-mossa da piè braccia 3¾, e piramidalmente si muri; sicchè nella fine,
-congiunta con l’occhio di sopra, che ha a essere fondamento e basa
-della lanterna, rimanga grossa braccia 2½. Facciasi un’altra cupola di
-fuori sopra questa, per conservarla dallo umido, e perchè la torni più
-magnifica e gonfiata; e sia grossa nella sua mossa da piè braccia 1¼, e
-piramidalmente segua, che insino all’occhio rimanga braccia ⅔.
-
-“El vano che rimarrà da l’una cupola all’altra, sia da piè braccia 2:
-nel quale vano si metta le scale per potere cercare tutto tra l’una
-cupola e l’altra; e finisca ’l detto vano a l’occhio di sopra braccia
-2⅓.
-
-“Sieno fatti ventiquattro sproni, che otto ne sieno negli angoli e
-sedici nelle faccie: ciascuno sprone negli angoli grosso dappiè braccia
-sette. Dalla parte di dentro, e di fuori, nel mezzo di detti angoli,
-in ciascuna faccia, sia due sproni; ciascuno grosso dappiè braccia
-quattro; e lunghe insieme le dette due volte, piramidalmente murate
-insieme insino alla sommità dell’occhio inchiuso dalla lanterna, per
-iguale proporzione.
-
-“I detti ventiquattro sproni con le dette cupole sieno cinti intorno
-di sei cerchi di forti macigni, e lunghi, e bene sprangati di ferro
-stagnato; e di sopra a detti macigni, catene di ferro che cingano
-d’intorno la detta volta, co’ loro sproni. Hassi a murare di sodo, nel
-principio braccia 5¼ per altezza; e poi seguano gli sproni, e dividansi
-le volte.
-
-“El primo e secondo cerchio, alto braccia 2; e ’l terzo e quarto, alto
-braccia 1⅓; e ’l quinto e sesto cerchio, alto braccia 1: ma ’l primo
-circhio dappiè sia, oltre a ciò, afforzato con macigni lunghi per lo
-traverso, si che l’una volta e l’altra della cupola si posi in su detti
-macigni.
-
-“E nell’altezza d’ogni braccia 12, o circa, delle dette volte, sieno
-volticciuole a botte tra l’uno sprone e l’altro, per andito alla detta
-cupola; e sotto le dette volticciuole, tra l’uno sprone e l’altro,
-sieno catene di quercia grosse, che leghino i detti sproni e cingano la
-volta dentro; e in su detti quercie una catena di ferro.
-
-“Gli sproni murati tutti di pietra di macigno e pietra forte, e le
-facce della cupola tutte di pietra forte, legate con sprone insino
-all’altezza di braccia 24: e da indi in su si muri di mattoni o di
-spugna, secondo che si delibererà per chi allora l’avrà a fare, più
-leggieri che pietra.
-
-“ ... Murinsi la cupola nel modo di sopra, senz’ alcuna armadura,
-massime insino a braccia 30; ma da indi in su, in quel modo che
-sarà consigliato e deliberato per quei maestri che l’avranno a
-murare: perchè nel murare la pratica insegna quello che si ha da
-seguire.”--Guasti, _La Cupola di Santa Maria del Fiore_, Florence,
-1857, pp. 28–30.
-
-[14] Durm, _Die Dom Kuppel in Florenz_, etc., Berlin, 1887, Plate
-I, gives an admirable illustration of the internal system of this
-remarkable dome, and shows the masonry of the solid base with its
-clamps and chains, as described in the document quoted by Guasti (note,
-p. 18).
-
-[15] This idea finds expression in the latest work that I have seen
-on the subject: _Die Kuppel des Domes Santa Maria del Fiore zu
-Florence_. Von Paul Wenz, Berlin, 1901, p. 52; also in Durm, _Die
-Baukunst der Renaissance in Italien_, p. 406.
-
-[16] For a full account of the deliberations held, as well as for much
-else of importance relating to the building of this dome, see Professor
-C. E. Norton’s _Church Building in the Middle Ages_, New York,
-Harper & Brothers, 1880.
-
-[17] But while Brunelleschi appears to have had great natural
-constructive aptitude, he had not had a sound training or experience
-in construction. Such training would have taught him that it would not
-do, under any circumstances, to spring a vault from the top of a wall,
-and he ought to have learned this from his study of the ancient Roman
-monuments.
-
-[18] Nelli, _Discorsi di Architettura_, Florence, 1753, p.
-74, reproduces an old drawing which purports to show the form of
-the scaffolding that Brunelleschi employed. This drawing bears the
-following inscription: “Questa Dimostrazione è di Filippo Brunelleschi
-Architetto fatta per e Ponti della Cupola di S. M’ra. del Fiore di
-Firenze nell’Anno M.CCCCXIX e fu quella che mostrò quando fu lasciato
-in libertà di dover esser solo nell’operazione di d.^a cupola senza il
-Ghiberti suo compagno non avendola voluta dar fuori prima di non essere
-libero Architetto di d^a Opera; come sentiranno nella sua Vita scritta
-da Diversi.” Brunelleschi, in his account of his intentions before the
-Board of Works (note, p. 19), would not explain his scheme for the
-scaffolding. He said merely that the vault was to be raised, without
-centring, to the height of 30 braccia, and from that level upwards, in
-the manner that should be advised by those who might then have the work
-in charge.
-
-[19] In his explanation of his scheme before the Board of Works, as
-given by Vasari, Brunelleschi begins as follows: “Considerato le
-difficultà di questa fabbrica, magnifici Signori Operaj, trovo che non
-si può per nessun modo volgerla tonda perfetta, atteso che sarebbe
-tanto grande il piano di sopra, dove va la lanterna, che mettendovi
-peso rovinerebbe presto.” _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 347.
-
-[20] It may be thought that this would condemn the use of metal clamps
-in masonry, such as were inserted in the walls of the Parthenon, or
-the wooden ties that were, in some cases, used in parts of Gothic
-buildings. But there is a wide difference between such use of clamps
-and ties, and the binding chains of the great domes of the Renaissance.
-In the Greek and Gothic work the masonry forms are favourable to
-stability independently of the clamps and ties. These were inserted
-either for security against unusual dangers, as from earthquakes,
-or for temporary security against rupture while the work was in
-progress, before the interaction of the parts of the system was
-fully established; but a dome without abutment violates the constant
-conditions of stability.
-
-[21] _Discrizione e Studj dell’Insigne Fabbrica di S. Maria del
-Fiore_, Florence, 1733, p. xxi.
-
-[22] _Memorie degli Architette_, etc., Florence, 1785, vol. 1, p.
-190.
-
-[23] Fontana, Nelli, Cecchini, and others.
-
-[24] These ruptures were first observed in the year 1693 (Nelli, _op.
-cit._, p. 13), and it was then advised by the architect Carlo
-Fontana to add a new chain of iron. Nelli, however, argued that the
-fissures had not arisen from thrust, but were due to a slight yielding
-of the foundations, and he urged that no chain be added, but that a bit
-of marble be dove-tailed into the vault across the opening, in order
-that any further movement might be detected by the breaking of this
-marble. For three years no further sign of disturbance was noticed,
-but a slight earthquake in 1697 broke a portion of the masonry of the
-outer face of the dome opposite the fissure across which the marble
-had been placed. It appears, however, to have been concluded that
-there was still no danger from thrust, and no new chain was inserted.
-Cecchini (_Opinione intorno lo Stato della gran Cupola del Duomo di
-Firenze_, published together with Nelli’s _Discorsi_, etc., p.
-82) speaks of several cracks in both the inner and the outer shells of
-the vault, and also in the supporting piers, even down to the ground.
-But he agrees with Nelli in attributing these to movements of the
-foundations from which he concludes that no further danger is to be
-apprehended, and he affirms that the structure is entirely safe.
-
-[25] Cf. Nelli, _op. cit._, p. 73.
-
-[26] The thrusts of a hemispherical dome are, in some degree,
-restrained by the binding of its continuous courses of masonry under
-compression, but this is not enough for security, as experience has
-shown; and in a polygonal dome, like Brunelleschi’s, there is no such
-binding force, because there are no continuous circles of masonry.
-
-[27] The term “Byzantine” is often applied loosely to buildings in
-which only the ornamental details have a Byzantine character. But the
-primary and distinguishing structural feature of Byzantine architecture
-is the dome on pendentives. The Byzantine features of the Pazzi are
-involved with others derived from different systems, but they are very
-distinct. The central vault, though of Gothic form, is supported on
-pendentives, and the true dome on pendentives occurs, as we have seen,
-in the sanctuary and the porch.
-
-[28] The entablature does, however, occur under vaulting in some
-provincial Roman buildings, as in the Pantheon of Baalbek, where it
-forms the wall cornice from which the vaulting springs. But this,
-though not defensible, is less objectionable than the Renaissance
-scheme of an entablature passing through the imposts of archivolts.
-
-[29] As in the arch of the apse of St. Paul outside the wall at Rome,
-and in the Baptistery of Florence.
-
-[30] The character of these details will be discussed in the chapter on
-the carved ornament of the Renaissance.
-
-[31] Cf. Vasari, _Opere_, vol. 2, p. 368 _et seq._, and Milanesi’s
-foot-note, p. 370.
-
-[32] _Op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 200.
-
-[33] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 541.
-
-[34] _Op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 201.
-
-[35] _Op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 201.
-
-[36] Vasari, _op. cit._, vol. 4, p. 152, and Milizia, vol. 1, p.
-214.
-
-[37] Figures 21 and 22 are taken from Serlio, _D’Architettura_,
-book 3, Venice, 1560, pp. 25 and 40.
-
-[38] _Op. cit._, vol. 7, p. 163.
-
-[39] Serlio, the architect (a younger contemporary of Bramante),
-_op. cit._, p. 33, tells us that Bramante, at his death, left no
-perfect model of the whole edifice, and that several ingenious persons
-endeavoured to carry out the design, among whom were Raphael and
-Peruzzi, whose plans he reproduces. That ascribed to Raphael has a long
-nave, while that said to be by Peruzzi has the form of the Greek cross
-with round apses and a square tower in each external angle. The whole
-question of Bramante’s scheme, and of the successive transformations
-to which the design for the edifice was subjected before its final
-completion, is fully discussed in the work of Baron H. von Geymüller,
-_Die ursprünglichen Entwürfe für Sanct Peter in Rom_, Wien and
-Paris, 1875–1880.
-
-[40] _Op. cit._, bk. 3, p. 37.
-
-[41] Serlio does not state on what authority this illustration is
-based, but there appears no reason to question its correctness. Its
-authenticity is discussed by Baron von Geymüller (_op. cit._, p.
-240 _et seq._), who accepts it as genuine.
-
-[42] The alterations that have been made at different times since
-the original completion of this interior are of no concern here. The
-arrangement was practically the same in Bramante’s time as it is now.
-
-[43] Some writers have supposed (cf. Middleton, _Ancient Rome_,
-Edinburgh, 1885, pp. 338–339) that the dome of the Pantheon is entirely
-of concrete, and without thrusts. We have no means of knowing its
-exact internal character, but there is reason to believe that it has
-some sort of an embedded skeleton of ribs and arches, with concrete
-filling the intervals. But if it were wholly of concrete, as Middleton
-affirms, it would not be safe without abutment; for, even supposing
-that a concrete vault may be entirely free from thrust in a state of
-integrity, there is always a chance of ruptures arising from unequal
-settlement, which might at once create powerful thrusts. However this
-may be, the fact is that the builders of the Pantheon took care to
-fortify it with enormous abutment, which would seem to show that they
-did not consider it free from thrust.
-
-[44] Michael Angelo’s model, on a large scale and finished in every
-detail, is preserved in an apartment of St. Peter’s.
-
-[45] Michael Angelo’s remark, quoted by Fontana (_Tempio
-Vaticano_, vol. 2, p. 315): “Imitando l’antico del Pantheon, e
-la moderna di Santa Maria del Fiore, corresse i difetti dell’uno, e
-dell’altro,” shows that he regarded as a defect the lowness of the
-Pantheon dome, which in point of construction is its capital merit,
-and that what he proposed to correct in the dome of Florence was its
-octagonal form, which is essential to its peculiar structural system.
-
-[46] A consistent exterior for such a vault would not, of course, be
-an unbroken drum, though a perfectly Gothic circular vault might be
-thus enclosed within a drum. A consistent external form would require
-salient buttresses against the lines of thrust, and the intervals
-between these buttresses would be open, as in a Gothic apse.
-
-[47] The outside of this vault is figured in my _Development and
-Character of Gothic Architecture_, 2d edition. New York and London.
-The Macmillan Co., 1900, p. 287.
-
-[48] Cf. my _Development and Character of Gothic Architecture_, p.
-70 _et seq._
-
-[49] The turrets, built upon the supporting piers of the interior, give
-the outside of the drum the aspect of a massive lantern.
-
-[50] Cf. Poleni, _Memorie Istoriche delle Gran Cupola del Tempio
-Vaticano, e de’ Danni di essa, e de’ Ristoramenti loro_ (Padua,
-1768), p. 29.
-
-[51] Milizia, _op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 325.
-
-[52] _Parere di tre Mathematici sopra i danni che si sono trovato
-nella cupola di S. Pietro sul fine dell’Anno MDCCXLII. Dato per Ordine
-di nostro Signore Papa Benedetto XIV_, Rome, 1742.
-
-[53] See Appendix.
-
-[54] “Cominciato forsi poco dopo terminata la fabrica.” _Op.
-cit._, p. 13.
-
-[55] _Ibid._, p. 14.
-
-[56] _Ibid._, p. 15.
-
-[57] _Ibid._, p. 19.
-
-[58] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, pp. 327–328.
-
-[59] It is true that fissures in a properly constructed vault are not
-necessarily alarming. Any vault may crack from unequal settlement of
-the supports. Gothic vaults are sometimes slightly ruptured in this
-way, but they are not thus endangered, because they are effectively
-buttressed. But fissures in a dome without abutments may be a sign of
-impending collapse.
-
-[60] _Ibid._, pp. 328–329.
-
-[61] _Ibid._, p. 388.
-
-[62] _Op. cit._, p. 399.
-
-[63] The principal work of Bramante’s immediate successors on the
-fabric itself appears to have been to strengthen the great piers, which
-seem to have been built too hastily, and on insecure foundations.
-Poleni tells that in order to strengthen these foundations, well-holes
-were dug under them and filled with solid masonry, and that arches were
-sprung between these sunken piers, consolidating the whole. _Op.
-cit._, p. 19.
-
-[64] _Ibid._, p. 19.
-
-[65] I call the end of the sanctuary “the east end” according to the
-nomenclature of the usual orientation. St. Peter’s, as is well known,
-does not conform to the general rule which has prevailed since the
-fifth century.
-
-[66] These vaults may have been begun by some of his predecessors.
-It is impossible to make out how far the building had been actually
-advanced by them.
-
-[67] The colossal order of the Temple of the Sun at Baalbek is so
-unique in scale, and so little known, that it does not influence our
-general notions of the size of a large classic order.
-
-[68] As it actually does in the western part of the nave built by
-Maderna.
-
-[69] _Le Vite_, etc., vol. 7, p. 249.
-
-[70] _Il Tempio Vaticano e sua Origine_, etc. Discritto dal Cav.
-Carlo Fontana, Rome, 1694, vol. 2, p. 406.
-
-[71] Letarouilly, _Edifices de Rome Moderne_, Paris, 1860, p. 350.
-
-[72] Milizia, _op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 144, affirms that it is by
-Bramante.
-
-[73] Cf. Fontana, _op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 363.
-
-[74] Bk. 3, p. 54.
-
-[75] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 240.
-
-[76] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 239.
-
-[77] _Memorie_, etc., vol. 2, p. 36.
-
-[78] _I Cinque Ordini d’Architettura._
-
-[79] _Op. cit._, plate 32.
-
-[80] Bk. 1, chap. 1.
-
-[81] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 30.
-
-[82] The drawings are found in the addendum to the edition of 1617,
-plates 7 and 8.
-
-[83] Recent investigations, the results of which are set forth by
-Signor Beltrami (_Il Pantheon_, Luca Beltrami, Milan, 1898),
-have shown that the existing portico is of later date than either the
-rotunda or the rectangular front against which it is set.
-
-[84] “A l’intérieur, pourtourné de pilastres également Corinthiens,
-deux parties de l’entablement qui n’ont pas leur raison d’être sous une
-voute, c’est-à-dire la frise et la corniche, par un raffinement peu
-habituel aux Italiens, ont été supprimées.” _L’Architecture de la
-Renaissance_, par Leon Palustre, Paris, Quantin, p. 72.
-
-[85] _Quatro libri dell’Architettura di Andrea Palladio_, Venice,
-1581.
-
-[86] _Le Vite_, etc., vol. 2, pp. 432–433.
-
-[87] _Op. cit._, vol. 4, p. 444.
-
-[88] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 537.
-
-[89] I believe I am correct in this. Photographs seem to show it
-clearly, but I have not verified this point in the monuments themselves.
-
-[90] _Op. cit_., vol. 1, p. 240.
-
-[91] _Le Vite_, etc., vol. 2, p. 433.
-
-[92] Cf. p. 144.
-
-[93] These ornamental features usually have, however, in Gothic art
-some real structural function.
-
-[94] _Op. cit._, bk. 3, p. 53.
-
-[95] _Milizia_, vol. 1, p. 346.
-
-[96] _Milizia_, vol. 1, pp. 346–347.
-
-[97] _Ibid_., p. 351.
-
-[98] “Sansovino lo sciolse con allungar il fregio quanto bastasse per
-supplire al difetto di quella porzione di metopa: ed il problema, e ’l
-ripiego sono un’inezia.”
-
-[99] _Memorie_, etc., vol. 2, p. 34.
-
-[100] _I Quattro Libri dell’ Architettura_, bk. 3, p. 41.
-
-[101] “Non dubito che questa fabrica non possa esser comparata à gli
-edifici antichi e annoverata tra le maggiori, e le più belle fabriche
-che siano state fatte da gli antichi in quà, si per la grandezza, e per
-gli ornamenti suoi, come anco per la materia, che è tutta di pietra
-viva durisima, e sono state tutte le pietre commesse e legate insieme
-con somma diligenza.” _Op. cit._, bk. 3, p. 41.
-
-[102] They were grammatical, not in the sense of using the classic
-orders with correctness,--this, as we have seen, they did not do,--but
-in the sense of arranging their architectural details, such as they
-were, on a basis of grammatical order.
-
-[103] Sir William Chambers, in his _Treatise on the Decorative Part
-of Civil Architecture_, London, 1791, p. 121, referring to this form
-of opening, says, “It is an invention of Scamozzi’s.”
-
-[104] Cf. Casati, _I Capi d’Arte di Bramante da Urbino nel
-Milanese_, Milan, 1870, p. 24 _et seq._ That the design of San
-Satiro was made by Bramante, Casati gives the evidence of a document
-printed in the year 1500 by the deputies of the church in which it
-is said, “ ... _Come vi si diede principio dopo l’anno 1470 con
-disegno del celebre Bramante_.” And he finds further confirmation of
-Bramante’s authorship in a commentary on Vitruvius by Cesare Cesariano,
-printed in Como in 1521, where this author states that the church
-and sacristy of San Satiro were designed by his preceptor, Donato of
-Urbino, called Bramante.
-
-[105] Salient ribs of stucco are carried up in the angles of the dome
-of the sacristy as they are in the vaulting of the apses of Todi.
-
-[106] Cf. Casati, _op. cit._, p. 44.
-
-[107] Cf., p. 134, the window sometimes called that of Scamozzi.
-
-[108] _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 434.
-
-[109] Melani, _Architettura Italiana_, vol. 2, p. 154.
-
-[110] Cf. _Architettura Italiana_, by Alfredo Melani, Milan, 1887,
-vol. 2, p. 157.
-
-[111] Coin of Metapontum.
-
-[112] Vitruvius, bk. 7, chap. 5, refers with disapproval to the
-tasteless and meaningless monstrosities embodied in the ornamental art
-of his time, and the remains of Roman reliefs offer many examples of
-such design.
-
-[113] The theory respecting the use of artificial elements in
-architectural ornamentation developed by Ruskin in his well-known
-chapter entitled, “The Lamp of Beauty,” in the _Seven Lamps of
-Architecture_, is, I believe, entirely right in principle, though
-the author is arbitrary in some of his conclusions and overemphatic in
-some of his statements.
-
-[114] The most authoritative French writers are misleading in affirming
-that no radical departure from their best building traditions was
-made by the French architects of the Renaissance. Thus Viollet le Duc
-(Dict., vol. 3, _s. v._ _Château_, p. 174) says of these architects,
-“Toujours fidèles a leurs anciens principes, ils ne sacrifièrent pas la
-raison et le bon sens.” But while affirming this, these same writers
-sometimes make admissions which so materially qualify the affirmation
-as to deprive it of its truth; thus the same author, remarking on
-the changes that were making in the character of the château, adds
-(p. 185), “Nous accordons que la tentative était absurde; mais la
-renaissance française est, à son début, dans les lettres, les sciences
-ou les arts, pleine de ces hésitations.”
-
-[115] Martin, _Hist. de France_, vol. 7, pp. 378–382.
-
-[116] Cf. Viollet le Duc, _s. v._ _Château_, p. 190.
-
-[117] I use Willis’s term, “continuous impost,” for an impost in which
-the jambs pass into the arch without the interposition of a capital,
-and without change of profiling.
-
-[118] Du Cerceau’s plate (_Les Plus Excellents Bastiments de
-France_, vol. 2, plate 4) is incorrect, like most of his other
-plates, in giving the semicircular form to the openings of this façade.
-
-[119] _Reigle Géneralle de Architecture_, etc., Paris, 1568.
-
-[120] Said by Palustre, _L’Architecture de la Renaissance_, p.
-176, to have been “servilement imité du temple de Jupiter Stator.”
-
-[121] These lower arches are concealed from view on the external
-façades by a basement wall.
-
-[122] Adolphe Berty, _Les Grands Architectes Français de la
-Renaissance_, Paris, 1860, p. 70.
-
-[123] Milizia, _Memorie_, vol. 1, p. 404.
-
-[124] Berty, _op. cit._, p. 71.
-
-[125] _Les Plus Excellents Bastiments de France_, plate 69.
-
-[126] The lines of this poem which relate to Lescot are quoted by M.
-Berty in _op. cit._, pp. 66–68.
-
-[127] _Regole Generale di Architettura di Sebastiano Serlio._
-
-[128] _Op. cit._, plate 2.
-
-[129] Viollet le Duc, in his _Entretiens sur l’Architecture_, p.
-362, says, “Philibert De l’Orme était peut-être l’artiste dont le goût
-était le plus sûr, le sentiment le plus vrai, les principes les plus
-sévères.” This estimate appears to me singularly short-sighted, but
-it is in keeping with the artistic limitations of its gifted author,
-whose great abilities did not, I think, include the finest powers of
-artistic judgment. Viollet le Duc’s own architectural projects, as
-illustrated in the _Entretiens_, are enough to show this. A truer
-estimate is given by M. Berty, in his _Life of De l’Orme_, as
-follows: “Ayant absolument rompu avec la tradition Gothique, toujours
-plein du souvenir des monuments romains qu’il avait étudiés en Italie,
-et qui constituaient pour lui la vraie architecture, De l’Orme, visant
-sans cesse à la majesté, n’atteignit souvent que la lourdeur. D’un
-autre côté, trop préoccupé de la recherche d’une beauté rationnelle
-qu’il demandait plutôt au calcul qu’au sentiment, procédé pernicieux
-qui égare à coup sûr, il ne peut éviter les bizarreries et même les
-gaucheries dans ses conceptions.... C’est sur le terrain de la science
-qu’il a vraiment dominé tous ses rivaux, en acquérant des droits
-incontestables à la reconnaissance de la postérité.” (_Les Grands
-Architectes Français_, etc., p. 36.) It was the scientific ability
-of De l’Orme that Viollet le Duc could best appreciate, his own genius
-being more scientific than artistic.
-
-[130] _Le Premier Tome de l’Architecture_, etc., Paris, 1567.
-
-[131] _Op. cit._, p. 156.
-
-[132] The Tuileries was designed by De l’Orme for Catherine de Médicis.
-
-[133] _Op. cit._, facing p. 240.
-
-[134] Assuming that De l’Orme was born in the year 1515. Cf. Berty,
-_op. cit._, p. 1.
-
-[135] _Op. cit._, bk. 4, p. 26.
-
-[136] Cf. my _Development and Character of Gothic Architecture_,
-p. 304 _et seq._
-
-[137] _Op. cit._, p. 155. The fanciful notion that the Ionic order
-was designed after female proportions is derived from Vitruvius, bk. 3.
-
-[138] The roof is not shown in Du Cerceau’s print.
-
-[139] Viollet le Duc, I may say again, appears to me greatly to
-overestimate De l’Orme’s artistic powers when he says, “Dans les
-œuvres de Philibert De l’Orme on constate une étude attentive et
-soigneuse des proportions, des rapports harmonieux qui semblent les
-plus simples, mais qui cependent sont le résultat d’une connaissance
-parfaite de son art et des moyens mis à sa disposition,” and when he
-speaks of the Tuileries as follows: “C’était bien là une architecture
-de palais grande et noble par ses masses, précieuse par ses détails.”
-_Entretiens sur l’Architecture_, vol. 1, p. 363.
-
-[140] _Op. cit._, bk. 8, chap. 9. The pages here are not numbered.
-
-[141] It need hardly he said that such variety is very different
-from that which results from an active inventive spirit, as where in
-Gothic art some new constructive idea gives rise to change, or where
-in sculptured ornamentation a teeming fancy finds expression in varied
-forms.
-
-[142] _Entretiens_, vol. 1, p. 374.
-
-[143] But why should an architect wish to do any such thing? The fact
-that he did so shows again the factitious and unreasonable character of
-this Renaissance design.
-
-[144] _Op. cit._, p. 375.
-
-[145] _Essay on Building._
-
-[146] These houses are figured by Mr. Gotch in his _Architecture of
-the Renaissance in England_, plates 7, 12, 20, and 66.
-
-[147] _The Lives of the Most Eminent British Painters, Sculptors, and
-Architects_, London, 1831, vol. 4, p. 85.
-
-[148] _A History of Renaissance Architecture in England_, by
-Reginald Bloomfield, M.A., London, 1897, vol. 1, p. 3.
-
-[149] Almost nothing is known of John Thorpe beyond what may be
-gathered from his numerous drawings preserved in the Soane Museum.
-He was working during the latter part of the sixteenth century, and
-appears to have been the original designer of some of the larger houses
-of that time, the plans of which are contained in the Soane collection.
-
-[150] These windows are said by Gotch, _op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 34,
-to have been inserted by Inigo Jones. An attic over the central bay is
-said to be also by him.
-
-[151] Gotch, plate 33.
-
-[152] Du Cerceau’s book was published in 1576, and Longford’s was begun
-in 1580. It is not unlikely, therefore, that Thorpe had studied the
-designs of Chambord and the Tuileries in the prints of this book.
-
-[153] Gotch, plate 92.
-
-[154] Gotch, plate 82.
-
-[155] _Ibid._, plate 86.
-
-[156] _Ibid._, plate 143.
-
-[157] Vol. 2, p. 260.
-
-[158] Cunningham’s _Lives of the Most Eminent British Painters,
-Sculptors, and Architects_, vol. 4, p. 71.
-
-[159] Cunningham, _op. cit._, p. 76.
-
-[160] A work undertaken at the request of the king, in which Jones
-reaches the astonishing conclusion that in Stonehenge we have the
-remains of a Roman temple of the Tuscan order. Cf. Cunningham, p. 106
-_et seq._
-
-[161] Cunningham, _op. cit._, p. 115.
-
-[162] Cunningham, _op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 266.
-
-[163] _The Designs of Inigo Jones, consisting of Plans and Elevation
-for Publick and Private Buildings_, by William Kent, London, 1727.
-
-[164] Plates 1 to 52 inclusive.
-
-[165] _Op. cit._, p. 265.
-
-[166] _A History of Renaissance Architecture in England_, by
-Reginald Bloomfield, London, 1897, vol. 1, p. 122.
-
-[167] _Parentalia, or Memoir of the Family of the Wrens_, by
-Christopher Wren, London, 1750, pp. 269–270.
-
-[168] _Parentalia_, p. 142.
-
-[169] _Parentalia_, pp. 261–262.
-
-[170] Wren had been appointed surveyor-general and principal architect
-of the city of London after the great fire.
-
-[171] _Parentalia_, p. 335.
-
-[172] _Ibid._, p. 273.
-
-[173] _Ibid._, p. 277.
-
-[174] _Parentalia_, p. 278.
-
-[175] _Ibid._, p. 281.
-
-[176] _Parentalia_, p. 283.
-
-[177] W. J. Loftie, _Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren_,
-London, Macmillan & Co., 1893, p. 196.
-
-[178] _A Complete Body of Architecture_, by Isaac Ware, Esq.,
-London, 1768.
-
-[179] _Op. cit._, p. 131.
-
-[180] _Lettera di Filippo Baldinucci intorno al modo di dar
-Proporzione alle Figure in Pittura e Scultura_, Leghorn, first
-published in 1802.
-
-[181] _Op. cit._, p. 10.
-
-[182] _Architettura Italiana_, Milan, 1887, vol. 2, p. 140.
-
-[183] The letters in this description refer to those of the
-illustration (Fig. 30) in the text.
-
-
-Transcriber’s Notes:
-
-1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
-corrected silently.
-
-2. Hyphenation has been rationalised. Inconsistent spelling (including
-accents) has been retained.
-
-3. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
-been retained as in the original.
-
-4. Superscripts are represented using the caret character, e.g. D^r. or
-X^{xx}.
-
-5. Italics are shown as _xxx_.
-
-*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHARACTER OF RENAISSANCE
-ARCHITECTURE ***
-
-Updated editions will replace the previous one--the old editions will
-be renamed.
-
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the
-United States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG-tm
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
-the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
-of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
-copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
-easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
-of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
-Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away--you may
-do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
-by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
-license, especially commercial redistribution.
-
-START: FULL LICENSE
-
-THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE
-PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK
-
-To protect the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg"), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg-tm License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the
-person or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph
-1.E.8.
-
-1.B. "Project Gutenberg" is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation ("the
-Foundation" or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg-tm mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg-tm
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg-tm name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg-tm License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg-tm work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country other than the United States.
-
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg-tm License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg-tm work (any work
-on which the phrase "Project Gutenberg" appears, or with which the
-phrase "Project Gutenberg" is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-
-  This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-  most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no
-  restrictions whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it
-  under the terms of the Project Gutenberg License included with this
-  eBook or online at www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the
-  United States, you will have to check the laws of the country where
-  you are located before using this eBook.
-
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase "Project
-Gutenberg" associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg-tm
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg-tm electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg-tm License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg-tm.
-
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm License.
-
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg-tm work in a format
-other than "Plain Vanilla ASCII" or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg-tm website
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original "Plain
-Vanilla ASCII" or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg-tm License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg-tm works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-provided that:
-
-* You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-  the use of Project Gutenberg-tm works calculated using the method
-  you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-  to the owner of the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark, but he has
-  agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-  within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-  legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-  payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-  Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-  Section 4, "Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-  Literary Archive Foundation."
-
-* You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-  you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-  does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg-tm
-  License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-  copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-  all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg-tm
-  works.
-
-* You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-  any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-  electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-  receipt of the work.
-
-* You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-  distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm works.
-
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
-the Project Gutenberg-tm trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
-forth in Section 3 below.
-
-1.F.
-
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg-tm collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain "Defects," such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the "Right
-of Replacement or Refund" described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg-tm electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you 'AS-IS', WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg-tm
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg-tm work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg-tm work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg-tm
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg-tm's
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg-tm collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg-tm and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at
-www.gutenberg.org
-
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation
-
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation's EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state's laws.
-
-The Foundation's business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
-Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
-to date contact information can be found at the Foundation's website
-and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg
-Literary Archive Foundation
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm depends upon and cannot survive without
-widespread public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular
-state visit www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-
-Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg-tm electronic works
-
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg-tm concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-
-Project Gutenberg-tm eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-
-Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
-facility: www.gutenberg.org
-
-This website includes information about Project Gutenberg-tm,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
diff --git a/old/69619-0.zip b/old/69619-0.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index 357ddad..0000000
--- a/old/69619-0.zip
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h.zip b/old/69619-h.zip
deleted file mode 100644
index f59ef9f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h.zip
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/69619-h.htm b/old/69619-h/69619-h.htm
deleted file mode 100644
index d51e2ef..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/69619-h.htm
+++ /dev/null
@@ -1,14931 +0,0 @@
-<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD XHTML 1.0 Strict//EN"
-    "http://www.w3.org/TR/xhtml1/DTD/xhtml1-strict.dtd">
-<html xmlns="http://www.w3.org/1999/xhtml" xml:lang="en" lang="en">
-  <head>
-    <meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=utf-8" />
-    <meta http-equiv="Content-Style-Type" content="text/css" />
-    <title>
-      Character of Renaissance Architecture, by Charles Herbert Moore&mdash;A Project Gutenberg eBook
-    </title>
-    <link rel="coverpage" href="images/cover.jpg" />
-    <style type="text/css">
-
-body {
-    margin-left: 10%;
-    margin-right: 10%;
-}
-
-    h1,h2,h3 {
-    text-align: center; /* all headings centered */
-    clear: both;
-    font-weight: normal;
-}
-
-h2   {font-size: 120%;}
-
-.subhed { display: block; margin-top: 0.5em; font-size: 75%; font-weight: normal; }
-
-.p-left  {text-indent: 0em; }
-
-.p-min  {margin-top: -.5em;}
-
-p {
-    margin-top: .51em;
-    text-align: justify;
-    margin-bottom: .49em;
-    text-indent: 1.2em;
-}
-
-.p0       {margin-top: 0em;}
-.p1       {margin-top: 1em;}
-.p2       {margin-top: 2em;}
-.p4       {margin-top: 4em;}
-.p6       {margin-top: 6em;}
-
-hr {
-    width: 33%;
-    margin-top: 2em;
-    margin-bottom: 2em;
-    margin-left: 33.5%;
-    margin-right: 33.5%;
-    clear: both;
-}
-
-hr.tb   {width: 45%; margin-left: 27.5%; margin-right: 27.5%;}
-hr.chap {width: 65%; margin-left: 17.5%; margin-right: 17.5%;}
-@media print { hr.chap {display: none; visibility: hidden;} }
-
-hr.r25  {width: 25%; margin-top: 1em; margin-bottom: 1em; margin-left: 37.5%; margin-right: 37.5%;}
-
-div.chapter {page-break-before: always;}
-
-ul       { list-style-type: none; }
-li.i1 {text-indent: 1em;}
-li.i2 {text-indent: 2em;}
-li.i3 {text-indent: 3em;}
-
-table {
-margin: auto;
-width:auto;
-border: 0;
-border-spacing: 0;
-border-collapse: collapse; }
-
-td {
-padding:  .05em .2em .2em 2.5em;
-border: .1em none white;
-text-align: left;
-text-indent: -2em; }
-
-th.chap {
-font-weight: normal;
-font-size: x-small;
-text-align: left;
-padding-left: 1em; }
-
-th.pag {
-font-weight: normal;
-font-size: x-small;
-text-align: right;
-padding-left: 6em; }
-
-td.header {
-padding:  1.5em .2em .2em .2em;
-text-align: center;
-text-indent: 0em;
-font-size: 100%; }
-
-td.header1 {
-padding:  .5em .2em .2em .2em;
-text-align: center;
-text-indent: 0em;
-font-size: 100%;
-font-variant: small-caps;}
-
-td.header2 {
-padding:  .5em .2em .2em .2em;
-text-align: center;
-text-indent: 0em;
-font-size: 100%;}
-
-td.chn {
-text-align: right;
-vertical-align: top;
-padding-right: 1em;  }
-
-td.cht {
-text-align: left;
-vertical-align: top;
-padding-left: 1em;
-text-indent: -1em;}
-
-td.pag {
-text-align: right;
-vertical-align: bottom;
-padding-left: 2em;}
-
-.hangingindent {
-  padding-left: 2em ;
-  text-indent: -2em ;}
-
-.hangingindent1 {
-  padding-left: 3em ;
-  text-indent: -2em ;}
-
-.hangingindent2 {
-  padding-left: 4em ;
-  text-indent: -2em ;}
-
-.hangingindent3 {
-  padding-left: 5em ;
-  text-indent: -2em ;}
-
-.pagenum { /* uncomment the next line for invisible page numbers */
-    /*  visibility: hidden;  */
-    position: absolute;
-    left: 92%;
-    font-size: smaller;
-    text-align: right;
-    font-style: normal;
-    font-weight: normal;
-    font-variant: normal;
-} /* page numbers */
-
-.center   {text-align: center;
-           text-indent: 0em;}
-
-.left1    {text-align: left;
-           text-indent: 2em;}
-
-.right    {text-align: right;}
-
-.xs { font-size: x-small;}
-
-.sm { font-size: small;}
-
-.lg  { font-size: large;}
-
-.smaller  {font-size: 90%; }
-
-.smcap    {font-variant: small-caps;}
-
-.gesperrt
-{
-    letter-spacing: 0.2em;
-    margin-right: -0.2em;
-}
-
-em.gesperrt
-{
-    font-style: normal;
-}
-
-#half-title {  text-align: center;
-                      font-size: 150%; }
-
-
-/* Images */
-
-img {
-    max-width: 100%;
-    height: auto;
-}
-
-.figcenter {
-    margin: auto;
-    text-align: center;
-    page-break-inside: avoid;
-    max-width: 100%;
-}
-
-/* Footnotes */
-.footnotes        {border: 1px dashed;}
-
-.footnote         {margin-left: 10%; margin-right: 10%; font-size: 0.9em;}
-
-.footnote .label  {position: absolute; right: 84%; text-align: right;}
-
-.fnanchor {
-    vertical-align: super;
-    font-size: .8em;
-    text-decoration:
-    none;
-}
-
-/* Transcriber's notes */
-.transnote {background-color: #E6E6FA;
-    color: black;
-     font-size:smaller;
-     padding:0.5em;
-     margin-bottom:5em;
-     font-family:sans-serif, serif; }
-
-    </style>
-  </head>
-<body>
-<p style='text-align:center; font-size:1.2em; font-weight:bold'>The Project Gutenberg eBook of Character of Renaissance Architecture, by Charles Herbert Moore</p>
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and
-most other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
-at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws of the
-country where you are located before using this eBook.
-</div>
-
-<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:1em; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Title: Character of Renaissance Architecture</p>
-<p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em'>Author: Charles Herbert Moore</p>
-<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Release Date: December 23, 2022 [eBook #69619]</p>
-<p style='display:block; text-indent:0; margin:1em 0'>Language: English</p>
-  <p style='display:block; margin-top:1em; margin-bottom:0; margin-left:2em; text-indent:-2em; text-align:left'>Produced by: Tim Lindell, Albert László, Karin Spence and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at https://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images generously made available by The Internet Archive/American Libraries.)</p>
-<div style='margin-top:2em; margin-bottom:4em'>*** START OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHARACTER OF RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE ***</div>
-
-
-
-<p id="half-title" class="p6">CHARACTER OF<br />
-
-RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_ii">
-    <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_ii.jpg"
-    alt="" />
-  </div>
-
-<h1 class="p2">CHARACTER OF<br />
-
-<span class="smcap subhed">Renaissance Architecture</span></h1>
-
-
-<p class="center p4 sm">BY</p>
-
-<p class="center">CHARLES HERBERT MOORE</p>
-
-<p class="center xs">AUTHOR OF “DEVELOPMENT AND CHARACTER OF<br />
-GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE”</p>
-
-
-<p class="center p4 sm">_WITH TWELVE PLATES IN PHOTOGRAVURE AND ONE HUNDRED<br />
-AND THIRTY-NINE ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT_</p>
-
-
-<p class="center"><span class="smcap">New York</span><br />
-THE MACMILLAN COMPANY<br />
-<span class="sm">LONDON: MACMILLAN &amp; CO., <span class="smcap">Ltd.</span></span><br />
-
-<span class="sm">1905</span></p>
-
-<p class="center xs">_All rights reserved_</p>
-
-
-
-<p class="center xs p4"><span class="smcap">Copyright, 1905,<br />
-By</span> THE MACMILLAN COMPANY.</p>
-
-<p class="center xs">Set up and electrotyped. Published October, 1905.</p>
-
-
-<p class="center xs p6">Norwood Press<br />
-J. S. Cushing &amp; Co.&mdash;Berwick &amp; Smith Co.<br />
-Norwood, Mass., U.S.A.</p>
-
-
-
-
-
-<p class="center sm p6">TO MY DAUGHTER</p>
-
-<p class="center">E. H. M.</p>
-
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2>PREFACE</h2>
-</div>
-
-
-<p>In the following attempt to set forth the true character of the
-architecture of the Renaissance I have endeavoured to reduce
-mere descriptions of buildings to a minimum, and to give graphic
-illustrations enough to make the discussions clear. The illustrations
-in the text are mainly from my own drawings, for the most part from
-photographs: but in a few cases I have reproduced woodcuts from the
-works of old writers, indicating, in each case, the source from which
-the cut is derived. The photogravure plates are from photographs by
-Alinari, Moscioni, Naya, Wilson, and Valentine. The right to reproduce
-and publish them has been obtained by purchase.</p>
-
-<p>With the best intentions and the greatest care, it is almost inevitable
-that a writer on such a subject should make some mistakes, and I cannot
-affirm that no inexact statements will be found in these pages, but I
-believe that no fundamental errors occur.</p>
-
-<p>I am again indebted to my almost life-long friend, Professor Charles
-Eliot Norton, for valuable criticism, and painstaking revision; but
-Professor Norton is not responsible for anything that I have said. I am
-indebted, also, to my publishers for their courteous compliance with my
-wishes as to the style and manufacture of the book, and to Mrs. Grace
-Walden for the care and thoroughness with which she has prepared the
-index.</p>
-
-<p class="smcap">Cambridge, Mass.,</p>
-
-<p class="left1 p-min">October, 1905.</p>
-
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_ix">[ix]</span></p>
-<h2>CONTENTS</h2>
-</div>
-
-<table summary="contents" class="smaller" style="max-width: 50em">
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER I</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Introduction</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <th></th>
-    <th class="pag">PAGE</th>
-  </tr>
-
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Character of the Fine Arts of the Renaissance not hitherto correctly set forth&mdash;The
-Fine Arts always an expression of the conditions and beliefs of a
-people&mdash;Mediæval Christianity as a source of artistic inspiration&mdash;Conditions
-that gave character to the Fine Arts of the Middle Ages&mdash;Artistic
-productions of the Renaissance qualified by the immoral tendencies of the
-time&mdash;Luxury and extravagance of Florence at the close of the fifteenth
-century&mdash;The Fine Arts made to minister to sensuous pleasure&mdash;Best
-classic art unknown in the Renaissance time&mdash;Mixed influences actuating
-the artist of the Renaissance&mdash;The Renaissance and the Middle Ages
-compared as to development of the individual&mdash;Lack of aptitude for construction
-among the architects of the Renaissance&mdash;The Italian genius
-for painting&mdash;The painter’s habits of design shown in the Renaissance
-use of the orders&mdash;Classification of architectural styles&mdash;Painting the
-best art of the Renaissance&mdash;Yet Italian painting of the sixteenth century
-is not all of exemplary character&mdash;Best art of the Renaissance founded
-on the earlier Christian art&mdash;A retrospective movement not a vital force
-in artistic development</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_1">1</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER II</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">The Dome of Florence</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Exhibits a wide departure from older dome constructions&mdash;Sources of the
-architect’s inspiration&mdash;General character of earlier domes&mdash;Remarkable
-construction of the dome of the Florentine Baptistery&mdash;It probably supplied
-the chief inspiration to both Arnolfo and Brunelleschi&mdash;Brunelleschi’s
-departures from the Baptistery scheme&mdash;His structural system and his own
-account of it&mdash;No Gothic character possible in a dome&mdash;The dome of
-Florence a daring innovation&mdash;Its general dimensions&mdash;Brunelleschi’s
-great ability as a constructor&mdash;His achievement of the work without the
-usual centring&mdash;Consideration of the dome as a work of art&mdash;The inherent
-weakness of its form&mdash;This not appreciated by the early Italian
-writers&mdash;Precautions taken for its stability&mdash;Signs of disintegration&mdash;Uncertainty
-as to its duration&mdash;Opinions of the early Italian writers as to
-its security&mdash;Structural integrity essential to good architecture&mdash;No
-classic character in Brunelleschi’s dome&mdash;Inferior character of the classic
-details of the lantern</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_10">10</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER III</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Church Architecture of the Florentine Renaissance</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">The Pazzi chapel&mdash;Gothic character of its central vault&mdash;Architectural treatment
-of the interior&mdash;Impropriety of a classic order in such a building&mdash;Awkward
-result of an entablature passing through an arch impost&mdash;Incongruities
-of design and construction in the portico&mdash;Use of stucco&mdash;Sources
-from which the façade may have been derived&mdash;Other church
-architecture by Brunelleschi&mdash;San Lorenzo and Santo Spirito&mdash;Use of
-the entablature block in these churches&mdash;Survival of mediæval features
-and adjustments&mdash;Church architecture of Leon Batista Alberti&mdash;The
-façade of Santa Maria Novella&mdash;The façade of San Francesco of Rimini&mdash;The
-church of Sant’ Andrea of Mantua&mdash;Return to Roman models in
-the structural forms of this building&mdash;Sant’ Andrea foreshadows St. Peter’s
-at Rome&mdash;Its west front an adaptation of the Roman triumphal arch
-scheme&mdash;Such fronts peculiar to Alberti&mdash;The designers of the Renaissance
-worked unconsciously on a foundation of mediæval ideas</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_26">26</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER IV</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">The Dome of St. Peter’s</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Bramante in Rome&mdash;His early training&mdash;Character of the Tempietto of San
-Pietro in Montorio&mdash;Its likeness to a Roman temple of Vesta&mdash;Bramante’s
-project for St. Peter’s&mdash;Uncertainty as to his scheme for the whole building&mdash;His
-design for the great dome&mdash;Sources of his inspiration&mdash;Comparison
-of his dome with that of the Pantheon&mdash;Structural merits and
-defects&mdash;The architect’s probable intention to use a great order for the
-interior of the church&mdash;Michael Angelo’s appointment as architect&mdash;His
-scheme for the great dome&mdash;Its statical defects&mdash;Its supposed Gothic
-character&mdash;Comparison with the dome of Salamanca&mdash;Its illogical buttress
-system&mdash;Its ruptures and the alarm which they occasioned&mdash;Commission
-appointed to examine the fabric and report on its condition&mdash;Poleni’s
-opinion and his binding chains&mdash;The grandiose character of the dome&mdash;In
-following Brunelleschi, Michael Angelo went farther in a wrong direction&mdash;Such
-a scheme cannot be safely carried out without resort to extraneous
-means of support&mdash;The proper mode of constructing a dome
-settled by the ancient Roman and the Byzantine builders&mdash;Condition of
-the dome ignored by recent writers&mdash;The ruptures attributed by the early
-Italian writers to carelessness on the part of Bramante&mdash;The beauty of
-the dome exaggerated&mdash;Its violation of structural propriety incompatible
-with the highest architectural beauty</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_44">44</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER V</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Church Architecture of the Roman Renaissance</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Other parts of the church of St. Peter&mdash;Beauty of its plan&mdash;This plan could
-not be carried out with a good result in classic Roman details&mdash;Awkward
-makeshifts to which Michael Angelo was led&mdash;The colossal order of the
-interior&mdash;The magnitude of the structural parts of the church unavoidable&mdash;The
-real character of the building contradicted by the external order&mdash;Makeshifts
-which this order necessitated&mdash;The real character of St. Peter’s
-has been rarely analyzed&mdash;Its grandeur due to its magnitude and to what
-it derives from the design of Bramante&mdash;Its incongruity and extravagance&mdash;Use
-of stucco in the ornamentation of the interior&mdash;Extravagant laudation
-of the building by the earlier Italian writers&mdash;Antonio San Gallo’s
-project for St. Peter’s&mdash;Earlier examples of Roman Renaissance church
-architecture&mdash;Sant’ Agostino a mediæval building with Renaissance details&mdash;Its
-façade&mdash;Santa Maria della Consolazione at Todi&mdash;Its attribution
-to Bramante&mdash;Irrational treatment of its interior&mdash;Merit of the
-exterior in its larger features&mdash;San Biagio at Montepulciano&mdash;The order
-of the interior&mdash;The Renaissance use of a pilaster coupled with a column
-on the corner of a building&mdash;Roman treatment of the corner&mdash;Instance
-of the use of a corner pilaster described by Serlio&mdash;The exterior of San
-Biagio&mdash;Its campanile and lantern&mdash;The evolution of this form of tower&mdash;System
-of Santissima Annunziatta at Arezzo&mdash;Vignola, and Milizia’s
-remarks on him&mdash;His book of architecture&mdash;His advocacy of ancient
-Roman art and his disregard in practice of its principles&mdash;His design
-for Sant’ Andrea di Ponte Molle&mdash;Its derivation from the Pantheon&mdash;Vignola’s
-design for the church of Santa Maria degli Angeli at Assisi&mdash;His
-design for the Gesù at Rome&mdash;Aberrations of design in this work&mdash;The
-façade by Della Porta&mdash;Palladio, and his great influence on modern art&mdash;His
-book of architecture&mdash;His design for the church of San Giorgio
-Maggiore at Venice&mdash;The Redentore and San Francesco della Vigna</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_66">66</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER VI</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Palace Architecture of the Florentine Renaissance</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">The neo-classic ideas most extensively carried out in palatial houses&mdash;Domestic
-architecture of the Middle Ages in Italy&mdash;The Palazzo Riccardi&mdash;Its
-mediæval features&mdash;Its general form&mdash;Its court arcades&mdash;General character
-of the interior&mdash;Vasari’s remarks on the Riccardi&mdash;The Palazzo
-Pitti&mdash;The Strozzino&mdash;The Strozzi&mdash;The Pazzi&mdash;The Quaratesi&mdash;The
-Guardagni and its reasonable character&mdash;The Rucellai&mdash;Introduction of
-orders in the façade of the Rucellai&mdash;The architect Alberti&mdash;His archæological
-and literary tastes&mdash;Alberti’s initiative in the use of the orders
-not immediately followed&mdash;Further neo-classic innovations introduced by
-Baccio d’Agnolo&mdash;Milizia’s remarks on these innovations&mdash;Increase in
-the spirit of display in domestic architecture&mdash;Decline of Florentine
-ascendency by the beginning of the sixteenth century&mdash;Artistic activities
-transferred to Rome&mdash;Erection of sumptuous palatial houses in Rome</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_102">102</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER VII</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Palace Architecture of the Roman Renaissance</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">The Cancellaria&mdash;Its attribution to Bramante&mdash;Exhibits features in further
-conformity with the Roman antique&mdash;Its pilasters in pairs&mdash;Its projecting
-<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xii">[xii]</span>bays&mdash;Its portals&mdash;Arcades of its court&mdash;The Palazzo Massimi&mdash;The
-functional order of its portico&mdash;Treatment of the upper façade&mdash;The
-Palazzo Farnese&mdash;Application of orders and pediments to the windows&mdash;The
-broken entablatures of these windows&mdash;An ancient example of
-similar treatment&mdash;Orders of the court&mdash;Awkward result in the angles&mdash;Rhythmical
-scheme of the cloister of Santa Maria della Pace&mdash;Lack of
-reason for this scheme&mdash;The architect Sansovino&mdash;His design for the
-Library of St. Mark at Venice&mdash;Treatment of the angles of the Doric
-order&mdash;Free-standing column in the order of the upper story&mdash;Sansovino’s
-design for the Loggetta of the Campanile&mdash;His design for the
-Palazzo Cornaro&mdash;Sanmichele&mdash;His design for the Porta del Palio at
-Verona&mdash;His design for the Palazzo Canossa&mdash;The Palazzo Pompei alla
-Vittoria&mdash;The Palazzo Bevilacqua&mdash;Its singular aberrations of design&mdash;Vignola’s
-design for the Palazzo Caprarola&mdash;Influence of its circular court
-on De l’Orme and Inigo Jones&mdash;The civic and domestic architecture of
-Palladio&mdash;The Portico of Vicenza&mdash;Its derivation from the town hall of
-Padua and from the Library of St. Mark&mdash;Syrian instance of the free-standing
-column in connection with the arch&mdash;Palladio’s own estimate of
-the merits of this design&mdash;Use of poor materials by Palladio&mdash;His versatility
-in meaningless composition&mdash;His palace fronts&mdash;Palladio a grammatical
-formalist&mdash;The art of Scamozzi&mdash;His use of an entablature broken
-by an arch</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_112">112</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER VIII</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Church Architecture of the Renaissance in North Italy</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Various other phases of the architecture of the Renaissance&mdash;The façade of
-San Bernardino of Perugia&mdash;The façade of the Certosa of Pavia&mdash;Its
-combination of local mediæval and distorted neo-classic features&mdash;The
-church and sacristy of San Satiro&mdash;Evidence that both were designed by
-Bramante&mdash;Santa Maria delle Grazie&mdash;Its dome&mdash;Architectural treatment
-of its exterior&mdash;Its attribution to Bramante&mdash;The chapel of St. Peter
-Martyr attributed to Michelozzi&mdash;The Monastero Maggiore&mdash;The cathedral
-of Como&mdash;Evidence of Bramante’s hand in the east end&mdash;Its details
-of mediæval Lombard character mixed with neo-classic elements&mdash;The
-south portal&mdash;The windows of the nave&mdash;Architecture of the Venetian
-Renaissance&mdash;The church of San Zaccaria&mdash;Peculiar column of its
-interior&mdash;The church of San Salvatore&mdash;Its piers&mdash;Attic of the interior&mdash;The
-church of Santa Maria dei Miracoli&mdash;Architectural treatment of
-its exterior&mdash;Excellence of its mechanical execution&mdash;The façade of Santa
-Maria Formosa</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_135">135</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER IX</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Palace Architecture of the Renaissance in North Italy</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Marked local character of the palace architecture of Venice&mdash;Façade of east
-side of court of the Ducal Palace&mdash;Irregularities of its composition&mdash;North
-side of the same court&mdash;The Giant’s stair&mdash;Façade of the Scuola
-<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xiii">[xiii]</span>di San Marco&mdash;Composition of the main portal&mdash;Notable refinements of
-execution in this portal&mdash;Façade of the Scuola di San Rocco&mdash;Unique
-architectural character of the palaces of the Grand Canal&mdash;Those of the
-mediæval period alone have the distinctive Venetian character&mdash;Neo-classic
-details used sparingly in the early Renaissance palaces of Venice&mdash;The
-Palazzo Corner-Spinelli&mdash;Disposition and character of its windows&mdash;Questionable
-propriety of the panelling of its pilasters&mdash;The beauty of
-the façade independent of its neo-classic details&mdash;The Palazzo Contarini&mdash;The
-varied proportions of its pilasters&mdash;The Palazzo Vendramini&mdash;The
-distinctive Venetian character altered by the application of complete
-orders&mdash;This character largely lost in the palaces of the Roman Renaissance&mdash;The
-Palazzo del Consiglio of Verona&mdash;Its mediæval scheme&mdash;The
-Palazzo Comunale of Brescia&mdash;The Ospedale Maggiore of Milan&mdash;Its
-lack of distinctive character&mdash;The later palace architecture of north
-Italy</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_154">154</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER X</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Architectural Carving of the Renaissance</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Little architectural character in the sculpture of the Renaissance&mdash;Close imitation
-of Roman models&mdash;Great delicacy of design and execution in much
-carving of the Renaissance&mdash;Lack of vital beauty in this carving&mdash;Comparison
-with Greek conventional ornamentation&mdash;Exceptional beauty of
-foliation in the reliefs of the Lombardi&mdash;Lifeless character of the scroll
-leafage of Filarete&mdash;Artificial convolutions of Renaissance ornamental
-designs&mdash;Artificial and inorganic composition in the works of Benedetto
-da Maiano&mdash;Representation of artificial objects in Renaissance ornamentation&mdash;Disordered
-composition in the borders of the Ghiberti gates&mdash;Comparison
-of Greek leafage with that of the Renaissance&mdash;The grotesque
-in Renaissance ornamentation</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_167">167</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER XI</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Architecture of the Early Renaissance in France</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">The Renaissance had not the same meaning north of the Alps that it had in
-Italy&mdash;A fundamental change in French architecture effected by the
-Renaissance influence&mdash;Survival of the Gothic style&mdash;Conditions which
-favoured the change from Mediæval to Renaissance forms&mdash;The transformation
-of the feudal castle into the Renaissance château&mdash;Factitious
-character of the French Renaissance château&mdash;Peculiar mixture of
-pseudo-Gothic and neo-classic details in early French Renaissance architecture&mdash;The
-château of Azay le Rideau&mdash;Survival in this building of
-the larger mediæval forms&mdash;Its ornamental portal based on that of Châteaudun&mdash;Analysis
-of this portal&mdash;A different manifestation of Flamboyant
-ideas in the portal of Chenonceaux&mdash;The château of La Rochefoucauld&mdash;The
-eastern wing of Blois&mdash;The staircase tower of the court&mdash;The garden
-side of the eastern wing&mdash;The château of Chambord&mdash;Its florid upper
-<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xiv">[xiv]</span>part&mdash;Fontainebleau&mdash;Écouen&mdash;Bullant’s portico&mdash;Exceptional character
-of the château of St. Germain en Laye&mdash;Further transformation of
-French architecture in the later sixteenth century</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_179">179</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER XII</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Lescot and De l’Orme</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">French architecture further changed by Lescot and De l’Orme, yet still without
-elimination of native characteristics&mdash;Lescot’s design for the Fountain of
-the Nymphs&mdash;The sculptures by Goujon&mdash;Possible derivation of the
-design from a drawing by Serlio&mdash;Lescot’s design for the Louvre&mdash;Capricious
-treatment of neo-classic details in this design&mdash;The traditional logic
-of French design ignored by Lescot&mdash;Excessive ornamentation of the
-Louvre&mdash;The architectural work of De l’Orme&mdash;Paucity of extant examples&mdash;His
-design for the palace of the Tuileries&mdash;De l’Orme’s column&mdash;His
-claim that this column was his own invention&mdash;Earlier instances of
-the same&mdash;A conscious effort to be original gave rise to most of the
-artistic aberrations of the Renaissance&mdash;Noble architecture not a personal,
-but a communal and national, product&mdash;Analysis of the façade of the
-Tuileries&mdash;De l’Orme’s other architectural aberrations&mdash;The château of
-Charleval&mdash;The freakish character of this design&mdash;Discussion of Viollet
-le Duc’s comments on it&mdash;The church architecture of the French Renaissance&mdash;The
-church of St. Eustache&mdash;Its unmodified Gothic structural
-system&mdash;Its neo-classic details&mdash;St. Étienne du Mont&mdash;SS. Gervais and
-Protais at Gisors&mdash;The apse of St. Pierre of Caen&mdash;The Portal of St.
-Maclou at Pontoise</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_194">194</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER XIII</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Architecture of the Renaissance in England</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header2" colspan="2">I. _Elizabethan Art_</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">Derivation of the Elizabethan domestic architecture from the native mediæval
-art&mdash;The reasonable character of the early Elizabethan house in its integrity&mdash;The
-ostentatious character and pseudo-classicism of the great
-English houses of the sixteenth century&mdash;Use of flimsy materials in ornamental
-details&mdash;General excellence of construction in the main body of
-the building&mdash;Employment of foreign craftsmen in ornamentation&mdash;Kirby
-Hall&mdash;Its lack of native English character&mdash;Peculiar aberrations in the
-use of structural forms without structural functions&mdash;Fantastic ornamentation
-of the gables&mdash;Longford Castle&mdash;Its resemblance to Chambord&mdash;Manifold
-forms of capricious design in Lower Walterstone Hall, Cranborne
-Manor-House, Tixall, Stanway, and other buildings&mdash;Fantastic composition
-of the gate at Caius College, Cambridge&mdash;Aberrations of design in
-Wollaton Hall&mdash;Ungrammatical and tasteless misuse of distorted classic
-elements in Elizabethan architecture largely due to Flemish and Dutch
-workmen&mdash;No professional architects in Elizabethan times&mdash;The classic
-<span class="pagenum" id="Page_xv">[xv]</span>orders foreign to the genius and the needs of the English people</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_216">216</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER XIV</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Architecture of the Renaissance in England</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header2" colspan="2">II. _Jones and Wren_</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">The architecture of England in the seventeenth century properly called Renaissance
-only by extension of the term&mdash;Jones and Wren the only architects
-of importance at this time&mdash;Walpole’s extravagant estimate of Inigo
-Jones&mdash;The early career of Jones&mdash;His design for the Banqueting Hall
-of the palace of Whitehall&mdash;Its lack of English character&mdash;Analysis of
-the design&mdash;Kent’s exaggerated estimate of Jones’s genius&mdash;The scheme
-for the whole palace&mdash;Jones’s design for the façade of old St. Paul’s&mdash;Thoughtless
-laudation of the art of Inigo Jones&mdash;Sir Christopher Wren&mdash;Artistic
-notions of the English dilettanti in the seventeenth century&mdash;Wren’s
-architectural training&mdash;His visit to France&mdash;The Sheldonian
-Theatre&mdash;Wren’s project for repairs of old St. Paul’s&mdash;His commission
-to rebuild&mdash;His first scheme for the new edifice&mdash;Sources of inspiration
-for the great dome&mdash;Rejection of the first scheme&mdash;The so-called warrant
-design&mdash;The existing edifice&mdash;The structural system of the dome&mdash;Character
-of the interior of the church&mdash;The masking of the buttress system&mdash;Wren’s
-city churches</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_226">226</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header" colspan="2">CHAPTER XV</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="header1" colspan="2">Conclusion</td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="cht">The architecture of the Renaissance not based on consistent principles&mdash;Incorrectness
-of the notion that the Renaissance aberrations in the use of
-the orders was but a free adaptation of the old elements to new conditions&mdash;The
-ancient architectural forms do not lend themselves to new conditions&mdash;Adaptation
-involves creative changes which wholly transform original
-elements&mdash;Influence of the writings of Vignola and Palladio in recent
-times&mdash;Modern recognition of the arbitrary character of the rules of the
-formalists&mdash;Genuine works of art not produced from rules&mdash;A juster
-sense of the real character of the architecture of the Renaissance shown
-by a few recent writers</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#Page_247">247</a></td>
-  </tr>
-</table>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xvii">[xvii]</span></p>
-<h2>ILLUSTRATIONS IN THE TEXT</h2>
-</div>
-
-<table summary="illustrations" class="smaller" style="max-width: 50em">
-  <tr>
-    <th></th>
-    <th></th>
-    <th class="pag">PAGE</th>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">1.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Hagia Theotokos. From Dehio and Bezold</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_011a">11</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">2.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Aachen. From Dehio and Bezold</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_011b">11</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">3.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Dome of Pisa</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_012">12</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">4.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Dome of Arnolfo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_013">13</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">5.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of the Baptistery of Florence</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_014">14</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">6.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Dissection of the vault of the Baptistery</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_015">15</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">7.</td>
-    <td class="cht">System of the dome of Florence</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_017">17</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">8.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of the dome of Florence. From Sgrilli</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_018a">18</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">9.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part plan of the dome of Florence. From Sgrilli</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_018b">18</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">10.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of the chapel of the Pazzi</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_026">26</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">11.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of the vault of the Pazzi chapel</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_027">27</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">12.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior of the Pazzi chapel</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_028">28</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">13.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of the Pazzi chapel</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_030">30</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">14.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Badia of Fiesole</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_032">32</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">15.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Impost of San Lorenzo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_033">33</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">16.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Crossing pier of San Lorenzo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_034">34</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">17.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of Santa Maria Novella</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_036">36</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">18.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of Sant’ Andrea, Mantua</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_039">39</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">19.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of Sant’ Andrea, Mantua</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_040">40</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">20.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Arch of Septimius Severus</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_041">41</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">21.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Temple of Vesta, Tivoli. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_045">45</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">22.</td>
-    <td class="cht">San Pietro in Montorio. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_046">46</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">23.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Bramante’s dome for St. Peter’s. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_048">48</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">24.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of the Pantheon. From Fontana</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_050">50</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">25.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of Bramante’s dome. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_051">51</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">26.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Michael Angelo’s model for the dome of St. Peter’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_054">54</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">27.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Diagrams of vault construction</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_056">56</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">28.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior of dome of Salamanca</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_057">57</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">29.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Diagrams of vault construction</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_058">58</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">30.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Dome of St. Peter’s. From the Report of the Mathematicians</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_061">61</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">31.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of St. Peter’s. From Fontana</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_067">67</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">32.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of aisle of St. Peter’s. From Fontana and Letarouilly</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_069">69</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">33.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Pier of Sant’ Agostino</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_072">72</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">34.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of Sant’ Agostino</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_073">73</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">35.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Exterior of Todi</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_075">75</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">36.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior of Todi</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_076">76</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">37.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of San Biagio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_077">77</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">38.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior of San Biagio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_078">78</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">39.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Arcade. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_079">79</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">40.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Exterior of San Biagio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_080">80</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">41.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Tower of Santo Spirito</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_082">82</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">42.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_083">83</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">43.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Vignola’s entablature. From Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_085">85</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">44.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Half plan of Sant’ Andrea. From Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_086">86</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">45.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of Sant’ Andrea. From Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_087">87</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">46.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Sant’ Andrea</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_088">88</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">47.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Order of Santa Maria degli Angeli</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_090">90</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">48.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of the Gesù. From Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_091">91</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">49.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of the Gesù. From Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_093">93</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">50.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of the Gesù, Della Porta. From Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_094">94</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">51.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Pediment of Baalbek</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_095">95</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">52.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Tablet from Vignola</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_096">96</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">53.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Orders of San Giorgio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_098">98</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">54.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of San Giorgio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_099">99</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">55.</td>
-    <td class="cht">The Redentore</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_100">100</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">56.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window-head of the Mozzi, Florence</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_103a">103</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">57.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window-head of Perugia</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_103b">103</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">58.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Court of the Riccardi</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_105">105</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">59.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of the Rucellai</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_108">108</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">60.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of the Bartolini</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_110">110</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">61.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of the Cancelleria</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_113">113</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">62.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portico of the Massini</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_115">115</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">63.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of the Farnese</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_117">117</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">64.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_118">118</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">65.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of façade of the Library of St. Mark</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_120">120</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">66.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Corner of the Parthenon</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_121">121</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">67.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Roman corner. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_122">122</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">68.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Corner of Library of St. Mark</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_123">123</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">69.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of Palazzo Cornaro</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_124">124</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">70.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of façade of the Porta del Palio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_125">125</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">71.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Detail of Palazzo Bevilacqua</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_127">127</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">72.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of the Portico of Vicenza. From Palladio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_129">129</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">73.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of supports, Portico of Vicenza. From Palladio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_130">130</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">74.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Arch of St. Simeon Stylites</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_131">131</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">75.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Loggia Bernarda, Vicenza</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_132">132</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">76.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of Palazzo Branzo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_133">133</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">77.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Niche of the Basilica of Shakka</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_134">134</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">78.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of the Certosa of Pavia</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_137">137</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">79.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Sacristy of San Satiro</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_139">139</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">80.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Santa Maria delle Grazie</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_141">141</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">81.</td>
-    <td class="cht">East end of Como</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_143">143</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">82.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal of Como</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_145">145</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">83.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Porch of San Zeno</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_146">146</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">84.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_147">147</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">85.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of nave of Como</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_148">148</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">86.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Column of San Zaccaria</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_150">150</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">87.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of pier of San Salvatore</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_151a">151</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">88.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of pier of St. Mark’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_151b">151</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">89.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of Santa Maria dei Miracoli</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_152">152</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">90.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of window of court of the Ducal Palace</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_155">155</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">91.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal of the Scuola di San Marco.</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_157">157</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">92.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of the façade of the Scuola di San Rocco</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_158">158</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">93.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of the Palazzo Contarini</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_162">162</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">94.</td>
-    <td class="cht">One bay of basement of the Ospedale Maggiore</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_164">164</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">95.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of the Palazzo Martinengo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_165">165</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">96.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Roman Arabesque relief</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_168">168</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">97.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Renaissance Arabesque relief</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_169">169</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">98.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Greek coin, magnified</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_170">170</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">99.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Arabesque by Filarete</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_171">171</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">100.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Console of pulpit in Santa Croce</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_172">172</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">101.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Leafage from the Ghiberti gates</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_173">173</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">102.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Pilaster in the National Museum, Florence</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_174">174</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">103.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Greek leafage</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_175a">175</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">104.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Roman leafage</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_175b">175</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">105.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Leafage of Brunelleschi</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_176a">176</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">106.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Leafage of Brescia</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_176b">176</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">107.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Leafage of San Gallo</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_177a">177</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">108.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Relief of the Scala d’Oro</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_177b">177</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">109.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Grotesque mask</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_177c">177</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">110.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Cornice of Blois</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_181">181</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">111.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Azay le Rideau</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_182">182</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">112.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal of Azay le Rideau</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_183">183</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">113.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal of Châteaudun</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_185">185</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">114.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of the portal of Chenonceaux</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_187">187</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">115.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of the court façade of Blois</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_189">189</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">116.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Du Cerceau’s print of the Fountain of the Nymphs</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_195">195</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">117.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Roman arch. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_197">197</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">118.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Part of Du Cerceau’s print of Lescot’s Louvre</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_198">198</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">119.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Plan of the Tuileries. From Du Cerceau</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_201">201</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">120.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Elevation of the Tuileries. From Du Cerceau</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_202">202</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">121.</td>
-    <td class="cht">De l’Orme’s column. From De l’Orme</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_203">203</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">122.</td>
-    <td class="cht">De l’Orme’s doorway. From De l’Orme</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_204">204</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">123.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Doorway. From Serlio</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_205">205</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">124.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Doorway of De l’Orme. From De l’Orme</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_208">208</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">125.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Façade of Charleval. From Du Cerceau</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_210">210</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">126.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior façade of Charleval. From Du Cerceau</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_212">212</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">127.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Chimney of Burghley House</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_217">217</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">128.</td>
-    <td class="cht">North side of court, Kirby Hall. From Gotch</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_219">219</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">129.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Gable of Kirby Hall. From Gotch</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_220">220</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">130.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Window of Walterstone Hall. From Gotch</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_222a">222</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">131.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Impost of Cranborne Manor-House. From Gotch</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_222b">222</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">132.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Portal of Wollaton Hall. From Gotch</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_224">224</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">133.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Basement of Whitehall. From Kent</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_230">230</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">134.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Front of old St. Paul’s. From Kent</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_231">231</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">135.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of Wren’s rejected scheme for St. Paul’s. From Bloomfield</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_236">236</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">136.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Section of the dome of St. Paul’s. From Longman</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_240">240</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">137.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Vaulting of St. Paul’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_242">242</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">138.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Crossing pier and impost of St. Paul’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_244">244</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">139.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Half section of the nave of St. Paul’s. From Longman</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_245">245</a></td>
-  </tr>
-</table>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_xx">[xx]</span></p>
-<h2>LIST OF PLATES</h2>
-</div>
-
-<table summary="plates" class="smaller" style="max-width: 50em">
-  <tr>
-    <th></th>
-    <th></th>
-    <th class="pag">PAGE</th>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">I.</td>
-    <td class="cht">The Dome of Florence</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_016fp">16</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">II.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior of Sant’ Andrea, Mantua</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_038fp">38</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">III.</td>
-    <td class="cht">The Dome of St. Peter’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_062fp">63</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">IV.</td>
-    <td class="cht">The Riccardi Palace</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_102fp">103</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">V.</td>
-    <td class="cht">San Bernardino, Perugia</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_134fp">135</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">VI.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Ducal Palace, Venice</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_154fp">154</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">VII.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, Venice</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_160fp">160</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">VIII.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Palazzo del Consiglio, Verona</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_162fp">163</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">IX.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Relief of the Lombardi</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_168fp">169</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">X.</td>
-    <td class="cht">The Banqueting Hall, Whitehall</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_228fp">228</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">XI.</td>
-    <td class="cht">The Dome of St. Paul’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_238fp">239</a></td>
-  </tr>
-
-  <tr>
-    <td class="chn">XII.</td>
-    <td class="cht">Interior of St. Paul’s</td>
-    <td class="pag"><a href="#i_242fp">242</a></td>
-  </tr>
-</table>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_1">[1]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER I<br />
-<span class="subhed">INTRODUCTION</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The great change in ideas and ideals which, after the remarkable
-intellectual and artistic life of the Middle Ages, was manifested
-in the so-called Renaissance, is not always correctly conceived or
-fairly stated; and the character and merits of the Fine Arts of the
-Renaissance, as compared with those of mediæval times, have not, I
-think, been often set forth in an entirely true light. Of the merits
-of the best Italian art of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries there
-can be no question, but the belief that this art is altogether superior
-to that of the Middle Ages will not bear examination in the light of
-impartial comparison.</p>
-
-<p>The Fine Arts are always an expression of the historical antecedents,
-the intellectual, moral, and material conditions, and the religious
-beliefs of the peoples and epochs to which they belong. They derive
-their whole character from these antecedents and conditions, and cannot
-be rightly understood or appreciated without reference to them. Thus a
-brief consideration of these conditions in the Middle Ages on the one
-hand, and in the period of the Renaissance on the other, may help us
-to understand the nature of the above-mentioned change, and to gain a
-more discriminating appreciation of the real character of the artistic
-productions of the latter epoch.</p>
-
-<p>During the Middle Ages ideas and imagination were governed by a
-religious faith which, though in many ways mistaken and misguided, was
-for the most part firm and unquestioning. Mediæval Christianity was
-a living power with the masses, and an inspiration to men of genius.
-The mediæval Christian mythology was well fitted to stimulate artistic
-invention, and the ideals which it maintained were full of beauty. It
-is true, indeed, that human conduct was not wholly governed by this
-faith; but the precepts of the Christian religion, as defined and
-interpreted by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_2">[2]</span> the Roman church, were generally held as of supreme
-authority, and to them most people acknowledged that they ought to
-conform. This Christianity gave the chief motive power for the best
-activities of the time, and the social relations of men were, in
-theory at least, based upon its teachings. The history of the Middle
-Ages abounds in evidence that popular habits of life were in many
-ways exemplary. Villani tells us that the citizens of Florence lived
-in sobriety and frugality, that they had loyal hearts, were faithful
-to one another, and that they required the same fidelity in the
-administration of public affairs.<a id="FNanchor_1" href="#Footnote_1" class="fnanchor">[1]</a> Florence in the fourteenth century
-was alive with industry, and the open country around the city was
-prosperous with agriculture. Of such conditions her Fine Arts were an
-outgrowth and expression.</p>
-
-<p>But the mediæval faith began at length to weaken. The church, as an
-ecclesiastical establishment, had grown corrupt and oppressive, so
-that men of spirit were moved to reject its dogmas and to resist its
-intellectual tyranny. Independent thought began to widen the range
-of ideas, and the reading of ancient authors gave a fresh incentive
-to philosophical speculation, and awakened a spirit of scientific
-investigation, as well as a taste for ancient poetry and mythology.
-The desire for intellectual freedom, and the thirst for new knowledge,
-which were thus stimulated in the fifteenth century constitute the good
-side of the Renaissance movement, the side which has hitherto been
-most emphasized by writers, and to which the modern world is indebted
-for a strong stimulus in the direction of some of its most fruitful
-activities.</p>
-
-<p>But there were other conditions that must not be ignored if we would
-rightly understand the spirit of the Renaissance, by which the ideals
-and aims of this brilliant epoch were materially qualified and
-weakened. Influences were at the same time at work that were not in
-harmony with what was best. The humanist learning bred a Neo-pagan
-spirit which favoured and strengthened a growing indifference to moral
-principles and religious beliefs. The strong feeling of opposition
-to the church was in part due to this. In fact, the Renaissance was
-by no means an entirely noble movement in the interest of spiritual
-and intellectual emancipation, or an unqualified advance in ideas and
-attainments beyond those of the Middle Ages. With all of its abuses
-the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_3">[3]</span> church still stood for moral order and spiritual aspirations.
-The revolt against it was in part a revolt against both religion and
-morals. The animating spirit of the movement contained much that was
-unchristian and destructive of high ideals.</p>
-
-<p>It is true that noble, and even pious, feelings survived in the minds
-of many men, especially during the early Renaissance time. Generous
-acts were still common among the merchant princes of Florence. In
-the early part of the fifteenth century the lives of Florentine
-patricians continued to be simple, and many of them recognized the
-responsibilities which their wealth imposed.<a id="FNanchor_2" href="#Footnote_2" class="fnanchor">[2]</a> But toward the close
-of that century a different spirit prevailed. Luxury and extravagance
-took the place of plainer living, the pursuit of pleasure without
-regard to justice or morality engrossed the minds of men, and vice and
-crime flourished in high places until the prophetic denunciations of
-Savonarola were called down upon the wickedness and vanity of the upper
-classes.</p>
-
-<p>Into the service of this luxurious and immoral life the Fine Arts were
-now called, and of the motives which animate such life they become
-largely an expression. The mediæval endeavour to embody the beauty
-of Christian ideals in works of art gave place to the desire to make
-the Fine Arts minister to sensuous pleasure and to mundane pride. In
-the height of its splendour the vicious life of Florence, the chief
-centre of literary and artistic productions, was appalling. Men now
-not only sought to escape from all forms of ecclesiastical and ascetic
-restraint; they went further, and freely proclaimed the sufficiency of
-intellectual, æsthetic, and sensuous enjoyments to satisfy the whole of
-man’s nature. They mistook the illusive pleasures of self-indulgence
-for the true joys of life. In abandoning himself to mundane pursuits
-and gratifications, the man of the Renaissance fancied that he got the
-utmost good out of this life, and took little thought of any other.</p>
-
-<p>In a corresponding spirit the architect now set himself to the task
-of producing a luxurious and specious style of palatial architecture,
-drawing his inspiration from the monuments of imperial Rome, and the
-sculptor and the painter sought to portray physical beauty as the
-primary and sufficient end of their art. Their<span class="pagenum" id="Page_4">[4]</span> conceptions of this
-beauty were in part drawn from the remains of the art of classic
-antiquity that were then accessible. But the ancient works of art known
-at that time were not those of the best periods of ancient artistic
-culture. They were, for the most part, works of the decadent Greek
-schools as represented in Roman copies. Many of these have, indeed, a
-great deal of sensuous charm, and display much technical refinement;
-but they are wanting in the nobler qualities that characterize the
-finest arts of Greece. From the Roman copies of fauns, Apollos, and
-Venuses that had been preserved in Italy, it was impossible that high
-inspiration and true guidance should be drawn.</p>
-
-<p>The Fine Arts of the Renaissance are in part a reflection of this
-decadent art of classic antiquity, and in part an expression of
-something quite different which was peculiar to the Italian genius at
-this time. To the man of the Renaissance the classic inspiration was
-necessarily different from what it had been to the man of antiquity.
-To the ancient Greek and Roman the pagan ideals had been real, and
-their inspiration was genuine; but to the Italian of the fifteenth
-century these ideals could not have the same meaning, or supply a true
-incentive. After the intervening centuries of Christian thought and
-experience it was impossible for men to approach the ancient themes in
-the spirit of the ancients. Thus the Neo-pagan Art of the Renaissance
-is not wholly spontaneous and sincere. It contains elements that are
-foreign to the pagan spirit, and not compatible with it. The art of
-the Renaissance is, in fact, an embodiment of heterogeneous ideas and
-conflicting aims.</p>
-
-<p>Much has been said of the importance of the Renaissance movement in
-developing the individual man, and it is true that one of the most
-marked characteristics of the artistic productions of this time, as
-contrasted with those of the Middle Ages, is a distinctly individual,
-or personal, stamp. This is especially marked in architecture. Whereas
-before, and during, the Middle Ages in particular, architecture had
-been a communal art, the joint product of companies of men working
-together on traditional lines, with common aims and aspirations, it
-was now become very largely an expression of the personal tastes of
-individuals working independently of each other. The architects of the
-Renaissance were scholars and artists, newly<span class="pagenum" id="Page_5">[5]</span> acquainted with the Roman
-antique, animated with desire to appropriate what they apprehended of
-its principles, and at the same time ambitious to achieve personal
-fame. A building of the Renaissance is thus always the product of the
-fancy of a particular designer, as a building of the Middle Ages is
-not. But architecture of the highest excellence can hardly be produced
-by an individual working independently. The noblest architecture of
-the past has always been an evolution of a people, the joint product
-of many minds, and the natural expression of many conditions. The
-importance of the opportunity for the development of the individual
-opened by the Renaissance has been exaggerated, and the conditions
-conducive to such development which had existed before have been too
-much overlooked. We are apt to forget that the mediæval communal life
-stimulated the faculties of the individual in many noble ways, and we
-do not always enough consider that individuality may be exercised in
-harmful as well as in salutary directions. The individuality that had
-been developed by the institutions and the intellectual life of the
-Middle Ages was vastly different from that which was produced by the
-influences of the Renaissance, and it was in many ways more excellent.
-The individuality of the Middle Ages was obedient to the demands
-of corporate and coöperative life, while that of the Renaissance
-was independent and capricious. Conditions favourable to individual
-development had arisen early in the Middle Ages in connection with
-organized monastic life. The cultivation of literature, philosophy, and
-the Fine Arts in the monasteries had given considerable range to the
-exercise of individual powers,<a id="FNanchor_3" href="#Footnote_3" class="fnanchor">[3]</a> though in limited directions, and
-the rise of the great communal organizations tended still further to
-stimulate an admirable individual development. But the individual of
-the Middle Ages felt himself a part of an organized body from which he
-derived moral support, and with which he felt that he must coöperate.
-It was the strong communal spirit, giving unity of purpose to the
-varied faculties of individuals, that made possible the production of
-the noble arts of the Middle Ages; and it is as the expression of this
-unity of purpose coördinating the fine artistic energies of the time,
-that these arts are preëminently notable. In so far<span class="pagenum" id="Page_6">[6]</span> as the development
-of the individual in the period of the Renaissance differed from that
-of the Middle Ages, it did so mainly in favouring individual caprice
-at the expense of harmonious collective effort. The capricious and
-irresponsible individuality of the time, together with the confused
-complexity of ideas and aims, gave rise to most of that which is open
-to criticism in the Fine Arts of the Renaissance.</p>
-
-<p>Nearly all of the architects of this epoch were sculptors and painters.
-Few of them had ever had a thorough training in architectural design
-and construction, such as had been general with the members of the
-great mediæval building corporations; and hardly any of them were
-endowed with a natural aptitude for logical construction. The artistic
-genius of the Italian people has, in fact, always been essentially a
-genius for painting, and the painter’s habits of mind are constantly
-manifested in the Italian architecture of all epochs. This is
-especially noticeable in their use of the Orders, which is rarely
-based on any structural need, but is governed only by the fancy of the
-designer in seeking to produce a pleasant surface composition. Columns
-and pilasters, answering to nothing in the real structural scheme of
-a building, are disposed with no thought save for agreeable lines and
-rhythmical spacings. Thus they soon came to be used in many novel ways.
-They were set in pairs, stretched through several stories, embraced
-by pediments, and varied in countless fanciful ways. In this way the
-architecture of the Renaissance even more than that of imperial Rome,
-became a mere surface architecture differing fundamentally from all of
-the great architectural systems of ancient times, and of the Middle
-Ages. This is a consideration of capital importance of which too little
-account has been taken. The unqualified and short-sighted laudation of
-this architecture by the sophisticated writers of the sixteenth century
-has been too readily accepted, and a more discriminating judgment
-cannot fail to alter materially the esteem in which it has been held.</p>
-
-<p>In surveying the history of architectural design with attention to
-its fundamental principles we shall find that there have thus far
-existed in Europe but three entirely consistent and distinctive styles;
-namely, the Greek, the Byzantine, and the Gothic. All other varieties
-of architecture may be broadly divided into<span class="pagenum" id="Page_7">[7]</span> two classes, the one
-consisting of buildings of transitional character, and comprising all
-organic and progressive types of Romanesque, and the other composed
-of styles made up of mixed elements not in process of organic fusion.
-The first architecture of the second class is that of imperial Rome
-with its off-shoots, the Christian Roman and the numerous subsequent
-forms of the basilican type, and the second is the architecture of
-the Renaissance. When, after studying the architecture of Greece, we
-come to examine that of Rome, we are at once struck by the incongruous
-mixture of elements which it exhibits; and although we may be impressed
-by its grandeur, we are unable to give it our unqualified admiration.
-In Byzantine art we find Greek, Roman, and Oriental elements, logically
-modified in adaptation to new uses, and fused into a radically new
-and distinctive style of entire consistency and great nobility.<a id="FNanchor_4" href="#Footnote_4" class="fnanchor">[4]</a> In
-the transitional art of western Europe we see the creative genius of
-Northern races gradually evolving the Gothic style, in which elements
-derived from the older systems are wholly recreated and assimilated
-in a wonderful manner, and when we turn from the beauty, and the
-structural logic, of the consummate Gothic Art<a id="FNanchor_5" href="#Footnote_5" class="fnanchor">[5]</a> to the architecture
-of the Renaissance, a similar contrast is again apparent.</p>
-
-<p>In one branch of art, however, the best achievements of the Renaissance
-period command our unqualified admiration; namely, the art of painting.
-As before remarked, the Italian genius appears to have been primarily
-a genius for painting, and in this field the conditions all conspired
-to produce results that were without precedent for excellence, and that
-still remain unrivalled. Yet here, too, we shall need to discriminate.
-Italian painting of the sixteenth century presents a variety of phases
-that are by no means of equal merit, and the noblest forms of it
-show the least of the essentially Renaissance spirit. The Christian
-painters of the fourteenth century had laid a foundation on which their
-successors could build, and this gave a character to much of the art
-of the Early Renaissance which the dominant influences of the time
-itself could not give.<a id="FNanchor_6" href="#Footnote_6" class="fnanchor">[6]</a> But<span class="pagenum" id="Page_8">[8]</span> the spirit of the sixteenth century was
-unfavourable to the highest ideals and the most exemplary practice,
-and, save for the works of a few exceptional men, there were no high
-achievements in painting after about 1520, except in Venice, where more
-than elsewhere natural and wholesome conditions had been maintained.</p>
-
-<p>Among the many influences that were stirring the artistic minds of the
-Renaissance there were two of chief importance, the Neo-pagan revival,
-and the true intellectual life of the people which was independent of
-the retrospective movement, and had been growing up through the Middle
-Ages. The most sterling qualities of the artistic products of the
-period are due to this intellectual life, and Florentine and Venetian
-painting, the two most admirable phases of the supreme art of Italy,
-are the finest expression of this. In other words, it was not the
-revival of interest in ancient thought and feeling, nor the influence
-of classic models, so much as the ripened development of the native
-Italian genius itself, that produced what is most excellent in the Fine
-Arts of the Renaissance. A consciously retrospective motive can hardly
-be a vital force in artistic development, and the direct attempt, in so
-far as such attempt was made, to shape the arts after classic models
-was an unmixed evil. The native traditions and innate tendencies of
-the Italian people were enough of themselves to give a strong classic
-quality to their art. In architecture what of classic feeling was
-natural to them needed only in the fifteenth century to be freed from
-the elements which had been misappropriated from the mediæval art of
-the North to allow it true expression in forms adapted to their needs.
-In normal human progress each successive stage of development creates
-its own appropriate<span class="pagenum" id="Page_9">[9]</span> forms; but peoples, like individuals, sometimes
-pass through periods of partial aberration, and while genius may
-still find scope enough, as in the Renaissance, to produce much that
-is admirable, the noblest forms of art are not an outgrowth of such
-conditions.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_10">[10]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER II<br />
-<span class="subhed">THE DOME OF FLORENCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The great dome of the cathedral of Florence marks the beginning of
-the Renaissance movement in architecture, though in its general form
-and structural character it has no likeness to ancient domes, and has
-few details drawn from the Roman classic source. It exhibits a wide
-departure from any previous forms of dome construction, and is an
-expression of the creative genius of a remarkably gifted man of great
-independence, working under inspiration drawn in part from ancient
-sources, in part from mediæval building traditions, and in still larger
-part from the new motives that were beginning to animate the artistic
-ambitions of the fifteenth century.</p>
-
-<p>The dome of the Pantheon and the dome of St. Sophia, the two greatest
-domes of former times, had been built on principles that did not admit
-of much external effect, and the numerous smaller ones of the Middle
-Ages, in western Europe, had been equally inconspicuous externally, if
-not entirely hidden from view, in consequence of rising from within
-a drum which reached far above the springing level. In most cases
-the whole construction was covered with a timber roof, so that from
-the outside the existence of a dome would not be suspected. This was
-a secure mode of construction, and one that for stability could not
-be improved; but it did not give the imposing external effect that
-Brunelleschi sought.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_011a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_011a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 1.</span>&mdash;Hagia Theotokos.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_011b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_011b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 2.</span>&mdash;Aachen.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Attempts to make the dome a conspicuous external feature had indeed
-been made before Brunelleschi’s time. The later Byzantine builders
-had raised small domes on drums resting on pendentives, and rising
-above the main roof of the building, but they had still carried these
-drums up somewhat above the springing of the dome, and had further
-fortified them with buttresses built over the supporting piers, as in
-Hagia Theotokos of Constantinople (<a href="#i_011a">Fig. 1</a>). Thus in such designs the
-dome<span class="pagenum" id="Page_11">[11]</span> still remains partly hidden from view, the drum being the most
-conspicuous part of the composition. Among the early domes of western
-Europe is that of Aachen (<a href="#i_011b">Fig. 2</a>). In this case the drum is carried
-up far beyond the springing, and is covered with a timber roof which
-completely hides the dome from external view. The same adjustment of
-the dome to its drum is, with minor variations of form (the dome being
-in some cases<span class="pagenum" id="Page_12">[12]</span> polygonal on plan, as at Aachen, and in some cases
-hemispherical) found in most other mediæval domes, and the timber roof
-over all is likewise common. But in a few cases a different scheme
-was adopted in which the dome is set on the top of the drum instead
-of within it. In such cases, however, the drum is low, not rising
-above the ridge of the timber roof of the nave, and the dome, being
-unprovided with abutment, is insecure except in so far as it may have a
-form that is self-sustaining as to thrusts (which removes it from the
-true dome shape, or may be secured by some kind of binding chain.<a id="FNanchor_7" href="#Footnote_7" class="fnanchor">[7]</a>
-An example of such a dome occurs on a small scale over the crossing
-of the cathedral of Pisa (<a href="#i_012">Fig. 3</a>). This dome is not hemispherical,
-its sides rise steeply, and with such moderate curvature as to render
-it measurably self-sustaining as to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_13">[13]</span> thrust.<a id="FNanchor_8" href="#Footnote_8" class="fnanchor">[8]</a> Another instance of a
-similar scheme, and on a larger scale, is that which appears to have
-formed a part of Arnolfo’s design for the cathedral of Florence. This
-dome was never executed, and our knowledge of it is derived from the
-well-known fresco in the Spanish chapel of Santa Maria Novella.<a id="FNanchor_9" href="#Footnote_9" class="fnanchor">[9]</a>
-Here both the dome and the drum are octagonal in conformity with the
-plan of the part of the building which it covers. The outline <a href="#i_013">(Fig. 4</a>)
-is slightly pointed, but the sides are nevertheless so much curved in
-elevation that a structure of this form would not stand without strong
-cinctures. It is, however, not unlikely that the fresco painter has
-given it a more bulging shape than Arnolfo intended. But domes of this
-character were exceptional in the Middle Ages. The builders of that
-epoch confined their practice for the most part to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_14">[14]</span> safer form in
-which the vault is made to spring from within the drum, and is thus
-necessarily, either in part or entirely, hidden from external view.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_012">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_012.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 3.</span>&mdash;Dome of Pisa.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_013">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_013.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 4.</span>&mdash;Dome of Arnolfo.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_014">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_014.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 5.</span>&mdash;Section of Baptistery.</p>
-  </div>
-
-
-<p>A remarkable dome of this latter class is that of the Baptistery of
-Florence, which, though the building has undergone various superficial
-transformations since its original construction at an early, though
-uncertain, epoch, has come down to us in essential integrity. This
-building on plan is in the form of an octagon, and the dome is of
-corresponding shape, and sprung from a level far below the top of the
-enclosing walls. In elevation the dome (<a href="#i_014">Fig. 5</a>) has a pointed outline,
-and is covered by a pyramidal roof of stone the upper part of which
-is incorporated with the dome itself, while beneath the lower portion
-is a void between the dome and the enclosing wall. The structure has
-an internal anatomy that is both ingenious and admirable. The span is
-about 25 metres, and the wall at the level of the springing is over 3
-metres thick. Above this the wall (_a_, Fig. 5) rises to a height
-of about 8 metres. The dome at its base is about 1 metre thick, and
-its extrados rises vertically to a height<span class="pagenum" id="Page_15">[15]</span> of about 2½ metres, leaving
-an open space between it and the wall of the enclosing drum of 1.26
-metres in width. Above this vertical portion the extrados is stepped
-by several courses of masonry, somewhat after the manner of the dome
-of the Pantheon. From the reëntrant angles of the octagon (_a_,
-Fig. 6) solid abutments are built up against the salient angles of
-the vault, and, between these, two secondary abutments (_b_) are
-carried up against each of its sides. These buttresses are in the
-form of cross walls dividing the space on each side of the octagon
-into three compartments, and over each of these compartments a barrel
-vault, on an axis inclined in conformity with the slope of the roof,
-is turned. The upper ends of these vaults intersect on the surface of
-the dome, as shown in Figures 5 and 6. The voids between the crowns
-of these vaults and the buttresses are filled in with masonry so as
-to form the sloping planes of the roof below where it is incorporated
-with the dome, and on these are laid the slabs that form the external
-covering. With such an effective buttress system as is here provided
-it is hard to find a reason for the chain of timbers which is inserted
-at the haunch of the dome. The constructive principle embodied in this
-monument is altogether sound,<a id="FNanchor_10" href="#Footnote_10" class="fnanchor">[10]</a> and its architectural character is in
-keeping with the construction.<a id="FNanchor_11" href="#Footnote_11" class="fnanchor">[11]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_015">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_015.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 6.</span>&mdash;Dissection of the vault of the
-Baptistery.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Such were the models of mediæval dome building accessible to
-Brunelleschi when he was forming his great scheme for the covering of
-the octagon of the cathedral of Florence. But the idea of a low dome,
-or a hidden dome, could not meet the wishes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_16">[16]</span> of the Florentines of the
-fifteenth century. Their civic pride and large resources called for an
-imposing design which should make the dome a dominant architectural
-feature of their city. It was decided that it should be raised upon the
-top of a high drum, and the task to which Brunelleschi applied himself
-was to fulfil this requirement.</p>
-
-<p>Of the vast and soaring dome which he succeeded in erecting many
-opinions have been held, but all beholders are impressed with its
-grandeur. It has been common to speak as if the master had been chiefly
-inspired by the ancient monuments of Rome, and had taken the Pantheon
-as his principal model.<a id="FNanchor_12" href="#Footnote_12" class="fnanchor">[12]</a> But although he came to his task fresh
-from the study of the ancient Roman monuments, and undoubtedly had
-the Pantheon much in mind, yet the dome which he produced has little
-in common with that great achievement of imperial Roman constructive
-skill. In general it follows, though with great improvements as to
-outline and proportions, the scheme of Arnolfo as illustrated in
-the fresco of the Spanish Chapel; but the model to which it most
-closely conforms, notwithstanding the obvious and essential points
-of difference, is that of the Baptistery just described. There can,
-I think, be little question that this monument supplied the chief
-inspiration and guidance to both Arnolfo and Brunelleschi. A comparison
-will show that the dome of the cathedral, with its supporting drum,
-is, in fact, little other than a reproduction of the Baptistery of San
-Giovanni in a modified form, and enlarged proportions, raised over the
-crossing.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_016fp" style="max-width: 501px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate I</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_016fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">DOME OF BRUNELLESCHI</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Florence</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_017">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_017.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 7.</span>&mdash;System of the dome.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But while taking the scheme of the Baptistery as the basis of his own
-scheme, Brunelleschi was obliged to make some daring changes in order
-to give his design the external character which he sought. This great
-dome (Plate <a href="#i_016fp">I</a>), like that of the Baptistery, is octagonal in plan and
-pointed in elevation. It rises from the top of the octagonal drum, and
-consists of two nearly concentric shells of masonry, with an interval
-between them. Eight vast ribs of stone rise from the angles of the drum
-and <span class="pagenum" id="Page_17">[17]</span>converge on the curb of an opening at the crown. These ribs
-extend in depth through the whole thickness of the double vault and
-unite its two shells. Between each pair of these great ribs two lesser
-ones are inserted within the interval that divides the two shells, and
-nine arches of masonry, lying in planes normal to the curve, are sprung
-between the great ribs and pass through the lesser ones on each side of
-the polygon (Figs. <a href="#i_017">7</a> and <a href="#i_018a">8</a>), while a chain of heavy timbers (_a_,
-Fig. <a href="#i_018a">8</a>, and Fig. <a href="#i_018b">9</a>), in twenty-four sections clamped together at the
-ends with plates of iron, binds the whole system between the haunch and
-the springing. So much of the internal structure can be seen in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_18">[18]</span> the
-monument itself, but further details are described in Brunelleschi’s
-own account of what he intended to do.<a id="FNanchor_13" href="#Footnote_13" class="fnanchor">[13]</a> From this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_19">[19]</span> we learn that
-the base of the dome, which was to be built solid to the height of 5¼
-braccia, was to consist of six courses of long blocks of hard stone
-(_macigno_) clamped with tinned iron and upon this were to be
-chains of iron.<a id="FNanchor_14" href="#Footnote_14" class="fnanchor">[14]</a> Mention is also made of a chain of iron over the
-timber chain (“in su dette quercie una catena di ferro”); but no
-such chain is visible in the monument,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_20">[20]</span> and if it exists, it must be
-embedded in the masonry of the vault, like the chains at the base.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_018a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_018a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 8.</span>&mdash;Section.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_018b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_018b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 9.</span>&mdash;Part Plan.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It will thus be seen that while Brunelleschi’s scheme is essentially
-different from that of the Baptistery, its structural system is little
-more than an ingenious modification of it. The parts of the one answer
-to those of the other with singular completeness. The attic wall and
-pyramidal roof of San Giovanni are transformed into the external shell
-of the cathedral dome, the angle buttresses of the older monument
-become the great angle ribs of Brunelleschi’s vault. The intermediate
-abutments of the Baptistery are changed into the intermediate ribs of
-the great dome, and the inclined barrel vaults of the Baptistery scheme
-are represented in the cathedral dome by the arches sprung between the
-great angle ribs.</p>
-
-<p>It has been thought by some writers that the rib system of the dome
-of Florence gives the structure a somewhat Gothic character, and it
-is sometimes called a Gothic dome.<a id="FNanchor_15" href="#Footnote_15" class="fnanchor">[15]</a> But there can be no such thing
-as a Gothic dome. It is impossible for a dome of any kind to have
-the character of a Gothic vault. The difference between the two is
-fundamental. A Gothic vault is a vault of concentrated thrusts, and
-it requires effective concentrated abutments. A dome is a vault of
-continuous thrust, and for sound construction it requires continuous
-abutments, as in the Pantheon. Whatever use the ribs of Brunelleschi’s
-vault may have, they do not, and cannot, perform the function of the
-ribs in Gothic vaulting. Their use is to strengthen the angles of the
-dome, and to augment its power of resistance to the weight of the
-lantern which crowns it. They do not support the vault as the ribs
-of a Gothic vault do. Being composed of very deep voussoirs, they
-have more strength to withstand thrusts, as well as to bear crushing
-weight, than the enclosing shells have, and thus to some extent they
-may hold these shells in. But it appears plain that the architect did
-not feel confidence in their power to perform this function without
-reënforcement by a chain, or chains, which, in his own words, “bind
-the ribs and hold the vault in” (che leghino i detti sproni e cingano
-la volta dentro). However this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_21">[21]</span> may be, the ribs of a dome cannot
-have any function like that of the ribs in Gothic vaulting. The
-shell of a Gothic vault is not held in by the ribs, nor is it in any
-way incorporated with them. Both shell and ribs are held in by the
-buttresses. This point will be considered further in connection with
-the dome of St. Peter’s.</p>
-
-<p>The whole scheme of this dome was a daring innovation of one man, and
-in this it differs from former architectural innovations, which were
-the comparatively slow outcome of corporate endeavour, progressive
-changes being so gradual that no wide or sudden departures from
-habitual modes of building were made at any one time, or by any one
-person.</p>
-
-<p>It was a prodigious undertaking. The span of the dome is nearly
-a hundred and forty feet, the springing level is a hundred and
-seventy-five feet above the pavement, and the height of the dome
-itself, exclusive of the lantern, is about a hundred and twenty feet.
-Such a project might well appall the most courageous of building
-committees, and we need not wonder that the Board of Works drew back in
-dismay when it was first laid before them.<a id="FNanchor_16" href="#Footnote_16" class="fnanchor">[16]</a></p>
-
-<p>The successful accomplishment of the work, and the stability which it
-has thus far maintained, show that the architect was a constructor
-of great ability,<a id="FNanchor_17" href="#Footnote_17" class="fnanchor">[17]</a> and the fact that he managed to raise the vast
-fabric without the use of the ponderous and costly kind of centring
-that had been commonly employed in vaulting, makes the achievement
-still more remarkable. The precise manner in which he did this is not
-clear, but of the fact there appears no question.<a id="FNanchor_18" href="#Footnote_18" class="fnanchor">[18]</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_22">[22]</span></p>
-
-<p>The dome of Florence is indeed a remarkable piece of construction,
-and it is no less remarkable as a work of art. In beauty of outline
-it has not, I think, been approached by any of the later elevated
-domes of which it is the parent. Yet with all of its mechanical and
-artistic merit, the scheme is fundamentally false in principle, since
-it involves a departure from sound methods of dome construction. A
-bulging thin shell of masonry on a large scale cannot be made secure
-without abutment, much less can such a shell sustain the weight of a
-heavy stone structure like the lantern of this monument, without resort
-to the extraneous means of binding chains. A builder having proper
-regard for true principles of construction in stone masonry would not
-undertake such a work. For although it may be possible to give the
-dome a shape that will be measurably self-sustaining as to thrusts, as
-Brunelleschi clearly strove to do,<a id="FNanchor_19" href="#Footnote_19" class="fnanchor">[19]</a> it is not possible to make it
-entirely so, and therefore if deprived of abutment it must be bound
-with chains. But a structure of masonry which depends for stability
-on binding chains is one of inherent weakness, and thus of false
-character.<a id="FNanchor_20" href="#Footnote_20" class="fnanchor">[20]</a></p>
-
-<p>From these considerations it appears to me that Brunelleschi led
-the way in a wrong direction, notwithstanding the nobility of his
-achievement from many points of view. And in following his example
-modern designers of elevated domes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_23">[23]</span> have wandered still farther, as we
-shall see, from the true path of monumental art.</p>
-
-<p>Moreover, when we consider that a dome set within its drum is not only
-stronger, but that it is also much better for interior effect, the dome
-of the Pantheon still remaining the grandest and most impressive arched
-ceiling of its kind in the world, the unbuttressed modern domes, with
-their manifold extraneous and hidden devices for security, appear still
-less defensible.</p>
-
-<p>But in the architectural thought of the Renaissance little heed was
-given to structural propriety or structural expression, and the Italian
-writers, who have largely shaped our modern architectural ideas, have
-not only failed to recognize the inherent weakness of such a building
-as the dome of Florence, but have even considered the work praiseworthy
-on account of those very characteristics which make it weak. Thus
-Sgrilli lauds Brunelleschi for having had the “hardihood to raise to
-such a height the greatest cupola which until its time had ever been
-seen, upon a base without any abutments, a thing that had not before
-been done by any one.”<a id="FNanchor_21" href="#Footnote_21" class="fnanchor">[21]</a> And Milizia says, “It is worthy of special
-notice that in the construction of this cupola there are no visible
-abutments.”<a id="FNanchor_22" href="#Footnote_22" class="fnanchor">[22]</a></p>
-
-<p>As to the permanent stability of this dome various opinions have been
-held by the experts among the older writers.<a id="FNanchor_23" href="#Footnote_23" class="fnanchor">[23]</a> Its form is, as we
-have seen, as favourable to stability as it would be possible to make
-that of any vault which could be properly called a dome. It appears
-to the inexperienced eye as stable as a crest of the Apennines. Every
-precaution as to material and careful workmanship seems to have been
-taken to make it secure. The wall of the drum on which it rests is five
-metres in thickness, and the solid base of the dome itself is built, if
-the architect’s scheme was carried out as he had stated it before the
-Board of Works, of large blocks of hard stone, thoroughly bonded and
-clamped with iron. The lower system is sufficiently strong, and appears
-to rest on a solid foundation. But nevertheless there are ruptures in
-various parts of the structure<span class="pagenum" id="Page_24">[24]</span> which have caused apprehensions of
-danger,<a id="FNanchor_24" href="#Footnote_24" class="fnanchor">[24]</a> and its future duration must be regarded as uncertain.
-The writers who have maintained that it is secure have argued on the
-assumption that the parts of a dome all tend toward the centre.<a id="FNanchor_25" href="#Footnote_25" class="fnanchor">[25]</a>
-These writers overlook the fact that the force of gravity above,
-especially when the dome is heavily weighed by a lantern, neutralizes
-the inward tendency of the lower parts and causes a tendency in those
-parts to movement in the opposite direction. This neutralizing force is
-lessened by giving the dome a pointed form, as Brunelleschi has done,
-but, as before remarked (p. <a href="#Page_22">22</a>), it can hardly be overcome entirely so
-long as any real dome shape is preserved.<a id="FNanchor_26" href="#Footnote_26" class="fnanchor">[26]</a></p>
-
-<p>It may be thought that the object which Brunelleschi had in view,
-of producing a vast dome that should be an imposing feature of the
-cathedral externally, justifies the unsound method of construction
-to which he resorted (the only method by which the effect that he
-sought could be attained). But structural integrity is, I think,
-so fundamental a prerequisite of good architecture that in so far
-as this gifted Florentine was obliged to ignore sound principles
-of construction in order to attain an end not compatible with such
-principles, the result cannot be<span class="pagenum" id="Page_25">[25]</span> properly considered as an entirely
-noble and exemplary work of art, however much beauty and impressiveness
-it may have.</p>
-
-<p>The example set by Brunelleschi was, in point of construction, a
-pernicious one, and bore fruit of a still more objectionable character
-in the works of other gifted men less scrupulous than he, and less
-endowed with mechanical ingenuity, as we shall see farther on.</p>
-
-<p>Though there is nothing whatever of classic Roman character in this
-great dome, the lantern which crowns it, built from Brunelleschi’s
-design after his death, has classic details curiously mingled with
-mediæval forms. Its eight piers are adorned with fluted Corinthian
-pilasters surmounted by an entablature, while the jambs of the openings
-have engaged columns carrying arches beneath the entablature in ancient
-Roman fashion. From the entablature rises a low spire with finials set
-about its base, and flying buttresses, adorned with classic details,
-are set against the piers. None of the classic details have any true
-classic character, nor has the ornamental carving, with which the
-composition is enriched, any particular excellence either of design or
-execution. But these details are invisible from the ground, and in its
-general form and proportions the lantern makes an admirable crowning
-feature of this finest of Renaissance domes.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_26">[26]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER III<br />
-<span class="subhed">CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>No other work by Brunelleschi is comparable in merit to the great dome
-of the cathedral. None of his other opportunities were such as to call
-forth his best powers, which appear to have required great magnitude
-to bring them into full play. In his other works the influence of his
-Roman studies is more manifest, and his own genius is less apparent. In
-these other works he revives the use of the orders, and employs them
-in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_27">[27]</span> modes which for incongruity surpass anything that imperial Roman
-taste had devised.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_026">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_026.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 10.</span>&mdash;Plan of the chapel of the Pazzi.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_027">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_027.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 11.</span>&mdash;Section of vault of the Pazzi chapel.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The first of these works is the small chapel of the Pazzi in the
-cloister of Santa Croce. It is a simple rectangle on plan (Fig. <a href="#i_026">10</a>),
-with a square sanctuary on the short axis, and a porch across the
-front. The central area is covered with a circular vault which by
-most writers is called a dome, but it is not a dome; it is a vault
-of essentially Gothic form, like two early Gothic apse vaults joined
-together (Fig. <a href="#i_027">11</a>). It rests on pendentives, and is enclosed by a
-cylindrical drum, which forms<span class="pagenum" id="Page_28">[28]</span> an effective, though not a logical,
-abutment to its thrusts, and is covered with a low-pitched roof of
-masonry having a slightly curved outline. Whether this external
-covering is connected with the vaulting in any way above where it
-parts from the crowns of the vault cells it is impossible to discover,
-because there is no way of access to the open space between the two
-parts. Through a small opening in the outer shell, near its crown, the
-hand may be thrust into the void, but nothing can be reached. It is a
-curious form of double vault, and differs fundamentally from the great
-double dome of the cathedral. The scheme as a whole is structurally
-inconsistent; for while the inner vault has the concentrated thrusts
-of Gothic construction, these thrusts are met by the enclosing drum,
-and not by the isolated abutments that the vault logically calls for.
-The sanctuary has a small hemispherical dome on pendentives, and the
-portico is covered with a barrel vault bisected by another small dome
-on pendentives.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_028">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_028.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 12.</span>&mdash;Interior of the Pazzi chapel.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The architectural treatment of the interior (Fig. <a href="#i_028">12</a>) exhibits<span class="pagenum" id="Page_29">[29]</span> a
-wide departure from that of any previous type of design. The form of
-the building is mediæval, being, with exception of the central vault,
-essentially Byzantine,<a id="FNanchor_27" href="#Footnote_27" class="fnanchor">[27]</a> but the details are classic Roman, and
-consist of a shallow order of fluted Corinthian pilasters with the
-entablature at the level of the vaulting imposts. In such a building,
-however, and used in this way, a classic order is out of place; for an
-order is a structural system designed for structural use, but the order
-here has no more structural function than if it were merely painted on
-the walls. It is used, of course, with a purely ornamental motive, but
-as ornament it is inappropriate. A proper ornamental treatment of such
-an interior would be either by marble incrusting, mosaic, or fresco,
-or else by pilaster strips, or colonnettes, and blind arches, which
-would break the monotony of the broad wall surfaces without suggesting
-an architectural system foreign to the character of the building. Such
-arcading would have an appropriate structural suggestiveness, if not an
-actual structural use; but a classic order is unsuitable for a building
-of mediæval character. The mediæval pilaster strip and blind arcade
-were designed for this use, and they have the further advantage that
-their proportions may be indefinitely varied to meet varied needs, as
-the proportions of the classic orders may not. But in their lack of a
-true sense of structural expression, and in their eagerness to revive
-the use of classic forms, the designers of the Renaissance failed to
-consider these things.</p>
-
-<p>A particularly awkward result of this improper use of an order is that
-the entablature passes through the arch imposts, making an irrational
-structural combination. This scheme was, however, extensively followed
-in the subsequent architecture of the Renaissance, but it is a
-barbarism for which no authority can, I believe, be found in ancient
-Roman design.<a id="FNanchor_28" href="#Footnote_28" class="fnanchor">[28]</a> The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_30">[30]</span> nearest approach to it in Roman art is the
-entablature block resting on the capital (as in the great hall of the
-Baths of Caracalla), which was a blundering device of the later Roman
-architects. The complete entablature running through the impost, as
-in the chapel of the Pazzi, sometimes, indeed, occurs in the early
-churches of Rome and elsewhere,<a id="FNanchor_29" href="#Footnote_29" class="fnanchor">[29]</a> as a result of unsettled conditions
-of design, while the architects were struggling with the traditional
-use of the entablature and the introduction of the arch sprung from the
-columns. But after the admirable logic of the mediæval arched systems
-of construction had been reached it appears strange that any designer
-should go back to this irrational combination.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_030">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_030.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 13.</span>&mdash;Façade of the Pazzi chapel.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the portico (Fig. <a href="#i_030">13</a>) the incongruities of design are of a still
-graver nature because they involve weakness of construction. The order
-of the interior is, as we have just seen, but a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_31">[31]</span> simulated order, and
-has no structural function, but in the portico a real Corinthian order
-is made to carry the barrel vault and dome above mentioned, and an
-attic wall which encloses the vaulting. But a classic order was never
-intended for such use, and cannot properly perform it. Such an order
-is adapted only to the support of crushing weight, and has no power of
-resistance to the thrusts of vaulting. The weight of the attic wall
-tends, indeed, in some measure to neutralize the force of the vault
-thrust, but this is not enough to render the structure secure, and
-unless the order were effectively steadied by some extraneous means the
-attic load would constitute a source of danger, as with any disturbance
-of its equilibrium by thrust its weight would hasten the overthrow of
-the system. How it is actually maintained is not apparent. No tie rods
-are visible beneath the vault, such as are common in Italian vaulted
-structures, which are rarely buttressed in an effective manner. Ties
-or clamps may, however, be concealed within the attic, though they
-would be less effective so placed. But in whatever way the system is
-held together, it is bad architecture, because the parts have no proper
-adaptation to their functions.</p>
-
-<p>The ornamental treatment of the attic wall is worthy of notice. The
-surface is divided into panels by diminutive pilasters, and these
-panels are subdivided by mouldings in a manner which recalls the
-treatment of the attic of the Baptistery. The coupling of the pilasters
-was an innovation in the use of classic members, but it enabled the
-architect to avoid unpleasant proportions in these details. Single
-pilasters of the same magnitude would be too slender for the deep
-entablature over them, or to harmonize with the great Corinthian
-order below, while wider single ones would be stumpy and inelegant.
-The pair give good proportion in the total composition, while each
-pilaster is well proportioned in itself. Another noticeable point is
-the manner in which the central archivolt and the archivolts spanning
-the ends of the porch intersect the pilasters at the springing. This
-could not be avoided, because the pilasters cover the whole space on
-the entablature over the capitals of the columns, and leave no place
-for the archivolts. Thus the mediæval principle of interpenetration is
-carried over into the neo-classic design.</p>
-
-<p>It should be observed that the details of this attic are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_32">[32]</span> wrought
-in stucco, so that we have with the beginning of the Renaissance a
-revival of a common ancient Roman practice of architectural deceit.
-The great order, however, is necessarily of stone, and its general
-proportions are good, though the details are poor in design, and coarse
-in execution.<a id="FNanchor_30" href="#Footnote_30" class="fnanchor">[30]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_032">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_032.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 14.</span>&mdash;Badia of Fiesole.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The façade of the Pazzi has been considered as showing noteworthy
-originality of design. But there are older buildings in the
-neighbourhood to which it bears enough likeness to suggest its
-derivation from them. The façade of the Badia of Fiesole (Fig. <a href="#i_032">14</a>) is
-one of these. By substituting a free-standing colonnade for the blind
-arcade of this front, and breaking its entablature and attic wall with
-an arch, we should get the leading features of the Pazzi front. Sant’
-Jacopo Soprarno, with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_33">[33]</span> its attic surmounting an open portico having an
-arcade on Corinthian columns, is also strongly suggestive of the same
-scheme. The features that are peculiar to the Pazzi, the arch breaking
-the entablature, the barrel vault sprung from the order, and the dome
-bisecting this vault, do little credit to the architect as a consistent
-designer.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_033">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_033.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 15.</span>&mdash;Impost of San Lorenzo.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Two more important examples of church architecture in Florence,
-which appear to be mainly by Brunelleschi, are San Lorenzo and Santo
-Spirito. What part Brunelleschi had in the design of San Lorenzo
-is not perfectly clear,<a id="FNanchor_31" href="#Footnote_31" class="fnanchor">[31]</a> but the main scheme was probably his,
-though the work was not completed until after his death. In the old
-sacristy of this church, which appears to be the part that was first
-built, the interior design of the Pazzi chapel is reproduced with
-some modifications of proportions and details, including the celled
-vault on a system of ribs, resting on pendentives. The church itself
-exhibits a frank return to primitive basilican forms and methods of
-construction, though with modifications and some additions. The nave
-has a flat wooden ceiling, but the aisles are covered with domical
-vaulting on salient transverse ribs, and over the crossing is a
-hemispherical dome on pendentives. In the arcades, which are carried
-on Corinthian columns like those of the portico of the Pazzi, the
-entablature blocks of late Roman design are reproduced in the impost
-(Fig. <a href="#i_033">15</a>). The revival of this meaningless feature shows again how
-little impression the logic of mediæval art had made on the Italian
-mind, and what lack of discrimination in their borrowings from the
-antique the designers of the Renaissance often show. Whatever features
-the Roman models displayed were looked upon as authoritative, and
-copied without<span class="pagenum" id="Page_34">[34]</span> question; and the frequency with which this superfluous
-detail was reproduced in the subsequent architecture of the Renaissance
-has given it wide acceptance in more recent times. Notwithstanding
-the intention of the designer to revive the ancient style, mediæval
-features are conspicuous in San Lorenzo, and something of the mediæval
-logic of structural adjustment occurs in some details. Not only is
-the dome over the crossing supported on pendentives, which, in their
-developed form, are mediæval features and thus foreign to classic Roman
-design, but the piers sustaining this dome are compound, and consist
-of members of different proportions adjusted in the organic mediæval
-manner. The members which take part in the support of the aisle arcades
-are necessarily short, while those which carry the great pendentive
-arches are lengthened to reach the higher level from which those arches
-spring. But all of these members have the form of fluted Corinthian
-pilasters (Fig. <a href="#i_034">16</a>). Thus were classic members used in ways that are
-foreign to classic principles, and their proportions altered with as
-much disregard for the rules of Vitruvius as the mediæval builders had
-shown.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_034">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_034.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 16.</span>&mdash;Crossing pier of San Lorenzo.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The church of Santo Spirito, built after the architect’s death, closely
-resembles San Lorenzo in its architectural character, though it is
-larger in scale. The entablature blocks occur in the arcades here
-also, but instead of a dome over the crossing as in San Lorenzo, there
-is a circular celled vault on converging ribs, like the vault of the
-Pazzi chapel. The interior is spacious and finely proportioned, but it
-presents no features that afford further illustration of the progress
-of neo-classic design.</p>
-
-<p>The retrospective movement was carried further by the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_35">[35]</span> Florentine
-scholar and architect Leon-Batista Alberti, who, says Milizia, is
-justly regarded as one of the principal restorers of the architecture
-of antiquity.<a id="FNanchor_32" href="#Footnote_32" class="fnanchor">[32]</a> His chief designs in church architecture are found
-in Santa Maria Novella of Florence, in San Francesco of Rimini,
-and in Sant’Andrea of Mantua. The first two of these are mediæval
-structures in which Alberti’s work is confined to the remodelling of
-the exteriors, but the last was wholly designed by him, though the work
-was not completed within his lifetime, and the dome over the crossing
-is the work of another architect of a later time.</p>
-
-<p>How much Alberti did to the façade of Santa Maria Novella, the part of
-the building to which his work is confined is not very clear. Vasari
-speaks vaguely as if the whole front were by him,<a id="FNanchor_33" href="#Footnote_33" class="fnanchor">[33]</a> but from a
-foot-note by Milanesi it would appear that he merely completed a part
-which had been left unfinished by an older architect, and the work
-remaining by the older architect is said to include all below the first
-cornice except the central portal, which is attributed to Alberti.
-Milizia says<a id="FNanchor_34" href="#Footnote_34" class="fnanchor">[34]</a> that although it is common to attribute the whole
-façade to Alberti, it has too much Gothic character to be entirely by
-him, and that therefore a part of it may, with more probability of
-correctness, be assigned to Giovanni Bettini, an older architect; but
-he adds that the central portal is undoubtedly by Alberti.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_036">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_036.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 17.</span>&mdash;Façade of Santa Maria Novella.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>An examination of the monument itself would seem to show that the part
-below the first entablature, with exception of the great Corinthian
-columns and the central portal, is mediæval work (Fig. <a href="#i_036">17</a>). The whole
-Corinthian order, with the angle pilasters and the pedestals on which
-the order is raised, look like neo-classic work, and are probably by
-Alberti. This order is wholly different in character from mediæval
-design, and quite foreign to the mixture of Pisan Romanesque and
-Italian Gothic features of the distinctly mediæval part with which
-it is associated. The columns of the order are, however, of mediæval
-proportions, being eleven or twelve diameters in height, and they
-are built of small stones in a common mediæval manner. But these
-proportions were necessitated by the older work to which the order
-had to be adjusted, and the small masonry of which they are composed
-makes them harmonize with the older<span class="pagenum" id="Page_36">[36]</span> parts. The central portal has a
-round arch on fluted Corinthian pilasters framing in a deeply recessed
-rectangular opening with a classic lintel and jamb mouldings. It is
-noticeable that the arch does not spring directly from the capitals
-of the pilasters, but that the entablature block is interposed, as
-in Brunelleschi’s arcades of San Lorenzo and Santo Spirito. Milizia,
-speaking of this feature in another work by the same architect, says:
-“In these arcades Alberti observed a rule always followed in the good
-ancient times, but since universally disregarded. The arches are
-not sprung from the columns, because this would be incorrect, but
-architraves [_sic_] are interposed. It would now be ridiculous
-to inculcate the importance of this rule, which is familiar to
-children.”<a id="FNanchor_35" href="#Footnote_35" class="fnanchor">[35]</a> This, like other notions to which the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_37">[37]</span> Renaissance
-gave currency, is a mistake. In inserting the entablature block at
-the arch impost Alberti did not follow a rule always observed in the
-ancient times. This feature is uncommon in ancient Roman art. It was,
-as before remarked, introduced by the late Roman architects, who,
-being accustomed to the use of the entablature over the column in the
-trabeate system which they had borrowed from the Greeks, did not see,
-when they began to spring arches from columns, that the entablature had
-no longer any reason for existence. The radical nature of the change
-wrought in architecture by the introduction of the arch was never
-grasped by the imperial Roman designers. First framing the arch with an
-order, thus uniting two contradictory systems, they afterwards, when,
-as in the basilica of Maxentius, springing the arches of vaulting from
-columns, thought that the rules required them to crown these columns
-with bits of entablature.</p>
-
-<p>This façade appears to have been originally designed in the Pisan
-Romanesque style, with a tall, shallow blind arcade on pilaster-strips
-reaching across the ground story. But the Romanesque character was
-modified in some details, the portals having pointed arches, pointed
-arched niches sheltering tombs being ranged in the intervals between
-the pilaster-strips. How far the upper part of this façade had been
-left incomplete until Alberti took it in hand we have no means of
-knowing; but no mediæval features occur in it as it now stands, except
-the circular opening in the central compartment. Upon this front,
-then, Alberti appears to have ingrafted the great Corinthian order,
-placing a wide pilaster paired with a column on each angle, breaking
-the entablature into ressauts to cover the columns, which have nothing
-else to support, and replacing the central portal with the existing one
-in the revived classic style. The preservation of the greater part of
-the mediæval work in the ground story made it impossible to get in more
-than the four columns in the great order, and these are necessarily
-spaced in an unclassic way, with a narrow interval in the middle and
-very wide ones on either side. To the upper compartment the architect
-has given an order of pilasters surmounted by a classic pediment, and
-flanked by screen walls over the aisle compartments in the form of
-gigantic reversed consoles, apparently the first of these features
-which became common thereafter in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_38">[38]</span> Renaissance fronts. The pilasters
-of this order are again four in number, and are set in pairs on either
-side of the circular opening, the width of this opening making it
-impossible to space them otherwise. We thus have in the clerestory
-compartment of this façade a forced arrangement of pilasters, which may
-have led to that alternation of wide and narrow intervals that became
-very common in the subsequent architecture of the Renaissance. The
-attic over the ground story, which extends across the entire front and
-answers to nothing in the interior of the building, is presumably also
-by Alberti.</p>
-
-<p>The front of Santa Maria Novella is notable as the first mediæval one
-which was worked over by a Renaissance architect, and as a whole,
-notwithstanding that it is a patchwork of incongruous elements, it
-exhibits a remarkable unity of effect. The merit of Alberti’s work
-here consists in its quietness. The applied orders are in low relief,
-their details are unobtrusive, and the mellowing effect of age on the
-beautiful marble incrusting has fused the whole front into an exquisite
-colour harmony that is almost unmatched elsewhere.</p>
-
-<p>Very different is the west front of San Francesco of Rimini, in which
-Alberti has introduced a Roman composition without any admixture of
-mediæval elements. It is substantially a reproduction of the arch of
-Septimius Severus. The details are in higher relief here in conformity
-with the ancient model, and the ressauts of the entablature become
-correspondingly more salient. A ressaut of this kind is another
-feature of Roman art which has no justification on structural grounds,
-and to which there is nothing analogous in any reasonable style of
-architecture. To set a useless column in advance of an entablature and
-then make a ressaut to cover it, is irrational.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_038fp" style="max-width: 650px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate II</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_038fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">SANT’ANDREA</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Mantua</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Alberti’s capital work in church architecture is Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-begun in 1472, the year of the architect’s death, in which he made
-a frank return to Roman models in the structural forms of the whole
-edifice, as well as in the ornamental details&mdash;a thing that was rarely
-done by the architects of the Renaissance. The plan (Fig. <a href="#i_039">18</a>) is,
-however, cruciform, and the dome over the crossing is supported in
-the Byzantine manner on pendentives. The nave (Plate <a href="#i_038fp">II</a>) has a barrel
-vault on massive square piers connected by arches, the intervals
-between the piers forming side chapels, and the lower part of each
-pier having a small <span class="pagenum" id="Page_39">[39]</span>square chamber within it, so that it does not
-look as massive on the plan as it does in elevation. The east end has
-the strictly Roman form of a semicircular apse with a half-dome vault.
-The details of the interior consist of a single order of pilasters,
-on high pedestals, set on the angles of the piers, and of rich Roman
-coffering on the surfaces of the vaulting. The piers closely resemble
-those of the so-called arch of the Silversmiths in Rome, which it is
-not unlikely that Alberti had in mind in designing them, inasmuch as he
-was a devoted student of Roman architectural antiquities. This interior
-is, I think, one of the very finest that the Renaissance produced. The
-justness of its proportions, the simplicity of the structural scheme,
-and the quietness of the ornamental details are all admirable. With
-the given elements it is hard to see how a better composition could
-be made; but the incongruity between the structural and ornamental
-systems, the entirely superficial use of the order, and its unfitness
-as ornament where it has no structural meaning, are fundamental defects
-of this as of most other Renaissance designs. The scheme of St. Andrea
-foreshadows that of St. Peter’s, and was undoubtedly in the mind of
-Bramante when he was preparing his colossal project for Pope Julius II.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_039">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_039.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 18.</span>&mdash;Sant’Andrea, Mantua.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_040">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_040.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 19.</span>&mdash;Façade of Sant’Andrea, Mantua.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The west front of this church (Fig. <a href="#i_040">19</a>) is again an adaptation of
-a Roman triumphal arch design. It is, in fact, as the plan (Fig.
-<a href="#i_039">18</a>) shows, a great porch set against the true front,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_40">[40]</span> and has no
-correspondence in its parts with those of the building itself. In
-outline it is an unbroken rectangle crowned with a pediment. A very
-shallow order of Corinthian pilasters divides it into a wide central
-bay and two narrow ones. A great arch over a smaller order opens into
-a barrel-vaulted recess, on the three sides of which the entablature
-is returned. A rectangular portal, with square jambs and a cornice,
-opens into the nave, and an arch reaching to the entablature opens into
-the lateral compartment on each side, and each of these compartments
-has a barrel vault with its axis perpendicular to that of the great
-central one. The entablature of the small order is carried across the
-front of each lateral bay, dividing it into two stages, and the great
-order rises through it, embracing both stages, and forming an early
-instance of the so-called colossal order that became common in the
-later Renaissance. The great order is raised on<span class="pagenum" id="Page_41">[41]</span> pedestals, and both
-pedestals and pilasters of this order are panelled, while the small
-order rests directly on the pavement and its pilasters are fluted. It
-is noticeable that the design of the central arch is almost exactly
-like that of the central portal of Santa Maria Novella in Florence,
-the smaller entablature being broken into shallow ressauts over the
-pilasters, giving the same character to the imposts. The front as a
-whole has the quiet and refined character that distinguishes this
-architect’s work in general.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_041">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_041.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 20.</span>&mdash;Arch of Septimius Severus.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>That Alberti derived all of these façades, and especially that of St.
-Andrea, from the Roman triumphal arch scheme a direct comparison will
-show; and the arch of Septimius Severus (Fig. <a href="#i_041">20</a>) may, I think, be
-taken as the model that he had chiefly in mind. In Santa Maria Novella
-the mediæval scheme upon<span class="pagenum" id="Page_42">[42]</span> which he had to fit his work prevented such
-a disposition of the columns, and such general proportions as this
-model exhibits. He was obliged to make the lateral intercolumniations
-much wider than the central one, and to make the whole rectangle of the
-composition more oblong than that of the ancient monument; but in most
-other points he has followed the arch of Septimius Severus closely.
-As in the Roman design the entablature crowns the wall instead of the
-order, so that ressauts have to be formed to cover the columns. The
-insertion of the angle pilaster is a departure from the Roman scheme,
-and the placing of the stumpy pilaster of the attic over the great
-pilaster, instead of on the column, is another point of difference.
-But the general scheme of the ground story and attic will be seen to
-resemble that of the Roman design about as closely as the mediæval
-edifice on which it is ingrafted would allow. In San Francesco at
-Rimini the architect had a freer hand, and the order is treated in
-closer conformity with the ancient model as to the spacing of the
-columns and other details. The angles are treated precisely as they
-are in the arch of Septimius Severus, the pilasters being omitted,
-and the entablature at each end extending beyond the ressaut. The
-attic is omitted here, and the unfinished upper part of the façade is
-necessarily of different design.</p>
-
-<p>In St. Andrea at Mantua the use of pilasters instead of columns,
-and the absence of ressauts in the great order, as well as the
-substitution of a pediment for the attic, make a great difference in
-the general character of the design; and yet the triumphal arch idea
-is even more strongly marked in this case, because it is not confined
-to the mere façade but extends to the form of the whole porch. The
-great barrel-vaulted recess is an exact reproduction of the central
-passageway of the Roman arch, and so are the lesser arches which open
-out of this recess on either side.</p>
-
-<p>The triumphal arch idea applied to church fronts appears to be
-peculiar to Alberti. Most other architects among his contemporaries
-and immediate successors limit themselves to an application of the
-orders variously proportioned and disposed. In some cases the mediæval
-scheme of buttresses dividing the front into bays is retained, and
-this scheme is enriched with pilasters, or columns, and mouldings of
-classic profiling, as in the façade of the Duomo of Pienza by the
-Florentine<span class="pagenum" id="Page_43">[43]</span> architect Rossellino. In the later Renaissance façades,
-as we shall see, there is frequently no organic division of the whole
-front into bays by continuous members embracing its whole height, but
-superimposed pilasters and entablatures are variously disposed upon the
-surface without any suggestion, in the composition as a whole, of the
-triumphal arch idea (as in Vignola’s fronts, Figs. 49 and 50). But in
-the characteristic Palladian scheme an organic division is formed by
-a great order of columns reaching to the top of the nave compartment,
-and overlapping a smaller order of pilasters extending across the whole
-front as in Figure 54.</p>
-
-<p>The foregoing examples are enough to illustrate the character of
-Florentine church architecture, and that which was wrought elsewhere
-under Florentine influence, in the fifteenth century. These examples
-show us that the designers, while ostensibly striving to revive the
-antique forms, were in reality working more or less unconsciously on a
-foundation of mediæval ideas from which they could not free themselves.
-The inconsistencies of their work are largely due to the irreconcilable
-nature of the elements which they sought to unite, not appreciating
-the logic of mediæval art on the one hand, nor the true principles
-of the best art of antiquity on the other. The classic orders were
-entirely unsuited to the buildings to which they affixed them. They
-properly belong to a very different type of architecture which had been
-developed by the Greeks in ancient times, and the Greeks alone have
-used them with propriety. The Romans misapplied and deformed them,
-and the Italians of the Renaissance now surpassed the Romans in their
-misapplication and distortion. Many further illustrations of this will
-appear as we go on.</p>
-
-<p>Early in the sixteenth century this architecture began to assume
-another phase in which the mediæval elements became less conspicuous,
-though they were not eliminated, and the imperial Roman features were
-more rigorously reproduced, yet they were never used with strict
-conformity to ancient models. This phase of the art was inaugurated by
-the architect Bramante after his settlement in Rome. We shall consider
-the Roman work of Bramante, in the following chapter.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_44">[44]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER IV<br />
-<span class="subhed">THE DOME OF ST. PETER’S</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>When in the year 1503 Pope Julius II came to the papal chair, the
-architect Bramante had recently settled in Rome. Born in Urbino, he
-had spent his early manhood in the North of Italy, where he had come
-under the influence of the Florentine architect Alberti at Mantua, and
-of the early Renaissance masters at Milan and elsewhere. Under these
-influences he had acquired a style that was peculiar to the North at
-that time. But since coming to Rome he had begun to form a new manner
-under the more direct influence of the Roman antique,<a id="FNanchor_36" href="#Footnote_36" class="fnanchor">[36]</a> and he soon
-developed a style in which the ancient Roman forms were reproduced with
-stricter conformity to the ancient usage, and with smaller admixture of
-mediæval features than had before prevailed.</p>
-
-<p>An early work in Rome in which he exhibits this more rigorous classic
-tendency is the small building known as the Tempietto in the cloister
-of San Pietro in Montorio. It consists of a circular cella with shallow
-pilasters, surrounded by a colonnade of the Roman Doric order, and
-surmounted by a hemispherical dome on a high drum. It is thus in form
-like a Roman temple of Vesta with its dome raised out of the abutting
-drum and set upon its top without abutment. A glance at Figures 21
-and 22, a part section and part elevation of the temple of Vesta at
-Tivoli, and an elevation of the Tempietto, respectively,<a id="FNanchor_37" href="#Footnote_37" class="fnanchor">[37]</a> will show
-how great a change Bramante made in the adjustment of the vault to
-the supporting drum, while it will show also the essential likeness
-in other points between the two monuments. In Figure 21 it will be
-seen that the vault is well abutted by the roof of the portico, and by
-stepped rings of masonry<span class="pagenum" id="Page_45">[45]</span> over the haunch, while in Figure 22 the drum
-is raised high above the encircling portico, and the vault is sprung
-from its top, and has no abutting rings. The architect appears to have
-realized that such a scheme would be unsafe on a large scale, for in
-the one which he prepared for the dome of St. Peter’s he took care, as
-we shall see, to provide strong abutment.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_045">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_045.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 21.</span>&mdash;Temple of Vesta, Tivoli, from Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The Tempietto is but a modified copy of an ancient model, and in no
-true sense an original design. The changes wrought by the copyist are
-not of a creative kind consistent with true principles of building.
-The pilasters, and the balustrade with which the order of the portico
-is crowned, are superfluous, and the work as a whole shows little
-of Bramante’s real ability as an architect. Such merit as it has is
-primarily due to the ancient<span class="pagenum" id="Page_46">[46]</span> model which he would have done better to
-have reproduced more exactly.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_046">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_046.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 22.</span>&mdash;San Pietro in Montorio, from Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But Bramante manifested his real powers in his project for the
-great church of St. Peter, his capital work, which, however, was
-never carried to completion. It is well known how Pope Julius II
-had conceived the idea of erecting a vast tomb for himself, and
-had employed Michael Angelo to prepare the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_47">[47]</span> design. We are told by
-Vasari<a id="FNanchor_38" href="#Footnote_38" class="fnanchor">[38]</a> that the project submitted by this great artist so pleased
-the Pope that he determined to rebuild the church of St. Peter in order
-to make it more worthy to enshrine so magnificent a monument. Under
-Pope Nicholas V, half a century before, the grand old basilica, that
-had stood since the time of Constantine, had been partially demolished,
-and a new edifice on a larger scale begun by the Florentine architect,
-Rossellino. This work had not progressed very far when it was suspended
-on the death of this Pope, and operations had not been resumed until
-now, when Pope Julius resolved to demolish Rossellino’s beginning along
-with what remained of the old structure, and to make a fresh start with
-a still grander scheme, which was prepared by Bramante, who began the
-new work in the year 1506.</p>
-
-<p>There is much uncertainty as to the exact nature of Bramante’s design
-for the building as a whole. No authentic drawings embodying the
-definitive project are known to exist, and in the monument itself
-Bramante did not go far enough to show his whole intention. Even what
-he actually did cannot be wholly made out with clearness, because
-so many other hands were employed after his death. The exact form
-of his plan is uncertain, though there appears little question that
-it was to be in the form of the Greek cross with towers set in the
-external angles, and it is certain that a vast dome was to rise over
-the crossing.<a id="FNanchor_39" href="#Footnote_39" class="fnanchor">[39]</a> The work, though considerably advanced, was not
-nearly completed when, in the year 1514, the master died. He appears
-to have built the great piers for the support of the dome, with their
-connecting arches and pendentives, but not to have begun the dome
-itself.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_048">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_048.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 23.</span>&mdash;Bramante’s dome for St. Peter’s, from
-Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The scheme was to be a colossal one, and the dome was to<span class="pagenum" id="Page_48">[48]</span> be its main
-feature. We may presume that Bramante naturally shared the universal
-feeling of admiration for Brunelleschi’s dome, and that he wished to
-rival its imposing character. But his ardent and intelligent study of
-the monuments of Roman antiquity had given him a better appreciation
-of their superior<span class="pagenum" id="Page_49">[49]</span> structural merits, and in his project for the great
-dome he had sought to adhere more closely than Brunelleschi had done to
-the ancient principles and ancient forms.</p>
-
-<p>In seeking guidance from the antique two monuments in particular
-appear to have appealed to him as offering appropriate suggestions,
-the Pantheon and the Basilica of Maxentius, then called the Temple
-of Peace. The first of these monuments gave the model for a mighty
-hemispherical vault securely suspended over a vast area, while the
-second offered an example of a stupendous system of piers and arches.
-In maturing his great scheme with these models before him, he conceived
-the idea of uniting their respective sublimities, and is said to have
-boasted that he would set the Pantheon upon the arches of the Temple
-of Peace. While it is probable that the majestic elevation of the
-dome of Florence haunted his imagination, and led him to feel that
-he must lift his dome high, he wished, at the same time, to give
-the design a more classic character, and a sounder structural form.
-In striving to accomplish this double purpose Bramante produced a
-scheme for an elevated dome of almost thoroughly Roman character, and
-at the same time of imposing external effect. The architect Serlio
-gives an illustration<a id="FNanchor_40" href="#Footnote_40" class="fnanchor">[40]</a> (Fig. <a href="#i_048">23</a>) of this project which is highly
-instructive.<a id="FNanchor_41" href="#Footnote_41" class="fnanchor">[41]</a> A comparison of it with the scheme of the Pantheon
-shows a close likeness in essential forms and adjustments. The points
-of difference are mainly such as Bramante’s desire to make his dome
-externally conspicuous would require. In the Pantheon (Fig. <a href="#i_050">24</a>) the
-dome springs from within the massive drum at a level far below the
-external cornice, so that the wall above the springing forms a solid
-and powerful abutment, reaching almost to the haunch of the vault.
-Above this a stepped mass of masonry, diminishing in thickness as
-it rises, is carried well over the haunch, effectively overcoming
-any tendency to yield to the force of thrust. A Corinthian order,
-surmounted by an attic, is carried around the wall of the interior,<a id="FNanchor_42" href="#Footnote_42" class="fnanchor">[42]</a>
-while the wall on the outside is plain.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_50">[50]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_050">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_050.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 24.</span>&mdash;The Pantheon.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In Bramante’s project every essential feature of this ancient monument
-is reproduced, but with modifications which give a different aspect to
-the design as a whole, but do not constitute any such radical departure
-from the principles embodied in the Pantheon as those wrought by
-Brunelleschi in adapting the scheme of the Baptistery to that of the
-dome of the cathedral of Florence. In order to secure greater elevation
-for external effect, the architect has raised the springing level of
-the dome considerably, though he has still kept it below the top of
-the drum. The drum itself is of great thickness, and forms a strong
-continuous abutment at the springing, and the haunch of the vault is
-loaded with steps of masonry as in the Pantheon, though not quite so
-heavily. The lower half of the drum is a solid wall resting on the
-pendentives, while the upper part, which is less than half as thick
-(Fig. <a href="#i_051">25</a>), is pierced with eight<span class="pagenum" id="Page_51">[51]</span> wide openings, and its inner and
-outer faces are each adorned with an order of pilasters alternating
-with free-standing columns in the intervals. The upper wall stands on
-the inner circumference of the massive lower ring, while an encircling
-order of Corinthian columns is ranged on its outer circumference, and
-gives an effect of lightness and elegance to the exterior, which,
-together with the lantern at the crown of the dome, goes far to
-disguise the real likeness of the whole to the Pantheon scheme.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_051">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_051.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 25.</span>&mdash;Plan of Bramante’s dome, from Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In these changes and additions Bramante was governed by a clear
-understanding of the exigencies of his project. He was obliged to
-raise the internal order from the place on the ground<span class="pagenum" id="Page_52">[52]</span> level which
-it occupies in the Pantheon, to the upper part of the drum, in order
-to provide a solid foundation resting on the pendentives; and this
-compelled him to eliminate the attic story of the Pantheon scheme. The
-most radical change was that of substituting the open colonnade for the
-solid wall on the outside of the drum. It is doubtful, I think, whether
-the drum thus lightened would have had enough strength to withstand the
-enormous thrusts of such a dome.</p>
-
-<p>Like the dome of the Pantheon, Bramante’s dome was to be hemispherical
-and to have an opening at its crown. Over this he was to set the
-lantern which in outline recalls that of Brunelleschi, though it is
-of lower proportions, in keeping with the less elevated form of his
-dome, and has a small hemispherical dome instead of a conical roof. The
-shape of the lantern accords well with the composition as a whole, and
-contributes much to the aspiring expression which was now demanded,
-without wholly contradicting the classical spirit that the architect
-was striving to maintain.</p>
-
-<p>The structural merit of this scheme lies in what it has derived from
-the forms and adjustments of the Pantheon. Its weakness consists in the
-increased elevation, lifting the dome away from its abutment to such
-an extent that it may be questioned whether it could have been made
-safe without chains. The thrusts of a hemispherical dome are vastly
-more powerful than those of a vault of pointed outline, like the dome
-of Florence, but if properly abutted, as in the Pantheon,<a id="FNanchor_43" href="#Footnote_43" class="fnanchor">[43]</a> it is
-perfectly safe, and makes a better ceiling than a pointed vault. In
-reducing the efficiency of his abutment by raising the springing of the
-dome so high, the architect ought to have diminished the force of its
-thrust in a corresponding degree by giving it a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_53">[53]</span> pointed form. This
-would have made it more safe, but it would have been inconsistent with
-the classic Roman models to which he was striving to conform.</p>
-
-<p>As for Bramante’s intended architectural treatment of the rest of
-the building we have, as before remarked, no precise information. It
-appears, however, most probable that he meant to cover the arms of the
-cross with barrel vaulting on massive square piers and arches, with a
-single order of pilasters such as Alberti had used in St. Andrea at
-Mantua, and such as Michael Angelo actually employed, though in a way
-peculiar to himself, and probably unlike that in which Bramante would
-have done it. For Bramante would, I think, have followed Alberti’s
-example in raising the order on pedestals&mdash;the great scale of St.
-Peter’s especially calling for such treatment. Bramante would have
-realized that a single order large enough to rest directly on the
-pavement and allow the entablature to pass over the crowns of the
-arches of the great arcades, would dwarf the apparent scale of the
-whole interior, as Michael Angelo’s order actually does. But whatever
-his intention was as to these details, Bramante died before they could
-be carried out, and we are left in the dark as to what the church as a
-whole would have been had he lived to complete it.</p>
-
-<p>To the work of his numerous successors prior to the appointment of
-Michael Angelo, we need give no attention because their labours did
-not materially affect the final result. Their work was largely on
-paper only, and the building as it now exists is substantially Michael
-Angelo’s design, based on that of Bramante, but with extensive, and
-damaging, additions by subsequent architects.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_054">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_054.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 26.</span>&mdash;The model.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Michael Angelo at the time of his appointment as architect, in the year
-1546, was seventy-two years of age. He professed great respect for the
-original scheme of Bramante, yet he radically changed the form and
-adjustment of its main feature, the dome. In conformity with Bramante’s
-project, he made the drum massive at the base and thinner above, but in
-place of Bramante’s external colonnade surmounted by a solid ring of
-masonry, forming a continuous abutment at the springing of the vault,
-he substituted a series of sixteen isolated buttresses, and raised the
-dome so high above them that they do not meet its thrusts at all. The
-drum is carried up above the buttresses so as to form<span class="pagenum" id="Page_54">[54]</span> an attic over
-the order with which the buttresses are ornamented, and from the top of
-this attic the dome is sprung. The stepped circles of abutting masonry
-at the haunch are omitted, and instead of one solid vault shell, such
-as Bramante intended, Michael Angelo’s project provided for a variation
-of Brunelleschi’s double vault, and was to include (as the model,
-Fig. 26, shows) three separate shells.<a id="FNanchor_44" href="#Footnote_44" class="fnanchor">[44]</a> The inner shell was to be
-hemispherical (Michael Angelo thus showing that he appreciated the
-superior character of the dome of the Pantheon and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_55">[55]</span> that of Bramante’s
-scheme to the dome of Brunelleschi as to internal effect), while the
-other two were to be pointed, with diverging surfaces. Following
-Brunelleschi, he introduced a system of enormous ribs rising over the
-buttresses of the drum, and converging on the opening at the crown of
-the vault. These ribs unite the outermost two shells, extending through
-the thickness of both, and support the lantern.</p>
-
-<p>Of this hazardous scheme only the drum was completed when Michael
-Angelo died. But the existing dome, which was carried out by his
-immediate successors, is substantially his design, though the innermost
-shell of the model was omitted in execution, and the vault was thus
-made double instead of three-fold (Fig. <a href="#i_061">30</a>). This dome does not,
-however, divide into two shells from near the springing, but is carried
-up in one solid mass almost to the level of the haunch. Michael Angelo
-may have thought that this would strengthen it, but the solid part
-has not a form capable of much resistance to thrust, and the isolated
-buttresses are located so far below the springing that they contribute
-practically nothing to the strength of the system, as already remarked,
-and as we shall presently see.</p>
-
-<p>Although this great dome has been almost universally lauded, it is
-entirely indefensible from the point of view of sound principles of
-construction. The work shows that Michael Angelo was not imbued,
-as Bramante had been, with a sense of the essential conditions of
-stability in dome building as exemplified in the works of Roman
-antiquity. He had conceived an ardent admiration for the dome of
-Florence, and in emulation of it he changed the external outline from
-the hemispherical to the pointed form, and, lifting it out of the
-buttressing drum, set it on the top.<a id="FNanchor_45" href="#Footnote_45" class="fnanchor">[45]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_056">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_056.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">_A_&emsp;&emsp;<span class="smcap">Fig. 27.</span>&emsp;&emsp;_B_</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>This vast dome is an imposing object, but it is nevertheless a monument
-of structural error. Not only does its form and construction render it
-much less secure than Brunelleschi’s dome, but its supporting drum is
-entirely unsuited to its function,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_56">[56]</span> save as to its strength to bear
-the mere crushing weight of the vault. In replacing the continuous
-colonnade, with its abutting load, of Bramante’s drum by the isolated
-buttresses, Michael Angelo ignored the true principle of resistance
-to the continuous thrusts of a dome. It has been thought that the
-rib system justifies this, that the ribs gather the thrusts upon the
-buttresses and give the dome a somewhat Gothic character. But this
-cannot be so. It is impossible for a dome to have any Gothic character.
-In addition to what has been already said (p. <a href="#Page_20">20</a>) on this point, it
-may be further remarked that, so long as the surfaces between the ribs
-remain straight on plan, as in the dome of Florence, or are segments
-of a hemisphere, or of a dome of pointed form on a circular base, like
-the dome of St. Peter’s, no ribs can be made to act in a Gothic way.
-A circular vault on Gothic principles would necessarily be a celled
-vault, more or less like the small vault of the Pazzi already described
-(p. <a href="#Page_27">27</a>). In such a vault there would have to be an arch (in a true
-Gothic vault a much stilted arch) in the circumference of the drum over
-the space between each pair of ribs. The crowns of these arches would
-reach to a considerable height, in a developed Gothic vault to nearly
-or quite the height of the crown of the vault itself. The triangular
-spaces enclosed by these arches and converging ribs would then be
-vaulted over by slightly arched courses of masonry running lengthwise
-of the triangle, or from the arches to the ribs, and approximately
-parallel with the crown of the cell (_A_, Fig. 27). Thus in
-place of an unbroken hemispherical or oval vault, we should have one
-consisting of deep cells. The drum would have to rise far above the
-springing, and the haunches would need to be loaded with a solid
-filling of masonry. The vault would thus be completely hidden from view
-on the outside. Nothing short of this would produce<span class="pagenum" id="Page_57">[57]</span> a circular vault
-on Gothic principles, or one in which the ribs could act in a Gothic
-way.<a id="FNanchor_46" href="#Footnote_46" class="fnanchor">[46]</a> The nearest approach to such a form, in a vault that may with
-any propriety be called a dome, occurs over the crossing of nave and
-transept in the old cathedral of Salamanca in Spain (Fig. <a href="#i_057">28</a>).<a id="FNanchor_47" href="#Footnote_47" class="fnanchor">[47]</a> But
-this vault has a very different character from the imaginary one just
-described. It rises from the top of a high drum resting on pendentives,
-and is built on a system of salient converging ribs. The spaces<span class="pagenum" id="Page_58">[58]</span>
-between these ribs are vaulted over with courses of masonry slightly
-arched from rib to rib, and thus running in a direction perpendicular
-to that of the courses in a Gothic vault cell, as in _B_, Figure
-27. A series of hollowed gores are thus formed which give a scalloped
-instead of a plain circular plan to the vault as a whole. But such a
-vault differs fundamentally from a Gothic vault. For the line of the
-crown of each cell is the steep segmental curve _ab_ in _A_,
-Figure 29. In other words, the vault as a whole is a hemisphere with
-its surface broken into shallow hollows like the gores of a melon.
-It is obvious that in a vault with cells so shaped the thrusts are
-as great at all points in the circumference as they are in a simple
-hemispherical dome, and that such a vault can have no Gothic character.
-To develop this into any real likeness to a Gothic vault, it would be
-necessary to reduce it to an unbroken circular plan by cutting off the
-scallops at its base so that it would fit into the circular drum, upon
-the inner surface of which it would now intersect in series of small
-arches, one for each hollowed gore, with its springing at the point
-_d_ and its crown at the point _c_. Then these arches would
-have to be raised by stilting and pointing until their crowns were
-brought up to the level, or near the level, of the point _b_ as in
-_B_ of the same figure. Thus the line _dc_, which represents
-the height of the arches in the first stage of this development,
-becomes the line _ac_ in the second stage. So long as the chord of
-the arc _bc_ is a steeply inclined line, the vaulting cells cannot
-bear upon the ribs, nor can the thrusts of the vault be concentrated in
-a Gothic way.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_057">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_057.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 28.</span>&mdash;Interior of dome of Salamanca.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_058">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_058.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">_A_&emsp;&emsp;<span class="smcap">Fig. 29.</span>&emsp;&emsp;_B_</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_59">[59]</span></p>
-
-<p>The vault of Salamanca is not a Gothic vault in any sense, though its
-rib system and its hollowed cells conform with the earliest stage of
-apsidal vault development leading to Gothic.<a id="FNanchor_48" href="#Footnote_48" class="fnanchor">[48]</a> It is a dome, and like
-the larger dome of St. Peter’s, it is sprung from the top of the drum;
-but unlike St. Peter’s dome, it is powerfully abutted by turrets and
-dormers built against its springing and its haunch, and it is loaded at
-the crown with a cone of masonry, so that from without it looks like a
-stumpy spire, and not like a dome.<a id="FNanchor_49" href="#Footnote_49" class="fnanchor">[49]</a></p>
-
-<p>But Michael Angelo’s vault has not even such remote approach to
-Gothic character as the small dome of Salamanca has. Its surface
-is unbroken by any hollowing into cells. It is a perfect circle on
-plan, and its ribs, which are embedded and not salient on the inside,
-cannot, therefore, sustain the vault in any Gothic way. This dome
-has, moreover, so much of a spherical shape as to give it a stronger
-tendency to thrust than the dome of Florence has, and the thrusts are
-exerted equally on all points in the circumference of the drum. The
-isolated buttresses are therefore illogical, and being set against
-the drum only, and not even reaching to the top of the drum, they are
-ineffectual. Thus though the dome was bound with two iron chains, one
-placed near the springing, and the other at about half the vertical
-height of the vault,<a id="FNanchor_50" href="#Footnote_50" class="fnanchor">[50]</a> it began to yield apparently soon after its
-completion. Fissures opened in various parts of both dome and drum
-which at length caused such apprehensions of danger, that Pope Innocent
-XI called a council of the most able engineers and architects of the
-time<a id="FNanchor_51" href="#Footnote_51" class="fnanchor">[51]</a> to examine into the extent of the damage, and ascertain
-whether serious danger existed. This council concluded that the cupola
-was in no danger of disintegration, and the Pope, in order to restore
-confidence in its safety, charged Carlo Fontana, the architect, to
-write a book on the building and prove the groundlessness of any
-fears of its collapse. Thus the matter appears for the time to have
-been dropped. But subsequently the condition<span class="pagenum" id="Page_60">[60]</span> of the structure became
-so alarming that three eminent mathematicians, among whom was the
-celebrated Boscovich, were, in the year 1742, commissioned by Pope
-Benedict XIV to make a further examination and submit a report with
-recommendations for its consolidation.</p>
-
-<p>The condition of the fabric at the time of this examination will be
-understood from Figure 30, a reproduction of the illustration subjoined
-to the mathematicians’ report.<a id="FNanchor_52" href="#Footnote_52" class="fnanchor">[52]</a> They found the structure, as the
-illustration shows, rent into numerous fissures, some of which were
-large enough to allow a man’s arm to be thrust through them. In some
-places these cracks had been filled up with brick and cement, and new
-ones had opened in the filling.<a id="FNanchor_53" href="#Footnote_53" class="fnanchor">[53]</a> At what time the ruptures had
-commenced could not be definitely ascertained, but the mathematicians
-express the opinion, for which they state their reasons, that they
-may have started very soon after the completion of the work.<a id="FNanchor_54" href="#Footnote_54" class="fnanchor">[54]</a> That
-they were not due to any weakness in the substructure was shown by the
-fact that this remained apparently quite firm. Had the fractures been
-caused by any weakness in the piers or pendentives, the mathematicians
-say,<a id="FNanchor_55" href="#Footnote_55" class="fnanchor">[55]</a> they would be wide at the base of the drum, whereas they were
-found (as shown in the illustration) to be small at the base and to
-increase in magnitude toward the top of the drum, and in the region of
-the haunch of the dome. This was thought by them to show that they were
-clearly due to weakness resulting from the form of the structure. The
-report states<a id="FNanchor_56" href="#Footnote_56" class="fnanchor">[56]</a> that the weight of the lantern had caused the heads
-of the great ribs to sink, the dome to expand at the haunch and at the
-springing, and the wall of the drum to be pressed outward at the top.
-To consolidate the fabric they recommended that additional chains be
-placed at various levels, the old ones having, they thought,<a id="FNanchor_57" href="#Footnote_57" class="fnanchor">[57]</a> burst
-asunder by the force of the thrusts; but this could not be verified
-because they are embedded in the masonry. They also recommended clamps
-of iron to hold in the buttresses.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_061">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_061.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center">CVPOLA DI S PIETRO</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 30.</span>&mdash;The dome with its ruptures.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The Marquis Poleni of Padua, a distinguished engineer of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_62">[62]</span> the time,
-was then called to examine the dome and to take such means as he might
-judge most effective to secure it against further disintegration.
-Milizia tells us<a id="FNanchor_58" href="#Footnote_58" class="fnanchor">[58]</a> that Poleni, after careful examination, expressed
-the opinion that although the cupola had not the catenary outline which
-he considered the best for stability, it had nevertheless a good form,
-and was in no danger of ruin. He pronounced the fissures of no material
-consequence,<a id="FNanchor_59" href="#Footnote_59" class="fnanchor">[59]</a> and attributed them to two classes of causes. The
-first of these he thought was haste in construction. The dome having
-been built in twenty-two months with materials of unequal quality,
-and not carefully laid, unequal consolidation resulted and caused
-numerous ruptures. The second class of causes he considered to consist
-in the action of heat and cold, humidity and dryness, lightning and
-earthquake. Thus far, says Milizia, the reasoning of Poleni is just,
-and worthy of his great mind, and he adds, “It would seem, then, that
-since the cupola was solid, it ought to have been left in peace, but he
-nevertheless advised five chains, which were placed under the direction
-of Vanvitelli.”<a id="FNanchor_60" href="#Footnote_60" class="fnanchor">[60]</a> The first of these chains was located at the base
-of the drum, the second at the level of the attic, the third at the
-springing of the dome, the fourth above the haunch, and the fifth
-around the opening at the base of the lantern.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_062fp" style="max-width: 532px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate III</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_062fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">DOME OF ST. PETER’S</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Rome</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Poleni, in his own book, is not wholly consistent in what he says of
-the dome. While affirming its form to be admirable and its strength
-sufficient, and attributing the ruptures to other causes than those
-inherent in the nature of the design, he yet, in another place, admits
-that they may be to some extent due to the shape of the vault which
-he here pronounces not high, or acute, enough.<a id="FNanchor_61" href="#Footnote_61" class="fnanchor">[61]</a> His admiration for
-Michael Angelo makes it hard for him, as a rule, to find any radical
-defect in the composition; but this passage, and the fact that he
-caused the additional binding chains to be applied, would seem to show
-that he had misgivings, and did not consider the monument so entirely
-<span class="pagenum" id="Page_63">[63]</span>safe as the general tenor of his book would lead us to believe. And
-the same misgivings are betrayed in what is said by the numerous other
-writers whose opinions are cited by him, though like himself they write
-for the most part with a manifest bias in favour of Michael Angelo.
-Thus one of these writers proposes that the outer covering of lead
-should be stripped off on account of its weight, and be replaced with
-copper, to which Poleni objects,<a id="FNanchor_62" href="#Footnote_62" class="fnanchor">[62]</a> affirming that the weight is an
-advantage, and tends to hold the dome together. Another writer suggests
-that the lantern be removed in order to relieve the fabric of its
-weight. Another thinks that the buttresses should be heavily weighted
-with statues. It was also proposed that additional buttresses should
-be set against the attic of the drum, and carried up against the dome
-itself; and again it was proposed that massive abutments be built up
-over each of the four great piers, but to this it was objected that
-the additional weight of such abutments would dangerously overcharge
-the substructure. The most radical suggestion was that both dome and
-drum be demolished and rebuilt in a more pointed form. All of these
-suggestions were rejected, and it was finally decided to employ the
-additional chains proposed by Poleni as already stated.</p>
-
-<p>The dome of St. Peter’s (Plate <a href="#i_062fp">III</a>) was conceived in a grandiose
-spirit, which, while it drew inspiration in part from the ancient Roman
-source, recklessly disregarded the lessons which Roman art should teach
-as to principles of construction. I have said that Brunelleschi led
-the way in a wrong direction when he set his great dome on the top
-of its drum, and had resort to clamps and chains for the resistance
-to its thrusts that should have been given by abutment. In following
-his example, Michael Angelo wandered still farther from the path of
-true and monumental art. To make a dome on a large scale a conspicuous
-object, from the springing to the crown, is a thing that cannot be
-safely done in stone masonry. To make it stand at all, resort must be
-had to extraneous and hidden means of support, and even these are of
-uncertain efficiency for any length of time. The ancient Roman and
-the Byzantine builders settled, I think, for all time the proper mode
-of constructing domed edifices. Bramante had recognized this, and
-while striving to include in his design for the dome of St. Peter’s
-as much as he could of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_64">[64]</span> the new character embodied in Brunelleschi’s
-dome, he tried at the same time to keep safely within the limits of
-the principles that had governed the ancient practice. He gave as much
-elevation to his dome as he thought these principles would allow, but
-even this, as we have seen, was too much, and in greatly increasing
-this elevation, so as to leave the dome entirely without abutment,
-Michael Angelo took unwarrantable risks, and lent his genius to the
-support of false principles.</p>
-
-<p>That this has not been generally recognized is due to the fact, already
-remarked, that the architects and leaders of taste of the Renaissance
-have made too little account of structural propriety, and structural
-expression, as a necessary basis for architectural design.</p>
-
-<p>Recent writers have ignored the condition of this monument. They do
-not appear to be aware of it; and although it has been fully set
-forth, and discussed at great length by the earlier Italian writers,
-few of them have found the true cause in its flagrant violation of the
-fundamental laws of stability. They attributed the alarming progress
-of disintegration, as we have seen, to accidents and circumstances
-of various kinds; and have sought to shift the responsibility to the
-shoulders of Bramante. They have affirmed that he did not take enough
-care to make his foundations secure. There appears to be some justice
-in this, though since his work was strengthened by his immediate
-successors<a id="FNanchor_63" href="#Footnote_63" class="fnanchor">[63]</a> the ruptures in the dome cannot, according to the
-mathematicians, be attributed to this. The remarks of the old writers
-on Bramante must, I think, be taken with some allowance. Their bias
-against him is very marked. Thus Poleni quotes Condivi, a disciple
-of Michael Angelo, as saying, “Bramante being, as every one knows,
-given to every kind of pleasure, and a great spendthrift, not even the
-provision given by the Pope, however much it was, sufficed him, and
-seeking to expedite his work, he made the walls of bad materials, and
-of insufficient size and strength.”<a id="FNanchor_64" href="#Footnote_64" class="fnanchor">[64]</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_65">[65]</span></p>
-
-<p>A great deal has been said of the beauty of St. Peter’s dome. It
-has been held up as a model of architectural elegance by countless
-writers from Vasari down. But no abstract beauty, no impressiveness
-as a commanding feature in the general view of the ancient city
-that it may have, can make amends for such structural defects. Its
-beauty has, however, I think, been exaggerated. Its lack of visible
-organic connection with the substructure makes it inferior in effect
-to the dome of Florence, where the structural lines of the edifice,
-from the ground upward, give a degree of organic unity, and the
-buttressed half-domed apses, grouped in happy subordination about the
-base of the drum, prepare the eye to appreciate the majesty of the
-soaring cupola as it rises over them. The dome of St. Peter’s has
-not the beauty of logical composition. Beauty in architecture may, I
-think, be almost defined as the artistic coördination of structural
-parts. As in any natural organic form, a well-designed building
-has a consistent internal anatomy, and its external character is a
-consequence and expression of this. The dome of St. Peter’s violates
-the true principles of organic composition, and this I believe to be
-incompatible with the highest architectural beauty.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_66">[66]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER V<br />
-<span class="subhed">CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMAN RENAISSANCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>As for the rest of the church of St. Peter, we need give attention to
-that part only which was designed by Michael Angelo on the basis of
-the original scheme of Bramante, namely, all to the eastward of,<a id="FNanchor_65" href="#Footnote_65" class="fnanchor">[65]</a>
-and including, the first bay west of the crossing. The western bays
-of the nave as it now stands were, as is well known, added at a later
-time by the architect Maderna. The plan (Fig. <a href="#i_067">31</a>) of the earlier part
-is thoroughly fine, and if the elevation had been made consistent with
-this plan, St. Peter’s might have been one of the noblest monuments
-in Christendom. But the architects of the Renaissance rarely sought
-consistency in design; they were prone, from first to last, to mix
-incongruous elements. The essentially Byzantine plan here adopted
-could not be carried out in elevation with classic Roman details
-with a noble result; and the attempt which Michael Angelo made to
-produce an architectural effect foreign to the real structural system
-led of necessity, not only to such inconsistencies as are common in
-Renaissance motives, but to some awkward makeshifts which have not, I
-believe, been hitherto noticed by writers on this edifice.</p>
-
-<p>Following what appears to have been Bramante’s intention, Michael
-Angelo constructed barrel vaults over the arms of the cross,<a id="FNanchor_66" href="#Footnote_66" class="fnanchor">[66]</a>
-supporting them on piers and arches which had been begun by Bramante.
-To this simple and reasonable scheme he applied a colossal order of
-Corinthian pilasters, a pair against each pier, as Alberti had done on
-a smaller scale at Mantua, and as Bramante appears to have intended in
-the great piers of the crossing, if not in all of the others. Apart
-from the superficial and purely ornamental character of the order, and
-its<span class="pagenum" id="Page_67">[67]</span> inappropriateness as ornament in such a system, its exaggerated
-scale dwarfs the effect of magnitude in the whole interior. The eye
-naturally estimates this magnitude by the customary proportions of a
-large classic order, and while these are by no means fixed, there is an
-approximate mean scale upon which we base our judgment. No beholder on
-entering St. Peter’s can, indeed, fail to be impressed with the unusual
-size of the order; but he is not apt to realize how far it exceeds
-the largest orders of antiquity. The order of the Parthenon is about
-forty-five feet high, and that of the portico of the Pantheon is about
-sixty feet. These are exceptionally large among the orders of Greek and
-Roman antiquity<a id="FNanchor_67" href="#Footnote_67" class="fnanchor">[67]</a> but the order of St. Peter’s is one hundred feet
-high.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_067">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_067.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 31.</span>&mdash;Plan of St. Peter’s, from Fontana.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_68">[68]</span></p>
-
-<p>The lack of due effect of scale in this interior has been often
-remarked, and it is generally attributed to the great magnitude of the
-structural parts. The size of these parts could not, however, well be
-different from what they are. Their magnitude is determined by the
-scale of the great dome and the width and altitude of the arms of the
-cross. The piers of the crossing are masses of masonry measuring on
-their longer sides more than fifty feet on the pavement, while the
-pendentive arches are one hundred and fifty feet high, and those of
-the arms of the cross are seventy-five feet high. But with appropriate
-treatment their scale might have been made more apparent. To adorn such
-piers and frame such arches with a classic order is to destroy the
-proper effect of scale, as well as to violate the true principles of
-architectural design by using structural members without any structural
-meaning.</p>
-
-<p>Apart from the barbarism already remarked (p. <a href="#Page_29">29</a>) of springing a vault
-from a classic entablature, the effect of the gigantic order is unhappy
-in other respects; the great salience of its cornice cuts off from view
-the lower part of the vaulting, and this pronounced overhanging ledge,
-extending around the whole interior, breaks the continuity of the
-upright lines into the vaulting, and diminishes the effect of altitude.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_069">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_069.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 32.</span>&mdash;Section of aisle of St. Peter’s.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But not only did Michael Angelo employ this incongruous and ineffective
-ornamental scheme for the interior of St. Peter’s, he also adopted a
-corresponding design for the exterior which wholly contradicts the real
-character of the structure and led the architect into some curious
-makeshifts. For this exterior he used another gigantic order surmounted
-with an attic story. This obliged him to carry up the enclosing walls
-of the aisles to a height equal to that of the nave, and led to
-difficulties within. For the aisle vaulting was now far down below the
-top of these walls, and it therefore became necessary, unless the space
-above this vaulting was to be left open to the sky, with the enclosing
-wall standing as a mere screen answering to nothing behind it,<a id="FNanchor_68" href="#Footnote_68" class="fnanchor">[68]</a> to
-construct a flat roof at the level of the attic cornice. Figure 32, a
-section through this part of the structure, will explain this and some
-other awkward expedients to which the architect was driven by the use
-of this colossal external order. Of the two compartments through which
-the line<span class="pagenum" id="Page_70">[70]</span> _AB_ (plan, Fig. 31) passes, one has a barrel vault
-and the other a dome, and, as each of the other corresponding parts of
-the plan are vaulted in the same way, there are four small domes in
-all. The effect of four smaller domes grouped around the great central
-one would be happy for both internal and external effect, if they were
-properly related in proportions, and the scheme were carried out in a
-structurally consistent and rational way; but such a scheme could not
-be developed here. For from the level of the aisle arches a dome, even
-on a proportionately high drum, could not be made to reach the level
-of the cornice of the enclosing wall unreasonably elevated for the
-sake of the gigantic external order. But Michael Angelo nevertheless
-constructed such a dome (_A_, Fig. 32), although it had to be sunk
-up to its crown beneath the aisle roof, and then, for external effect,
-he built another dome over it (_B_, Fig. 32). To light the lower
-dome it was necessary to sink oblique openings, _a_, through the
-massive masonry of the roof, and to light the useless vaulted chamber,
-_b_, which he was obliged to make over the barrel vault of the
-inner compartment (the crown of which is still farther down below the
-roof), the well, _c_, had to be sunk. Thus instead of making a
-reasonable design with ornamental details appropriate to its structural
-forms, Michael Angelo first conceived an ornamental scheme consisting
-of the inappropriate colossal order, and then fitted the building to
-it, filling up vacant spaces with extravagantly massive solids and
-useless voids, and resorting to other tortuous devices to piece out a
-fundamentally irrational system.</p>
-
-<p>Such is St. Peter’s church, which, though it has been much criticised,
-has been more generally lauded as a model of architectural greatness.
-Its real character has rarely been analyzed or rationally considered.
-That it has qualities of majesty and grandeur need not be denied; but
-these qualities are mainly due to its vast magnitude, and to what
-it retains of the design of its first, and greatest, architect. The
-manner in which the scheme of Bramante was modified and distorted
-by his successors, and chiefly by Michael Angelo, notwithstanding
-his professions of admiration for Bramante’s intentions, is far
-from admirable, as I think the foregoing account of its structural
-and artistic aberrations must show. The building as a whole is
-characterized by incongruity and extravagance, and when we<span class="pagenum" id="Page_71">[71]</span> consider
-further that the ornamentation of the interior is for the most
-part a cheap deception, the rich coffering of the vaulting and the
-pilasters of the great order being wrought in stucco on a foundation of
-brickwork, we get the measure of the ideals and architectural standards
-of men who, like Vasari, could write of it that, “not in Christendom,
-nor in all the world, can a building of greater magnificence and
-grandeur be seen.”<a id="FNanchor_69" href="#Footnote_69" class="fnanchor">[69]</a> And this short-sighted admiration did not abate
-as time went on, as we learn from the estimates quoted by Fontana in
-his well-known book,<a id="FNanchor_70" href="#Footnote_70" class="fnanchor">[70]</a> among which are the following: “Temple more
-famous than that of Solomon,” “Unique miracle of the world,” “Chief
-among the most celebrated of Christendom,” “Compendium of the arts,”
-“Basis of the Catholic faith,” “Unique edifice of the orb of earth,”
-etc., etc.</p>
-
-<p>Before leaving St. Peter’s a word may be said of a project for the
-building which was prepared by Antonio San Gallo the younger, Michael
-Angelo’s immediate predecessor as architect for the fabric. This
-design, no part of which was ever carried out, is embodied in a wooden
-model preserved with that of Michael Angelo in the existing edifice.
-The most meritorious feature of this model is the dome which, from
-a structural point of view, is better than the one that was built,
-since it is well abutted both at the springing and at the haunch. This
-important condition is secured, however, by an architectural treatment
-that cannot be commended, and consists of two superimposed concentric
-arcades, the lower one surrounding the drum and abutting the vault at
-the springing, while the upper one is set in retreat and fortifies the
-haunch. The architectural effect of these arcades, which are of course
-adorned with classic orders, is not happy because an arcade with a
-classic order is not an appropriate form of abutment, though it may be
-made mechanically effective, and also because the upper circle, rising
-from within the circumference of the lower one, gives the composition
-an unpleasantly telescopic effect.</p>
-
-<p>Our consideration of St. Peter’s has led us to an advanced phase of the
-church architecture of the Roman Renaissance, and we must now go back
-and examine a few of the earlier<span class="pagenum" id="Page_72">[72]</span> structures in Rome and elsewhere that
-were produced under the distinctly Roman influence.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_072">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_072.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 33.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The church of Sant’Agostino is spoken of as a building of the early
-Roman Renaissance, and is said to have been built by the architect
-Giacomo da Pietra Santa between 1471 and 1484. But it is incredible
-that such a church could have been designed by any architect of the
-Renaissance, or by an Italian architect of any time. Letarouilly says
-of it that from the thirteenth century the Augustinians had a convent
-and small church in Rome, and that two centuries later they resolved to
-enlarge the church, and employed as architects Giacomo da Pietra Santa
-and a Florentine named Sebastiano.<a id="FNanchor_71" href="#Footnote_71" class="fnanchor">[71]</a> The character of the building is
-such, however, as to warrant the belief that it is a mediæval structure
-with slight interior ornamental additions of the Renaissance, which
-may be by Pietra Santa, and a façade, dating from before the close
-of the fifteenth century, by Baccio Pintelli. In general character
-the church is in the style of the Rhenish Romanesque architecture of
-the twelfth century. It has a nave with groined vaulting in square
-compartments, each embracing two vault compartments of the aisles. It
-has also the Rhenish alternate system with plain square piers, and
-archivolts of square section, originally without mouldings, and the
-main piers have each a broad pilaster-strip carried up to the springing
-of the vaults. The triforium space has no openings, and the clerestory
-has plain round-arched windows. It is thus a thoroughly northern
-Romanesque scheme, entirely logical in its simple construction and fine
-in its proportions. The Renaissance interpolations consist of a few
-ornamental details only. A stilted composite column is set against the
-pilaster-strip of each main pier (Fig. <a href="#i_072">33</a>), this column is crowned with
-an entablature-block reaching to the level of the triforium, and upon
-it is set a short pilaster surmounted with a smaller entablature-block
-at the vaulting impost. This superfluous and irrational compound,
-breaking<span class="pagenum" id="Page_73">[73]</span> the reasonable and effective continuity of the mediæval
-pilaster-strip, greatly disfigures the originally noble design. The
-only other neo-classic details of the interior are mouldings at the
-arch imposts and on the archivolts, and coffering on the soffits of
-the arches. These are quiet and less injurious in effect, though
-equally superfluous and inappropriate. Thus did the sophistication
-of the Renaissance designers often blind them to real architectural
-excellence, and lead them to fancy that they could improve such an
-admirable and consistent interior by incongruous and meaningless
-features.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_073">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_073.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 34.</span>&mdash;Façade of Sant’ Agostino.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The façade (Fig. <a href="#i_073">34</a>) is wholly of the Renaissance, and has no mediæval
-character except in its general outline, which conforms with that of
-the building itself. It is a simple design,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_74">[74]</span> and foreshadows those of
-Vignola and Della Porta for the church of the Gesù, to which it is
-superior in merit, being more reasonable and quiet. Shallow pilasters
-of considerable elegance mark the divisions of the interior, the
-portals are framed with simple classic mouldings without orders, and
-the aisle compartments are surmounted with reversed consoles after the
-manner of those introduced by Alberti in the façade of Santa Maria
-Novella in Florence. These consoles are, however, so different in
-character from the rest of the façade, having their details in higher
-relief and being set a little in retreat, that they would appear to
-be later interpolations. Answering to nothing in the building, they
-are superfluous ornaments, and do not improve the composition, which
-without them is as reasonable as a composition made up of superficial
-classic details can well be. A peculiar feature of this front is the
-truncated pediment that crowns the lower division, and forms the basis
-of the clerestory compartment. The small rectangular tablets that break
-the wall surfaces are also noticeable as foreshadowing a treatment
-that was subsequently much affected by Vignola. Contemporaneously
-with the façade, and by the same architect, a dome on a drum resting
-on pendentives was built over the crossing. The present dome rising
-directly from the pendentives is an alteration of a later time.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_075">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_075.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 35.</span>&mdash;Exterior of Santa Maria della
-Consolazione, Todi.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the earlier churches that were wholly built under the Roman
-Renaissance influence, the Byzantine scheme largely prevails in the
-plan and structural forms, probably because it lent itself to the most
-effective display of a high central dome. Among the first of these
-buildings is the church of Santa Maria della Consolazione outside the
-wall at Todi. The design is attributed to Bramante,<a id="FNanchor_72" href="#Footnote_72" class="fnanchor">[72]</a> and it seems
-to bear enough resemblance to what we know of his work to justify the
-attribution. The arms of the cross here take the form of apses, the
-eastern one being semicircular on plan, and the others polygonal.
-The dome (Fig. <a href="#i_075">35</a>) is raised on a high drum, and is almost an exact
-reproduction of that of San Pietro in Montorio. Its thrusts are thus
-entirely unbuttressed, but it is probably bound with chains, as was
-the custom at this time in domes constructed in this manner.<a id="FNanchor_73" href="#Footnote_73" class="fnanchor">[73]</a> The
-half-domes of the apses are better adjusted. They spring from within
-the supporting walls, which are carried<span class="pagenum" id="Page_75">[75]</span> up high enough to give
-effective abutment, and are loaded at the haunch by stepped rings of
-masonry, as in the Pantheon. The details of the interior (Fig. <a href="#i_076">36</a>)
-consist of two superimposed orders of small pilasters, with great
-pilasters on the angles of the crossing reaching from the pavement to
-the springing of the pendentive arches, and from ressauts of the upper
-entablature converging ribs rise against the surfaces of the vaults.
-Several further awkward results are here noticeable as a consequence
-of this application of the inappropriate classic details to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_76">[76]</span>
-Byzantine structural scheme. The entablature which is carried around
-the whole interior at the springing of the vaults, has to do duty at
-once for the small order of the upper stage and for the great angle
-pilasters, and thus in so far as it is in good proportion for the one
-it cannot be so for the other. Then the true magnitudes of the piers
-and the pendentive arches are falsified by the pilasters and simulated
-archivolts which spring from them. These piers and arches really
-embrace in width<span class="pagenum" id="Page_77">[77]</span> both the pilasters and archivolts and the spaces of
-wall and vaulting between them and the pilasters of the smaller orders
-and ribs which spring from them. The proper and impressive massiveness
-of the essentially Byzantine system employed is thus contradicted by an
-apparent skeleton of classic orders simulating an organic structural
-scheme which has no real existence.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_076">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_076.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 36.</span>&mdash;Interior of Todi.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_077">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_077.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 37.</span>&mdash;Plan of San Biagio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The exterior of this monument (Fig. <a href="#i_075">35</a>) has much merit in its general
-form and proportions. The great central square mass, visible from the
-ground upward, gives the sense of support for the dome which the eye
-demands, and the apses with their half-domes are effectively grouped
-in subordination to the crowning feature. But this merit, which Todi
-shares with many other buildings of the Renaissance, is primarily due
-to the Byzantine scheme adopted, and cannot, therefore, be wholly
-credited to the Renaissance architect.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_078">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_078.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 38.</span>&mdash;Interior of San Biagio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_079">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_079.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 39.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A variation of this scheme occurs in the church of San Biagio<span class="pagenum" id="Page_78">[78]</span> at
-Montepulciano by Antonio San Gallo the elder, and begun in the year
-1518. Here the arms of the cross (Fig. <a href="#i_077">37</a>) are square, with an apse
-added to the eastern arm. The interior is ornamented with a single,
-and very heavy, Doric order (Fig. <a href="#i_078">38</a>), framing arched recesses in the
-imperial Roman manner. The use of pilasters on the angles makes the
-awkward combination of a pilaster coupled with a column necessary,
-and since the entablature is in the plane of the wall, it has to be
-broken into very salient ressauts in order to cover these members.
-Above the entablature is a low ledge in retreat, broken into ressauts
-in conformity with those of the entablature, and from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_79">[79]</span> these ressauts
-coffered archivolts are sprung under the ends of the barrel vaults
-which cover the arms of the cross. The Doric order is designed here,
-for the most part, in close conformity to ancient models, save for
-the pilaster on the angle, which does not generally occur in Roman
-monuments. The common Roman treatment of the angle is shown in the
-arch of Septimius Severus (Fig. <a href="#i_041">20</a>, p. 41), where the end column of
-the order is placed at some distance from the end of the façade, which
-is left in retreat without any pilaster. But Serlio<a id="FNanchor_74" href="#Footnote_74" class="fnanchor">[74]</a> describes the
-ruins of an ancient Roman building (Fig. <a href="#i_079">39</a>) that appears to have been
-a sort of open arcade or stoa, used as a meeting place for merchants,
-on the angles of which pilasters are set together with columns,
-somewhat as they were by Alberti in Santa Maria Novella, by San Gallo
-here in San Biagio, and by many other architects of the Renaissance. He
-speaks of the treatment of the angles of this building as follows: “The
-corner pilasters are larger than the others, and were truly made with
-excellent judgment, for they strengthen<span class="pagenum" id="Page_80">[80]</span> the angle with good effect;
-and from this architects may learn how to design angles with columns
-and pilasters bound together, in order that the corner may be brought
-into line with the column, which gives more solidity to the angle. If
-the said<span class="pagenum" id="Page_81">[81]</span> angle were withdrawn into line with the middle pilasters,
-the façade, when viewed obliquely, with the round column on the angle,
-would appear imperfect, and for this ... I strongly commend this form
-of angle because it may be fully seen from all sides.”</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_080">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_080.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 40.</span>&mdash;San Biagio, Montepulciano.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Externally the composition is remarkably good in its larger features
-(Fig. <a href="#i_080">40</a>). The dome, of slightly pointed outline, on a high drum, rises
-grandly from the substructure, and is well proportioned in relation
-to it. The wall surfaces are treated broadly, with no orders carried
-across them. They are divided into two stages, with a pediment over
-each façade. Super-imposed pilasters are set on the angles, and a Doric
-entablature, carried across the whole front, with ressauts over the
-lower pilasters, divides the two stages. The wall of the lower stage is
-entirely plain, with a severely simple rectangular portal surmounted
-by a pediment. The wall of the upper stage is divided into rectangular
-panels, as in the attic of the Pazzi chapel in Florence, the central
-panel being pierced with a square-headed window and framed with an
-order of which the capitals are Ionic and the entablature Doric. The
-cornice of the top story and the raking cornice of the pediment of
-each façade are broken into ressauts over the pilasters, and an order
-of Ionic pilasters, with a very high entablature broken into ressauts,
-surrounds the drum which supports the dome. Square detached towers
-are set in the reëntrant angles of the west side, only one of which
-was carried to completion. The completed one is in three stages, each
-adorned with a heavy order, Doric, Ionic, and Corinthian respectively.
-In these orders half-columns are coupled with angle pilasters, as in
-the interior, and the entablatures have ressauts on the angles over
-these members. An octagonal spire-like lantern, with a tall drum
-adorned with an order of Corinthian pilasters and surmounted by an
-attic, crowns the tower. Small obelisks set on the tower angles and
-reversed consoles against the angles of the attic give a simulation
-of Gothic form to the neo-classic scheme, and show the strong hold
-that mediæval ideas still retained upon the minds of the designers.
-The first of these spire-like towers of the Renaissance appears to
-be that of the church of Santo Spirito in Florence, which is spoken
-of by Milizia as the most beautiful of Italian bell towers.<a id="FNanchor_75" href="#Footnote_75" class="fnanchor">[75]</a> It
-was designed by<span class="pagenum" id="Page_82">[82]</span> Baccio d’Agnolo, who, beginning as a wood carver,
-imbibed the new enthusiasm for the antique, and after studying the
-ancient monuments of Rome<a id="FNanchor_76" href="#Footnote_76" class="fnanchor">[76]</a> began the practice of architecture.
-This campanile is thus noteworthy as the first of a large class of
-modern towers with spires of which Wren’s famous steeples were the
-ultimate outcome. The scheme is based on the mediæval campanile, the
-earliest form of which is the Lombard Romanesque tower. The Lombard
-tower is characterized by its simple rectangular outline, the walls
-rising sheer from the ground to the cornice, and strengthened and
-adorned with shallow pilaster-strips, corbelled string-courses marking
-the successive stories, and by small grouped openings. The tower of
-Santa Maria Novella in Florence is designed on this model, and the
-neighbouring tower of Prato and Giotto’s famous campanile are later and
-richer modifications of the same type. In the tower of Santo Spirito
-(Fig. <a href="#i_082">41</a>) Baccio d’Agnolo has taken the Lombard scheme and clothed it
-with a pseudo-classic dress. While his classic details have much of
-that elegance which belongs to the best Italian work, they are out of
-place in such a structure. The tall pilaster-strips of the mediæval
-tower gave an expression as of an organic skeleton running through the
-building. They had been developed out of the classic pilaster to meet
-the needs of the mediæval type of structure, and in substituting the
-superimposed classic orders for the appropriate continuous members, the
-artist did violence to the true principles of design.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_082">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_082.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 41.</span>&mdash;Tower of Santo Spirito.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_83">[83]</span></p>
-
-<p>The lantern with which this tower is crowned is an adaptation of
-Brunelleschi’s lantern on the dome of the cathedral, but made more
-aspiring in form, so that the general outline is like that of a Gothic
-spire. But the form of a Gothic spire is far removed from anything that
-is proper to classic composition.</p>
-
-<p>Returning to San Biagio, it may be said that the orders here have a
-closer conformity with those of classic antiquity than occurs in the
-earlier monuments already mentioned, except the Tempietto of San Pietro
-in Montorio by Bramante.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_083">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_083.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 42.</span>&mdash;Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the nave of the church of Santissima Annunziatta in Arezzo, the same
-architect produced a different design. The nave (Fig. <a href="#i_083">42</a>), of only
-three bays, is covered with a barrel vault, and the aisles have small
-domes on pendentives. The supporting piers are square with a shallow
-Corinthian pilaster on the face of each and an entablature passing over
-the crowns of the arches. The archivolts are deep, and each one is
-moulded on the face and plain on the soffit. These are carried on plain
-pilasters with simple impost mouldings. The wall above the entablature
-is plain and unbroken, except by a round-arched window over each bay of
-the ground story,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_84">[84]</span> and is crowned with a heavy cornice from which the
-vaulting springs. We have here a structural system of imperial Roman
-massiveness, necessitated by the use of the great barrel vault.</p>
-
-<p>After the early part of the sixteenth century Italy produced few
-architects of a high order of genius. Most of the more advanced
-neo-classic art is the work of mediocre men who, while professing to be
-ardent advocates of grammatical correctness according to the ancient
-rules, were hardly less capricious in their misuse of classic elements
-than their predecessors had been. To enter upon the examination of any
-large number of buildings in this later Renaissance style would be
-tedious and unnecessary; but in addition to what we have already seen
-of it in the work of Michael Angelo in St. Peter’s, we may give some
-attention to a few characteristic works of the two leading architects
-of the later time: Vignola and Palladio.</p>
-
-<p>Few men did more to make the neo-classic ideas authoritative than
-Giacomo Barrozzi, called Vignola. Beginning like so many others with
-painting, Vignola was led early to the study of architecture, in which
-he strove to gain an exact knowledge of classic Roman forms by drawing
-and measuring the remains of the ancient edifices. He thus became a
-devoted partisan of the antique, and he wrote a treatise on the Five
-Orders which has been widely accepted as an authoritative guide in
-modern architectural practice. To him, says Milizia, “Architecture is
-under lasting obligations because he established it upon system, and
-prescribed its rules.”<a id="FNanchor_77" href="#Footnote_77" class="fnanchor">[77]</a> And the same author tells us further that
-Vignola “purified architecture from some abuses which neither his
-contemporaries nor the ancients had perceived”; yet nevertheless, he
-adds, “his book has produced more harm than good, for to make the rules
-more general, and more easy of application, he has altered the finest
-proportions of the antique.” No system of architecture, Milizia says
-further, “is more easy than that of Vignola, but the facility of it is
-obtained at the expense of architecture itself.”</p>
-
-<p>In his book,<a id="FNanchor_78" href="#Footnote_78" class="fnanchor">[78]</a> which is made up largely of drawings and diagrams,
-Vignola shows how the proportions of an order may be regulated by a
-module down to the smallest details. He explains how to construct Ionic
-volutes and other curves from centres, and how to describe the details
-of Corinthian and composite<span class="pagenum" id="Page_85">[85]</span> capitals by means of plan and elevation.
-He thus introduces a mechanical system modelled after the formulas of
-Vitruvius.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_085">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_085.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 43.</span>&mdash;Vignola’s entablature.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But notwithstanding his ardent advocacy of the principles of ancient
-Roman art, Vignola, in his own practice, not only altered the
-proportions of the orders as Milizia says, but made many fanciful
-changes in them. He introduced details which have no counterparts in
-correct Roman design, and freely mixed those of different orders. An
-instance of this occurs in an entablature figured in his book,<a id="FNanchor_79" href="#Footnote_79" class="fnanchor">[79]</a>
-which he calls his own invention. In this composition (Fig. <a href="#i_085">43</a>) we have
-a pseudo-Doric frieze between an architrave with multiplied faciæ, and
-a cornice on modillions. In the place of triglyphs this frieze has
-consoles with two channels, like those of a triglyph, on the curved
-face of each. To such travesties of classic design did the striving
-after novelty, which was curiously mingled with their ardour for the
-antique, lead the men of the later Renaissance. For an advocate of
-classic correctness such aberrations are the more<span class="pagenum" id="Page_86">[86]</span> surprising as they
-are expressly condemned by Vitruvius, who warns his readers against
-them as follows: “If dentiled cornices are used in the Doric order,
-triglyphs applied above the voluted Ionic, thus transferring parts to
-one order which properly belong to another, the eye will be offended,
-because custom otherwise applies these peculiarities.”<a id="FNanchor_80" href="#Footnote_80" class="fnanchor">[80]</a> The Roman
-writer might, indeed, have given a better reason why the purity of the
-orders ought to be maintained, namely, because to each of them the fine
-artistic genius of the Greeks had given its appropriate details.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_086">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_086.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 44.</span>&mdash;Half plan of Sant’Andrea.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In designing entire buildings Vignola shows no less freedom in
-unclassic and incongruous combinations. This is manifested in the
-earliest of his church edifices, that of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle
-outside of the Porta del Popolo at Rome (Figs. <a href="#i_086">44</a>, <a href="#i_087">45</a>, and <a href="#i_088">46</a>). It is a
-small, oblong, rectangular enclosure covered with a dome of oval plan
-on pendentives. The structural scheme is thus primarily Byzantine,
-but the architectural treatment is Roman. The dome is built in a
-praiseworthy form, and follows the construction of the dome of the
-Pantheon. An enclosing drum is carried up from the pendentives to a
-considerable height, and the haunch of the vault is well fortified by
-stepped rings of masonry. These rings are criticised by Milizia<a id="FNanchor_81" href="#Footnote_81" class="fnanchor">[81]</a> as
-awkward and unnecessary because, he affirms, the vault might have been
-made secure without them. He probably means that it might have been
-bound with chains in the usual manner of the Renaissance. As in the
-Pantheon, the drum rises so high above the springing that but little
-of the dome is visible externally. The character of the rectangular
-substructure is puzzling to the eye of a beholder who looks for meaning
-and congruity in architectural forms. Wrought in shallow relief upon
-its façade is an order<span class="pagenum" id="Page_87">[87]</span> of Corinthian pilasters surmounted by a classic
-pediment, and the entablature of the order is returned on the sides
-of the building. The effect of the whole may be compared to that of a
-Greek temple with an attic supporting a dome built upon it. So awkward
-is the combination that it might be supposed to be a piece of patchwork
-in which a building of Greek temple form had been altered to gain more
-height within, were it not that we find in the architect’s own book
-the plan and section reproduced in Figs. 44 and 45, which show that
-the building as it now exists was originally designed in its present
-form.<a id="FNanchor_82" href="#Footnote_82" class="fnanchor">[82]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_087">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_087.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 45.</span>&mdash;Longitudinal section of Sant’Andrea,
-from Vignola’s book.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>On reflection we discover that the scheme suggests a derivation
-from the Pantheon. Not only is the dome shaped and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_88">[88]</span> adjusted as in
-that ancient monument, save for its oval plan, but the rest of the
-composition is pretty clearly from the same source. To realize this it
-is necessary only to eliminate, in idea, the portico of the Pantheon
-with the exception of its pediment, and to conceive this pediment as
-drawn back into the plane of the rectangular façade. The pediment
-would then surmount the order of Corinthian pilasters which adorn this
-façade, and the resulting composition would be substantially identical
-with that of the façade of St. Andrea. The minor differences are
-unimportant, as where Vignola has placed a pair of pilasters, instead
-of only one, at each end of the façade, has given the whole order more
-shallow relief, and has omitted the fluting on the pilasters. Even the
-niches on either side of the portal are reproduced from the Pantheon,
-though Vignola has pierced them with windows.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_088">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_088.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 46.</span>&mdash;Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The likeness extends farther. The return of the entablature<span class="pagenum" id="Page_89">[89]</span> along
-the side walls and the cornice of the attic are the same in both
-instances; but the second pediment in the Pantheon façade Vignola has
-not reproduced. St. Andrea is thus a close, though a modified, copy of
-the rectangular part of the Pantheon, with the rectangle elongated and
-surmounted by a dome designed on the Pantheon model. It was not known
-in the sixteenth century that the ancient monument is not a homogeneous
-structure, but an awkward patchwork, the result of successive
-alterations and additions.<a id="FNanchor_83" href="#Footnote_83" class="fnanchor">[83]</a> Vignola took it entire as an example
-of that ancient style which he regarded as authoritative, and based
-his design for St. Andrea upon it, just as many modern architects have
-taken motives from Vignola himself. If it were proposed to erect a dome
-upon the Parthenon, few people would fail to see that the result would
-be an architectural monstrosity, yet this would not be very different
-from what was done in St. Andrea by an architect who has been looked
-upon as a champion of classic correctness in design.</p>
-
-<p>M. Palustre has called attention to the fact that, in the interior
-of St. Andrea (Fig. <a href="#i_087">45</a>), the two parts of the entablature which have
-no _raison d’être_ under a vault have been omitted.<a id="FNanchor_84" href="#Footnote_84" class="fnanchor">[84]</a> But the
-impropriety of a complete entablature in connection with vaulting is
-no greater than that of any part of a classic order, which has no
-justification in such connection, as we have already remarked.</p>
-
-<p>The pilgrimage church of Santa Maria degli Angeli, built over the
-oratory of St. Francis at Assisi, is a more extensive monument which
-was begun by Vignola in the year 1569. Though completed by other
-architects, and extensively restored in 1832, the building as it now
-stands is uniform in style throughout, and bears the marks of Vignola’s
-manner of design. It is cruciform in plan, with a long nave and aisles,
-and a square chapel opening out of each bay of each aisle. The nave and
-transept have barrel vaulting, a half-dome covers the apse, and a dome
-on a high drum resting on pendentives rises over the crossing. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_90">[90]</span>
-aisles have domical groined vaulting with transverse ribs, and the side
-chapels have barrel vaults with their axes perpendicular to that of the
-nave. These chapels thus form abutments to the inner vaulting, so that
-no external buttresses are needed. The entire fabric is of brick, but
-the details, including the orders of the interior, of the west front,
-and of the drum, are wrought in stucco. For the interior the architect
-has employed a great order of Doric pilasters, a single pilaster on
-the face of each pier, and on the sides of the piers, under the aisle
-archivolts, he has placed pairs of smaller pilasters. The soffits
-of the archivolts are very wide, and have each a pair of salient
-sub-archivolts corresponding with the pilasters. It had been common for
-the architects of the Roman Renaissance to break the entablature into
-ressauts over the columns or pilasters of the orders when used in this
-way, as San Gallo had done in Montepulciano and Michael Angelo in St.
-Peter’s. But the effect of thus breaking the continuity of the cornice
-line is unpleasing, and Vignola has avoided it here by confining the
-ressaut to the architrave, frieze, and bed-mouldings, leaving the
-corona of the cornice unbroken as in Figure 47. The great piers of the
-crossing show the influence of St. Peter’s in being splayed, and the
-forms of the pendentives lose their spherical surfaces in being fitted
-to the straight line of the splay, as they do in St. Peter’s. The
-design of the façade expresses with unusual truthfulness the divisions
-of the interior, which are marked by pilasters like those of the great
-order within, and by an arch coinciding with the curve of the vaulting.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_090">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_090.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 47.</span>&mdash;Order of Santa Maria degli Angeli.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_91">[91]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_091">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_091.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 48.</span>&mdash;Plan of the Gesù.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The Gesù in Rome, another large church by Vignola, and built at about
-the same time as Santa Maria degli Angeli, is a variation of the
-same scheme, and shows in a more marked degree the influence of St.
-Peter’s. A plan of this building, the intended façade which Vignola
-did not live to construct, and the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_92">[92]</span> existing façade by Jacomo della
-Porta are given in the addendum to the edition of the architect’s book
-on the Five Orders published in 1617 already referred to (p. <a href="#Page_84">84</a>),
-and are reproduced in Figures 48, 49, and 50. The aisles are omitted
-here so that the side chapels, which communicate with each other by
-narrow openings in the dividing walls, open directly out of the nave.
-The transept is short, and extends on either side beyond the nave
-only by the thickness of its walls. An elevated dome on pendentives,
-circular on plan within and octagonal on the outside, rises over the
-crossing, and barrel vaults cover the nave and transept arms. The
-side chapels are vaulted, with small domes on pendentives, except
-those in the angles of the crossing, which do not require pendentives
-because their supports are shaped to the circular form as shown in the
-plan, Figure 48. These supports are made heavier than the others in
-order to strengthen the crossing piers, which, in consequence of this
-reënforcement, do not need to advance so far into the space under the
-great dome as they otherwise would. In Santa Maria degli Angeli the
-aisles prevent this treatment, and the crossing piers extend far into
-the nave and narrow the spans of the crossing arches.</p>
-
-<p>The scheme of the interior of the Gesù is a close reproduction of
-that of St. Peter’s, though the great pilasters are of the composite,
-instead of the Corinthian, order, and other minor differences are
-noticeable. It is worthy of remark that the entablature has no
-ressauts except at the crossing, and the vaulting is raised upon an
-attic, so that no part of it is hidden from view by the cornice of the
-entablature, as it is in St. Peter’s. It is also noticeable that, while
-capricious in the use of elements derived from the antique, Vignola
-in his church architecture eliminates mediæval forms more completely
-than most architects of his time. Where in St. Peter’s, for instance,
-the apses have celled vaults on converging ribs, he employs the plain
-half-dome of Roman antiquity.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_093" style="max-width: 440px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_093.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">_Questa facciata no fu messa in opera per la morte del
-architecto_</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 49.</span>&mdash;Façade of the Gesù, Vignola.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_094" style="max-width: 407px">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_094.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">_Facciata del Giesu come al presente si troua fatta da
-Iacomo della Portta._</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 50.</span>&mdash;Façade of the Gesù, Della Porta.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Vignola’s design for the façade (Fig. <a href="#i_093">49</a>) presents the familiar
-features of his style as already embodied in the earlier façade of St.
-Andrea, but with additional infractions of propriety, as well as of
-classic form in its more elaborate details. This façade corresponds in
-outline with the form of the building, except for the podium of the
-upper story (which contradicts<span class="pagenum" id="Page_93">[93]</span> the roof lines of the side chapels),
-and the abutting walls of curved outline over the side compartments.
-The chief aberrations of detail are the broken pediments of the
-doors and windows, and the barbaric scrollwork and hermæ, the use of
-which this architect did much to establish. How far the barbarism of
-breaking the pediment was an independent freak of the Renaissance I<span class="pagenum" id="Page_94">[94]</span>
-do not know. Instances of somewhat similar treatment occur in the
-Roman architecture of Syria, as in Baalbek (Fig. <a href="#i_095">51</a>), where the middle
-part of the pediment is in retreat of the rest, so that the ends form
-ressauts. Of the complete removal of a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_95">[95]</span> part of the cornice I know no
-instance in the Roman architecture of antiquity. To this, however, the
-architects of the later Renaissance were, in their desire for novelty
-of design, led. But the cornice of a pediment is, like the roof of an
-entire building, suggestive of shelter for the parts below. The actual
-necessity for such shelter may be slight, but any justification which
-the raking cornice has must be for expression, if nothing more, of a
-sheltering roof to what it surmounts (unless we are to assume that
-architectural design is a matter of purely fanciful composition of
-lines with no structural meaning or expression). To cut a piece out of
-the middle of it is an architectural solecism.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_095">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_095.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 51.</span>&mdash;Pediment of Baalbek.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The actual façade by Della Porta (Fig. <a href="#i_094">50</a>) follows the main lines of
-Vignola’s design, but the details are much altered. The podium of the
-upper story is raised in height, reversed consoles are substituted for
-the plain curved abutments of Vignola, and the raking cornices of the
-small pediments are made whole. But other aberrations take the place
-of those which are eliminated, as that of placing one pediment within
-another over the central portal, and the ugly shapes and framings of
-the tablets and niches that break the wall surfaces. Della Porta had
-acquired these habits of design from his master, Vignola, and how far
-Vignola himself could go in such monstrosities is shown in some of the
-figures of his book already spoken of. Figure 52 from this book affords
-an instance.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_096">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_096.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 52.</span>&mdash;Tablet from Vignola.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>If Vignola did much to make authoritative the later ideas of the
-sixteenth century as to the principles of ancient art and their
-application to modern uses, Palladio did even more. By the example
-of his numerous architectural works, as well as by his writings,
-the influence on modern art of this famous neo-classicist has been
-greater than that of any other architect of the Renaissance, so that
-we have, in the principal countries of Europe, a style of architecture
-which is known as Palladian.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_96">[96]</span> Palladio was the first architect of the
-Renaissance who was not at any time either a painter or a sculptor.
-He begins his well-known book<a id="FNanchor_85" href="#Footnote_85" class="fnanchor">[85]</a> as follows: “Guided by natural
-inclination, I began in my earliest years to devote myself to the study
-of architecture, and having been always of the opinion that the ancient
-Romans were in building, as in many other things, far in advance of all
-those who came after them, I took for my master and guide Vitruvius,
-who is the only ancient writer on this art,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_97">[97]</span> and I set myself to the
-investigation of the remains of the ancient edifices which, injured
-by time and the violence of barbarians, are still extant. And finding
-them much more worthy of attention than I at first thought, I began
-with great diligence to measure most minutely every part of them. I
-became so ardent an investigator, not having known with what judgment
-and fine proportion they had been wrought, that not once only, but many
-times, I visited different parts of Italy and elsewhere, in order to
-understand and delineate them completely. And seeing how far the common
-manner of building differs from what I have observed in the ancient
-edifices, and read in Vitruvius, and in Leon Batista Alberti, and in
-other excellent writers since Vitruvius, and from that new manner which
-I have practised with much satisfaction, and which has been praised by
-those who profited by my work, it has seemed to me right, since man is
-not born for himself alone, but also to be useful to others, to publish
-the drawings of these edifices, which at the cost of much time and
-peril I have gathered; and to state briefly that which has seemed to me
-most worthy of consideration in them, together with those rules which I
-have observed, to the end that those who shall read my book may profit
-by such good as may be in it, and supply that which may be wanting (for
-much, perhaps, may be) so that, little by little, we may correct the
-strange abuses, the barbarous inventions, avoid the superfluous cost,
-and (what is more important) the various and continued deterioration
-which we see in so many buildings.”</p>
-
-<p>The implicit confidence of the neo-classicists in the art of Roman
-antiquity as the embodiment of all true principles of architectural
-design, and their unquestioning belief that mediæval art was wholly
-false in principle and barbaric in character, have seldom been more
-naïvely expressed.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_098">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_098.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 53.</span>&mdash;Orders of San Giorgio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of church architecture by Palladio we have two important buildings,
-San Giorgio Maggiore and the Redentore, both in Venice. The first of
-these stands on the island of San Giorgio, opposite the Piazzetta, and
-is a characteristic Palladian design, though some parts of the west
-front may have been added after the architect’s death. This church is
-cruciform, and has barrel vaulting with interpenetrations for light,
-and a dome on pendentives over the crossing. The piers are heavy, with
-a single engaged column of the composite order, raised on a high<span class="pagenum" id="Page_98">[98]</span>
-pedestal, against each one, except at the crossing, where the columns
-are coupled with pilasters, while the wide archivolts rest on pairs
-of smaller pilasters of the Corinthian order, without pedestals (Fig.
-<a href="#i_098">53</a>). Both columns and pilasters have strong entasis, and the frieze of
-the entablature is rounded in profile. In raising the great order on
-pedestals Palladio conformed more closely to ancient Roman practice
-than Michael Angelo and Vignola had done; but the pedestals have a
-clumsy effect thus ranged along the nave, and their sharp angles are
-in the way of moving crowds of people. It is noticeable, too, that
-Palladio has introduced complete orders under the archivolts, giving an
-entablature to each pair of small pilasters. The entablature had before
-been omitted in this situation. The whole scheme shows in a marked
-degree how inappropriate is the use of classic orders in a church
-interior. The application of such orders to a building with aisles and
-a high nave obliges the designer to make awkward combinations, and
-to violate true classic usage in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_99">[99]</span> manifold ways, as we have already
-abundantly seen. He must associate large and small orders, and give
-them relationships and adjustments that belong to mediæval, rather
-than to classic, composition. The façade of this building (Fig. <a href="#i_099">54</a>)
-has the merit of conforming in outline to the shape of the nave and
-aisles. It is the outline of the primitive Christian Roman basilica
-without any disguises in the way of reversed consoles over the aisle
-compartments, or divisions contradicting those of the interior. Instead
-of the superimposed orders of Vignola’s west fronts, Palladio has
-here, in the nave compartment, one great order of engaged columns, on
-high pedestals, rising through the entablature of a small order of
-pilasters, which is carried across the whole front, reaching to the
-height of the aisles. The total scheme gives a suggestion of mediæval
-organic composition,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_100">[100]</span> but has no real organic character pertaining to
-the building.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_099">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_099.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 54.</span>&mdash;Façade of San Giorgio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the façade of San Francesco della Vigna, also in Venice, and by
-the same architect, the design of San Giorgio is repeated, with some
-notable changes in detail. In this case the small order, as well as the
-larger one, consists of columns, except that on each angle a pilaster
-takes the place of a column, and both orders rise from the same level,
-the smaller one resting on a continuous podium, and the larger one
-on pedestals which are ressauts of the podium. The entablature of
-the small order is here not continuous, but is broken by the nave
-compartment, though a fragment of it is inserted in the central bay of
-this compartment over the small columns that flank the portal.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_100">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_100.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 55.</span>&mdash;The Redentore, Venice.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The scheme of the Redentore differs from that of San Giorgio. It has
-no transept and no aisles, but in the place of aisles a series of side
-chapels. A square area in front of the sanctuary is covered with a
-dome on pendentives, while the nave has a barrel vault, and the side
-chapels have barrel vaults with their axes perpendicular to the axis
-of the nave. From the dividing walls of these chapels solid abutments
-in pairs are carried up through the lean-to roofs over the chapels to
-meet the thrusts of the nave vaulting, as shown in the general view of
-the exterior (Fig. <a href="#i_100">55</a>). The plan of the east end is peculiar. A round
-apse opens out of the north and south sides of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_101">[101]</span> square covered by
-the dome, and a colonnade on a curved plan forming the sanctuary bounds
-this square area on the east side. Beyond this is an oblong enclosure
-the eastern wall of which is on a curved plan, and the sanctuary is
-flanked by small towers. The interior has a great order of Corinthian
-columns, one against each pier, resting directly on the pavement, and
-the small pilasters under the archivolts carry entablatures which
-extend to the outer wall and from them the barrel vaults of the chapels
-spring. The entablature of the great order is not set in the wall and
-broken by ressauts to cover the columns, as in San Giorgio; but is
-carried by the columns, and thus overhangs the wall with a supporting
-corbel in the middle of each intercolumniation which forms a keystone
-to the arch beneath. The façade of the Redentore is a variation of
-that of San Giorgio with the pedestals omitted from the great order,
-as in the interior, and it has an attic behind the pediment like that
-of Vignola’s small church of St. Andrea at Rome. Such is the nature
-of Palladian church architecture. We shall see more of Palladio’s art
-when we come to the consideration of the later civil and domestic
-architecture of the Renaissance.</p>
-
-<p>It is unnecessary to multiply examples of the church architecture of
-the Roman Renaissance, _i.e._ that architecture which derived
-its character primarily from the influences that were active in Rome
-from the beginning of the sixteenth century. For while the churches
-of this style differ considerably one from another in details, they
-agree essentially in architectural treatment growing out of a closer
-contact with ancient monuments, though with no strict conformity to
-them. Descriptions of minor differences in the forms of such buildings,
-and in the composition of their ornamental details, are tedious, and
-enough of them have now been given. We may, therefore, in the next
-chapter, pass on to the consideration of the palace architecture of the
-Renaissance.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_102">[102]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER VI<br />
-<span class="subhed">PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE FLORENTINE RENAISSANCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>While it was in church edifices that the neo-classic ideas in
-architecture were first embodied, it was in vast palatial houses that
-they were most extensively carried out. Early in the fifteenth century
-luxurious living began to prevail among the upper classes of society,
-and sumptuous private dwellings on an unprecedented scale were now
-erected in Florence. Magnificent palaces had, indeed, been built in the
-later Middle Ages which were among the chief ornaments of the mediæval
-towns; but those were civic monuments expressive of the communal spirit
-and artistic culture of their time. Such buildings as the Palazzo
-Vecchio in Florence, the Palazzo Pubblico of Siena, the Ducal Palace
-of Venice, and many others were the material manifestation of a state
-of municipal pride, and popular love of beauty and propriety in public
-monuments. Upon these buildings the best craftsmanship was lavished,
-while the dwellings of the most wealthy citizens were modest in scale,
-though often beautiful in design.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_102fp" style="max-width: 410px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate IV</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_102fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">PALAZZO RICCARDI</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Florence</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A fine example of an unostentatious, though dignified, house of a
-Florentine Patrician of the thirteenth century still extant is the
-Palazzo Mozzi. Its broad walled front of two stories over a high
-basement, with narrow string courses of simple profile and moderate
-projection, its well-faced and finely jointed masonry, and its plain
-window openings of the characteristic mediæval Florentine form in
-which the extrados is pointed while the intrados is round (Fig.
-<a href="#i_103a">56</a>), is a model of architectural simplicity, while it expresses the
-superior social station of its inmates. A few smaller houses of similar
-character as to quietness and simplicity of design, many of them suited
-to the needs of humbler citizens, have been preserved in some of the
-Italian towns. A few interesting examples of these may be found in
-Perugia. They have plain stone fronts, with simple <span class="pagenum" id="Page_103">[103]</span>string courses
-marking off the stories, and windows in some cases wholly round arched,
-in others having the extrados pointed with an ogee curve (Fig. <a href="#i_103b">57</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_103a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_103a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 56.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_103b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_103b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 57.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But early in the fifteenth century vast structures for private use
-began to arise which rivalled in scale, and in costly splendour, the
-great civic monuments of the former time. The first of these larger
-palaces in Florence is the one now known as the Riccardi, designed
-by the architect Michelozzi for Cosimo de’ Medici in 1430. It is a
-princely edifice, and though comparatively plain in general aspect, it
-is in many ways superior in architectural character to all of those
-which followed it. Like other buildings of its class it is in plan a
-survival of the ancient Roman house, having the form of a rectangle
-enclosing an open court. In elevation (Plate <a href="#i_102fp">IV</a>) it has two stories
-over a high basement, and is grandly simple in design, and fine in its
-proportions. In buildings of this class there is no peculiar internal
-system which requires attention before the outside can be understood.
-The apartments have generally flat wooden ceilings, and where vaulting
-occurs, as usually in the basement and sometimes in the upper stories,
-it is of a kind that calls for no buttresses against the wall, the
-thrusts being met by the thickness of the walls, and by the weight of
-the upper stories. The façades of the Riccardi have no engaged orders,
-but the great cornice has classic profiling, and its bed mouldings have
-dentils and other classic details, while modillions of semi-classic
-form support the corona. The window openings are of thoroughly mediæval
-character in their larger features, and are each composed of a round
-arch embracing two smaller arches with a central shaft and jamb
-shafts, but the shafts have the tapering form with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_104">[104]</span> entasis, and the
-_congé_, of classic design. The capitals are of nondescript form,
-with a channelled bell, an ovolo with egg and dart ornament, reversed
-Corinthianesque leafage depending from its angles, and a Corinthian
-abacus in each. The openings are uniform in each story, and their
-archivolts are treated in the mediæval Italian manner, the extrados
-being struck from a higher centre than the intrados. The graduated
-heights of the stories, and the varied treatment of the wall surfaces
-by rough-faced rustication in the basement, smooth-faced rustication in
-the principal story, and smooth close-jointed masonry in the top story,
-add much to the beauty of this finest of early Renaissance palaces. It
-is worthy of notice that here, as in the Italian domestic architecture
-of the Renaissance generally, the roof is not visible in a near view of
-the building, and no dormers or chimney-stacks appear. The conditions
-of climate did not call for a high-pitched roof, nor for any of those
-features that are naturally developed in the architecture of more
-northern countries. The general outline of the edifice is thus severely
-simple, and its agreeable effect is due to its fine proportions and
-arrangement of parts. It is noticeable, too, that the reveals are
-shallow on the outside, in marked contrast to the deep reveals of
-the later Renaissance architecture. This is not only conducive to
-quietness of effect, but it has the advantage of giving to the interior
-the maximum of light&mdash;since the farther out the glass is placed the
-less will be the shadow thrown upon it, while the internal reveal,
-especially when it is splayed, reflects light into the interior.</p>
-
-<p>The interior court of the Renaissance palace has a vaulted arcade on
-each of its four sides beneath the overhanging upper stories. These
-arcades are, in the Riccardi (Fig. <a href="#i_105">58</a>), supported on columns of classic
-form with capitals of a composite type, but of no great beauty. The
-arches spring directly from these capitals, and have classic profiles,
-while two string courses, with an interval forming a semblance of a
-frieze, give the effect of an entablature passing over the crowns of
-the arches.</p>
-
-<p>The spacious apartments of these early Florentine palaces are generally
-fine in their proportions and simple in their architectural treatment.
-They are, however, rarely well lighted. The ceilings are at a great
-height above the comparatively low windows, and the windows are
-disposed for external effect, rather<span class="pagenum" id="Page_105">[105]</span> than for convenience within. Thus
-while these apartments are stately, they are rarely adapted to cheerful
-indoor life, and in a northern climate they would be intolerably
-gloomy. When used, as they now often are, as galleries for the
-display of works of art, they do not serve well, very small portions
-of their vast wall spaces being well lighted, and the disposition of
-the openings often such as to produce embarrassing cross lights and
-reflections.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_105">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_105.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 58.</span>&mdash;Court of the Riccardi.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Vasari tells us that “after Brunelleschi, Michelozzi was held to be
-the most consistent architect of his time, and the one who with best
-judgment planned either palaces, monasteries or houses.” And concerning
-the Riccardi he adds, “All the more praise is due him since this was
-the first Palace in Florence built in the modern manner, and which has
-a disposition of apartments both useful and beautiful.”<a id="FNanchor_86" href="#Footnote_86" class="fnanchor">[86]</a> He does not
-explain in what the superior planning of the Riccardi consists, and it
-is doubtful whether these remarks were based on any definite idea. But
-however this may be, the building is indeed a stately and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_106">[106]</span> magnificent
-one, of quiet aspect, and for the most part free from meaningless
-features.</p>
-
-<p>Hardly any other one of the Florentine palaces of the Renaissance
-equals the Riccardi in beauty and dignity. That part of the Pitti which
-was begun by Brunelleschi in 1435, though equally free from meaningless
-features, is almost too bald to be called an architectural design. Each
-story of its long façade is as monotonous as the Claudian aqueduct
-which it closely resembles.</p>
-
-<p>The front of the small palace called the Strozzino is in the style of
-the Riccardi, and is attributed to the same architect. It has but one
-story above the high basement, and the treatment is even more mediæval
-in character, the window arches having the pointed form.</p>
-
-<p>The Palazzo Strozzi, begun in 1489 by Benedetto da Majano, follows
-the same general scheme as the Riccardi, but is less admirable in its
-proportions. Vasari tells us that Majano carried the exterior almost
-to completion, but that the court and the great cornice were the work
-of Simione Pollaiuolo, called Il Cronaca. This cornice, he says, was
-copied from an ancient model in Rome which the architect had drawn and
-measured with great exactness, but he had here enlarged the scale to
-suit the proportions of the building.<a id="FNanchor_87" href="#Footnote_87" class="fnanchor">[87]</a> I think it may be said that
-he enlarged it too much, and that, in common with the cornices of most
-of these Renaissance palaces, it is too heavy. The Strozzi, more than
-any other of the palatial houses of its time, has the fortress-like
-character which indicates the turbulent condition of Florence in the
-fifteenth century. The vast basement of ponderous masonry, with no
-window openings near the ground, gives a gloomy and forbidding aspect
-to the front, and marks a survival of the savage habits of feudal life
-in this epoch of advanced Italian civilization and culture.</p>
-
-<p>The Palazzo Pazzi, now known as the Quaratesi, is attributed to
-Brunelleschi, and has the marks of his style in the details of the
-windows. It has the same general scheme of design as the foregoing
-houses, and its stories are proportioned with the same pleasing
-gradation in their heights that we have noticed in the Riccardi;
-but the wall surfaces are different, being uniformly overlaid with
-stucco. A series of small circular openings, with<span class="pagenum" id="Page_107">[107]</span> mouldings over the
-windows of the topmost full story, resembling those of the drum of the
-Pazzi chapel, seem to give further evidence of Brunelleschi’s hand.
-Still another building in this style, though of even plainer external
-character, having small undivided openings, is the Palazzo Gondi,
-designed by Guiliano da San Gallo toward the close of the fifteenth
-century. The arcades of the court of the Gondi have Corinthian columns
-of great elegance, and the arches have ornamental keystones.</p>
-
-<p>Another type of Florentine palace of the early Renaissance is
-exemplified in the Palazzo Guardagni, attributed to Simone Pallaiuolo.
-It has an open loggia at the top, and the portals and windows have
-the round arched form with the extrados pointed. This is a thoroughly
-reasonable and appropriate Italian style of domestic building, and
-if it had been consistently adhered to, without any admixture of the
-classic elements that were soon introduced, the domestic architecture
-of Florence in the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries might have merited
-our unqualified admiration. On the simple and appropriate scheme of
-the Palazzo Guardagni there was opportunity for such variations of
-disposition, proportion, and details as utility and taste might call
-for, without any resort to neo-classic elements.</p>
-
-<p>The foregoing buildings, though larger and more elegant than the
-private houses of the Middle Ages, are still in their main features
-largely mediæval in character. But before the later buildings of this
-class were erected, another phase of design in palatial architecture
-arose in which the spirit of the Renaissance is more manifest in the
-application of the classic orders to the walls of the façades. This
-application, as is well known, occurs first in the Palazzo Rucellai,
-designed by the architect Alberti and built just after the middle of
-the fifteenth century. We have already (pp. <a href="#Page_35">35–42</a>) seen something of
-Alberti’s use of classic orders in church architecture, and we have
-now to consider further the influences which were guiding the public
-taste as they are reflected in the works of the man who on the whole
-did most at this early epoch to establish the new architectural ideas.
-Alberti was a scholar and a man of high social station. Like most men
-of culture in Florence he had a taste for the fine arts, but, as Vasari
-tells us, he “applied himself not only to discover the principles and
-the proportions of antiquity, but also, being naturally so inclined,
-much more to writing than to practice.”<a id="FNanchor_88" href="#Footnote_88" class="fnanchor">[88]</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_108">[108]</span> The moving purpose with
-him was thus primarily archæological and literary, rather than artistic.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_108">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_108.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 59.</span>&mdash;Façade of the Rucellai.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The Rucellai is in form substantially like the Riccardi and other
-buildings of its class, but in place of the plain wall surfaces which
-are appropriate for a building that has no structural framework, we
-have an order of classic pilasters dividing the face of each story into
-bays answering to nothing in the real system of construction (Fig. <a href="#i_108">59</a>).
-We thus have here in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_109">[109]</span> domestic architecture an instance of that false
-use of the orders which in church architecture was first introduced in
-the chapel of the Pazzi. Alberti’s classic tendencies are here shown
-further in the introduction of a diminutive entablature passing through
-the smaller arches of the windows, and these arches are merely cut in
-relief on a solid tympanum (Fig. <a href="#i_108">59</a>). It is worthy of notice, too, that
-the rustication of the masonry of this façade does not mark the true
-joints. The blocks of stone are in many cases much larger than they
-appear, channels being cut upon them to simulate joints. The arch of
-one window, for instance, which by the rustication would appear to be
-made up of fourteen voussoirs, has in reality only three. The same lack
-of conformity of the simulated jointing with the true masonry joints
-is noticeable also in many parts of the façade of the Riccardi, and I
-know not how general this treatment may be in the architecture of the
-Renaissance.<a id="FNanchor_89" href="#Footnote_89" class="fnanchor">[89]</a></p>
-
-<p>The initiative thus given by Alberti was not at once universally
-followed. The orders did not come into general use in the façades of
-domestic architecture until the period of the later Renaissance. The
-most important Florentine palaces of the latter part of the fifteenth
-century have, as we have seen in the Strozzi, no classic orders. The
-classic elements of these buildings are confined to details such as
-the profiling of cornices, and the introduction of dentils and other
-kindred ornaments, and to the capitals of court arcades.</p>
-
-<p>Early in the sixteenth century a further innovation in the treatment of
-palace fronts was made in Florence by the Architect Baccio d’Agnolo,
-whose design for the campanile of Santo Spirito we have already noticed
-(p. <a href="#Page_82">82</a>), in the Palazzo Bartolini. This consisted in framing the
-windows with small orders crowned by pediments (Fig. <a href="#i_110">60</a>). Milizia thus
-refers to this innovation: “This was the first palace with windows
-adorned with frontispieces and with columns at the doorway carrying
-architrave, frieze, and cornice. A novelty, like most others, at first
-disapproved and then idolized. The Florentines all ridiculed Baccio for
-this new style of architecture, not only with words, but with sonnets,
-and with jesting devices attached to the building, taunting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_110">[110]</span> him with
-having made a church of a palace.”<a id="FNanchor_90" href="#Footnote_90" class="fnanchor">[90]</a> For the rest, though Baccio
-d’Agnolo has not adorned the walls of this building with orders, he has
-marked the stories with entablatures, and placed rusticated pilasters
-at the angles.</p>
-
-<p>As time went on the spirit of display in domestic architecture
-increased. Buildings like the Riccardi owe their admirable character
-largely to their moderation. The well-known remark of Vasari<a id="FNanchor_91" href="#Footnote_91" class="fnanchor">[91]</a>
-that Cosimo de’ Medici had rejected a scheme for that building which
-had been prepared by Brunelleschi on the ground that so sumptuous a
-dwelling for a private citizen might excite envy, indicates the more
-modest feeling and sense of fitness, which as yet held in check the
-spirit of ostentation. But the boast of Filippo Strozzi that he would
-make his great palace excel all others in magnificence betrays the
-ambition that governed the later builders of the great houses of the
-Renaissance.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_110">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_110.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 60.</span>&mdash;Window of the Bartolini.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>By the beginning of the sixteenth century the vigour of the Florentine
-Republic was spent, and its artistic ascendency was declining. Lorenzo
-de’ Medici had died, and the chief seat of artistic activity was, as we
-have already seen, transferred to Rome where the conditions were very
-different from what they had been in Florence during the earlier time.
-Ideals and aspirations were further changed, and the quest of material
-splendour was more than ever stimulated under the mundane ambitions
-of a luxurious and profligate society. Thus it was that in connection
-with the later neo-classic church architecture already considered there
-arose a corresponding movement in the erection<span class="pagenum" id="Page_111">[111]</span> of sumptuous palatial
-houses, though still for some time palatial architecture retained much
-of the earlier moderation in design. The great Roman houses of the
-early part of the sixteenth century have a dignity and grandeur that go
-far to redeem their incongruities. It was not, as we shall see in the
-next chapter, until men like Sansovino, Vignola, and Palladio appeared
-that the Roman influences bore their full fruit.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_112">[112]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER VII<br />
-<span class="subhed">PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMAN RENAISSANCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>Among the first of the great Roman palatial houses of the Renaissance
-is the so-called Cancelleria, which together with the Palazzo Girand
-Torlonia of similar design, has been attributed to Bramante. The
-building is believed, however, to have been begun before Bramante had
-settled in Rome, but it is not impossible that he may have had a hand
-in its design and construction at a later time while he was at work on
-the church of St. Peter. Some ground for belief in his authorship of
-the façade is found in some of its leading features which resemble, on
-the one hand, those which are characteristic of the early Renaissance
-architecture of the north of Italy, where Bramante received his early
-training, and on the other, the work of Alberti under whose influence
-it is reasonable to suppose that he had come while in Mantua. The north
-Italian features<a id="FNanchor_92" href="#Footnote_92" class="fnanchor">[92]</a> are the windows of the principal story (Fig. <a href="#i_113">61</a>),
-which are undivided and flanked with pilasters carrying archivolts
-surmounted with cornices on panelled spandrels, and the disks in the
-wall over the windows, while the features bearing likeness to the work
-of Alberti are the orders of pilasters applied to the walls, as in the
-Rucellai of Florence. But Bramante, if this be his design, has gone
-a step farther in conformity with the Roman antique in introducing
-a podium beneath each order, as in the Flavian Amphitheatre. He
-has also extended Alberti’s arrangement of the pilasters of the
-clerestory of Santa Maria Novella, setting them in pairs across the
-whole front instead of spacing them equally. He thus established a
-mode of treatment that was afterwards extensively followed, with many
-variations, in palatial façades. Among Renaissance innovations in the
-use of the orders this is one of the most marked. In ancient Greek
-usage the columns of an order were equally spaced, save in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_113">[113]</span> exceptional
-cases where the central intercolumniation is considerably widened to
-give a more ample passageway, as in the Propylæa at Athens. The Romans,
-in their triumphal arches, increased the width of the central space,
-but no other inequality of spacing is common in ancient art.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_113">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_113.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 61.</span>&mdash;Façade of the Cancelleria, Rome.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The façade of the Cancelleria has a feature that is not common in
-Italian architecture, that of a slight advance of the wall at each
-end, so as to form projecting bays, as in the pavilions of the French
-Renaissance châteaux. The salience of these bays is very slight,
-however, and is hardly noticeable in a general<span class="pagenum" id="Page_114">[114]</span> front view. The scheme
-of the upper façade resembles that of the Rucellai very strikingly,
-save in the points just noticed; but the basement is different, having
-no order, its rusticated wall being unbroken except by the portals, of
-which there are two, and a series of small arched window openings. Only
-one of these portals belongs to the original design. This one, shown
-in the illustration, is of stately magnitude and fine proportions. Its
-jambs and lintel are profiled with severely classic mouldings, and it
-is crowned with a cornice on consoles with a frieze between it and the
-lintel. It is an amplification of Alberti’s portals in the Rucellai,
-and is of almost Greek purity of design, though it differs from a
-Greek portal in the more pronounced character of its cornice, in the
-introduction of the frieze, in the greater development of the consoles,
-and in its vertical jambs, which in Greek design would incline inward.
-A comparison with the portal of the Erechtheum will illustrate the
-points of likeness and of difference. The other portal appears to be
-an interpolation of a later time. An order of Doric columns framing
-an arch is set against a double order of Doric pilasters, the whole
-supporting a balcony, and forming a scheme characteristic of the later
-Renaissance.</p>
-
-<p>The court of the Cancelleria has an arcade of two vaulted stories.
-These arcades support the overhanging upper story and attic, both of
-which are embraced by a single order of pilasters not arranged in
-pairs, as in the external façade, but evenly spaced.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_115">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_115.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 62.</span>&mdash;Portico of the Massimi, Rome.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In Rome as in Florence many of the great palaces are without engaged
-orders dividing the wall surfaces into bays. The Palazzo Massimi,
-for instance, the next one of importance, designed by Baldassare
-Peruzzi, and dating from the early part of the sixteenth century, has
-an order on the basement story only, while the wall above is unbroken
-even by string courses. In conformity with the line of the street on
-which it stands, the façade of the Massimi is curved on plan. A wide
-recessed portico (Fig. <a href="#i_115">62</a>) gives a reason for the introduction of a
-free-standing Doric order, and in continuation of this order, an order
-of engaged Doric pilasters is ranged along the basement wall on either
-side. Both columns and pilasters are here again placed in pairs, the
-narrow intervals being narrower than in the Cancelleria, and in the
-portico the interval on the axis, opposite<span class="pagenum" id="Page_115">[115]</span> the portal, is wider than
-the other wide ones, while at each end a column is necessarily paired
-with a pilaster. The plain wall of the upper stories is uniformly
-rusticated and smooth-faced. The windows of the principal story are
-framed with mouldings of quiet classic profiling, have simple cornices
-on consoles, and are ranged on a podium with a ressaut under each
-window. Above are two tiers of small oblong rectangular windows with
-cartouche frames. The details of this façade have great refinement, and
-show the influence of Alberti. The Roman Doric order of the portico has
-much simple beauty. The entasis of the columns is more moderate than
-is common in later Renaissance design, and the light falls on their
-rounded surfaces, as they stand relieved against the dark void of the
-porch, with admirable effect. The façade as a whole is monotonous, but
-it<span class="pagenum" id="Page_116">[116]</span> has an expression of architectural reserve that is worthy of praise.</p>
-
-<p>The façade of the Palazzo Farnese, by Antonio da San Gallo the younger,
-the grandest of these Roman palaces, again has its wall surfaces
-unencumbered with orders. The basement is comparatively low, and all
-three stories are in effect of nearly equal height. The walls are of
-brick with rusticated quoins of stone, and a rusticated stone portal
-in relief, of the simple early Florentine type, occupies the centre
-of the basement. The quoins suggest the influence of the rusticated
-pilasters on the angles of the Bartolini palace in Florence, and San
-Gallo has followed Baccio d’Agnolo, the architect of the Bartolini,
-further by introducing small orders with pediments to frame the windows
-of the upper stories. But for pilasters he has substituted engaged
-colonnettes on high pedestals, and in the principal story has made
-angular pediments alternate with curved ones. This mode of designing
-doors and windows has since become so common that it generally passes
-without question of its propriety. It is, however, justifiable only
-on the principle, universally accepted by the architects of the
-Renaissance, that structural members may be used for ornamental
-purposes without any structural meaning or expression in harmony with
-the character of the building to which they are applied. But this is
-a principle which finds no support in any thoroughly noble system of
-architecture&mdash;Greek, Byzantine, or Gothic. Structural members may be
-used properly enough with a primarily ornamental purpose when they have
-a character in keeping with the real structural system in which they
-are used. The blind arcades, and shafted archivolts of the portals, of
-Romanesque and Gothic architecture, are largely of this nature;<a id="FNanchor_93" href="#Footnote_93" class="fnanchor">[93]</a>
-but to surround the windows of a walled structure, like the Farnese,
-with columns and entablatures applied to the surface of the wall, is an
-architectural solecism. A further barbarism occurs in the windows of
-the top story, which are said to have been designed by Michael Angelo,
-and the fact that they are like the upper windows of the church of St.
-Peter lends support to the attribution. These windows of the Farnese
-are arched, and the crowns of the arches rise above the capitals of the
-flanking colonnettes so that<span class="pagenum" id="Page_117">[117]</span> an entablature resting on these capitals
-cannot pass over them. Complete entablatures are therefore omitted,
-entablature blocks being set upon the capitals to support the raking
-cornices of the pediments (Fig. <a href="#i_117">63</a>). This makes a bad composition,
-because the structural system simulated would in reality be an
-insecure one in consequence of the absence of a tying member which the
-entablature should form in such a scheme. The eye instinctively feels
-that the pediment cornices are tending to thrust so as to overthrow the
-supporting colonnettes. It is true that in the windows of the principal
-façade (the figure is taken from a window on the side of the building)
-the cornice of the entablature block is returned against the wall over
-the arch; but this is so far in retreat, and so inconspicuous, that it
-does not properly complete the pediment triangle. Precedents for many
-of these Renaissance aberrations of design may be found in ancient
-Roman art, and this particular one is foreshadowed at Baalbek, where
-in the pediment already noticed (p. <a href="#Page_95">95</a>) the entablature, as well as
-the raking cornice, is broken, the middle part being set back in the
-plane of the wall, and the parts over the supporting pilasters forming
-ressauts. But I know of no ancient instance in which the entablature
-is completely removed between the ressauts, unless the one figured by
-Serlio<a id="FNanchor_94" href="#Footnote_94" class="fnanchor">[94]</a> (reproduced in Fig. 64) be ancient. He does not say that it
-is, but he describes it among other things that he calls ancient, and
-says that he found it between Foligno and Rome, and that it exhibits an
-architectural license because the architrave is broken by the arch.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_117">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_117.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 63.</span>&mdash;Window of the Farnese.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_118">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_118.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 64.</span>&mdash;Portal from Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the court of the Farnese we have a frank return to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_118">[118]</span> ancient
-Roman combination of arch and entablature, with a Doric order in the
-basement, an Ionic order next above it, and an order of Corinthian
-pilasters in the top story. Where engaged orders are thus used in the
-inside of a rectangle it is usual to set a section of a pilaster in the
-angle, as the architect has done here. But the treatment of the capital
-in this angle becomes a matter of difficulty which cannot be overcome
-in an entirely satisfactory manner. This is especially the case where
-the Ionic order is used, as in the principal story of this court. It
-is necessary here to have parts of two capitals, on the angle strip of
-pilaster, in order that there may be a bolster on each side parallel
-with those of the other capitals in the colonnade to which it belongs,
-and a volute on each side facing in the same direction as the others
-in the same series. Thus two<span class="pagenum" id="Page_119">[119]</span> volutes have to be mitred together with
-awkward effect. A further awkwardness arising from this misuse of the
-orders is that of bringing three supporting members together in the
-angles, the end column of each adjoining colonnade, and the pilaster
-set in the angle in which they meet.</p>
-
-<p>An earlier instance of the Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to
-a continuous arcade occurs in Rome in the cloister of Santa Maria della
-Pace, the design of which is attributed to Bramante. The upper story of
-this arcade is worthy of notice as having a rhythmical scheme, such as
-is common in mediæval design, wrought into the neo-classic composition.
-This story has no arches, but a simple entablature is carried on square
-piers rising over the piers of the ground story, with a pilaster on
-the face of each, and in each interval is a small round column rising
-over the crown of the arch below. But this alternation of large and
-small, and compound and simple, members has no meaning apart from that
-of ornamental effect. In mediæval design, the larger members would
-have the function of supporting heavier weights, and the rhythmical
-arrangement would thus have a primarily structural meaning.</p>
-
-<p>After the early part of the sixteenth century Italy, as before
-remarked, produced few architects of a high order of genius. The later
-architecture of the Renaissance is the work of men of little genuine
-artistic inspiration, though many of them had great enthusiasm for what
-they conceived to be the true principles of the art and unbounded zeal
-in its practice. A few typical examples of the later forms of palatial
-design by such men as Sansovino, Sanmichele, Vignola, Palladio, and
-Scamozzi will be enough for us to consider. All of these men based
-their practice theoretically, as we have seen, on the writings of
-Vitruvius and on a rigorous study of the architectural remains of Roman
-antiquity; and nearly all of them wrote treatises on their art which
-have formed the basis of most modern practice.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_120">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_120.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 65.</span>&mdash;Part of façade of the Library of St.
-Mark.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Jacopo Tatti, called Sansovino, went to Rome early in the sixteenth
-century in company with Giuliano de San Gallo, and there formed a
-friendship with Bramante<a id="FNanchor_95" href="#Footnote_95" class="fnanchor">[95]</a> under whose influence he acquired that
-exclusive predilection for classic<span class="pagenum" id="Page_120">[120]</span> forms which we find reflected in
-his art. Coming to Florence, we are not told in what year, he designed
-a false front of wood for the cathedral church of Santa Maria del
-Fiore, which is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_121">[121]</span> said to have called forth the admiration of Pope Leo
-X.<a id="FNanchor_96" href="#Footnote_96" class="fnanchor">[96]</a> This incident is significant of the spirit of the time, and such
-architectural shams were extensively produced by the architects of the
-later Renaissance. The most important works of Sansovino are in Venice,
-where he built the well-known Library of St. Mark, the so-called
-Loggia of the Campanile, the Palazzo Cornaro, and several other large
-buildings.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_121">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_121.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 66.</span>&mdash;Corner of the Parthenon.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The façade of the Library of St. Mark has but two stories including
-the basement, and these are adorned with a Doric and an Ionic order
-respectively (Fig. <a href="#i_120">65</a>); the first noticeable peculiarity of this design
-is its very florid character. The reveals are deep, the orders are in
-high relief, and the friezes and arch spandrels are loaded with showy
-ornamental carvings. Milizia says<a id="FNanchor_97" href="#Footnote_97" class="fnanchor">[97]</a> that in the Doric order of this
-façade Sansovino attempted to solve a problem which had troubled all of
-the Italian architects, namely, how to make exactly half of a metope
-fall at the end of the frieze. The Greeks had placed a triglyph at the
-angle, but in so doing they had been obliged to sacrifice uniformity,
-since this angle triglyph fell over one<span class="pagenum" id="Page_122">[122]</span> side of the corner column,
-instead of over its centre as the other triglyphs of the series did
-(Fig. <a href="#i_121">66</a>). This had made it necessary to lengthen the last metope,
-and to narrow the last intercolumniation. The Romans had set the last
-triglyph over the centre of the corner column, and had thus been
-obliged to give less than half a metope to the corner (Fig. <a href="#i_122">67</a>), though
-they secured uniformity in all the rest of the parts. The frieze,
-however, had now an appearance of incompleteness at each end, as of a
-thing cut off arbitrarily through one of its members. The architects
-of the Renaissance appear to have disliked this narrow section of a
-metope at the end of the frieze, and to have sought a way to make it
-exactly half. This, as Milizia tells us, Sansovino did in the Library
-of St. Mark by lengthening the frieze enough to give the fragment of
-metope the width that was desired. Turning to the design itself (Fig.
-<a href="#i_123">68</a>), we find that this obliged him to set a square pier with a pilaster
-on its face at the angle. Of this device Milizia remarks that it was a
-folly.<a id="FNanchor_98" href="#Footnote_98" class="fnanchor">[98]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_122">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_122.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 67.</span>&mdash;Roman corner.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the general scheme of this façade (Fig. <a href="#i_120">65</a>) Sansovino has followed
-that of the ancient theatre of Marcellus, with a free introduction of
-additional enrichments. In the order of the basement he has departed
-from the severe plainness of the Roman model by adding mouldings and
-keystones to the archivolts, reliefs to the spandrels, and disks to
-the metopes<span class="pagenum" id="Page_123">[123]</span> of the frieze. But all this is done with a commendable
-feeling for breadth of effect. To the order of the upper story he has
-made more striking additions, the most noticeable of which is the
-insertion of a small free-standing column on each side of the pier to
-bear the archivolt, an innovation which was followed by Palladio and
-many later architects. The least admirable features of the design are
-the frieze of the upper order, which is widened beyond all tolerable
-proportion, and an ornamental balustrade over the main cornice. The
-frieze is ornamented with inelegant festoons in high relief, and
-pierced with oblong windows opening into a low upper story which the
-entablature encloses. The columns of the upper order, as well as the
-free-standing colonnettes, are raised on panelled pedestals, and
-balustraded balconies are formed in front of each window opening. This
-sumptuous scheme embodies very fully the ideal to which the designers
-of the Renaissance had been tending under the Roman influence of the
-sixteenth century, and it has been extensively reproduced, with various
-minor modifications, in the civic architecture of all parts of Europe.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_123">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_123.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 68.</span>&mdash;Angle of Library of St. Mark.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>As the façade of the Library of St. Mark is based upon that of the
-ancient theatre of Marcellus, so the Loggetta of the Campanile is an
-adaptation of the scheme of the Arch of Titus extended to include three
-arches, and enriched with statues and reliefs to suit the florid fancy
-of the time. But while the scheme is plainly derived from the Arch of
-Titus, the proportions of the parts are very different, and much less
-admirable.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_124">[124]</span> The order is made lower and the attic higher. The Arch of
-Titus is the finest in proportions of all the Roman triumphal arches,
-and the grandest in monumental simplicity. Sansovino’s changes and
-ornamental additions spoil the composition, and do not fit the design
-for the building to which it is attached. Such a design could not have
-any proper relationship to such a building. To attach any sort of a
-Roman triumphal arch scheme to the base of a mediæval tower is an
-architectural absurdity.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_124">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_124.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 69.</span>&mdash;Palazzo Cornaro.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In the scheme of the Palazzo Cornaro an Ionic order and a Corinthian
-order frame in the round-headed windows of the upper stories. The
-columns of these orders are set in pairs, each pair having a plinth
-and pedestal in common. On the side walls of the building these orders
-are returned to the extent of one bay, which brings four columns
-together at the angles with clumsy effect. The frieze of the uppermost
-entablature is widened, as in the Library of St. Mark, but its
-surface is plain save for a series of oval openings which light a low
-attic. The high rusticated basement, which includes a mezzanine, has
-square-headed windows framed by a rusticated Doric order resting on a
-projecting sill supported on plain consoles; and over each of these a
-low rectangular window, flanked by elongated consoles on square blocks
-set upon the entablature of the window below, lights the mezzanine.
-A curved pediment over each of the lower windows, between the blocks
-that support the flanking members of the windows above, gives further
-awkwardness to the total scheme (Fig. <a href="#i_124">69</a>). Barbaric compositions such
-as this were now to become of frequent occurrence in the architecture
-of the later Renaissance. While the designers were eliminating the
-mediæval forms more completely<span class="pagenum" id="Page_125">[125]</span> than their predecessors had done, they
-were at the same time departing more widely from classic models, and
-introducing many monstrosities of composition, from the influence of
-which modern art has greatly suffered.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_125">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_125.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 70.</span>&mdash;Two bays of the Porta del Palio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The works of Sanmichele show an equally exclusive employment of
-classic features, with the same freedom in deforming them and using
-them in novel and ungainly ways. In the Porta del Palio of Verona, a
-characteristic example of his work, he has used a pseudo-Doric order
-in which the columns are fluted after the Ionic manner with fillets
-between the channels, and are raised on heavy square plinths. The
-columns are disposed in pairs, dividing the façade into three wide
-intervals and four narrow ones (Fig. <a href="#i_125">70</a>), and each wide space has a
-large rectangular recess spanned by a flat arch, with a sculptured
-keystone in the form of a console, under the entablature of the
-order. At the level of the soffit of this arch the wall is crowned
-by a cornice passing behind the columns. The central bay has a large
-rectangular portal without jamb mouldings, and in each lateral bay is
-a small doorway framed with classic jamb mouldings and a pediment on
-consoles. Over each of these openings is a secondary flat arch with
-deep voussoirs reaching to the soffit of the upper one. Pilasters take
-the place of columns on the angles of the façade, and the walls are
-rusticated. In<span class="pagenum" id="Page_126">[126]</span> the façade of the opposite side the scheme is varied,
-and is plainer. The columns of the order are disposed as before, but
-instead of being fluted they are rusticated like the walls, and have no
-bases, while a large round-arched opening, with impost mouldings and a
-plain keystone, fills each wide interval.</p>
-
-<p>Of Sanmichele’s palace fronts the best in Verona is, I think, that
-of the Palazzo Canossa, where over a high rusticated basement he
-has placed a shallow order of Corinthian pilasters in pairs, set
-close together, on a podium with ressauts. This order embraces both
-the principal floor and a low story above it, and has considerable
-elegance. The effect of the whole front is broad and quiet, save for
-the heavy balustrade with showy statues which crowns it. It will be
-seen, as we pass in review these different compositions, that the range
-of eccentricities of design embodied in them is as great as we find in
-the works of the earlier Renaissance, though they show fewer mediæval
-characteristics. The Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria, also by Sanmichele,
-for instance, has a Doric order over a plain rusticated basement, like
-that of the Porta del Palio, but with the columns equally spaced,
-except that the central intercolumniation is made wider than the others
-in conformity with the width of the portal beneath it, and a pilaster
-is coupled with a column on each angle. Plain round-arched windows
-occupy the intervals between the columns, and a corbel in the form
-of a sculptured head is set under the entablature of the order over
-the crown of each arch. The plain windows of the basement have clumsy
-rectangular sills on consoles.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_127">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_127.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 71.</span>&mdash;Palazzo Bevilacqua.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A more elaborate design by the same architect is that of the front of
-the Palazzo Bevilacqua (Fig. <a href="#i_127">71</a>). Here an order of rusticated Doric
-pilasters, supporting an entablature with channelled consoles in
-the place of triglyphs, and a cornice surmounted with a balustrade
-forming a balcony to the story above, divides the basement wall into
-alternately wide and narrow bays. A round-arched window in each bay
-has a heavy keystone in the form of a sculptured bust, which forms
-at the same time a corbel to the entablature. The unequal spacing of
-the pilasters leads to an awkward irregularity in the spacing of the
-channelled consoles which do duty as triglyphs in the frieze. One of
-them is set over the centre of each pilaster, and the spaces over the
-wide intervals each give place to three of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_127">[127]</span> them, while over the narrow
-intervals there is too much room for one and not enough for two. The
-designer has chosen to have but one, and the effect of the resulting
-wider spacing over the narrow bays is both unpleasant and unclassic.
-The upper story has a still more barocco character. A Corinthian order
-with columns of alternately straight and spiral channelling, spaced in
-conformity with the pilasters of the basement and raised on pedestals,
-frames in a series of round-arched windows which are alternately large
-and small in correspondence with the magnitudes of the intervals.
-The window of each wide bay nearly fills the space enclosed by the
-order, and a keystone in the arch forms a corbel to the entablature,
-while the spandrels are adorned with sculptures in high relief after
-the manner of those of the Roman triumphal arches. Over the smaller
-arch in each narrow bay the spandrels are in relief and are crowned
-with a pediment surmounted by a horizontal cornice on a shallow
-ressaut corresponding to that of the spandrels, while over all this
-a plain oblong rectangular opening lights a low top story which is
-not otherwise expressed in the composition. In these narrow bays the
-corbels are introduced under the entablature<span class="pagenum" id="Page_128">[128]</span> as in the wider ones, and
-carved festoons fill the spaces between them and the capitals on either
-side. It is a capricious scheme, by which the designer has sought to
-quicken the jaded sensibilities of people surfeited with architectural
-aberrations. Of course the arrangement of these elements is based on a
-certain rhythmical order which often appears to be thought a sufficient
-justification of such meaningless compositions; but order and rhythm do
-not alone constitute a fine work of art.</p>
-
-<p>Of the secular architecture of Vignola the Palazzo Caprarola, in the
-hill country between Rome and Viterbo, is the most important. This
-building, says Milizia, “is without doubt the grandest and the most
-beautiful work of this great artist.”<a id="FNanchor_99" href="#Footnote_99" class="fnanchor">[99]</a> The building, which is
-illustrated by elaborate drawings in Vignola’s own book, has in plan
-the form of a regular pentagon enclosing a circular court. The form is,
-of course, given from pure caprice, and imposes needless difficulties,
-as if with the sole purpose of ingeniously solving them. The basement,
-with a salient fortress-like bastion on each angle, is in two stages,
-of which the lower one has a batter wall. Over this are the principal
-story of the state apartments, and two other stories containing upward
-of eighty sleeping chambers. Slightly projecting bays are formed on the
-angles, as in the Cancelleria at Rome, and each façade is divided into
-two stages by superimposed orders of pilasters on high pedestals. The
-projecting bays have rusticated quoins instead of pilasters, and the
-wall of the first story of each of these bays is rusticated. An open
-loggia with five arches in the intervals of the order, and one enclosed
-arch at each end, reaches across the main front of the principal story
-between the salient bays, and the main portal is an arched opening,
-with rusticated jambs in relief and an entablature, in the upper stage
-of the basement. This portal is reached by a double ramp mounting
-an outer terrace and the lower basement stage. Below this, giving
-access to the lower basement, is a rusticated portico with an order
-of rusticated pilasters and three open arches flanked by two narrow
-enclosed bays with niches, and crowned with a balustrade.</p>
-
-<p>The circular court has an open arcade of widely spaced arches in two
-stages, of which the lower one has a plain rusticated wall, and the
-upper one an Ionic order with columns in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_129">[129]</span> pairs, and a balustrade
-with statues crowning the entablature. This sumptuous monument was a
-source of inspiration to the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_130">[130]</span> later architects of the trans-alpine
-Renaissance, and De l’Orme’s oval courts of the Tuileries, and the
-circular courts of the palace of Whitehall by Inigo Jones, suggest its
-influence.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_129">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_129.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 72.</span>&mdash;Part of the Portico of Vicenza, from
-Palladio’s book.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_130">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_130.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 73.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But in domestic and civic architecture Palladio was more prolific
-than Vignola, and his work has had a correspondingly wider influence.
-Among the earlier civic buildings by him is the well-known portico
-of the town hall of his native city, Vicenza. This portico of two
-stories covers three sides of a building of oblong rectangular plan,
-dating from the Middle Ages, and consisting of a great hall over a
-low basement. Palladio’s scheme (Fig. <a href="#i_129">72</a>) for this portico is plainly
-derived from the town hall of Padua to which he refers in his book
-as a most notable edifice.<a id="FNanchor_100" href="#Footnote_100" class="fnanchor">[100]</a> But while basing his design on that
-of Padua, he modifies it by features drawn from other sources. In
-place of the simple arcades of the mediæval Paduan model, he has
-substituted a complicated combination of arches with large and small
-orders, in which the inspiration of Sansovino’s Library of St. Mark in
-Venice is apparent. The free-standing column under the archivolt of
-Sansovino’s upper story (Fig. <a href="#i_120">65</a>, p. 120) is reproduced by Palladio
-in both stories of the portico of Vicenza. But instead of a single
-column, he has inserted a pair on each side of the arch, ranged in the
-direction of the thickness of the wall, as shown in the plan (Fig.
-<a href="#i_130">73</a>). The intervals between the columns of the great orders are very
-wide, because they had to conform with the spacing of the openings in
-the mediæval structure enclosed; but the arches within the intervals
-are necessarily of narrower span, since their crowns could not rise
-above the soffit of the entablature. Thus the free-standing columns
-of the small order which support these arches are set farther away
-from the pier than they are in Sansovino’s scheme. This free-standing
-column supporting the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_131">[131]</span> archivolt is often spoken of as an innovation of
-Sansovino and Palladio. It is worthy of notice, however, that instances
-of it occur in the Græco-Roman architecture of Syria, as in S. Simeon
-Stylites (Fig. <a href="#i_131">74</a>); but the arch in these cases is not framed in with
-the useless order. In the ground story arcade of Padua the spandrels
-have circular perforations, and these are reproduced by Palladio in
-both stories of his portico.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_131">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_131.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 74.</span>&mdash;Arch of St. Simeon Stylites.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>From a structural point of view Palladio’s scheme is an improvement on
-that of Padua. For in Padua, as in Vicenza, both stories of the portico
-are vaulted, and the slender columns which alone bear the vaulting
-are too weak to withstand the thrusts of this vaulting, and thus both
-transverse and longitudinal tie-rods are inserted to maintain the
-stability of the fabric. But Palladio’s massive and heavily weighted
-piers are strong enough to bear the thrusts without the aid of ties,
-and it may be added that the great orders have more function here
-than they usually have in Renaissance design, since their columns act
-somewhat as buttresses. The shaft of an order has not, indeed, a proper
-form for an abutment, and has no buttress expression. Its resistance
-to thrust is slight, but it is better than nothing at all. Following
-Sansovino, the architect has introduced a balustrade in each opening of
-the arcade, and a continuous one as a crowning feature of the cornice.</p>
-
-<p>Palladio himself thought well of this work, and he does not hesitate to
-say in his book that it will bear comparison with the most beautiful
-buildings of antiquity. He tells us, also, that it is constructed in
-the best manner out of excellent cut stone.<a id="FNanchor_101" href="#Footnote_101" class="fnanchor">[101]</a><span class="pagenum" id="Page_132">[132]</span> The last remark is
-significant, for genuine stone masonry was not always employed by
-Palladio in buildings which had the appearance of stone construction.
-The use of brick and rubble with a revetment of stucco had not been
-uncommon with the builders of the early Renaissance, and such materials
-were extensively employed even by Bramante and Michael Angelo. But
-Palladio went further than his predecessors in the creation of
-architectural shams.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_132">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_132.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 75.</span>&mdash;Loggia Bernarda.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_133">[133]</span></p>
-
-<p>Palladio was an earnest devotee of his art as he understood it, but
-he had what may be called a theatrical ideal of architecture. The
-superficial appearance was what chiefly concerned him. He had great
-versatility in scenic and structurally meaningless composition,
-and his numerous palace fronts in Vicenza are remarkable for their
-superficially varied character. The Palazzo Valmarana, with its
-colossal pilasters on a high podium overlapping a lesser order
-embracing the basement and mezzanine, while the great entablature is
-broken into ressauts over the pilasters; the Palazzo Colleone-Porta,
-with its basement wall rusticated over a plain dado and an Ionic order
-on the face of the superstructure; the Palazzo Porta-Barbarano, with
-its superimposed orders and elaborate ornamentation in stucco relief;
-and the Loggia Bernarda, with its gigantic composite order and balcony
-corbels in the form of Doric triglyphs (Fig. <a href="#i_132">75</a>), are sufficient
-illustrations of this. The skin of stucco with which many of these
-buildings were originally covered has broken off in many places,
-revealing the poor materials of which they are built.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_133">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_133.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 76.</span>&mdash;Window of Palazzo Branzo.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Palladio’s compositions are, indeed, based on order and symmetry, but
-order and symmetry of a mechanical kind. On these and other kindred
-qualities grammarians in art are prone to lay great stress, but unless
-accompanied by many others, which for the most part elude all human
-powers of analysis and description, though they are instinctively
-grasped by the true artist and appreciated by the discerning and
-sympathetic beholder, they have little value. Palladio and his
-associates were not true artists, they were grammatical formalists
-without the inspiration of genius.<a id="FNanchor_102" href="#Footnote_102" class="fnanchor">[102]</a> As for Scamozzi, little need be
-said.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_134">[134]</span> Milizia tells us that he studied architecture with his father,
-but that his real masters were the monuments of art themselves; and
-that, stimulated by the fame of Sansovino and Palladio, he observed
-their compositions closely, and conceived the ambition to surpass
-them. His works, which do not differ materially from those of these
-masters, present no features that are worthy of special remark, unless
-a peculiar form of compound window, which occurs in the Palazzo Branzo
-in Vicenza, be an exception. In this composition, often reproduced
-in the later Renaissance architecture of all countries, two narrow
-square-headed openings, each crowned with an entablature, flank a wider
-one spanned by an arch (Fig. <a href="#i_133">76</a>). This composition has been called
-an invention of Scamozzi’s.<a id="FNanchor_103" href="#Footnote_103" class="fnanchor">[103]</a> But there had been many previous
-instances of its most noticeable feature, _i.e._ the entablature
-broken by an arch, as in the porch of the Pazzi by Brunelleschi. I do
-not know that windows had before been designed in this form in the
-architecture of the Renaissance; but the same composition occurs in the
-Roman architecture of Syria, as in the Basilica of Shakka (Fig. <a href="#i_134">77</a>).</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_134">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_134.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 77.</span>&mdash;Basilica of Shakka.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_134fp" style="max-width: 419px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate V</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_134fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">SAN BERNARDINO</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Perugia</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>We have thus far confined our attention to the architecture of the
-Renaissance as it was developed under the Florentine and Roman
-influences, early and late. We must now notice some of the phases which
-the art assumed under other local influences that were subordinately
-active, chiefly in the north of Italy.</p>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_135">[135]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER VIII<br />
-<span class="subhed">CHURCH ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN NORTH ITALY</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>While the architecture of the Italian Renaissance assumed the two
-principal phases that are broadly classified as Florentine and Roman,
-from the localities in which the conditions and influences that gave
-rise to them chiefly prevailed, it is also true, as is well known, that
-other influences became active in various parts of Italy, leading to
-the production of phases of design that cannot be strictly classed as
-either Florentine or Roman. No exact classification of these can be
-made, but the most marked types having distinctly local characteristics
-are those of Lombardy and Venice.</p>
-
-<p>But before we examine the church architecture of the Lombard and
-Venetian Renaissance, one small building of exceptional character in
-central Italy is worthy of special notice, namely, the façade of the
-church of San Bernardino of Perugia, dating from the second half of the
-fifteenth century. This work is remarkable for delicate workmanship,
-and affords a rare instance of the use of colour in the architecture
-of the Renaissance. It is made up of red and white marble, with points
-of dark green and turquoise blue, arranged with quiet harmony of
-effect. But it is a combination of members put together with no regard
-to structural consistency. The designer appears to have had not the
-slightest idea that arches and columns, pilasters and entablatures,
-have any meaning save as elements of abstract ornamental composition
-to be played about according to his fancy. The front (Plate <a href="#i_134fp">V</a>) is an
-upright rectangle, crowned with an entablature and a low pediment. A
-broad pilaster is set on each angle, and the space between is filled
-with a wide and deep recess having a splayed arch reaching to the
-entablature on splayed jambs. A smaller entablature at the arch impost
-crosses the entire front, breaking around the jambs and pilasters,
-and dividing it into two nearly equal parts. The smaller details
-consist of panellings and medallions<span class="pagenum" id="Page_136">[136]</span> in the splays of the jambs and
-archivolts, of sculptured reliefs on the tympanum and on the panels,
-and of shafted and gabled niches sheltering statues on the pilasters.
-The panels of the splays are flanked with diminutive pilasters which
-are superimposed with only a narrow fillet between those below and
-those which rest upon them, and the ornamental framing of the niches is
-made up of colonnettes carrying rectangular stilt-blocks on which small
-pediments are set. The elaborate richness of this façade is unusual in
-the Renaissance architecture of central Italy, except in the smaller
-compositions of tombs and pulpits, which in treatment it resembles. But
-profusion of ornament is a marked characteristic of the architecture
-of the Renaissance in north Italy, to which we may now turn. In Milan
-and Venice the neo-classic influences were, even more than in Florence
-and Rome, confined to ornamental details, and in these details the
-designers of the North had still less regard for classic correctness
-and consistency than those of central Italy had shown; while the larger
-structural forms of their buildings still remained essentially Lombard
-and Venetian. Much of the architecture of the North was, it is true,
-the work of architects from central Italy, but these architects were
-so far influenced by local tastes and conditions as to produce designs
-very different in character from those of Florence or of Rome.</p>
-
-<p>A characteristic early example of this Northern Renaissance design in
-its most florid form is the well-known façade of the church of the
-Certosa of Pavia, dating from the close of the fifteenth century. The
-effect of this front is in its larger parts much like that of a late
-mediæval Italian one, but the details are pseudo-classic with strange
-admixture of mediæval elements. The general scheme is a reproduction
-of the pseudo-Gothic façade of the neighbouring cathedral of Milan,
-having nearly the same general proportions, and being divided into
-five bays by deep buttresses. The steep gable, however, which in Milan
-embraces the whole front, is omitted, and in its stead a horizontal
-cornice crowns the three central bays, and this, together with the
-strongly marked horizontal lines below, greatly modifies the general
-effect of the composition. In the smaller details there is no likeness
-between the two façades, that of Pavia showing a survival of Lombard
-Romanesque<span class="pagenum" id="Page_137">[137]</span> forms with the pseudo-classic elements ingrafted on them.
-A prominent feature of the Lombard Romanesque architecture is the
-diminutive open arcade. This feature is extensively employed in the
-mediæval portions of the church to which this façade is the western
-enclosure, and it is reproduced, with neo-classic modifications, at
-the top of each of the two principal stages into which the façade is
-divided. The arches are here carried on small piers, and are framed
-with diminutive pilasters and entablatures. The portal has a pair of
-free-standing Corinthian columns on each side, bearing a ressaut of an
-entablature which spans the opening, and from these ressauts an arch is
-sprung with spandrels in relief crowned with a classic cornice. In each
-one of the other bays of the ground story a rectangular window, with
-classic mouldings and a cornice of classic profile, is subdivided in
-the mediæval manner with two small arches on a central column and jamb
-shafts. These last have a tapering form, with a profusion of carved
-ornament in high relief, and are like the shafts of candelabra (Fig.
-<a href="#i_137">78</a>). The mediæval feature of a large circular opening over the central
-portal is enclosed within a rectangle surmounted by an entablature and
-a classic pediment, while this compound is flanked on either side by
-a pair of arches opening beneath a larger arch. To all this mixture
-of Romanesque and neo-classic features a pseudo-Gothic character is
-superadded by statues set in niches of the buttresses, and spiky
-pinnacles over the lateral bays. The details of this overelaborate
-composition, the work of several successive architects, have no merit
-in themselves, and the work as a whole is trivial and unmeaning.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_137">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_137.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 78.</span>&mdash;Certosa of Pavia.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Among the monuments of the early Renaissance in Milan are several of
-importance, and of these the church and sacristy<span class="pagenum" id="Page_138">[138]</span> of San Satiro are
-of special interest because they are said to have been designed by
-Bramante.<a id="FNanchor_104" href="#Footnote_104" class="fnanchor">[104]</a></p>
-
-<p>The church bears, I think, unmistakable marks of Bramante’s
-authorship, being a reflection on a reduced scale of St. Andrea of
-Mantua by Alberti, which there is every reason to believe had been
-studied and admired by Bramante during his travels in the north for
-improvement in his art, and a foreshadowing of the great scheme which
-he subsequently prepared for St. Peter’s in Rome. Like St. Andrea, it
-has a barrel-vaulted nave and transept, with a dome on pendentives
-over the crossing. The aisles have groined vaulting, and the piers are
-square and are faced with pilasters. The dome is raised on a very low
-drum moulded in stucco into the form of an entablature, and the vault
-surfaces are elaborately coffered in stucco. The church has no eastern
-arm, since a wall with a much-venerated painting of the Virgin is said
-to have stood so near the site that space for such an arm could not
-be had without demolishing it; and as this was not to be thought of,
-Bramante made a semblance of an eastern arm in the form of a sunk panel
-with splayed sides, on which he wrought in stucco relief the elaborate
-perspective which is so noticeable a feature of the interior.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_139">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_139.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 79.</span>&mdash;Sacristy of San Satiro.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The sacristy (Fig. <a href="#i_139">79</a>) was built immediately after the church, in the
-form of an octagon about eight metres in diameter. It is covered with
-an octagonal dome lighted by a circular opening in each of its sides
-just above the springing level. The walls of the interior are divided
-into two stages, the lower one having segmental niches alternating
-with shallow rectangular recesses, one on each side of the polygon
-except that of the entrance, while the stage above has a gallery, like
-a triforium, in the thickness of the wall, with a pair of round-arched
-openings in each bay. The dome is enclosed within a drum of brick which
-is covered by a low-pitched timber roof.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_139">[139]</span></p>
-
-<p>The ornamental details of the interior are all of stucco, and consist
-of two superimposed false orders of pilasters set in the angles,
-and broken on plan so as to fit them, the entablature of each order
-having a ressaut over each pilaster, and the surfaces of the friezes
-and pilasters being profusely enriched with ornaments in relief. But
-these details are said to have<span class="pagenum" id="Page_140">[140]</span> been extensively worked over in later
-times, so that it is doubtful whether any correct idea of the original
-character of this interior can now be formed, except as to its larger
-features.</p>
-
-<p>The monument is a diminutive adaptation, in simplified form, of a local
-mediæval type of building of which San Vitale of Ravenna appears to
-have been the original example, and San Lorenzo of Milan an offshoot.
-There are points of similarity between the sacristy of San Satiro and
-the church of the Consolazione of Todi (Fig. <a href="#i_076">36</a>, p. 76) that go far to
-determine their common authorship. The superimposed pilasters broken
-into the angles of a polygon, the niches in the lower bays, and the
-ribs on the surfaces of the vault rising from the pilasters<a id="FNanchor_105" href="#Footnote_105" class="fnanchor">[105]</a> are
-similar in both.</p>
-
-<p>A curious domed structure of the early Renaissance in Milan is the
-east end of the church of Santa Maria delle Grazie. The dome is
-hemispherical, and is raised on a drum resting on pendentives over
-a square area. The most noticeable part of the composition is the
-exterior, which completely masks the inside. The drum (Fig. <a href="#i_141">80</a>) is
-a polygon of sixteen sides, and is in two stages, the lower one of
-which is solid, and rises above the springing of the vault, while the
-upper stage, in the form of an open arcaded gallery, with an attic in
-retreat, reaches far above the haunch of the dome which is covered with
-a low-pitched roof of timber crowned with a lantern. The lower stage
-has an order of pilasters with a nondescript entablature, having an
-enormously high frieze ornamented with an engaged balustrade. A pair of
-square-headed windows with mullions, surmounted with pediments, opens
-through each face of the polygon, except the four which fall over the
-piers of the interior. Against each of these sides a turret rises,
-forming an abutment. A panelled podium crowns the entablature of this
-lower stage, and upon it the shafted arcade of the top story rests. The
-north and south sides of the square beneath have each a low apse, while
-on the east is a rectangular choir with an apse like the other two.</p>
-
-<p>The architectural treatment of this exterior is not expressive of the
-inside. The square parts are divided into four stages answering to
-nothing within, and the lower three of these<span class="pagenum" id="Page_141">[141]</span> stages are carried around
-the apses. The wall surfaces are broken into rectangular panellings by
-mouldings and pilasters, every alternate pilaster in the third stage
-having a tapering ornamental member, like the window shafts of the
-Certosa of Pavia, worked in relief on its face; and the panels are
-adorned with disks and medallions. Like most of the early Renaissance
-architecture of Milan, this building is entirely of brick with
-ornaments of terra-cotta.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_141">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_141.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 80.</span>&mdash;Santa Maria delle Grazie.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_142">[142]</span></p>
-
-<p>The design is attributed to Bramante,<a id="FNanchor_106" href="#Footnote_106" class="fnanchor">[106]</a> and it has features that
-lend support to belief in this authorship. The encircling arcade at
-the top suggests the encircling colonnade of the same architect’s
-subsequent design for the dome of St. Peter’s. It may not be unlikely
-that this arcade, wrought while the author was under the influence of
-the local Lombard Romanesque, suggested the idea of the encircling
-colonnade after he had come under the severer classic influence in
-Rome. The alternation of pilasters in the top story of the apses, with
-the two intercolumns over each interval in the stage below, corresponds
-to the design of the interior of the sacristy of S. Satiro.</p>
-
-<p>In the chapel of St. Peter Martyr of the church of Sant’Eustorgio,
-attributed to the Florentine architect Michelozzi, we have a circular
-celled vault on salient ribs, like Brunelleschi’s vault of the Pazzi.
-This vault is enclosed within a drum carried on pendentives, and is
-lighted by a circular opening in the drum under each alternate vault
-cell. The drum is polygonal on the outside, is carried up far above the
-haunch of the vault, and is covered with a low-pitch roof of timber
-crowned with a tall lantern. The lower walls of the interior of the
-square beneath this vault have an order of pilasters, and over the
-entablature of this order are arched windows, one on the north and the
-other on the south side, each of which has a mullion and jamb shafts
-of the Certosa tapering type, and pseudo-Gothic tracery. Most of the
-details of this interior are of stone, which give it a more monumental
-character than the buildings before noticed have. The outside is of
-brick, the square part being plain, with simple angle buttresses, and
-crowned with a cornice of classic profiling. Pinnacles made up of
-neo-classic details rise from the angles, and the drum is adorned with
-an order of pilasters, and with moulded circular panels alternating
-with circular openings. The building as a whole has the moderation of
-the works of the early Florentine Renaissance, and is in noticeable
-contrast to the more florid designs of this region already noticed.</p>
-
-<p>A somewhat later example of ecclesiastical architecture of the
-Renaissance in Milan is the church of the Monastero Maggiore, dating
-from the beginning of the sixteenth century, and said to have been
-designed by Dolcebono, a pupil of Bramante. This is a rectangular
-structure without aisles, having round-arched<span class="pagenum" id="Page_143">[143]</span> pseudo-Gothic vaulting,
-and divided into two parts by a screen across the middle, and into two
-stories by superimposed orders of pilasters. In each bay of the ground
-story is a deep round-arched rectangular recess in the thickness of
-the wall, and over each of these an open gallery with two colonnettes
-and two small jamb pilasters carrying an entablature over each of the
-lateral spaces so formed, and an arch over the central one, an early
-instance of a form of compound opening that was much used in the
-architecture of the later Renaissance.<a id="FNanchor_107" href="#Footnote_107" class="fnanchor">[107]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_143">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_143.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 81.</span>&mdash;East end of Como.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The cathedral of Como affords further illustration of the style of
-early Renaissance design that is peculiar to north Italy. The building,
-however, has parts which belong to different<span class="pagenum" id="Page_144">[144]</span> periods ranging from
-1396 to the early part of the eighteenth century. The features most
-worthy of attention are chiefly those of the exterior,&mdash;the east end
-and the sides of the nave. It is said that Bramante worked here also,
-and certainly as viewed from the east the composition bears a striking
-likeness to the church of the Consolazione at Todi (pp. <a href="#Page_74">74–77</a>). It is,
-however, in the larger features alone that the likeness holds. The
-details of Como are not, as at Todi, of purely neo-classic character;
-they are mediæval Lombard modified by neo-classic elements. Instead
-of superimposed orders of pilasters we have here (Fig. <a href="#i_143">81</a>) Lombard
-Romanesque buttresses reaching from the ground to the cornice. The
-cornice has the neo-classic profiling, and is broken into ressauts over
-the buttresses, and at a lower level a subordinate band of mouldings is
-carried along the wall and around the buttresses, the whole forming a
-likeness to an entablature. The traditional Lombard features peculiar
-to this region are further reproduced in the arcades of each bay just
-beneath the pseudo-entablature; but instead of mediæval colonnettes
-these small arches are supported by diminutive pilasters. The walls
-are divided into three stages by string courses of classic profiling,
-and a rectangular window with plain classic jambs and lintel opens in
-each bay of the middle stage, while the basement wall is unbroken by
-openings. Disks, one in each bay, adorn the frieze of the simulated
-entablature, and a sculptured figure is worked on the corresponding
-part of each buttress. The bases of the half domes over the apses are,
-as at Todi, treated like attics, but the central dome, with its high
-drum, is not by Bramante. It is of a later period, and has a more
-advanced neo-classic character. The scheme of the Lombard buttresses
-is extended along the walls of the nave, but the details of the window
-openings, and of the portals here are very different from anything in
-the apses, and are in a more florid style.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_145">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_145.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 82.</span>&mdash;Portal of Como.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_146">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_146.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 83.</span>&mdash;Porch of San Zeno, Verona.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_147">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_147.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 84.</span>&mdash;Portal of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro,
-Pavia.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The ornaments of these openings are composed in a manner which appears
-to be peculiar to this region. The portal (Fig. <a href="#i_145">82</a>) of the south side,
-for instance, has the mediæval scheme of a shafted round arch of two
-orders reproduced in neo-classic details, with an entablature for a
-lintel passing through the imposts, and another entablature with a
-pediment placed over the crown of the arch on spandrels in relief. To<span class="pagenum" id="Page_145">[145]</span>
-associate the entablature with the arch in any way is unreasonable, but
-to put one entablature under the arch and another one over it in this
-manner is childish composition. Yet illogical and puerile as the scheme
-is, I believe it is derived from a common form of Lombard Romanesque
-porch which is entirely reasonable in design. A comparison of this
-portal with the porch<span class="pagenum" id="Page_146">[146]</span> of San Zeno of Verona (Fig. <a href="#i_146">83</a>) will illustrate
-this. In San Zeno we have a sheltering porch and a portal, and each is
-reasonable in itself, while they are equally reasonable in combination.
-But if the porch were eliminated, with exception of its façade, and
-this façade were drawn back into the plane of the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_147">[147]</span> wall, so as merely
-to frame in the portal, the result would resemble, in composition of
-lines, the portal of Como, and would be as illogical. The first, or
-encompassing, order of the portal of Como is like the façade of such
-a mediæval porch wrought in relief against the wall as an ornamental
-framework. For the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_148">[148]</span> Lombard columns the Renaissance designer has
-substituted pilasters, for the plain lintel an entablature, and for the
-mediæval gable a classic pediment with an entablature.</p>
-
-<p>A curious instance of a somewhat similar composition of lines in a
-Lombard Romanesque portal without an overhanging porch occurs in the
-façade of the San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro in Pavia (Fig. <a href="#i_147">84</a>). Here the
-arched opening is flanked by tall engaged shafts which carry a narrow
-string course surmounted by a gable over the crown of the arch, while
-another string course, on short colonnettes resting on the capitals
-of the larger shafts, passes over the apex of the gable. But in this
-case it is only the childish association of members without structural
-meaning that offends the eye. There is no introduction of forms, like
-the classic pilasters and entablatures of the portal of Como, that are
-foreign to the architectural system.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_148">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_148.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 85.</span>&mdash;Window of nave of Como.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>This scheme, with various modifications, became a characteristic one in
-the Lombard and Venetian Renaissance, and was extensively applied to
-windows, as in the nave of the same cathedral of Como. The windows of
-this nave are splayed, and are flanked with pilasters from the capitals
-of which their archivolts spring, while in some of them diminutive
-pilasters rise from the same capitals and carry an entablature and
-pediment over the crown of the arch (Fig. <a href="#i_148">85</a>).</p>
-
-<p>A variety of forms occur in these openings of the cathedral of Como,
-like so many experiments in fanciful composition without any basis
-of reason. The window, for instance, of the bay adjoining that here
-represented, seems to show that the designer felt dissatisfied with the
-small pilaster set upon the larger one, and accordingly omitted it, a
-moulding on the edge of the spandrel, profiled like the lower member
-of the crowning entablature, taking its place. But again, as if he now
-felt that the entablature required a more architectural support, he
-has in another<span class="pagenum" id="Page_149">[149]</span> window reproduced the small pilaster, but instead of
-a large single one below he has employed two narrow ones, thus giving
-separate support to the arch and the entablature. The doorway on the
-north side of the nave presents a further modification of the scheme.
-Here the jambs and the arch are splayed as before, and a tall column
-of the ornamental tapering form, already noticed in the windows of
-the Certosa of Pavia and in the chapel of St. Peter Martyr, is set on
-either side of the composition. This portal, like the one on the south
-side, has two entablatures with an arch between, and these columns
-reach to the upper entablature of which they carry ressauts. No great
-pediment crowns this doorway, but a tall niche, framed in with an order
-of diminutive pilasters and surmounted with a small pediment, rises
-over the centre of the upper entablature. This niche shelters a statue
-of the Virgin, and is flanked by a statue on either side. Many variants
-of this ornamental scheme for door and window occur in Lombardy and
-Venice, and it was reproduced in many other parts of Italy, occurring,
-as we have seen, even in Rome as in the palace of the Cancelleria and
-the Palazzo Torlonia.</p>
-
-<p>In the fifteenth century, as in the Middle Ages, the architecture of
-each principal locality developed peculiarities of style in accordance
-with its peculiar tastes and conditions. Thus the Renaissance design of
-Venice has a general character of its own, though it drew some of its
-materials from Florentine and Lombard sources. Michelozzi had followed
-the exiled Cosimo de’ Medici to Venice, and Vasari tells us<a id="FNanchor_108" href="#Footnote_108" class="fnanchor">[108]</a> that
-he made there many drawings and models for private dwellings and public
-buildings. On the other hand a family of architects and sculptors from
-Lombardy, known as the Lombardi (Pietro Lombardo and two sons, Santo
-and Tullio), had come to Venice in the fifteenth century and introduced
-features from the Lombard Renaissance.</p>
-
-<p>Among the churches of the Venetian Renaissance San Zaccaria is one of
-the earliest, and its interior exhibits a singular mixture of those
-mediæval and pseudo-classic forms of which the Italian architects
-produced such an astonishing variety. To an apse with a half dome and
-pseudo-Gothic substructure is joined a nave of three square bays, the
-first of which is covered<span class="pagenum" id="Page_150">[150]</span> with a dome on pendentives, while each of
-the others has a plain groined vault. These vaults spring from an
-entablature which crowns the great arcade, and is returned on the ends
-of the building, with ressauts on corbels at the imposts. The aisles
-have oblong groined vaults on pointed transverse arches springing from
-corbels on the wall side, and tied with iron rods. The main proportions
-conform with those of the so-called Italian Gothic churches, the
-great arcades of the nave, and consequently the aisle vaulting, being
-relatively very high. The most singular feature of this interior is
-the column (Fig. <a href="#i_150">86</a>) of nondescript character, and a variant of the
-tapering Lombard Renaissance shaft of Pavia and Como. It consists of a
-shaft of pseudo-Corinthian form raised on a high octagonal pedestal,
-with a very wide and richly moulded base.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_150">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_150.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 86.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The church of San Salvatore, dating from the close of the fifteenth
-century, and attributed to the architect Tullio Lombardo, though begun
-by Spavento,<a id="FNanchor_109" href="#Footnote_109" class="fnanchor">[109]</a> has a modified Byzantine structural scheme applied
-to a long nave with three domes on pendentives separated by short
-sections of barrel vaulting. The supports (Fig. <a href="#i_151a">87</a>) of this vaulting
-are peculiar, and are like the piers of the nave of St. Andrea of
-Mantua modified by piercing them both transversely and longitudinally
-so as to leave four slender solid parts at the angles (two of which are
-engaged in the aisle wall), the void being covered with a diminutive
-dome on pendentives. The plan of the structure as a whole suggests
-this comparison with St. Andrea, but the character of the supports
-suggests their derivation from the piers of the church of St. Mark.
-These last are square masses of masonry pierced longitudinally and
-transversely so as to leave four heavy solids as in Figure 88, the void
-in this case being covered with a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_151">[151]</span> diminutive groined vault. In San
-Salvatore the solids are greatly reduced in volume, and are faced with
-neo-classic pilasters, above which the pier is solid, and is faced with
-an entablature surmounted by an attic from which the vaulting springs.
-The use of an attic in an interior, and especially as a support for
-vaulting, is one of those architectural aberrations with which the
-Renaissance has made us familiar. I know not when or where it first
-occurred, but there can be few earlier instances than this. It was not
-seldom introduced by the architects of the later Renaissance, and, as
-we shall see, by Sir Christopher Wren in St. Paul’s cathedral. It is
-worthy of notice that the system of San Salvatore is that of the church
-of St. Mark modified by lightening the piers in the way that we have
-seen, and by the application of neo-classic details.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_151a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_151a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 87.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_151b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_151b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 88.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The nearly contemporaneous church of S. Fantino has the same general
-character, except that groined vaulting takes the place of domes on
-pendentives in all but the easternmost compartment of the nave, and the
-attic story is omitted.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_152">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_152.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 89.</span>&mdash;Santa Maria dei Miracoli, Venice.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>No work of the early Renaissance in north Italy exhibits more
-refinement in its details than the small church of Santa Maria dei
-Miracoli in Venice, the design of which is ascribed to Pietro Lombardo
-(Fig. <a href="#i_152">89</a>). The plan is a simple rectangle with a rectangular sanctuary.
-The plain walls of the nave are covered with a round timber roof,
-and the sanctuary has a small dome on pendentives. The interior
-is richly incrusted with marble and relief carvings of the utmost
-delicacy, and of unusual beauty of design. The walls of the exterior
-are divided into two stages by superimposed orders of pilasters on
-podiums. The pilasters of the upper order carry archivolts instead
-of an entablature, thus recalling the mediæval Lombard blind arcade,
-and the walls above this are crowned with an entablature. Over the
-portal a curved pediment is set against the entablature of the lower
-order, and the whole façade is crowned with a semicircular<span class="pagenum" id="Page_152">[152]</span> pediment
-pierced with a large round opening and five smaller ones ranged on
-its semicircumference. The wall surfaces are incrusted with marble
-panelling set with disks and lesser panels of cruciform and rectangular
-shapes in faintly coloured marbles, and the whole building is a
-marvel of excellence<span class="pagenum" id="Page_153">[153]</span> in mechanical execution. But the use of the
-inappropriate superimposed orders falsifies the design by giving it the
-appearance of two stories while in reality it has only one.</p>
-
-<p>The façade of Santa Maria Formosa exhibits another phase of early
-Renaissance design in Venice. This façade is noticeable as reproducing
-some of the larger features of Alberti’s west front of St. Andrea of
-Mantua with details having the character of the works of the Lombardi.
-The great central arch of St. Andrea is omitted here, and the existing
-portal is an alteration of a later time in a style that does not agree
-with the rest of the design. The three compartments into which the
-front is divided are treated as sunk panels flanked by half pilasters
-set against the larger ones, over which last the entablature is broken
-into ressauts. In each lateral compartment over a podium connecting
-the high pedestals on which the pilasters are raised is an opening of
-the Lombard type. The main lines of the composition correspond with
-the internal divisions of the building, except that the entablature of
-the order, which is carried across the entire front, divides the nave
-compartment into two stages.</p>
-
-<p>The foregoing examples are enough to show the leading characteristics
-of the church architecture of the early Renaissance in north Italy. In
-the later period the local peculiarities give place for the most part
-to the measurably uniform style of which Vignola and Palladio were
-the leading masters, and which has been already considered under the
-heading of Church Architecture of the Roman Renaissance.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_154">[154]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER IX<br />
-<span class="subhed">PALACE ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN NORTH ITALY</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The palace architecture of the Renaissance in north Italy which has
-the most marked local character is that of Venice. We have already, in
-the preceding chapter, noticed several buildings here by Sansovino,
-but these belong to the later Roman Renaissance style, and are thus
-not so distinctly Venetian. Several civic monuments, however, and
-many houses of the Grand Canal and elsewhere, exhibit the peculiar
-Venetian type. Among the earliest and most noteworthy of these is the
-east side of the Court of the Ducal Palace by the architect Antonio
-Riccio of Verona.<a id="FNanchor_110" href="#Footnote_110" class="fnanchor">[110]</a> This richly ornamental scheme is wrought upon
-a foundation of earlier work to which the architect was obliged
-to conform, and this appears to have given rise to the irregular
-magnitudes and spacings of the openings of the upper stories, which
-are so noticeable, and are in marked contrast with the symmetrical
-regularity of Renaissance design in general. The long façade is in two
-walled stories above a basement in two stages of open arcading, with
-the so-called giant’s stairway giving access to the upper arcade. The
-ground story has splayed round arches on piers of corresponding section
-adorned with pilasters of neo-classic form, while the stage above has
-a pointed arcade on compound shafted supports of mediæval Venetian
-character (Plate <a href="#i_154fp">VI</a>). The upper stories are marked by entablatures,
-and the round-arched windows are flanked by pilasters reaching, in the
-principal story, to the arch impost, and then stilted to carry curved
-pediments worked in relief against the entablature that crowns this
-story. The top story is divided into two parts of nearly equal length,
-but of different height, and different design. The part extending from
-the middle to the sea side of the court is the lower, and has its
-windows flanked by pilasters reaching to the crowning entablature.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_155">[155]</span>
-These pilasters are raised on pedestals forming ressauts to a podium,
-and some of the windows are grouped in pairs, some in double pairs,
-and some are single. In the taller part the windows are taller, and
-show considerable differences of design. One group, consisting of
-a double pair, has flanking pilasters reaching only to the impost,
-with a stilt-block rising from the capital of each to the crowning
-entablature, while Corinthian colonnettes, with strongly marked
-entasis, support the archivolts&mdash;both pilasters and shafts being raised
-on low pedestals. Separated from this by a considerable interval is
-another window group of the same design, but consisting of a single
-pair, while in the intervening space, and along the rest of the wall
-toward the church of St. Mark, are unequally spaced single windows
-with pilasters supporting the archivolts, and other pilasters flanking
-these, all raised on high pedestals connected by a continuous podium.
-In the upper stage of the basement, at the head of the giant’s stair,
-the pointed arcade is interrupted by a group of three round arches
-on grouped pilasters. The wall surfaces are everywhere elaborately
-panelled and enriched with arabesques, and the friezes, spandrels,
-and podiums have panelled disks, festoons, and arabesque ornaments in
-tiresome profusion.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_154fp" style="max-width: 550px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate VI</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_154fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">FAÇADE OF COURT, DUCAL PALACE</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Venice</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_155">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_155.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 90.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The north side is also in the Renaissance style, but here is only
-one enclosed story, and this is on the level of the upper arcade of
-the east side. The architectural scheme of this part is different,
-except that its entablature is a continuation of the lower one of the
-eastern façade. The work here appears to have been wholly new, and the
-regularly spaced windows are each framed with a pseudo-Corinthian order
-in high relief, the shafts of this order being raised on ornamented
-round pedestals resting on corbel-blocks (Fig. <a href="#i_155">90</a>). The walls are
-incrusted with large slabs of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_156">[156]</span> veined marble, and an ornamental disk in
-relief is set in each interspace.</p>
-
-<p>The finest thing in this court is the giant’s stair. Few architectural
-works of the Renaissance are so reasonable and so free from superfluous
-and unmeaning features. The steps, broken about midway by a landing
-stage, are enclosed by balustrades of severely simple design starting
-from square newels; and the sides are plainly panelled in marble,
-with delicate mouldings and arabesque carvings on the surfaces of the
-framing members. The mechanical execution of the whole is superb, no
-settlement or fracture appearing in any part.</p>
-
-<p>The façade of the Scuola di San Marco, begun in 1485 and attributed to
-the architect Martino Lombardo, is a marvel of delicate workmanship
-resembling in many of its features the small church of the Miracole
-(p. <a href="#Page_151">151</a>) while including details of a different character. It is in
-two stories, and is divided into two parts, answering to an internal
-division, one of which, embracing the main portal, is larger and richer
-than the other. An order of Corinthian pilasters embraces both parts of
-each story, and these pilasters are unequally spaced in conformity with
-the proportions of the respective parts and their openings. The main
-division, which is on the spectator’s left as he faces the building,
-has three bays of which the central one is the wider. The main portal
-(Fig. <a href="#i_157">91</a>) is in this bay, and has two arch orders on pilasters flanked
-with larger pilasters, also in two orders, reaching to the entablature
-which passes over the arch. A free-standing Corinthian column on a high
-pedestal is set in front of each pilaster of the greater suborder, and
-from ressauts of the entablature over these columns an archivolt in
-high relief is sprung against the wall of the upper story. The shafts
-of the flanking columns are unusually short, the pedestals being about
-half the total height from the ground to the entablature. Comment on
-the unreason of such compositions becomes wearisome, and criticism may
-appear like captiousness. But if the reader will consider the character
-of a Greek portal, with its jamb mouldings and cornice, as reasonable
-and appropriate as they are simple, of a true Gothic doorway with its
-consistent arch orders, but with no superfluous or unmeaning features,
-he can hardly fail to feel the childishness of this Renaissance design
-in comparison.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_157">[157]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_157">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_157.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 91.</span>&mdash;Portal of the Scuola di San Marco,
-Venice.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The other division of this front has a smaller and more simple doorway
-in its central bay, with an unbroken wall above, and a narrow arched
-window, framed with pilasters and a gabled pediment in each upper
-lateral bay, while the lateral compartments of the ground story are
-adorned with remarkable carvings<span class="pagenum" id="Page_158">[158]</span> in very low relief which present
-an extreme instance of that tendency to pictorial treatment that
-distinguishes the relief sculpture of the Renaissance. The main
-cornice, embracing both divisions of the front, is crowned with a
-series of arched pediments, varying in span with the bays beneath,
-which recall those of the façade of the church of St. Mark. Those over
-the main division of the façade are raised on ornamental attics of
-which the middle one is in two stages.</p>
-
-<p>The details of this composition are in very low relief, and the
-entablatures are broken into slight ressauts over the pilasters. The
-wall surfaces are incrusted with marble slabs, with simple panellings
-and small disks introduced sparingly, and the archivolts of the main
-portal, and of the crowning pediments, are adorned with arabesques and
-with small statues and finials.</p>
-
-<p>The merit of this composition as a whole lies solely in the ordering
-of the component details which the designer has employed in a purely
-fanciful way without any proper architectural meaning; but the
-refinement of execution, and the beauty of the marbles, with their
-pearly colours subdued and harmonized by time, make the monument one of
-the most notable in Venice.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_158">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_158.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 92.</span>&mdash;Part of the Scuola di San Rocco.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Another characteristic example of early Renaissance design in Venice
-is the Scuola di San Rocco (Fig. <a href="#i_158">92</a>). The façade<span class="pagenum" id="Page_159">[159]</span> of this building is
-again in two divisions each of two stories, the main division having
-three bays and the other but two. These bays are marked by superimposed
-pilasters which are carried across both divisions, and in the main
-division a free-standing Corinthian column is set in front of each
-pilaster. In each story the columns are raised on pedestals connected
-by a podium, and each one is wreathed with a band of ornamental
-foliage. The entablatures are in the plane of the wall, and are broken
-into very salient ressauts which in the main cornice are unpleasantly
-conspicuous against the sky. Both the columns and the ressauts are
-meaningless, the columns having nothing but the ressauts to carry,
-and the ressauts having no function but to cover the useless columns.
-The lesser details of this façade are of mixed character. The main
-portal has splayed jambs adorned with pilasters, and an archivolt of
-corresponding section. This portal is framed by an order of smaller
-Corinthian columns, on high polygonal pedestals, with a pediment over
-the entablature. The side bays of the basement of the main division
-have each a wide arched window subdivided by a central colonnette
-and jamb shafts carrying two small arches, with a tympanum pierced
-with a circle and triangles in mediæval fashion. The great arches of
-these windows have spandrels in relief crowned with cornices in the
-Lombard Renaissance manner. In the upper story each bay has a pair of
-arched windows framed by a pseudo-Corinthian order of colonnettes on
-ornamented round pedestals resting on corbels, the entablature of this
-diminutive order being surmounted by a pediment. In the window of the
-central bay the pier between the openings is wider than the piers of
-the side windows, and has a pair of colonnettes on its face instead of
-only one.</p>
-
-<p>But the most characteristic architecture of the Renaissance in Venice
-is that of the private palaces of the grand canal. The princely
-dwellings ranged along this unique waterway are unmatched by anything
-else in the world. The finest of them are, however, those of the later
-mediæval period. These alone have the thoroughly distinctive Venetian
-character; but a few of the palaces of the early Renaissance retain the
-fine proportions, the quiet outlines, and the expression of refined
-opulence that belong to the buildings of the preceding epoch. In the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_160">[160]</span>
-best of them the neo-classic details are used sparingly, though not
-without strange new inconsistencies of form and adjustment.</p>
-
-<p>The Palazzo Corner-Spinelli (Plate <a href="#i_160fp">VII</a>), attributed to Pietro Lombardo,
-is one of the most characteristic. Its broad-walled basement, and the
-well-ordered subdivisions of the upper stories, are exceedingly fine,
-though the basement is high and the principal story rather low. No
-complete orders occur in this façade, but superimposed pilasters are
-placed on the angles, and an entablature is carried across each of the
-upper stories, while only a narrow string course crowns the basement.
-The windows are disposed in the manner of those of the mediæval
-Venetian palaces, a pair of them being set together in the middle, and
-a single one occupying the centre of each lateral bay in conformity
-with the divisions of the interior. These windows are wide, and are
-composed in the mediæval manner, with a dividing shaft and two small
-arches encompassed by a larger arch, as in the Scuola di San Rocco. A
-noticeable peculiarity of detail in these windows is the incomplete
-circle in the tympanum space, which intersects the smaller arches so
-as to form sinuous curves like those of Flamboyant Gothic tracery.
-The archivolts are carried by small pilasters, and the spandrels are
-framed with mouldings. The windows open on corbelled balconies with
-balustrades in Renaissance form of great refinement and elegance, and
-the balcony rails are carried as string courses along the walls. The
-panelling of the pilasters, as in this design and many others that we
-have noticed beginning with Alberti’s façade of St. Andrea of Mantua,
-is of questionable propriety, for supporting members need to have
-an expression of concentrated strength with which such treatment is
-hardly compatible. The surface of a pier or pilaster may be enriched by
-any kind of fluting or chasing that does not materially diminish its
-substance, but to sink panels in such supporting members is to destroy
-in a measure the expression of homogeneous compactness. The classic
-details in this building show the same disregard for correct classic
-forms and proportions that we find in the art of the Renaissance
-generally. The superimposed pilasters on the angles are of uniform
-width, though they differ greatly in height, and those of the various
-openings are of still different proportions and sizes. This association
-of members of the same kind, but of many different <span class="pagenum" id="Page_161">[161]</span>magnitudes,
-is proper to the organic mediæval architectural systems, under the
-influence of which these designers were unconsciously working; but
-it is foreign to the principles of the classic art. The beauty of
-the Corner palace, is, however, quite independent of the neo-classic
-details which are sparingly ingrafted upon it, and belongs to the
-larger forms and proportions of the mediæval Venetian style.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_160fp" style="max-width: 412px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate VII</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_160fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">PALAZZO CORNER-SPINELLI</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Venice</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Other Venetian palaces of the early Renaissance exhibit other
-peculiarities which it would be tedious to describe at length, but
-it may be well to notice a few of them. The Palazzo Contarini, for
-instance, has its three principal interior divisions marked by
-superimposed pilasters in addition to the pilasters on the angles. The
-basement order is raised on a podium, and both the basement and the
-principal story have an entablature, while the top story is crowned
-with a low cornice with modillions and no complete entablature. The
-arched portal is flanked with pilasters in two orders, both crowned
-with entablature blocks, but no entablature spans the opening under the
-arch, and the spandrels are framed with mouldings and crowned with a
-cornice. The windows are narrow and round arched, and have no dividing
-members. Four of these are grouped together in the central bay of each
-upper story, and those of the principal story are framed in with a
-Corinthian order of five columns surmounted by a pediment, the whole
-composition having exactly the form of a diminutive temple front. Each
-lateral bay above the basement has two single windows, those of the
-principal floor being each framed with a Corinthian order like that of
-the central group, and crowned with a pediment. The windows of the top
-story are flanked by very slender pilasters of equal height with those
-of the main order, and smaller pilasters carry the archivolts. The end
-windows of the central group and the inner ones of the lateral bays
-come close to the pilasters of the main order, thus giving on each side
-a group of pilasters of three different proportions and magnitudes,
-as in Figure 93. The front as a whole is good in its proportions, and
-quiet in effect. The neo-classic details add nothing to it of value,
-and the composition would be better without them.</p>
-
-<p>The Palazzo Vendramini has full orders in all three stories, and the
-distinctive Venetian character is materially altered by them. The
-usual scheme of the Venetian palace front, in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_162">[162]</span> which a wide central
-bay wholly occupied by openings is flanked by lateral bays each with
-a solid wall on either side of an opening, is indeed retained, but
-the effect of it is much obscured by the prominence given to the
-orders, which are in high relief, and extend across the whole front.
-The openings have the mediæval form of two shafted arches beneath an
-embracing arch with a circle in the tympanum space. Three, instead
-of two, of these compound openings are grouped within the unusually
-wide central bay, and each one fills an intercolumniation of the
-order. In each lateral bay the columns of the order are unequally
-spaced in conformity with the narrow strips of solid wall, one on
-either side of the opening, which they enclose, giving a wide central
-intercolumniation and two narrow ones. The cornice of the basement
-entablature is widened, and supported on corbels from the frieze, in
-front of the windows of the principal story, and balustrades are set on
-these projecting ledges so as to form balconies. To give emphasis to
-the topmost entablature as the crowning feature of the façade, it is
-made so high as to be out of all proportion to the order of which it is
-a part.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_162">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_162.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 93.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_162fp" style="max-width: 550px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate VIII</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_162fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">PALAZZO DEL CONSIGLIO</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Verona</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of the later palace architecture of Venice it is unnecessary to give
-any extended analysis because it is less distinctly Venetian, and
-belongs more fully to the so-called Roman Renaissance style which is
-essentially uniform in character in all parts of the country. In these
-later palace fronts the main divisions of the typical Venetian scheme
-persist indeed, but they are so slightly emphasized, and so overladen
-with heavy orders, that they lose their proper effect. In Sansovino’s
-Palazzo Cornaro, for instance, already described (p. <a href="#Page_124">124</a>), these main
-divisions of the front are hardly noticeable in a general view. The
-general <span class="pagenum" id="Page_163">[163]</span>effect is of evenly spaced pairs of columns in each of the
-upper stories. It is not until we examine the composition closely that
-we perceive the narrower proportions of the three middle openings. The
-same is true of the façade of the Palazzo Grimani by Sanmichele, though
-in this case the grouping is different, the columns being set in pairs
-in the lateral bays only. Even in the still later and heavy rococo
-design of the Palazzo Pesaro by the architect Longhena, which is based
-on the scheme of the Library of St. Mark, the unequal main divisions of
-the Venetian palace type are still preserved.</p>
-
-<p>Among examples of north Italian Renaissance palace architecture outside
-of Venice the well-known Palazzo del Consiglio of Verona (Plate <a href="#i_162fp">VIII</a>)
-presents a mediæval broletto scheme dressed out in Renaissance details
-which it would be better without. The building has but one story over
-an open arcaded basement. The arcade is in two divisions of four
-arches each, the arches springing from short columns raised on square
-pedestals, and the pedestals connected by a balustrade. A central
-pier and a pier at each end enclose these divisions, and on the face
-of each pier is a shallow pilaster supporting a narrow entablature
-which extends across the whole front, with a corbelled capital over
-the central column of each division to support the entablature in
-the long intervals between the pilasters. The upper story is divided
-into four equal parts by pilasters set over the pilasters and corbels
-of the basement. These pilasters are on ressauts of a podium over
-corresponding ressauts in the entablature below, and the crowning
-entablature is likewise broken with ressauts. A twin-arched opening
-with central colonnette, flanked by pilasters and crowned with an
-entablature and curved pediment, occupies the middle of each division
-of this story, and the walls are incrusted with elaborate marble inlay.
-The general form and proportions of this monument are exceedingly
-fine, but in respect to these qualities it belongs to the Middle
-Ages and not to the Renaissance. To the simple arcade and plain
-walled superstructure the neo-classic details are inappropriate and
-meaningless.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_164">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_164.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 94.</span>&mdash;One bay of basement of the Ospedale
-Maggiore.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Another northern Renaissance building of the broletto type is the
-Palazzo Comunale of Brescia, in which we have a basement arcade of
-three arches on heavy piers, with an engaged Corinthian order adjusted
-in the Roman manner, and over this<span class="pagenum" id="Page_164">[164]</span> a single story in retreat divided
-into three wide bays by pilasters carrying a heavy entablature. A
-square-headed window in each bay is framed by an order of smaller
-pilasters the entablature of which reaches to the soffit of the
-crowning entablature. In those parts of the Ospedale Maggiore of
-Milan which were designed about the middle of the fifteenth century,
-by the Florentine architect, Antonio Filarete, the larger features
-are of mixed and debased mediæval character with no application<span class="pagenum" id="Page_165">[165]</span> of
-classic orders. The building is of brick with elaborate ornaments
-of terra-cotta, and has but two stories including the basement. The
-basement has a blind arcade of round arches on stumpy columns with
-Corinthianesque capitals, and a compound opening of two pointed
-arches under a larger pointed arch is set in each bay (Fig. <a href="#i_164">94</a>).
-The faces of the jambs and archivolts of these openings are heavily
-adorned with mouldings and foliate ornaments in terra-cotta relief,
-while the archivolts of the arcade above have more simple neo-classic
-profiling, and more refined and conventional foliate ornamentation.
-The window-sills are on coupled corbels of heavy and inelegant form,
-and the whole arcade is raised on a high base with ressauts under the
-columns. Medallions with busts in high relief are set in the tympanums
-of the windows and in the spandrels of the arcade, while a wide frieze
-somewhat like an entablature crowns this part of the composition. The
-upper story has a plain brick wall with windows like those of the
-basement enclosed within rectangular panels.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_165">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_165.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 95.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Other peculiarities of design are found in some of the early
-Renaissance palaces of Bologna, where in the Palazzo Bevilacqua the
-windows of the principal story have the mediæval form of two small
-arches under a larger arch, modified by the omission of the central
-shaft which gives the middle of the tympanum the form of a pendant. But
-it is not worth while to follow these aberrations of early northern
-Renaissance design further. The palace architecture of the later
-Renaissance in north Italy has no distinctive character that calls
-for particular comment. It is for the most part based on the art of
-Palladio and Vignola which we have already enough considered. While
-it exhibits many more of those misadjustments of structural members,
-and other vagaries of design, in which Italian architects have been
-at all times fertile, it has no great importance to justify special
-remark. To point out in detail many such meaningless<span class="pagenum" id="Page_166">[166]</span> caprices as those
-introduced by Pellegrini in the court of the Palazzo Brera in Milan,
-where the arches of the superimposed arcades are sprung from pairs of
-columns connected by short entablatures, making it necessary to double
-the transverse arches of the vaulting behind them, or such novelties
-as occur in the windows of the basement of the Palazzo Martinengo
-of Brescia, which are adorned with small Doric columns carrying
-architraves without the other parts of an entablature, while an upright
-block with a ball on it rises over each column (Fig. <a href="#i_165">95</a>), would be
-tiresome and profitless. We may therefore pass on in the next chapter
-to a brief consideration of the carved ornament of this architecture,
-before taking up the architecture of the Renaissance in France and
-England.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_167">[167]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER X<br />
-<span class="subhed">ARCHITECTURAL CARVING OF THE RENAISSANCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>All effective sculpture on buildings, including that of the human
-figure, is architectural carving; but it is in Gothic art only
-that sculpture of the human figure, as well as that of subordinate
-ornamentation made up of the other elements, has at once an appropriate
-architectural character and a high degree of excellence in the
-development of form. In the best Greek art the carving of the human
-figure has, indeed, a grandly monumental quality; but the Greek
-sculptor did not seek primarily to give his work an architectural
-expression. He wrought it with a kind of perfection that is not
-compatible with the fullest measure of such expression. Greek
-sculpture, though placed on a building, is in a measure independent of
-it, and thus it not only loses nothing, but may even gain in value,
-when taken from its place on the building and set up in a museum where
-it can be viewed by itself.</p>
-
-<p>In the art of the Renaissance the human figure in the full round is
-treated so independently as to lose nearly all monumental expression,
-while for strictly architectural carving we have reliefs on pilasters,
-friezes, and capitals, made up of scrolls and meanders with leafage,
-grotesque animal life, and a great variety of objects, including the
-human figure, represented more or less fantastically as ornament.
-Renaissance sculpture of the human figure thus having so little proper
-architectural character, we shall not consider it here, but confine
-our attention to the relief carving, which has a closer architectural
-connection, if not a much truer architectural expression.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_168">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_168.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 96.</span>&mdash;Roman Arabesque.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_168fp" style="max-width: 550px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate IX</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_168fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">RELIEF OF THE LOMBARDI</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">Venice</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_169">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_169.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 97.</span>&mdash;Renaissance Arabesque.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>A great deal of this carving is in close imitation of Roman models,
-as a comparison of a fragment of Roman arabesque from the Museum of
-Florence (Fig. <a href="#i_168">96</a>) with a fragment of Renaissance arabesque from
-the Ducal Palace of Gubbio (Fig. <a href="#i_169">97</a>) will show. But in elegance,
-delicacy, and subtlety of line<span class="pagenum" id="Page_168">[168]</span> and surface, the best carving of the
-Renaissance is superior to that of ancient Rome. The linear basis
-of such design is highly artificial, consisting of formal scrolls
-and meanders, and the leafage and other forms introduced are treated
-artificially without being finely conventionalized. The conventions of
-this <span class="pagenum" id="Page_169">[169]</span>art are not the natural result of a true sense of ornamental
-abstraction, of architectural fitness, and of the nature of materials.
-They do not manifest a fine appreciation of the beauty of the object
-conventionalized. They are factitious conventions which often do
-violence at once to the forms of nature, and to the true principles
-of design. The ear of barley, and the flower stalks, in Plate <a href="#i_168fp">IX</a>, a
-characteristic work of the Lombardi in the church of Santa Maria dei
-Miracole in Venice, illustrate this. The rigid parallel straight sides
-and the square end of the barley ear, and the flaccid sinuousness
-of the flower stalk, are expressive of no architectural or material
-conditions to which the artist had to conform. They express nothing
-but the designer’s insensitiveness to the character and beauty of
-the natural forms. Compare the ear of barley (Fig. <a href="#i_170">98</a>) from an
-ancient Greek coin in the British Museum.<a id="FNanchor_111" href="#Footnote_111" class="fnanchor">[111]</a> Though severely
-conventionalized, this representation finely expresses the true
-character of the real object. Such details as the rectangular barley
-ear and nerveless flower stalk in Plate <a href="#i_168fp">IX</a> would seem to indicate an
-incapacity on the part of the designer to appreciate those elements
-of beauty in plant life which may be made effective in ornamental
-carving, were they not associated with other details that manifest
-a fuller sense of vital character. The foliation of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_170">[170]</span> the scrolls in
-the same relief (Plate <a href="#i_168fp">IX</a>) has a character which makes us wonder how
-a designer who could so finely render the nervous life of leafage
-could associate with this leafage the lifeless details just noticed,
-and the further monstrosities of the axial composition including the
-characterless grotesque animals out of which the scroll leafage issues.
-The symmetrical Arabesque scheme of the whole, and the nonsensical
-details of the central part, are from the Roman source,<a id="FNanchor_112" href="#Footnote_112" class="fnanchor">[112]</a> while the
-leafage, though also cast in the Roman form, owes much of its best
-quality to the inspiration of Gothic art. The qualities that give their
-subtle charm to such conventionalized forms elude complete analysis
-and definition, but they are based on the proportions, curvature, and
-relations of lines and surfaces that belong to the organic forms of
-nature.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_170">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_170.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 98.</span>&mdash;Greek coin, magnified.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Such subtle beauty of leafage is exceptional in the ornamental design
-of the Renaissance. The carver of the fifteenth century generally
-misses the vigour of line, the finer surface flexures, and the
-expression of organic structure shown in the supremely fine details of
-the reliefs by the Lombardi. The convolutions of Renaissance design
-are apt to be more formal and the leading lines less springy. In some
-cases the finer qualities of curvature are wholly wanting, as in the
-scrolls that border the bronze door-valves of St. Peter’s in Rome by
-the Florentine sculptor Filarete (Fig. <a href="#i_171">99</a>). In these scrolls the heavy
-and lifeless character of the poorest Roman models is reproduced. The
-finish of these carvings, in the better examples, is usually elaborate,
-and in such work as that of the Lombardi<span class="pagenum" id="Page_171">[171]</span> in Venice it is exquisite.
-But in many cases it is mere surface smoothing without expressive
-character, as in the leafage of Benedetto da Maiano in the pulpit of
-Santa Croce of Florence, where the expression of the beautiful leaf
-anatomy is almost wholly polished out.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_171">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_171.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 99.</span>&mdash;Arabesque by Filarete, Rome.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It is a fundamental weakness of this style of ornamentation that it is
-so largely made up of artificial convolutions and formal symmetries.
-Reduced to its linear elements, it mainly consists either of an axial
-line with scrolls and weak curves set symmetrically on either side of
-it, or of a formal meander with alternating scrolls. The wearisome
-repetition of these two schemes of composition is a characteristic of
-the art of the Renaissance. Many changes are wrung on these primary
-motives, but no possible variation of them can relieve their dulness.
-That they are derived from an ancient source does not justify their
-use. They are not, however, drawn from the best ancient source. In
-Greek art elements of a kindred nature had been treated in a finer way,
-with exquisite moderation of curvature and vitality<span class="pagenum" id="Page_172">[172]</span> of line. But the
-ornamental designers of the Renaissance drew their inspiration from the
-Græco-Roman travesties of Greek ornamentation, such as the tiresome
-arabesques that were painted on the walls of Pompeian houses.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_172">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_172.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 100.</span>&mdash;Console of pulpit in Santa Croce.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The arrangements, as well as the treatment, of the details drawn
-from plant life that are associated with this style of design are
-often most artificial and inorganic, as in the pulpit of Santa Croce
-before mentioned, where on the side of a console (Fig. <a href="#i_172">100</a>) fruit
-and leafage issue from a nondescript receptacle of ungraceful shape,
-having a clumsy fluted stalk bound with a fluttering ribbon ending in
-a tassel. Such unnaturally composed details are unknown in the pure
-Gothic art which the men of the Renaissance thought so barbaric. The
-introduction of objects like the singular cornucopia and the ribbon of
-this design is common in Renaissance ornamentation. Without affirming
-that artificial objects may never enter into an ornamental composition,
-I think it may be said that such objects, if used as conspicuous
-features, ought to have some beauty of form,<a id="FNanchor_113" href="#Footnote_113" class="fnanchor">[113]</a> and certainly every
-group of objects, of whatever kind, should be composed so as to
-produce an effect of organic unity.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_173">[173]</span> Each detail ought to have a place
-and a posture which should make it a part of some system of related
-ornamental lines. This is, of course, elementary, and the principle is
-usually carried out in the ornamentation of the Renaissance, though in
-a highly artificial way. But in the design on the triangular panel of
-this console there is no fine system of related lines. The fruit and
-leafage have a disjointed arrangement, and the wriggled ribbon has no
-beauty of line or surface.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_173">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_173.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 101.</span>&mdash;Leafage from the Ghiberti gates.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Instances of such disordered composition are conspicuous in the borders
-of the famous Ghiberti gates of the Florentine Baptistery, where
-the bosses of leafage set at regular intervals are composed in the
-same inorganic way (Fig. <a href="#i_173">101</a>), and the bunches are bound with spiral
-fluted fillets. It is noticeable that the details are here elaborated
-with a minute naturalistic completeness that is incompatible with
-architectural effectiveness. The possibilities of the bronze material
-in which the design is wrought are developed to the utmost in the
-rendering of leaf veinings, serrations, and surface textures. This
-tendency to combine excessive naturalism with extremely artificial
-composition is a curious characteristic of both Roman and Renaissance
-art.</p>
-
-<p>We find in the ornamental carving of the Renaissance not only a formal,
-and often a disjointed, scheme of composition, with artificial objects
-of no beauty or meaning introduced among elements derived from natural
-forms, but numerous instances occur where the design is made up
-entirely of such objects, as in a pilaster in the National Museum of
-Florence (Fig. <a href="#i_174">102</a>). Such value as this design has lies wholly in its
-childish symmetry of arrangement of the ugly elements about an axis.
-It contains nothing else on which the eye can rest with pleasure. I
-think<span class="pagenum" id="Page_174">[174]</span> it may be taken as a true principle that architectural ornament
-cannot be good unless it be an expression of the kind of beauty that we
-find in organic nature. I do not say that the elements of such ornament
-must be directly, or consciously, drawn from nature; but every quality
-of line and surface that, in a healthy state of mind, we feel to be
-beautiful is exemplified in organic nature, so that however abstract
-or conventional a piece of good carving may be, its forms will have a
-correspondence with those of natural objects.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_174">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_174.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 102.</span>&mdash;Pilaster in the National Museum,
-Florence.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The finest forms that occur in the carvings of the Renaissance are
-those of foliation such as we have already noticed (p. <a href="#Page_170">170</a>). But even
-these are rarely of real excellence. An appreciation of the vital
-beauty of leafage has in general not been manifested by the Italians,
-whether ancient or modern. The leafage of Roman art is as inferior to
-Greek leafage as that of the Renaissance is to the foliation of the
-French Gothic carvers. Take, for instance, the crisp acanthus leaves
-of the capital from Epidaurus (_A_, Fig. 103) in the National
-Museum of Athens, with their strong nervous life notwithstanding their
-severely conventional treatment; or the leaf _B_ in the same
-figure, from another Greek capital in the same museum, with its spiky
-cusps and its exquisite systems of radiating lines&mdash;at once true to
-nature and effective as ornament; and compare with these any examples
-of Roman, or Græco-Roman,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_175">[175]</span> leafage, as _A_ and _B_ (Fig.
-<a href="#i_175b">104</a>). Observe in _A_, from a composite capital in the Naples
-Museum, the excessive convolution of the leaf ends, the obtuse rounded
-cusps, the lack of radial relationship in the lines of depression, and
-the unmodelled flatness of the surfaces between the furrows. And notice
-in _B_, from a Corinthian capital supposed to have belonged to
-the so-called Temple of Jupiter Stator, the immoderate and artificial
-undulations of line and surface.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_175a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_175a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 103.</span>&mdash;Greek leafage.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_175b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_175b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 104.</span>&mdash;Roman leafage.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Turning now to the Renaissance leafage of capitals, we may take,
-first, any one of the portico of the Pazzi chapel by Brunelleschi. The
-obtuseness shown here (Fig. <a href="#i_176a">105</a>) to the fine qualities of natural forms
-that may be made effective as architectural ornament is really amazing.
-The treatment is of the Roman<span class="pagenum" id="Page_176">[176]</span> kind with emphasis on the artificial
-conventions of Roman art. The rigid lines and rectangular sections of
-the furrows, each ending abruptly in a straight line across the bottom,
-and the unmodelled flatness of the intervening surfaces indicate a
-surprising lack of appreciation of those elements of beauty which
-distinguish really fine ornamental carving. Such leafage is, indeed,
-exceptionally poor, yet instances of a kindred sort are not seldom met
-with, as in the capitals of the doorway of the sacristy of Santa Croce
-in Florence by Michelozzi.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_176a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_176a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 105.</span>&mdash;Leafage of Brunelleschi.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The more characteristic Renaissance leafage is, however, sometimes
-beautiful, as in the capitals of the municipal palace of Brescia (Fig.
-<a href="#i_176b">106</a>). Nevertheless, a curious, and singularly artificial, convention is
-noticeable here in the fillet-like form, and abrupt angular termination
-of the upper end, of the ridges which mark the subdivisions of the leaf
-surface. This peculiar detail is of almost constant occurrence in the
-acanthus foliation of the Renaissance, and is in marked contrast with
-the finely rounded and more natural treatment of the corresponding
-parts of the Greek leaf forms as in Figure 103. This unnatural detail
-sometimes takes another form, as in a capital by Giuliano da San Gallo
-in the Palazzo Gondi, where its edges (Fig. <a href="#i_177a">107</a>) are less angular, its
-surface grooved lengthwise, and the upper end is rounded. But whatever
-beauty this Italian leafage may have, the design is rarely more than
-a recast of Roman models, with little manifestation of that fresh
-inspiration from nature that gives such charm to Gothic foliation.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_176b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_176b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 106.</span>&mdash;Leafage of Brescia.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_177a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_177a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 107.</span>&mdash;Leafage of San Gallo.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_177b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_177b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 108.</span>&mdash;Relief of the Scala d’Oro.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_177c">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_177c.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 109.</span></p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The grotesque, which enters largely into these ornamental<span class="pagenum" id="Page_177">[177]</span>
-compositions, is uniformly weak and characterless. This has been
-already noticed (p. <a href="#Page_170">170</a>) in the work of the Lombardi. It is equally
-marked in all other neo-classic representations of imaginary
-creatures. The southern genius appears never to have been capable of
-conceiving the grotesque in an imaginative way. That power appears
-to have belonged exclusively to the northern races. The monster of
-the Renaissance, like his Roman ancestor, has no organic life, no
-suggestion of reality, and therefore no impressiveness comparable to
-that of the grotesque creature of the Gothic carver. And not only is
-the grotesque of the Renaissance unimaginative and insipid, but its
-forced monstrosities not seldom have a repulsive vulgarity, as well as
-a structureless incoherence. Take, for instance, the silly creatures
-in the relief of the Scala d’Oro in the Ducal Palace of Venice by
-Sansovino (Fig. <a href="#i_177b">108</a>). These nondescript monsters, without anatomy, and
-without point or meaning of any kind, are merely disgusting<span class="pagenum" id="Page_178">[178]</span> when we
-attend to anything more than the ornamental lines in the abstract, and
-even these lines are without any fine qualities. The masks ending in
-leafage (Fig. <a href="#i_177c">109</a>), from a pilaster in the church of the Miracole in
-Venice, are fantastical, but neither witty nor effectively grotesque;
-and the _Putti_ treated in the same way, so frequently introduced,
-are equally pointless, and without particular merit as design.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_179">[179]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER XI<br />
-<span class="subhed">ARCHITECTURE OF THE EARLY RENAISSANCE IN FRANCE</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>On the north of the Alps the Renaissance had not the same meaning that
-it had in Italy, and in France, where its influence was first felt, the
-art naturally assumed a different character. The term “Renaissance” is
-not, in fact, properly applicable here, for the French people had not
-had a classic past, and the adoption of architectural forms derived
-from classic antiquity was not at all natural for them. Through the
-developments of a noble history they had acquired and perfected a
-peculiar genius which had found expression in forms of art that were
-radically different from those of ancient times; and in now departing
-from the principles of this art they did violence to their own native
-traditions and ideals.</p>
-
-<p>It has been often affirmed that French architecture was but
-superficially changed by the Renaissance influence, and that its
-essential character survived beneath the Italian dress.<a id="FNanchor_114" href="#Footnote_114" class="fnanchor">[114]</a> This
-is not wholly true. The Italian influence did effect a fundamental
-change in this architecture by giving it, as we shall presently see,
-a factitious, in place of a natural, character. This point has been
-overlooked by those writers who have maintained that the French
-artistic genius suffered no loss of integrity while yielding to the
-Renaissance movement.</p>
-
-<p>But it must not be forgotten that the native art had lost its best
-character long before the Italian influence supervened.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_180">[180]</span> The finest
-Gothic impulse was spent before the close of the thirteenth century,
-and the feeble spirit and florid extravagance of the Flamboyant style
-which now prevailed betrayed a weakened condition of the national
-artistic mind which made it an easy prey to the foreign innovations.</p>
-
-<p>Until the sixteenth century the Gothic style survived in its decadent
-forms. Yet in some quarters before this time an interest in the
-arts of antiquity was gaining foothold, and a few Italian artists
-had come into France and wrought some small architectural works in
-the neo-classic manner. But the way appears to have been opened for
-a more general movement in the new direction when the French upper
-classes began to construct fine houses adapted to the requirements of
-luxurious life. This movement was favoured by the changed conditions
-of the times. Concomitant with the cessation of feudal turmoil and the
-need for fortified castles was a great increase of material wealth,
-far exceeding that which France had enjoyed at any former time in
-its history. Life and property were now secure, population grew,
-the towns enlarged their borders, and the resources of the king and
-the nobles were correspondingly enlarged.<a id="FNanchor_115" href="#Footnote_115" class="fnanchor">[115]</a> These conditions had
-found expression in architecture during the fifteenth century in such
-palatial houses as that of Jacques Cœur at Bourges, and the Hôtel Cluny
-in Paris. These houses, though retaining the irregular character of
-mediæval French castles, have no defences, and are abundantly lighted
-on all sides by large window openings. They are the forerunners of the
-Renaissance châteaux.</p>
-
-<p>To understand the early French Renaissance château it is necessary
-to recall the character of the feudal castle of the Middle Ages out
-of which it was evolved. The plan of the feudal castle was generally
-irregular and its outline picturesquely broken. But its irregularity
-and picturesqueness were not the result of any purpose on the part of
-its builders to produce a picturesque effect. It was a consequence
-of the natural conformation of the rugged site to which the building
-had to shape itself, of the need for defensive towers, and of the
-conditions of climate calling for high-pitched roofs, more or less
-broken by dormers and chimney-stacks.</p>
-
-<p>The earlier palatial residences of the open country were in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_181">[181]</span> many
-cases the older castles remodelled or enlarged, and opened, by great
-windows cut through their massive walls, to the light and air.<a id="FNanchor_116" href="#Footnote_116" class="fnanchor">[116]</a> And
-although there was no longer need for such defences as would withstand
-the siege of a feudal army, it was still for some time necessary to
-provide for security against roving bands of marauders which continued
-to move about, and thus the surrounding fosse and the drawbridge were
-retained for a considerable time after the loopholes and embattled
-towers of the Middle Ages had become unnecessary.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_181">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_181.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 110.</span>&mdash;Cornice of Blois.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In cases where the château was a wholly new building, it was generally
-placed on even ground, and the plan became symmetrical. Yet still the
-outline remained broken with the steep gables, chimneys, and dormers
-that are proper to a northern climate; and even the towers, turrets,
-and other features of feudal architecture were largely retained. The
-French château, as has been often remarked, was never transformed
-into any likeness to the Italian villa; but it was, nevertheless,
-so radically changed as to lose that admirable logic of design
-which distinguishes the French architecture of the Middle Ages. The
-composition of the Renaissance château is factitious in the sense
-of being artificially made up; it is not, like the mediæval castle,
-an outgrowth and expression of natural conditions and actual needs.
-Thus while it is still peculiarly French in character, it is not an
-expression of the French genius in its integrity. The French genius in
-its integrity has not been manifested in architecture since the Middle
-Ages.</p>
-
-<p>The earliest palatial houses of the Renaissance in France<span class="pagenum" id="Page_182">[182]</span> are
-ornamented with debased Gothic details almost exclusively. The
-neo-classic elements are introduced sparingly, and are hardly
-noticeable in the general effect. An illustration of this is afforded
-in those parts of the château of Blois which were built under Louis
-XII. Here the egg and dart scheme is worked on the lower members of
-the cornice, while elsewhere the mediæval details are retained. This
-cornice (Fig. <a href="#i_181">110</a>) is a curious medley, though of no exceptional kind.
-Against a flat lower member is a corbel-table (a Romanesque feature)
-treated in a Flamboyant way, the small arches being splayed and having
-the three-centred form. The crowning mouldings have approximately
-true Gothic profiling, while a Flamboyant parapet of elaborate design
-surmounts the whole.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_182">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_182.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 111.</span>&mdash;Azay le Rideau.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_183">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_183.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 112.</span>&mdash;Portal of Azay le Rideau.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of the distinctive early French Renaissance architecture, which took
-form during the reign of Francis I, a fine example is the château of
-Azay le Rideau (Fig. <a href="#i_182">111</a>). This building was an entirely new structure,
-not a mediæval one remodelled. It is of moderate dimensions, and,
-although it has considerable<span class="pagenum" id="Page_184">[184]</span> beauty, it well illustrates the hybrid
-and factitious character of early French Renaissance design. There was
-no need of defences, yet round towers are set on the angles simulating
-those of feudal times, and each one of these is crowned with a low
-overhanging story supported on corbels, and having a superficial
-resemblance to the mediæval machicolated gallery. This overhanging
-attic is carried along each side of the building, and its numerous
-small square windows are so spaced as to give the intervening wall
-solids somewhat the appearance of battlements, while steep gables,
-crowned with spiky pinnacles, and high dormers and chimneys make up a
-total composition of great picturesqueness. The larger features are all
-of mediæval form, but the windows are flanked with classic pilasters
-and crowned with entablatures. The most elaborate, and least admirable,
-feature of this building is an ornamental bay (Fig. <a href="#i_183">112</a>), not seen in
-the general view here shown (Fig. <a href="#i_182">111</a>), which embraces the main portal.
-This bay is worthy of analysis because it is a highly characteristic
-example of French Renaissance design in which distorted neo-classic
-details are worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme. The composition is
-plainly derived from the neighbouring castle of Châteaudun, which was
-built at the beginning of the sixteenth century, and ornamented in the
-Flamboyant Gothic style. In Châteaudun (Fig. <a href="#i_185">113</a>) a staircase tower
-rises over the main portal of the south façade in four stories. The
-front of this tower, which is flush with the wall of the façade, is
-treated as an enriched bay, the upper two stories of it reaching above
-the main cornice, and being flanked by round turrets overhanging the
-wall, which is corbelled out to support them. The portal is double, and
-each upper story of the bay has a pair of large openings. All of these
-openings have the Flamboyant depressed arches, and the whole bay is
-flanked by buttresses, while a smaller buttress is set against a middle
-pier that rises through the composition. All of these parts have the
-characteristic Flamboyant forms and ornamental details. The openings
-are splayed, and their profilings have the sharp Flamboyant arrises.
-The buttresses have the multiplicity of angular members set obliquely,
-with the simulated interpenetrations, and the niches and canopies, of
-the latest Gothic style.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_185">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_185.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 113.</span>&mdash;Châteaudun.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Returning now to the portal of Azay le Rideau (Fig. <a href="#i_183">112</a>), we find
-this scheme substantially reproduced, but with greatly<span class="pagenum" id="Page_185">[185]</span> altered
-details. In place of the buttresses we have a remarkable combination
-of columns, pilasters, and other neo-classic ornaments put together
-so as to produce a pseudo-Flamboyant<span class="pagenum" id="Page_186">[186]</span> Gothic effect. The portals and
-windows are flanked with pilasters and crowned with entablatures, and
-the whole is bounded right and left by superimposed columns broken
-by highly ornamented niches, and banded by the string courses and
-entablatures. On the first floor over the portal the window pilasters
-are made to appear as hidden behind tall ornamental niches, composed
-of many neo-classic and nondescript elements, arranged in the manner
-of the details on Flamboyant buttresses. Only small portions of the
-base mouldings of the pilasters appear beneath this filigree overlay.
-In the story next above, the central pilaster only is hidden in this
-way, but here a part of the capital, instead of the base, comes into
-view. The manner in which the pseudo-Gothic features are adjusted to
-the neo-classic elements of the composition is curious in other ways.
-The pilasters of the several superimposed orders are, of course, of
-equal length in each story, and their entablatures make strongly marked
-horizontal lines. But the nondescript ornaments laid over these orders
-are carried up to unequal heights, all of them crossing the middle
-entablature, and the finial of the central one reaching above the
-architrave of the top entablature, while the lateral pilasters of this
-upper order are wholly exposed to view, except that the finials of the
-canopies over the niches below cover parts of their bases. The mixture
-of neo-classic and pseudo-Gothic forms is carried out in the details
-of these superimposed ornaments. Under the base of each niche are two
-diminutive pilasters, set obliquely so as to present an arris in front,
-like the angular members in Flamboyant buttresses, as in Châteaudun,
-and between these is a small shaft supporting a corbel which forms
-the base of the niche. The niche is flanked by slender pilasters set
-obliquely in conformity with those below, but these pilasters are
-almost entirely hidden from view by very salient nondescript ornaments
-worked on the face of each. The mouldings of the grouped bases, which
-are of different magnitudes, interpenetrate in Flamboyant fashion, and
-the canopies over the niches are made up of miniature entablatures on
-curved plans ornamented with filigree, and each of them is surmounted
-by a group of minute niches with statuettes, and crowned by a finial.
-The windows have the depressed arches of the Flamboyant style, with
-panelled dadoes beneath, as in Châteaudun; but their profilings are
-pseudo-classic,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_187">[187]</span> and they have keystones at their crowns. The total
-scheme is more mediæval than classic, notwithstanding the free use of
-neo-classic orders. To produce a continuity of upright lines, and thus
-emphasize the Gothic effect, the entablatures are broken into ressauts
-over the pilasters, and are carried around the lateral columns, as
-before remarked. The double portal is the only part of the composition
-that is quite free from mediæval elements. The order and the arches are
-here combined in the ancient Roman manner, as they are, indeed, in the
-upper stories; but here the arches have the Roman semicircular form,
-and the order is not overlaid with other ornaments. Classic proportions
-are not at all observed. The pilasters are short, and are raised on
-high pedestals, which are necessary to the composition in order to give
-the effect of adequate foundation for the superstructure. The design
-as a whole has no reason on structural grounds, nor has it any logic
-of simulated structure. Such merit as it has is of a purely abstract
-ornamental kind entirely extraneous to the building. Apart, however,
-from its factitious general character, and its incongruous details, the
-château of Azay le Rideau has a thoroughly French character, and is one
-of the finest monuments of the early Renaissance in the country.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_187">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_187.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 114.</span>&mdash;Part of the Portal of Chenonceaux.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Among other châteaux contemporaneous with Azay le<span class="pagenum" id="Page_188">[188]</span> Rideau, and of
-similar character, are Chenonceaux and La Rochefoucauld. Of Chenonceaux
-the portal (Fig. <a href="#i_187">114</a>) is worthy of notice as an instance of a different
-manifestation of the survival of Flamboyant ideas in the treatment of
-neo-classic details. In this portal we have again the three-centred
-form of arch, with a keystone and continuous imposts.<a id="FNanchor_117" href="#Footnote_117" class="fnanchor">[117]</a> The jambs
-and archivolt are in three planes, or orders, of shallow projection,
-with simple mouldings of semi-Flamboyant effect. No entablature
-surmounts this portal, but a corbelled cornice supporting a heavy
-balcony passes over the arch. This balcony has a curved ressaut at
-each end carried on a massive corbel in graduated rings of overhanging
-masonry, with a compound support beneath consisting of a stout pilaster
-and two small shafts. The Flamboyant idea running through this
-nondescript scheme is shown in the depressed form of the arch, and by
-the simulated interpenetrations at the imposts of the pilasters.</p>
-
-<p>In La Rochefoucauld we have an instance of a mediæval fortified castle
-transformed into a palatial residence. The most noticeable features
-here are the superimposed arcades of the court. In these arcades we
-have orders of pilasters used in the Roman way to frame in the arches,
-but these arches have the Flamboyant three-centred form. In the top
-story the number of arches is doubled, and the entablature over them
-is crowned with an ornamental parapet and finials. The vertical lines
-of the superimposed pilasters, made continuous by ressauts in the
-entablatures and carried up through the parapet by the finials, give a
-semi-Gothic expression to the ancient Roman scheme.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_189">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_189.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 115.</span>&mdash;Part of the court façade of Blois.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In those parts of the vast châteaux of Blois and Chambord that were
-built in the time of Francis I a richer phase of this early French
-Renaissance architecture is found. The eastern wing of Blois, which
-had been begun by Louis XII, illustrates this. On the side facing the
-court the walls are panelled, not as they sometimes were in the earlier
-buildings, as at La Rochefoucauld, by interpenetrating mouldings of
-Flamboyant profiling, but by three superimposed orders of pilasters,
-in which a continuity of upright lines is given by shallow ressauts
-in the entablatures (Fig. <a href="#i_189">115</a>). The pilasters are here irregularly
-spaced<span class="pagenum" id="Page_189">[189]</span> in conformity with the window openings of the work that had
-been begun, and considerably advanced, under the preceding reign;
-and have the novel addition of ornamented bead mouldings set on the
-edges of the pilasters, and along the under edges of the entablatures,
-while in each of the panels thus framed the salamander and crown are
-carved in relief. In the deep and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_190">[190]</span> elaborate cornice, dentils and
-modillions and the egg and dart are worked in with Gothic gargoyles and
-a corbel-table; while a rich parapet crowns the whole, and dormers of
-picturesque form, with pseudo-classic orders surmounted by gables and
-pinnacles, rise against the vast high-pitched roofs which are further
-broken by ornamented chimney-stacks. A survival of the later Gothic
-habit of design is further shown in the continuity of upright lines
-obtained by the ressauts already remarked. But the most remarkable
-feature of this façade is the great polygonal staircase tower that
-rises through it. Four vast piers like buttresses, reaching from the
-ground to the main cornice which is carried out so as to crown them,
-are treated like colossal pilasters with rich Corinthianesque capitals,
-and are banded above the middle with mouldings of classic profiling.
-Yet on the face of each of these members is a corbelled niche, with a
-rich canopy and statue in late Gothic style. These piers are connected
-by three stages of ramps with panelled parapets elaborately ornamented
-with small pilasters, carvings in relief, and gargoyles issuing from
-their base mouldings. The whole composition is crowned with a dormer
-having a square opening on each side, grouped pilasters on the angles,
-an entablature with compound ressauts over the pilasters, and with
-gargoyles reaching from the cornice, and a balustrade over all.</p>
-
-<p>The reader should consider well the meaning of all this, and observe
-how the persistence of the native French habits of design, without the
-logic of the former time, was still giving a largely mediæval aspect
-to works in which details from the Italian Renaissance, modified
-and combined in strangely new ways, were being more and more freely
-introduced.</p>
-
-<p>On the garden side this wing of Blois has a different design, and shows
-a survival of the Flamboyant depressed arch in the window openings
-necessitated by the form of the earlier façade, which is incased
-in that of Francis I.<a id="FNanchor_118" href="#Footnote_118" class="fnanchor">[118]</a> The windows of this earlier façade were
-spaced and proportioned so as to make wide and narrow voids and solids
-alternate in a very irregular manner. In the work of the sixteenth
-century, which overlays this, superimposed pilasters are set in pairs
-on the wider solids,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_191">[191]</span> and single ones adorn the narrow piers. The
-pilasters of the lower order rest on tall pedestals supported on spurs
-rising out of the batter wall of the basement, while the upper order
-is set on plinths resting on the entablature of the order beneath.
-This upper order has a plain corbel-table in place of an entablature,
-with a simple cornice, and gargoyles over the pilasters. Over this is
-the novel feature of an open gallery covered by an extension of the
-main roof which is held up by columns of no distinct order, with a
-balustrade in each interval. Similar galleries were afterward in some
-instances produced by extending the roofs over originally uncovered
-terraces below the eaves, supporting the extension on wooden posts&mdash;as
-at La Rochefoucauld.</p>
-
-<p>The walls of Chambord, the next vast château of the early French
-Renaissance, are adorned with pilasters as at Blois, though the design
-below the cornice is much simpler. Above the cornice, however, it is
-the richest of all the great French châteaux, and with its steep roofs
-and manifold dormers, chimneys, and central lantern, it presents an
-aspect which for multiplicity of soaring features resembles a late
-Gothic building. It is not worth while to give an extended analysis
-of its redundant details which, with its vast chimneys adorned with
-free-standing orders, niches, panelled surfaces, and pinnacles; its
-dormers with overlaid orders of pilasters, pediments, scrolls, and
-endless filigree ornaments; and its great lantern with inverted
-consoles on entablatures forming flying-buttresses (where there is
-nothing to be buttressed), make up a bewildering complex without
-structural meaning or artistic merit. Viollet le Duc has well remarked
-that “Chambord est au château féodal des XIII<sup>e</sup> et XIV<sup>e</sup> siècles ce que
-l’abbaye de Thélème est aux abbayes du XII<sup>e</sup> siècle: c’est une parodie.”</p>
-
-<p>The same general character, though in less florid development, marks
-those parts of Fontainebleau which are contemporaneous with Blois and
-Chambord. This is true also of Écouen, where the architectural scheme
-is comparatively simple. Instead of superimposed orders the walls of
-Écouen are adorned with continuous pilasters banded by the mouldings of
-entablatures that crown each of the stories. These details are in very
-shallow relief, the wall spaces enclosed by them are not panelled as at
-Blois and Chambord, and the windows have no framing<span class="pagenum" id="Page_192">[192]</span> members. Even the
-dormers have a marked sobriety of design, though they are framed with
-small orders, and crowned with fantastic pediments made up of classic
-elements and filigree ornaments.</p>
-
-<p>The architect Bullant, who appears to have had a large part in the
-design of Écouen, was among the first French architects of the
-Renaissance to travel in Italy. In Rome, as he tells us in his
-book,<a id="FNanchor_119" href="#Footnote_119" class="fnanchor">[119]</a> he had measured some of the ancient monuments, and in
-the great portico of the court he reproduced the order of a Roman
-temple.<a id="FNanchor_120" href="#Footnote_120" class="fnanchor">[120]</a> This portico embraces both stories of the building, and
-is, I believe, the earliest example in France of the reproduction of
-an ancient order without any admixture of mediæval details, or Italian
-corruptions. In the main body of the building it was natural that the
-architect should modify and adjust his neo-classic details in the
-prevailing manner of his time; but this colossal portico gave him an
-opportunity to carry out fully the classic Roman ideas which he appears
-to have imbibed during his Roman sojourn. It was impossible, however,
-to make any organic connection between this ancient scheme and the
-building to which it is attached, and it stands against the façade as
-an utterly foreign interpolation.</p>
-
-<p>An exceptional building of the early French Renaissance is the château
-of St. Germain en Laye. The top story of this building is vaulted, and
-to meet the vault thrusts a series of deep buttresses is ranged along
-each façade. These buttresses are connected by arches at the level of
-the floor of the principal story<a id="FNanchor_121" href="#Footnote_121" class="fnanchor">[121]</a> and beneath the main cornice,
-and entablatures, which crown the basement and the principal floor,
-break around them. They are adorned with pilaster-strips of Romanesque
-proportions, connected by small blind arches, capped by ressauts of the
-main cornice, and pierced with water-ducts ending in gargoyles. The
-arched windows are in pairs (one pair in each story between each pair
-of buttresses), and are framed with pilaster-strips and entablatures
-surmounted with pediments. The balconies formed by the ledges over
-the lower arches are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_193">[193]</span> enclosed with balustrades, and balustrades
-connect the buttresses over the main cornice. The roof is very low and
-invisible, thus there are no dormers, but large chimneys ornamented
-with blind arcading break the sky line.</p>
-
-<p>Such is the early Renaissance architecture of France. Notwithstanding
-its factitiousness, and its ornamental incongruities, it still has,
-as I have said, a distinctly French expression, though it has not
-the reasonable character of the native art of the Middle Ages in its
-integrity. But the departure from their own ideals and traditions
-was destined to be carried further, and at length to reach results
-which should still more profoundly contradict the true native spirit.
-This further transformation was wrought during the second half of the
-sixteenth century under the influence of several noted architects who
-stand in relation to the French Renaissance very much as Vignola,
-Palladio, and their followers stand in relation to that of Italy. The
-art of these men will be considered in the next chapter.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_194">[194]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER XII<br />
-<span class="subhed">LESCOT AND DE L’ORME</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>Among the architects of the later French Renaissance Pierre Lescot and
-Philibert De l’Orme were preëminent. The change which they effected
-gave the French architecture a more marked neo-classic dress, yet
-still without wholly eliminating its native character. This change was
-of course analogous to that which had been wrought in Italy by the
-later designers of that country, but the resulting forms in France
-were different from those of the Italian art, and were to the last
-peculiarly French, though, as before remarked (p. <a href="#Page_179">179</a>), not expressive
-of the French genius in its integrity. This was entirely natural.
-The architecture of a people inevitably retains much of its original
-character while yielding to foreign influences. It had been so with
-the Italian art of the Middle Ages when it was subjected to the Gothic
-influence, and it could not be otherwise with the French art of the
-sixteenth century when the later Renaissance wave swept over it.</p>
-
-<p>Lescot and De l’Orme came strongly under the influence of Vignola
-and Palladio, their Italian contemporaries, and they fully accepted
-the Italian belief in the superiority of the neo-classic principles
-of design to those which had given rise to what they considered the
-architectural barbarisms of the Middle Ages. Lescot, says Berty,<a id="FNanchor_122" href="#Footnote_122" class="fnanchor">[122]</a>
-“was one of the first French architects to employ the ancient style in
-its purity,” and De l’Orme, according to Milizia,<a id="FNanchor_123" href="#Footnote_123" class="fnanchor">[123]</a> “exerted all his
-industry to strip architecture of her Gothic dress and clothe her in
-that of ancient Greece.”</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_195">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_195.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 116.</span>&mdash;Du Cerceau’s engraving of the
-Fountain of the Nymphs.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Lescot is said to have designed the Fountain of the Nymphs, now known
-as the Fountain of the Innocents,<a id="FNanchor_124" href="#Footnote_124" class="fnanchor">[124]</a> in Paris, in collaboration
-with Goujon, the sculptor. In this work there is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_195">[195]</span> nothing whatever
-of mediæval character. In its present condition it is, indeed, very
-different from what it was originally. It first (1550) stood on the
-corner of two streets with a façade of two bays on one street and a
-return of one bay on the other. In 1788 it was taken down and reërected
-in the square of the Innocents on a square plan, a fourth façade
-being then added. Figure 116, from an engraving by Du Cerceau,<a id="FNanchor_125" href="#Footnote_125" class="fnanchor">[125]</a>
-illustrates the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_196">[196]</span> original design, each bay of which is nothing more
-than a reproduction of the scheme of a Roman triumphal arch, with a
-short pediment over the attic. The whole structure is raised on a
-high basement of plain character with lions’ heads for water-spouts.
-Such pure imitation of the antique does the architect little credit
-as a designer, and it is hard to understand how such works could have
-been regarded as monuments of a regenerating art. The sculptures by
-Goujon which adorn this structure have, in my judgment, no monumental
-qualities, nor any notable merits of design. Their movements are
-awkward, and their lines ill composed. The influence of the decadent
-Italian art is marked in them, without any new qualities that should
-entitle them to distinction.</p>
-
-<p>Little is known of the early training of Lescot beyond what is told
-in a poem by Ronsard,<a id="FNanchor_126" href="#Footnote_126" class="fnanchor">[126]</a> from which we learn that in his youth he
-had occupied himself with painting and geometry, and that at the age
-of twenty he began the study of architecture. He does not appear to
-have visited Italy, and his knowledge of ancient art must, therefore,
-have been acquired at second hand; very likely in great part through
-Serlio’s book which had been published in 1537. A woodcut (Fig. <a href="#i_197">117</a>) on
-page 127 of this book,<a id="FNanchor_127" href="#Footnote_127" class="fnanchor">[127]</a> giving the design of an ancient Roman arch
-in Verona, might have served as a model for the Fountain of the Nymphs.
-He must also have come in contact with Serlio himself, who in 1541 had
-been called into the service of the French king.</p>
-
-<p>The capital work of Lescot was the early part of the new Louvre, begun
-about 1546 on the site of the old castle of Philippe Auguste which
-Francis I had demolished in order to rebuild in the new style. The
-new scheme was apparently intended to cover almost precisely the same
-area that had been occupied by the mediæval structure, and the old
-foundations were to be utilized in the new building. Thus in conformity
-with the older castle Lescot’s design embraced a square court; but only
-a part of this project was actually carried out, namely, the wings
-on the south and west sides. And of these the south wing afterward
-suffered a damaging alteration by the architect Lemercier who enlarged
-the court to about four times the area<span class="pagenum" id="Page_197">[197]</span> that Lescot had intended. Thus
-the only part of Lescot’s work which has survived substantially intact
-is that part of the existing west side which extends from the southwest
-angle to the great western pavilion. This portion is figured by Du
-Cerceau,<a id="FNanchor_128" href="#Footnote_128" class="fnanchor">[128]</a> and save for some alterations in the timber roof the
-existing fabric agrees with his print.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_197">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_197.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 117.</span>&mdash;Roman arch, Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_198">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_198.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 118.</span>&mdash;Part of Du Cerceau’s print of
-Lescot’s Louvre.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>In this design (Fig. <a href="#i_198">118</a>) there is no survival of the character of a
-mediæval stronghold, though the rectangular pavilions, which break the
-long façades, and the high pitched roofs are<span class="pagenum" id="Page_198">[198]</span> feeble echoes of the
-mediæval French traditional forms. It is worthy of notice that Lescot’s
-projecting bays have no meaning apart from their æsthetic effect in
-the external architectural scheme. In the feudal castle the towers had
-of necessity to stand out beyond the curtain walls in order from their
-loopholes and battlements to defend them. But the salient pavilions of
-the Louvre have no function; they do not even materially enlarge the
-interior, but are purely ornamental features. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_199">[199]</span> scheme includes two
-stories and an attic, each of which is adorned with a classic order. In
-the basement and in the principal story the orders consist of fluted
-Corinthian pilasters on pedestals, while in the attic short pilasters,
-with their surfaces panelled in the Lombard Renaissance manner, are
-used. The principal orders only have complete entablatures, the order
-of the attic having only a cornice with a frieze which takes in the
-capitals, and this cornice is surmounted by a parapet with filigree
-ornamentation. In the intercolumniations of the basement order arches
-are sprung beneath the entablature in the Roman fashion, each arch
-embracing a narrow window with a segmental head concentric with the
-arch, while the window openings of the upper stories are rectangular,
-those of the principal floor having alternately round and angular
-pediments on consoles.</p>
-
-<p>In the pavilions we have in each story a variation of the scheme of
-the Fountain of the Nymphs. The imitation of Serlio’s cut (Fig. <a href="#i_197">117</a>
-above) is closer, Corinthian columns being used instead of pilasters
-as in Serlio’s design. But in the basement the architect has made
-marked changes in the central bay, omitting the arch, and cutting
-out a portion of the entablature. This last device, of which, as
-we have seen, the later Renaissance architecture of Italy affords
-many instances, is not only a violation of the principles of classic
-design which these architects were professing to restore, but it is
-a barbarism, because it breaks the continuity of those lines which
-in such a composition should have the expression of binding the
-parts together. In the story above the entablature is not completely
-broken; the architrave and frieze only are cut in order to insert a
-tablet. In the attic, however, the cornice is cut out completely, and
-a segmental arch is sprung over the opening to form a pediment as a
-crowning feature of the pavilion. The traditional logic of French
-design is thus completely ignored by Lescot, and he abandons himself
-to capricious methods of composition as completely as the Italians
-had done. It is surprising not only to find the French people thus
-following the Italians in their irrational misuse of structural forms
-in ornamentation, but also to find them, after having produced in the
-Middle Ages the most living and beautiful forms of foliate sculpture
-that the world has ever seen, resorting to the heavy and formal
-festoons<span class="pagenum" id="Page_200">[200]</span> of decadent Roman art, as Lescot has done in these friezes of
-the Louvre.</p>
-
-<p>Another noticeable characteristic of this phase of Renaissance design
-in France is its excessive profusion of ornament. The wall surfaces
-are embossed with reliefs, or set with niches, disks, or tablets until
-no broad plain surfaces remain. Such extravagance of ornament is
-characteristic of later Roman, and debased Gothic, but it is foreign to
-the finest classic, and the pure Gothic, art.</p>
-
-<p>Of the architectural work of De l’Orme little is now extant, and the
-most of that which has survived has suffered such alterations that we
-can form from the monuments themselves but an imperfect idea of their
-original aspect. We have, however, in the fragments that remain, in Du
-Cerceau’s prints, and in the illustrations to his own writings, enough
-to show that he was a man with little artistic genius, though he had an
-ardent passion for architecture as he understood it.<a id="FNanchor_129" href="#Footnote_129" class="fnanchor">[129]</a> He was among
-those architects of his time who went to Rome to study the antique, and
-he tells us in his book<a id="FNanchor_130" href="#Footnote_130" class="fnanchor">[130]</a> that he dug about their foundations, and
-made drawings and measurements. His most important work was the palace
-of the Tuileries, begun in 1564. Of this gigantic scheme only a small
-part, the central part on the garden side, was completed by De l’Orme,
-and this was much altered by successive architects before the building
-was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_201">[201]</span> destroyed in 1871. The plan, as given by Du Cerceau (Fig. <a href="#i_201">119</a>), is
-symmetrical, but it is broken by projecting bays and angle pavilions
-more pronounced than those of the Louvre. These features, survivals of
-the mediæval plan, distinguish the French Renaissance architecture from
-that of Italy to the last.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_201">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_201.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 119.</span>&mdash;Plan of the Tuileries, from Du
-Cerceau.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_202">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_202.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 120.</span>&mdash;Tuileries, from Du Cerceau.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The external façade (Fig. <a href="#i_202">120</a>) has a single story with an attic of
-broken outline, and in it the architect made use of a peculiar<span class="pagenum" id="Page_202">[202]</span> form of
-Ionic column of which he speaks<a id="FNanchor_131" href="#Footnote_131" class="fnanchor">[131]</a> as follows: “I make here a short
-digression to speak of the Ionic columns which I have employed in the
-above-mentioned palace of her Majesty the Queen Mother.<a id="FNanchor_132" href="#Footnote_132" class="fnanchor">[132]</a> ... The
-said columns are sixty-four in number on the side facing the garden,
-and each one is two feet in diameter at the base. They are not all of
-one piece, since I could not find so large a number of such height as
-was necessary.... I have fashioned them as you see (Fig. <a href="#i_203">121</a>), and
-with suitable ornaments to hide the joints; which is an invention that
-I have never yet seen in any edifice either ancient or modern, and
-still less in our books of architecture. I remember to have made nearly
-the same in the time of his late Majesty Henry II, in his château of
-Villers Cotterets, in the doorway of a chapel which is in the park,
-and it was very graceful, as you may judge from the figure which I
-give.” Further on he proposes that this shall be called the French
-order, saying: “If it was allowable for the architects of antiquity, in
-different nations and countries, to invent new columns, as the Romans
-invented the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_203">[203]</span> Tuscan and the Composite, the Athenians the Athenian,
-and, long before the said Romans, those of Doris the Doric, of Ionia
-the Ionic and Corinthian, who shall forbid us Frenchmen from inventing
-some, and calling them French, as those might be called which I have
-invented and used in the porch of the chapel of Villers Cotterets?” Of
-this column De l’Orme, in his book, gives several variants, showing how
-the salient drums, or rings, may be variously ornamented or left plain,
-or may be varied in their proportions; and he gives also a design for a
-doorway (Fig. <a href="#i_204">122</a>)<a id="FNanchor_133" href="#Footnote_133" class="fnanchor">[133]</a> in which he employs a Tuscan order treated in
-this way.</p>
-
-<p>It is hard to conclude what to think of De l’Orme’s claim to this
-column as his own invention, and of his statement that he had never
-seen one of its kind in any building, or in any book of architecture;
-for such a column was not a new thing, though it may not before have
-been used in France. Several examples of practically the same column
-occur in Serlio’s book, which was published in 1537 when De l’Orme
-was but twenty-two years of age,<a id="FNanchor_134" href="#Footnote_134" class="fnanchor">[134]</a> one of which, in a design for a
-doorway, is here (Fig. <a href="#i_205">123</a>) reproduced.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_203">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_203.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 121.</span>&mdash;De l’Orme’s column.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of this doorway Serlio says: “Although Doric doorways may be designed
-in other ways, yet most men are pleased with novelty, and with that
-which is not too common, and they have satisfaction especially from
-that which, though being mixed, still retains its character, as in this
-doorway where, although the column, the frieze, and other members are
-broken, and covered with rustic work, nevertheless the form is seen
-well defined in all its proportions.”<a id="FNanchor_135" href="#Footnote_135" class="fnanchor">[135]</a> He does not affirm that this
-novelty was<span class="pagenum" id="Page_204">[204]</span> his own invention, but he seems to imply that it was.
-However this may be, he was writing long before De l’Orme could have
-produced such a column as his design shows. The château of Villers
-Cotterets built for Henry II, in which De l’Orme remembered to have
-made columns somewhat like those of the Tuileries, could not have been
-begun before 1547, the year of Henry’s accession, and ten years after
-Serlio’s book was published.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_204">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_204.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 122.</span>&mdash;De l’Orme’s doorway.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_205">[205]</span></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_205">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_205.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 123.</span>&mdash;Doorway, Serlio.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>An ancient adumbration of this form of column occurs in the Porta
-Maggiore in Rome, where it has the appearance of an unfinished work,
-the drums being roughly shaped to be finished after they were set
-up, in the customary ancient manner. Such an example may well have
-suggested to the architects of the Renaissance the idea embodied in
-Serlio’s cut. Sansovino made use of this form of column in the façade
-of the Zecca in Venice, which was commissioned by the Council of Ten
-in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_206">[206]</span> 1535, and at Genoa, in the wall that was built to enlarge the
-circuit of the city, there is a portal bearing the date 1553, in which
-the scheme figured by Serlio is carried out. This peculiar column had
-therefore undoubtedly been in existence, both in a book of architecture
-and in actual monuments, before De l’Orme was writing. It is, of
-course, quite possible that he may have devised his scheme in ignorance
-of the Italian examples, but whether he did or not is for us a matter
-of little importance. It is, I think, an architectural monstrosity, and
-reflects little credit on its designer.</p>
-
-<p>It may be further remarked concerning De l’Orme’s claim to this column
-as his own invention, that it expresses an idea which was at the
-bottom of most of the architectural misconceptions and mistakes of
-the Renaissance, the idea that architectural excellence may result
-from independent personal effort to be original. I think it may be
-said that the artistic aberrations of the Renaissance arose largely
-from this false notion. The conscious effort to be original in
-architecture is inevitably disastrous. The personal contributions of
-individuals in architectural development consist of little more than
-small improvements on lines of endeavour common to large bodies of men.
-The aggregate of such improvements finally become conspicuous, and
-mark fundamental changes of architectural styles; but the part of any
-individual in such changes is hardly noticeable. Noble architecture has
-always been, and must, I think, always be, mainly a social, communal,
-and national, not a personal product. De l’Orme failed to consider that
-the ancient orders were not inventions of individual designers, but the
-outcome of a process of evolution toward which the ingenuity of large
-numbers of men through long periods of time had contributed. He thought
-that he might himself invent a new order, and call it French. He ought
-rather to have called it by his own name, for it was not French in the
-sense of being a product of the collective French genius. Had he and
-his contemporaries had more discernment, they might have realized that
-a true French order was already in existence in that very Gothic art
-which they vilified, that the shaft and its load of the twelfth-century
-national style was such an order, a true evolution out of the ancient
-orders superbly adapted to new conditions.<a id="FNanchor_136" href="#Footnote_136" class="fnanchor">[136]</a></p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_207">[207]</span></p>
-
-<p>As for De l’Orme’s façade for the Tuileries, as an architectural
-composition, little in the way of praise can, I think, be said.
-The basement arcade (Fig. <a href="#i_202">120</a>, p. 202) is but an adaptation of the
-wearisome Roman scheme of pier and arch overlaid with an order in
-which the Roman form of column gives place to the peculiar one just
-described and called his own invention. This deformed column has an
-Ionic capital, and De l’Orme tells us that he employed the Ionic
-order here because it had been as yet little used, and “because it
-is feminine, having been invented after the proportions of women and
-goddesses,”<a id="FNanchor_137" href="#Footnote_137" class="fnanchor">[137]</a> and is therefore suitable for the palace of a queen.
-In this façade the monotony of the long range of arches with their
-orders is partly relieved by a ressaut in the entablature over every
-fourth bay, and this ressaut only is supported by columns, pilasters
-of similar character being used in the intervening bays. The attic
-story reproduces with variations some of the architectural vagaries
-of Vignola and his followers. Tall, rectangular dormers alternate
-with oblong panels crowned with broken pediments, and flanked with
-coupled hermæ. In this composition the native French characteristics
-of design survive in hardly anything more than the broken outline of
-the attic, and the steep roof behind it.<a id="FNanchor_138" href="#Footnote_138" class="fnanchor">[138]</a> That such architecture is
-shaped on mathematical proportions, and has an orderly and rhythmical
-distribution of parts, does not make it good architecture. Proportion
-and rhythm of this mechanical kind cannot, as I have before said, make
-a fine work of art.<a id="FNanchor_139" href="#Footnote_139" class="fnanchor">[139]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_208">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_208.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 124.</span>&mdash;Doorway of De l’Orme.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>What we know of other important works by De l’Orme, as the châteaux
-of Anet and Saint Maur, shows the same lack of a fine artistic sense.
-The lay-out of these vast pleasure-houses may be well adapted to the
-requirements of the courtly life of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_208">[208]</span> the time. De l’Orme understood the
-needs of this life, and was ingenious in providing for them, but such
-ingenuity constitutes but a small part of an architect’s equipment,
-and may exist without any artistic aptitude. It is only in so far
-as such ingenuity is accompanied by a genuine artistic sense that a
-fine work of art can be produced. De l’Orme undoubtedly worked with a
-steady regard for what he considered artistic design, but<span class="pagenum" id="Page_209">[209]</span> his works
-show, I think, that he was devoid of true artistic genius. If further
-illustration of this be desired, it may be abundantly found in the
-numerous architectural projects published in his book, of which the
-doorway (Fig. <a href="#i_208">124</a>) is a fair example.<a id="FNanchor_140" href="#Footnote_140" class="fnanchor">[140]</a> Of this composition the
-author remarks as follows: “I give you here following another form of
-doorway being square and straight in its covering, and having pilasters
-at the sides, in which one sees only the plinths of their bases under
-the said pilasters, which are larger at the top than at the bottom;
-which is the contrary of the columns and pilasters made according to
-measure [_i.e._ according to neo-classic proportions?] which
-are narrower at the top than at the bottom. But such an invention is
-produced according to the suggestion and fancy that presents itself,
-like many others; which, provided the proportions are well observed,
-are always found to have a pleasing effect, which is an easy thing to
-do by those who have experience and skill in architecture. You see how
-in this design which I figure, in place of capitals mutules in the
-form of consoles carry the soffit of a tympanum or frontispiece, which
-is cut out, as is seen, and has its cornices above and ornaments on
-acroteria, as may be seen in the figure with all the other ornaments,
-and pieces cut out which make the covering of the doorway, and above
-a tablet with another tympanum and other ornaments. To describe all
-in detail would require too much time, but you can easily understand
-from the drawing, which is of a Doric doorway having three steps which
-are well shown, as in the other doorways, when they are raised above
-the ground.” These remarks, like the drawing itself, show clearly
-that design with De l’Orme was a matter of purely capricious fancy,
-regulated only by a mechanical system of proportions. If the rules of
-proportion be “well observed,” he thinks that such a crazy composition
-as this, with its foolishly deformed members, may have a “pleasing
-effect.”</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_210">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_210.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 125.</span>&mdash;Façade of Charleval, Du Cerceau.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It is not worth while to follow this phase of the French Renaissance
-art much further, but Du Cerceau gives one other design that is worthy
-of a moment’s attention for its freakish irrationality and, I will not
-hesitate to say, ugliness, the project for the château of Charleval,
-begun for Charles IX, but not far advanced in construction at the
-time of his death, and never<span class="pagenum" id="Page_210">[210]</span> completed. The exterior façade of the
-_basse-court_ is divided into a long series of bays (Fig. <a href="#i_210">125</a>) by
-colossal rusticated pilasters of two orders, embracing the two stories
-into which the elevation, above the basement, is divided. Each pilaster
-is crowned with a section of an architrave and frieze, in the form of a
-ressaut of two orders, which interpenetrates the bed mouldings of the
-continuous cornice. Since the architrave and frieze are not carried
-along the intervening walls, the pilasters have no real entablature to
-support even in appearance. Another unmeaning freak of design in this
-façade is the kind of variation of the details of the several bays
-which it exhibits. The rectangular windows are in one bay surmounted
-with round archivolts, in the next with curved pediments, in another
-with angular pediments<span class="pagenum" id="Page_211">[211]</span> above and curved ones below, in another with
-curved pediments above and round archivolts below, in still another
-with curved pediments above and a single one embracing both windows
-below; and so on with continued change with no purpose but that of mere
-change.<a id="FNanchor_141" href="#Footnote_141" class="fnanchor">[141]</a> Viollet le Duc<a id="FNanchor_142" href="#Footnote_142" class="fnanchor">[142]</a> commends the architect of this façade
-for seeking what he calls a grand disposition without abandoning the
-logical principles of his predecessors. But the great French master
-appears to me to err in his reasoning here, as frequently elsewhere in
-his discourse on the architecture of the Renaissance. The great order
-of Doric pilasters used in this façade fills, he says, exactly the
-function of buttresses, and he then proceeds to defend the whole scheme
-by saying that, “Taking the order as a buttress it is possible, without
-violence to reason, to cut it by a floor” (_i.e._ to divide the
-space between the pilasters into two stories). But there is no sense
-in taking the order as a buttressing system, for there is nothing in
-the structure to require buttressing; and if there were, the pilasters
-of an order, even though doubled, as in this case, would not form an
-effective buttress system. It is in nothing but the general arrangement
-of the main lines that such a composition can be said to bear any
-resemblance to an organic mediæval system in which buttresses have a
-function, and are shaped so as to express it.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_212">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_212.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 126.</span>&mdash;Interior façade of Charleval, Du
-Cerceau.]</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The interior façade of the same building (Fig. <a href="#i_212">126</a>) presents a
-different scheme. The great order here has fluted pilasters, and
-the division of the building into two stories is not expressed on
-the outside. Viollet le Duc remarks on this façade as follows: “The
-architect wished here not only to accent the great order more clearly,
-but also to hide entirely the floor of the upper story;<a id="FNanchor_143" href="#Footnote_143" class="fnanchor">[143]</a> and
-in adopting this scheme, contrary to the logical principles of the
-architects of the Middle Ages, he has carried it out with remarkable
-skill. The line of the floor, naturally placed at the level _A_,
-is cut by arched niches, so that the eye does not suspect its
-existence, and<span class="pagenum" id="Page_212">[212]</span> is forced to embrace the whole front as if it were one
-stage.” And he adds: “C’était là l’œuvre d’un artiste consommé.”<a id="FNanchor_144" href="#Footnote_144" class="fnanchor">[144]</a>
-Thus in one case the architect is lauded for employing the order like
-a buttress system to justify its embracing two stories, while in the
-other he is praised for giving a deceptive appearance of only one
-story; so that this part of the design may, as the writer says in
-another place, be in better scale with the order. But the distinguished
-author betrays embarrassment in dealing further with these
-architectural incongruities of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_213">[213]</span> Renaissance design, and after remarking
-that the architects of this time have resorted to various devices
-for overcoming the difficulties arising from the lack of harmony
-between design and construction (“entre la mode d’architecture et les
-convenances”), which, he says, have occasioned them much torment, he
-exclaims (p. 376): “Voilà cependant où conduit l’oubli des principes
-vrais.” It is indeed far into devious paths that the architect is led
-by departure from the true principles of design.</p>
-
-<p>A few remarks on the church architecture of the French Renaissance may
-be added here. It was natural that in church architecture the mediæval
-structural forms should largely survive. The French people could not
-adopt those semi-classic basilican forms of building that were natural
-to Italy. Thus, while now professing to despise their own noble Gothic
-art, they still retained through the sixteenth century the later
-Gothic structural system with no essential modification. This is well
-illustrated in the church of St. Eustache in Paris, which was begun
-as late as 1532. It is a very large cruciform Gothic structure, with
-double aisles and a range of side chapels, overlaid with Renaissance
-details. Pilasters and entablatures, variously distorted in order to
-fit them to the Gothic proportions and functions, take the place of
-vaulting shafts and string courses in the interior of the nave, while
-on the outside similar members are used with less distortion because
-of a different division of the stories giving proportions more nearly
-agreeing with those of classic art. The chapels opening out of the
-outer aisles have only half the height of these aisles, and thus the
-exterior has two stories where there is but one inside. An entablature
-crowns each of these stories, and the upper one has a pseudo-Doric
-character. The buttresses above the chapels have two superimposed
-orders of pilasters, and are crowned with urns on pedestals. Thus was
-a frankly Gothic structure made agreeable to the French taste of the
-sixteenth century by a barbarous misapplication of mixed and distorted
-classic details.</p>
-
-<p>The persistence of Gothic structural forms is shown further in the
-church of St. Etienne du Mont, begun in 1517. In the parts belonging
-to the original construction almost no classic details occur. It is
-Flamboyant Gothic of a peculiar type in which vaulting of almost true
-Gothic form is sustained by plain<span class="pagenum" id="Page_214">[214]</span> cylindrical columns of unusual
-height. The church has no triforium, but the columns are connected
-by arches at the usual triforium level, and these arches carry a
-balustraded passageway. The archivolts of this arcade have classic
-profiles and keystones, and the balustrade is of neo-classic form.
-In the west front, begun in 1620, neo-classic features are adjusted
-to Gothic outlines, and the central portal, in the form of a Roman
-triumphal arch, is furnished with columns modelled after those of De
-l’Orme which he claimed as his own invention.</p>
-
-<p>The church of SS. Gervais and Protais at Gisors has a Flamboyant west
-front in parts of which Renaissance features have been inserted in
-different degrees of compromise with Gothic forms and adjustments. The
-north tower below the cornice has no such features, but the south tower
-has been completely masked by a late Renaissance covering in three
-stories of pseudo-classic orders of which the uppermost is incomplete.
-The main portal is flanked by pilasters, and has splayed jambs and
-a splayed archivolt, with an entablature at the impost. A segmental
-arch over this supports a ledge on which is set a tabernacle of three
-arches, faced by a Corinthian order having no continuous entablature
-but only entablature blocks, and an attic over the central arch crowned
-with a curved pediment. It is unnecessary to analyze this west front
-further; it presents one of the most confused jumbles of incongruous
-elements anywhere to be met with.</p>
-
-<p>A different manifestation of Renaissance caprice is found in the florid
-exterior of the apse of St. Pierre of Caen, which is made up of details
-of a sixteenth-century Lombard character applied to a Flamboyant
-structural scheme. The round arch and the complete circle take here the
-place of the pointed forms, and pilasters against the angles have short
-Flamboyant buttresses set against them, the faces of these buttresses
-being treated like Lombard Renaissance pilasters.</p>
-
-<p>One of the most remarkable designs to be found in the Renaissance
-church architecture of France is that of the portal of the north
-transept of St. Maclou of Pontoise. It belongs to the early period, and
-is much like what we have seen in the portal of the château of Azay le
-Rideau (p. <a href="#Page_182">182</a>). The opening is round-arched and has a narrow splay. It
-is flanked by pilasters and crowned with an entablature surmounted with
-a fanciful<span class="pagenum" id="Page_215">[215]</span> pediment of broken outline, ornamented with a tablet and
-death’s-head, and flanked by finials of nondescript design. This portal
-is again flanked by colossal pilasters, rising from pedestals almost as
-high as the arch impost, and reaching to the cornice at the level of
-the aisle roof. Against each of these pilasters a short, fluted column,
-with a capital of pseudo-composite form, rises from a pedestal engaged
-with the pilaster pedestal. The portion of the pilaster that rises
-above this column is treated like a niche, with a base resting on the
-capital of the column, and with an ornamental canopy above that rises
-through the capital of the pilaster.</p>
-
-<p>It is unnecessary to extend further these tiresome descriptions. The
-foregoing examples are enough to show how irrational was the use
-made of neo-classic details in the church architecture of the French
-Renaissance, and how they were engrafted on a Gothic structural scheme.
-It was in this manner that the French architects of the time sought to
-“reform the Gothic and bastard styles.”</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_216">[216]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER XIII<br />
-<span class="subhed">ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND</span><br />
-<span class="subhed">I. _Elizabethan Art_</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>When the need for feudal strongholds had passed, and the conditions
-of life in the open country had become peaceful, a type of domestic
-architecture arose in England which assumed its most characteristic
-form in the early Elizabethan Age. The best features of this
-architecture were of native growth out of the humbler forms of
-mediæval domestic building, the feudal castle, and the latest phase
-of Perpendicular Gothic. These features are mainly the rectangular
-plan, with plain enclosing walls in long blocks broken by projecting
-bays, and with large mullioned windows, high-pitched roofs, and tall
-chimney-stacks. The better form of early Elizabethan dwelling on a
-large scale had the plain, external character of the traditional
-yeoman’s house. It was planned with some regard for convenience, was
-admirably suited to the climate, and was expressive of that pleasant
-and dignified home life which is peculiar to England. It is picturesque
-and cheerful in aspect, but has little other architectural character
-than such as results from adaptation to needs, straightforward logic
-of construction, and generally good proportions. It embodies the
-essentially English idea, as expressed by Lord Bacon, that, “Houses
-are built to live in, and not to look on.”<a id="FNanchor_145" href="#Footnote_145" class="fnanchor">[145]</a> And while this remark
-may seem to ignore architecture as such, _i.e._ the fine art of
-beautiful building, it expresses a fundamental principle; for to build
-a house to live in, shaped for the needs of civilized human life, is
-to secure the primary condition of good architectural effect. And no
-domestic architecture in Europe has had more genuine charm for the
-eye than that of England of the Elizabethan time in its integrity,
-as it may be seen, for instance, in the greater parts<span class="pagenum" id="Page_217">[217]</span> of Haddon
-Hall; St. Johns, Warwick; Hambleton Old Hall, Rutland; North Mymms,
-Hertfordshire, and others.<a id="FNanchor_146" href="#Footnote_146" class="fnanchor">[146]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_217">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_217.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 127.</span>&mdash;Burghley House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>But, unhappily, English life among the upper classes in the sixteenth
-century was not without sophistication. Many of the great houses were
-built, not for convenience and propriety, but to gratify a spirit of
-ostentation and pedantry. False notions of symmetry were allowed to
-control design at the expense of fitness, and classic details, even
-more grotesquely disfigured than in Italy and France, and combined
-with elements of nameless character, began to overlay the walls, and
-break the sky-lines. The formal regularity and awkward composition of
-Hardwick, and the ludicrous pseudo-classicism of Burghley House, with
-its chimneys (Fig. <a href="#i_217">127</a>) in the form of Doric orders, are among the
-numerous instances of this. All that offends the eye in the English
-palatial architecture of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries is
-due to these sophistications, which largely subverted the native
-good sense and sound craftsmanship. “This was,” says Cunningham,
-“a style of architecture strangely compounded, and neither in the
-weak wildness of its combinations, nor in the flimsy variety of its
-materials, was it made to endure. Plaster, terra-cotta, paint, tiles,
-wood, iron, and brick, even when united with all the skill of the most
-exquisite art, cannot long resist the rapid wear and tear of such a
-humid climate as ours. Those unsubstantial structures, with all their
-dazzling incrustations, are passed or passing from the earth: nothing
-is lasting but hard massive stone, impenetrable cement, and scientific
-combinations.”<a id="FNanchor_147" href="#Footnote_147" class="fnanchor">[147]</a> It ought to be said,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_218">[218]</span> however, that whatever
-flimsiness of material entered into the composition of these buildings
-was confined to ornamental details, and chiefly to the interiors. The
-main body of the Elizabethan structure was of solid and well-executed
-masonry. Mr. Bloomfield points out that these houses were built by
-Englishmen and ornamented by foreigners.<a id="FNanchor_148" href="#Footnote_148" class="fnanchor">[148]</a> And it is certainly true
-that in plan and outline they have little foreign character. Most of
-the plans of the native architect, John Thorpe,<a id="FNanchor_149" href="#Footnote_149" class="fnanchor">[149]</a> appear, indeed, to
-show a French influence, but in the larger features of the elevation
-they are English. It is thus in the ornamental details chiefly, which
-seem to have been wrought in part by foreigners and in part by native
-craftsmen striving to conform to foreign ideas, that we find the
-strangest aberrations of design. A few examples will serve to show the
-character of this art.</p>
-
-<p>The façade of the north side of the court of Kirby Hall, for instance,
-is divided into bays by colossal pilasters of hybrid style, which have
-not even a semblance of structural meaning, since they carry only
-ressauts of an entablature, the total height of which is less than the
-diameters of the pilasters. From each of these ressauts rises a slender
-pedestal, against a low attic wall, surmounted by finials resting upon
-the cornice (Fig. <a href="#i_219">128</a>). The central bay, enclosing the entrance to the
-court, is wider than the others, and the pilasters here are panelled,
-and have arabesques in relief, while the others are fluted. The façade
-is in two stories, their division being marked by an entablature; the
-lower story has an open arcade, while the upper one has a rectangular
-window in each bay crowned with a pediment.<a id="FNanchor_150" href="#Footnote_150" class="fnanchor">[150]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_219">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_219.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 128.</span>&mdash;North side of court, Kirby Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The general scheme has no English character, and it so nearly resembles
-that of the court of Charleval, in France, (cf. p. <a href="#Page_212">212</a>) as to suggest
-that its designer may have been influenced by the French composition.
-The effect of the scheme,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_219">[219]</span> as a whole, from the point of view of
-structure, is curious with its great pilasters of unusual projection,
-which have the function of supporting nothing but miniature pedestals
-and finials. In a general view the low attic wall has somewhat the
-effect of an entablature, though it is behind, and not over, the
-pilasters; but considered as an entablature its frieze is encumbered
-with the pediments of the windows which rise against it. The windows
-are, however, an alteration, and the original scheme may be better
-judged of from the opposite, or south, side of the court. Here the
-attic has distinctly the appearance of an entablature of somewhat
-suitable proportions for the order; though, here too, it is behind the
-pilasters, and does not rest upon them. The façade on this side is in
-one story, with a tall mullioned and transomed window in each bay. With
-a proper entablature the scheme would not be a bad one. The wall being
-almost wholly eliminated by the great window voids, the order would
-have the true function of upholding the roof if a<span class="pagenum" id="Page_220">[220]</span> true entablature and
-the roof were where they ought to be. But not only is the attic wall,
-substituted for an entablature, in retreat of the pilasters, but the
-roof rises from behind the attic, so that this last becomes a parapet.</p>
-
-<p>At the centre of this façade of one story is a porch of two stories
-with a tall attic and a gable of ogee outline flanked by finials. This
-porch has an order of fluted Ionic pilasters in the ground story, an
-order of Corinthian columns above, and a small order of Corinthian
-columns in the attic. The pilasters and columns of the first and
-second stories respectively, are in pairs on each side of an opening,
-and the entablature in each of these stories has a ressaut over each
-pair. The pilasters of the ground story are raised on a panelled
-podium, while the columns of the upper story, and of the attic, are
-carried on consoles. The attic has no openings, and the columns of the
-small order here are equally spaced, with narrow intercolumniations,
-and an entablature block over each column in place of a continuous
-entablature. The ground story opening has a plain, round arch, while
-that of the upper story which is arched also, is framed with a stilted
-order, and crowned with a broken pediment of curved outline. The scheme
-is a variation of Lescot’s Louvre pavilions, and thus appears to show
-further that its designer had either studied in France, or had borrowed
-ideas from the plates of Du Cerceau’s book.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_220">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_220.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 129.</span>&mdash;Gable of Kirby Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The southwest angle, with its curved bays, in two stories and attic,
-is more English in character. No neo-classic elements occur here,
-except the entablature bands which crown the stories. The gables (Fig.
-<a href="#i_220">129</a>) of fantastic outline with strap-work scrolls, are, I suppose,
-of Flemish, or Dutch, origin; but they became common features of the
-more showy Elizabethan architecture.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_221">[221]</span> Longford Castle,<a id="FNanchor_151" href="#Footnote_151" class="fnanchor">[151]</a> another
-design by John Thorpe, is triangular on plan with a round tower at each
-angle. Though the building has been more or less altered in some of its
-details, the main features tally with Thorpe’s elevation, preserved in
-the Soane collection, and reproduced by Gotch (vol. 1, p. 20). French
-influence is marked here in the general disposition of the principal
-façade, and in some of the more conspicuous details. This façade, in
-the relation of the central block to the angle towers, bears a striking
-resemblance to the east front of Chambord. The towers have nearly the
-same form and proportions, but the central block is longer in Longford
-than in Chambord. The architectural scheme of this block, though not
-a reproduction of that of Chambord, has enough similarity to provoke
-comparison. Both are divided into three stories, and both have open
-arcades framed with orders. But in Longford the arcades are confined
-to the centre of the block, and to the first two stories, while in
-Chambord, above the ground story, they are differently disposed,
-and occur in all three stories. The long block of Longford has two
-projecting pavilions which are connected by the arcades, while the
-front of Chambord is all in one plane; but in a general front view the
-effect is not greatly different. In the orders of his pavilions Thorpe
-has employed De l’Orme’s pilaster of the Tuileries, and in the attics
-which he has set at intervals over his main cornice, other features, as
-the hermæ supporting the pediments of the Tuileries, are reproduced in
-modified form.<a id="FNanchor_152" href="#Footnote_152" class="fnanchor">[152]</a></p>
-
-<p>The caprice of design shown in the Elizabethan neo-classic
-ornamentation assumes an astonishing variety of forms, of which it may
-be well to give a few further examples. A window in the entrance front
-of Lower Walterstone Hall has a lintel in the form of an architrave
-supported on short sections of pilasters carried on brackets, while
-over this a pediment is inserted in the wall with an interval between
-it and the lintel, the whole forming the semblance of an entablature
-beneath the pediment, with its frieze in the wall plane (Fig. <a href="#i_222a">130</a>).
-In the porch of Cranborne Manor-House an entablature over an arcade
-is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_222">[222]</span> broken into ressauts resting on corbels in the shape of lions’
-heads projecting from the arch spandrels (Fig. <a href="#i_222b">131</a>), and over this
-entablature is a blind attic adorned with strap-work. The angles of
-the façade in which this porch occurs are furnished with buttresses
-in three stages with deep offsets, like those of Gothic art. The
-outer face of each stage is ornamented with a pair of pilasters on
-tall pedestals, with an entablature in ressauts, and over the topmost
-pair are two obelisks as finials. The pilasters are each broken in
-the middle by a larger block of stone after the manner of De l’Orme’s
-columns.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_222a">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_222a.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 130.</span>&mdash;Window of Walterstone Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_222b">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_222b.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 131.</span>&mdash;Cranborne Manor-House.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The gatehouse at Tixall<a id="FNanchor_153" href="#Footnote_153" class="fnanchor">[153]</a> has a plain front of three stories with a
-projecting bay over the portal, and angle towers. The window openings
-are all of the broad mullioned Elizabethan type, and the façade as a
-whole would be admirable if it had nothing more. But the Renaissance
-ideas led the designer to crown each story with an entablature, and to
-set a pair of classic columns on either side of the central bay, and
-in each tower angle. To cover these useless columns the entablature
-has to be broken into deep ressauts, and the three superimposed pairs
-carry nothing but a pedestal block above the main cornice, the several
-pedestal blocks being connected by a balustrade.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_223">[223]</span></p>
-
-<p>The gatehouse of Stanway<a id="FNanchor_154" href="#Footnote_154" class="fnanchor">[154]</a> has a portal with a four-centred
-arch framed with a shallow Doric order, having a pilaster with a
-free-standing column in front of it on either side. The entablature
-has a double ressaut over each of these compound members, and a curved
-pediment over the entablature is likewise broken into ressauts.
-A rectangular tablet with an escutcheon, surmounted by a smaller
-pediment, breaks through the middle of the larger pediment, and
-acroteria are set on its sides, while a keystone in the arch carries a
-shallow ressaut in the entablature. The front of Westwood Park<a id="FNanchor_155" href="#Footnote_155" class="fnanchor">[155]</a> is
-for the most part free from foreign elements, but it has a porch in the
-form of a Roman triumphal arch with three openings, and a Corinthian
-order of almost correct ancient proportions.</p>
-
-<p>A remarkable illustration of the architectural taste of this time is
-afforded by the well-known Gate of Honour at Caius College, Cambridge.
-A triumphal arch scheme with an Ionic order, a Tudor arch, no openings
-in the lateral bays, and no attic, is surmounted with a Greek temple
-front of an engaged Corinthian order raised on tall pedestals connected
-by an engaged balustrade. This embraces in width only the central bay
-of the substructure, and solid abutments of concave outline are carried
-up over the side bays. A plain attic over the pediment of the temple
-forms the base for a square pyramid intersected by a tall hexagon,
-surmounted with a hexagonal dome. No voids, except the central opening
-under the Tudor arch, break the solid mass, but the wall surfaces are
-ornamented with disks, niches, entablatures, and small pediments in
-relief; and the pedestals of the temple order are carried on corbels
-and ressauts in the lower entablature.</p>
-
-<p>Of the many English houses built at the close of the sixteenth century,
-few are more tasteless and pretentious than Wollaton Hall,<a id="FNanchor_156" href="#Footnote_156" class="fnanchor">[156]</a> built
-by Sir Francis Willoughby “at great expense, it was said, for a foolish
-display of his wealth.” An order of coupled pilasters, broken in the
-middle by salient blocks, adorn each story, while vacant niches in the
-upper stories break the narrow wall surfaces between the pilasters on
-either side of the large mullioned windows. The chimney-stacks are, as
-in Longford Castle, shaped in the semblance of pseudo-Doric columns,
-and the square angle pavilions have their cornices<span class="pagenum" id="Page_224">[224]</span> adorned with false
-pediments of capricious outline and strap-work ornamentation, flanked
-by obelisks on tall pedestals. One other feature of this remarkable
-design is perhaps worthy of notice, namely, the portal of the north
-front. This portal has a low arch, and is sheltered by a porch in
-the form of a massive free-standing Doric order, the shafts of which
-are broken in the middle by a salient drum, and the middle of the
-entablature is supported by a heavy console which forms, at the same
-time, a monstrous keystone to the arch (Fig. <a href="#i_224">132</a>).</p>
-
-<p>It is unnecessary further to multiply examples. While one great
-house of the period differs from another in unimportant ways, those
-in which ornaments are extensively applied are without exception
-disfigured by them. The Elizabethan architectural ornamentation is at
-once pretentious and grotesquely ugly. It was only in so far as they
-held to a straightforward provision for domestic needs, and avoided
-architectural pretensions, that the English people of the Elizabethan
-Age produced really good domestic architecture.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_224">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_224.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 132.</span>&mdash;Portal of Wollaton Hall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Toward the close of the sixteenth century many Flemish and Dutch
-ornamental workers had come into England, and had brought in the
-tasteless forms of design that had been current with them. The
-ungrammatical and inelegant misuse of the orders, and the meaningless
-barocco scrollwork, with which the Elizabethan houses were overloaded,
-may be largely due to them. But these modes of design were readily
-assimilated by the native English workmen, and approved by the
-aristocratic English taste. The architect, in the more modern sense,
-did not yet exist. The design and execution of these buildings were in<span class="pagenum" id="Page_225">[225]</span>
-the hands of the master builders. No complete drawings were prepared
-in advance. Only the general scheme in rough sketches of plans and
-elevations was furnished, and these were freely modified, and the
-details developed, as the work proceeded under the direction of the
-master mason. It was a survival of the mediæval system, and no better
-system could be devised so long as the workmen were suitably trained to
-their craft, worked together on traditional lines, and were governed by
-a common understanding, common aims, and a strong feeling of artistic
-fellowship. But the Elizabethan workmen were not thus associated and
-governed. The older traditions of design had been largely lost, and
-the builders were attempting to use architectural forms which they
-did not understand. The aberrations that resulted from the efforts of
-these craftsmen to use the classic orders were ludicrous, as we have
-abundantly seen. The orders were entirely foreign to the genius and
-to the requirements of the English people, and were altogether out of
-place in English house building. Their departure from their own proper
-traditions and architectural habits at length weakened the building
-craftsmen, so that they finally lost their occupation with the rise of
-the modern professional architect, who first appeared in England in the
-person of Inigo Jones, whose work we may consider in the next chapter.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_226">[226]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER XIV<br />
-<span class="subhed">ARCHITECTURE OF THE RENAISSANCE IN ENGLAND</span><br />
-<span class="subhed">II. _Jones and Wren_</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>It is only by extension of the term that the architecture of England
-in the seventeenth century may be properly called Renaissance. But
-if, in architecture, we understand by Renaissance a revival of the
-use of classic details, such extension is justifiable, for in this
-architecture the use of classic details is becoming established,
-and the art of Jones and Wren stands in relation to the Elizabethan
-architecture as the art of Vignola and Palladio does to that of the
-early Renaissance in Italy, and that of Lescot and De l’Orme to the
-early French Renaissance.</p>
-
-<p>Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren were the only English architects
-of great importance at this epoch. It was their genius that determined
-the character of modern English architecture, and we may therefore
-confine our attention to their works.</p>
-
-<p>Of Jones, Horace Walpole thus speaks in his _Anecdotes of
-Painting_:<a id="FNanchor_157" href="#Footnote_157" class="fnanchor">[157]</a> “Inigo Jones, ... if a table of fame like that in
-the _Tatler_ were to be framed for men of indisputable genius
-in every country, would save England from the disgrace of not having
-her representative among the arts.... Vitruvius drew up his grammar,
-Palladio showed him the practice, Rome displayed a theatre worthy of
-his emulation, and King Charles was ready to encourage, employ, and
-reward his talents.” This famous architect began his artistic career
-in the early part of the seventeenth century. Nothing is known of
-his early education, but in youth he appears to have manifested an
-inclination for drawing, and to have acquired some skill in landscape
-painting.<a id="FNanchor_158" href="#Footnote_158" class="fnanchor">[158]</a> He does not seem to have had any systematic training in
-architecture,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_227">[227]</span> but in early life he travelled in Italy,<a id="FNanchor_159" href="#Footnote_159" class="fnanchor">[159]</a> where he
-studied the ancient monuments and read the works of Palladio and other
-Italian authors. In a book entitled _Stonehenge Restored_,<a id="FNanchor_160" href="#Footnote_160" class="fnanchor">[160]</a>
-he says: “Being naturally inclined in my younger years to study the
-arts of design, I passed into foreign parts to converse with the great
-masters thereof in Italy, where I applied myself to search out the
-ruins of those ancient buildings which, in despite of time itself, and
-violence of barbarians, are yet remaining. Having satisfied myself
-in these, and returning to my native country, I applied my mind more
-particularly to the study of architecture.” For a quick-witted man with
-architectural aptitudes no training could be better, except that of
-growing up in an atmosphere of building activity, as the craftsmen of
-the Middle Ages did.</p>
-
-<p>In his first practice Jones appears to have worked in a mixed style.
-The mongrel Elizabethan art was still in full vogue, and with this
-style, says Cunningham, “Inigo compounded, and for some time persevered
-in what the wits of the succeeding age nicknamed King James’s Gothic.”
-The well-known porch of St. Mary’s church, Oxford, if it be by Jones,
-may furnish an example of this earlier style. But he soon sought to
-free himself from the vagaries of the Elizabethan craftsman, and strove
-to introduce a rigorous use of Palladian forms. He had learned the
-grammar of the orders as formulated by the architects of the later
-Renaissance, and had apparently conceived a sincere belief that the
-Palladian canons embodied all that was most excellent in architectural
-design. He saw in the Elizabethan art only its manifold infractions
-of the rules of order and proportion, and its grotesque distortions
-of classic forms. To reëstablish these rules and restore these forms
-appeared to him the way to regenerate English art.</p>
-
-<p>First among his extant works that can be certainly identified is the
-well-known Banqueting Hall built in 1619, for King James I, as a part
-of the projected palace of Whitehall, for which he had prepared the
-plans on a vast scale. The first remark prompted by this design is that
-it is not at all English.<span class="pagenum" id="Page_228">[228]</span> Every form and feature of the native art
-is eliminated. The Elizabethan house, however overlaid with foreign
-elements, was English in its primary forms and expression. But here
-Inigo Jones swept away everything English, and substituted a Palladian
-scheme that is foreign to England in every particular. The low-pitched
-roof, the plain rectangular outline, and the narrow undivided
-window openings are as Italian as the orders with which the façade
-is overlaid. But such was the state of taste among the influential
-classes that these features were approved, and the design was applauded
-with acclamation. “It spread,” says Cunningham, “the love of classic
-architecture far and wide, and there was soon a growing demand for
-works which recalled Athens to the learned, and presented something
-new to the admiration of the vulgar.”<a id="FNanchor_161" href="#Footnote_161" class="fnanchor">[161]</a> The learned had then small
-knowledge of Athenian architecture, and even now many learned people
-fail to consider that there was never in Athens anything at all like
-Palladian design.</p>
-
-<p>The façade of the Banqueting Hall (Plate <a href="#i_228fp">X</a>) is in two stories on a
-low basement, and has a rusticated wall of smooth-faced masonry,
-with an engaged order in each story, and a parapet with a balustrade
-over the main cornice. The central part of this façade has its wall
-slightly advanced, and in each story the orders, Ionic and Corinthian
-respectively, have engaged columns against the projecting middle part,
-and pilasters on either side, a pair of them being set together at
-each end. These pilasters taper and have strong entasis, so that parts
-of those on the angles overreach the end walls. The entablatures are
-carried by the walls, and thus have to be broken into ressauts to
-cover the columns and pilasters. The structural function of all these
-superimposed columns and pilasters is therefore only that of carrying
-the ressauts of the parapet. The rectangular windows, of severely
-classic design, have pediments, alternately curved and angular, in the
-lower story, and flat cornices only in the story above, while a frieze
-below the main entablature is adorned in Roman fashion with masks and
-festoons.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_228fp" style="max-width: 550px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate X</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_228fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">BANQUETING HALL, WHITEHALL</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">London</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>It is surprising that such a mechanical reproduction of a foreign
-style should ever have called forth high praise from Englishmen.
-The design exhibits no invention, no creative adaptation of foreign
-elements to new conditions, and therefore <span class="pagenum" id="Page_229">[229]</span>no reason for the use of
-such elements. The low-pitched roof (wholly invisible from any near
-point of view) is unsuited to the English climate, and the parapet
-and balustrade are equally inappropriate. Yet of this design Walpole
-remarks<a id="FNanchor_162" href="#Footnote_162" class="fnanchor">[162]</a> that “it stands as a model of the most pure and beautiful
-taste.” And an earlier expression of the feeling which prevailed among
-the dilettanti of the time is found in the text which accompanies
-Kent’s well-known book of Jones’s designs<a id="FNanchor_163" href="#Footnote_163" class="fnanchor">[163]</a> as follows: “If the
-reputation of this great man doth not rise in proportion to his merits
-in his own country, ’tis certain, in Italy, which was his school, and
-other Parts of Europe, he was in great esteem; in which places, as well
-as in England, his own works are his monument and best Panegyrick;
-which, together with those of Palladio, remain equal Proofs of the
-Superiority of those two great Masters to all others.”</p>
-
-<p>The whole scheme for the palace of Whitehall is fully illustrated
-by Kent.<a id="FNanchor_164" href="#Footnote_164" class="fnanchor">[164]</a> The plan is a vast rectangle measuring 874 by 1151
-feet, and comprising seven courts, of which the central one toward
-the park encloses a circular gallery. The long blocks are broken by
-rectangular pavilions, one on the axis of each of the four sides, one
-at each angle, and others at intervals between. It is thus French in
-character, rather than Italian, and suggests a derivation from De
-l’Orme’s plan of the Tuileries. It is not worth while to examine the
-architectural character of the elevation fully in detail; but, in
-addition to the Banqueting Hall already noticed, it may be well to
-examine several other parts which further illustrate the art of Inigo
-Jones. The axial pavilions are flanked with rectangular towers in
-three stages, each stage adorned with an order, and surmounted with an
-octagonal cupola. On the Westminster front the basement has a Doric
-order with a modification of De l’Orme’s column, in which the larger
-stones are square. This basement (Fig. <a href="#i_230">133</a>) has a mezzanine marked by
-an entablature which is cut in the middle by the keystones of a flat
-arch over a window beneath. The great entablature in this case is
-borne by the columns, and the order has thus a structural character
-(though it has no structural<span class="pagenum" id="Page_230">[230]</span> reason for being) which the orders of
-the Banqueting Hall do not have. The only other feature of Whitehall
-that need be mentioned is the façade of the circular court enclosed by
-the king’s apartments. This is a _bizarre_ design in two stages,
-with a so-called Persian order below and an order of caryatids above.
-The bearing members of these orders stand out beyond the entablatures,
-and thus support nothing but ressauts, while a balustrade with statues
-crowns the whole.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_230">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_230.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 133.</span>&mdash;Basement of a part of Whitehall.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_231">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_231.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 134.</span>&mdash;Front of old St. Paul’s by Inigo
-Jones.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>With all his zeal for reform by a stricter conformity to classic
-models, the designs of Inigo Jones were never truly classical, and they
-often exhibit ludicrous aberrations. He had no true conception of the
-principles of classic art, as no architects of the Renaissance ever
-had. The Palladian architecture, which he mainly strove to follow, was
-itself, as we have seen, far from true to classic design. Some of these
-aberrations are strikingly shown in the west front which he built to
-the nave of old St. Paul’s cathedral. In attempting to apply classic
-details to such a building he was obliged to depart widely from<span class="pagenum" id="Page_231">[231]</span>
-classic principles. His scheme, as shown in Kent’s print (Fig. <a href="#i_231">134</a>)
-is as incongruous a mixture as was ever produced by the Elizabethan
-craftsmen. This front, in its main outline, has to follow the form of
-the Mediæval structure, with its high nave and low aisles. To this
-mediæval form the architect has affixed a variety of features derived
-from Roman, Renaissance, and even Egyptian sources. He has crowned the
-wall with a pseudo-classic cornice surmounted by a steep gable, he has
-set obelisks on Roman pedestals over the buttresses, affixed reversed
-consoles to the clerestory walls, and built a Corinthian portico with a
-balustrade upon its entablature, and completed the scheme with flanking
-towers crowned with lanterns. It is a thoroughly barbarous composition,
-which even Walpole complains of as follows: “In<span class="pagenum" id="Page_232">[232]</span> the restoration of
-that cathedral he made two capital faults. He first renewed the sides
-with very bad Gothic, and then added a Roman portico, magnificent and
-beautiful indeed, but which has no affinity with the ancient parts that
-remained, and made his own Gothic appear ten times heavier.”<a id="FNanchor_165" href="#Footnote_165" class="fnanchor">[165]</a></p>
-
-<p>The art of Inigo Jones has been thoughtlessly lauded in more recent
-times. “His special strength,” says Mr. Bloomfield, his latest
-panegyrist, “lay in his thorough mastery of proportion, his contempt
-for mere prettiness, and the rare distinction of his style. His own
-theory of architecture was that, in his own words, ‘it should be solid,
-proportional according to the rules, masculine and unaffected.’<a id="FNanchor_166" href="#Footnote_166" class="fnanchor">[166]</a>
-Was Inigo Jones a master of proportion? Does he not in this declaration
-betray a fundamental misconception of the true meaning of proportion?
-Is any genuine work of art “proportional according to the rules,”
-_i.e._ the mechanical formulas of Vitruvius or Palladio on which
-he professed to base his practice? And did Jones ever carry out in
-practice his avowed theory that architecture should be unaffected? Can
-an art be unaffected which is so frankly copied from a foreign style?
-I have characterized the spirit of much of the architecture of the
-Renaissance as theatrical; that of Inigo Jones is preëminently so,
-and it is significant that he was extensively employed, in his early
-career, in designing architectural backgrounds for the stage.</p>
-
-<p>The artistic career of Sir Christopher Wren, the most justly
-famous architect of the belated English Renaissance, began
-after the Civil War. Inigo Jones had prepared the way for him,
-and a body of aristocratic dilettanti, ardently devoted to the
-neo-classic propaganda, had arisen. The artistic notions of these
-people are instructively set forth in the following passage from
-_Parentalia_:<a id="FNanchor_167" href="#Footnote_167" class="fnanchor">[167]</a> “Towards the end of King James I’s Reign, and
-in the Beginning of his Son’s, Taste in Architecture made a bold step
-from Italy to England at once, and scarce staid a moment to visit
-France by the way. From the most profound Ignorance in Architecture,
-the most consummate Night<span class="pagenum" id="Page_233">[233]</span> of Knowledge, Inigo Jones started up, a
-Prodigy of Art, and vied even with his Master Palladio himself. From
-so glorious an Out-set, there was not any Excellency that we might not
-have hoped to obtain; Britain had a reasonable Prospect to rival Italy,
-and foil every Nation in Europe beside. But in the midst of these
-sanguine Expectations, the fatal Civil War commenced, and all the Arts
-and Sciences were immediately laid aside.”</p>
-
-<p>Before turning his attention to architecture Wren had been a
-distinguished scholar at Oxford, where he was appointed Professor of
-Astronomy in the year 1657. It was not until mature manhood that he
-began the practice of architecture, and thus, like so many others who
-have achieved distinction in this art, he never had a special and
-systematic preliminary training for it. His father, Dr. Christopher
-Wren, Dean of Windsor, is said to have been skilled in all branches of
-mathematics and in architecture,<a id="FNanchor_168" href="#Footnote_168" class="fnanchor">[168]</a> and this, together with his own
-native aptitudes, appears to have made it easy for him, by observation
-and practice, to acquire the necessary preparation for such work as he
-was to do. His opportunities for study of the architectural monuments
-of the Continent were small. He never visited Italy, but he spent some
-months in Paris, and while there wrote, in a letter to a friend, as
-follows: “I have busied myself surveying the most esteem’d Fabricks
-of Paris, and the Country round; the Louvre for a while was my daily
-Object, where no less than a thousand Hands are constantly employ’d
-in the Works; some in laying mighty foundations, some in raising the
-stories, columns, entablements, &amp;c., with vast stones, by great and
-useful Engines; others in Carving, Inlaying of Marbles, Plastering,
-Painting, Gilding, &amp;c., which altogether make a school of Architecture,
-the best probably, at this Day in Europe.” The Italian architect
-Bernini was working on the Louvre at the time, and in the same letter
-Wren writes: “Mons. Abbé Charles introduc’d me to the acquaintance of
-Bernini, who shew’d me his Designs of the Louvre, and of the King’s
-Statue.... Bernini’s Design of the Louvre I would have given my skin
-for, but the reserv’d Italian gave me but a few Minutes View; it was
-five little Designs on paper, for which he hath receiv’d as many
-thousand Pistoles; I had only<span class="pagenum" id="Page_234">[234]</span> time to copy it in my Fancy and Memory.
-I shall be able by Discourse, and Crayon, to give you a tolerable
-Account of it.”<a id="FNanchor_169" href="#Footnote_169" class="fnanchor">[169]</a></p>
-
-<p>He appears to have made the most of his time while in France, but he
-naturally confined his attention to the modern works of that country,
-which alone were then thought worthy of notice. The great châteaux
-of Fontainebleau, St. Germain, Chantilly, and many others, he speaks
-of in the same letter as having “surveyed that I might not lose the
-impressions of them.”</p>
-
-<p>Wren’s first architectural work appears to have been the Sheldonian
-Theatre in Oxford, which is thus referred to in _Parentalia_:
-“This Theatre, a work of admirable Contrivance and Magnificence, was
-the first publick Performance of the Surveyor,<a id="FNanchor_170" href="#Footnote_170" class="fnanchor">[170]</a> in Architecture;
-which, however, had been executed in a greater and better style, with
-a view to the ancient Roman Grandeur discernable in the Theatre of
-Marcellus at Rome, but that he was obliged to put a Stop to the bolder
-strokes of his Pencil, and confine the Expense within the Limits of a
-private Purse.”<a id="FNanchor_171" href="#Footnote_171" class="fnanchor">[171]</a> But his great opportunity occurred after the fire
-of London, when he was commissioned to prepare plans for the rebuilding
-of the city, including the cathedral of St. Paul and all the city
-churches. Before the great fire he had been ordered to submit designs
-for the restoration of the old cathedral of St. Paul, the grand old
-Norman structure, with additions in the early English style, which,
-notwithstanding the repairs and additions of Inigo Jones, was still
-thought to be in a dangerous condition. Wren made a careful survey,
-and worked out a plan, elevation, and section of the old structure,
-and expressed surprise at what he considered the negligence of the old
-builders. “They valued not exactness: some Inter-columns were one inch
-and a half too large, others as much, or more, too little. Nor were
-they true in their levels.”<a id="FNanchor_172" href="#Footnote_172" class="fnanchor">[172]</a> He thought that the whole fabric was
-alarmingly insecure, except the portico built by Jones, which, he said,
-“being an entire and excellent piece, gave great reputation to the work
-in the first repairs.”<a id="FNanchor_173" href="#Footnote_173" class="fnanchor">[173]</a></p>
-
-<p>He prepared plans for a thorough restoration, but these were<span class="pagenum" id="Page_235">[235]</span> not
-approved, and he set off for France. Then came the great fire and put
-an end to all thought of repairs on his part, though the commissioners
-appear still to have clung to the idea of restoration until they were
-satisfied, by fruitless effort to utilize what remained of the old
-work, that such a course was impracticable.<a id="FNanchor_174" href="#Footnote_174" class="fnanchor">[174]</a></p>
-
-<p>An entirely new structure was now decided on, and Wren was directed
-to “contrive a Fabrick of moderate Bulk, but of good Proportions;
-a convenient Quire, with a Vestibule and Porticoes, and a Dome
-conspicuous above the Houses. A long Body with aisles was thought
-impertinent, our Religion not using Processions.”<a id="FNanchor_175" href="#Footnote_175" class="fnanchor">[175]</a></p>
-
-<p>It is difficult from the statements in _Parentalia_ clearly to
-identify Wren’s different drawings which have been preserved, and to
-reconcile either the statements or the drawings with what is said by
-more recent writers, who do not always agree among themselves. The
-drawings embody widely different schemes which were the results of so
-many attempts to meet the wishes of the king and court on the one hand,
-and those of the citizens on the other. Of these there are two sets
-which may be considered as the principal ones.</p>
-
-<p>The first of these has a novel plan based on that of the Greek cross,
-but having the reëntrant external angles filled out to segmental curves
-struck from the corners of a square enclosing the whole. A great dome
-on a circular drum supported by eight piers rises over the crossing, a
-small dome on pendentives covers each of the spaces between the great
-circle and the curved enclosing walls; while the northern, southern,
-and western arms of the cross have each a square groined vault. The
-form of the vaulting over the eastern arm is not indicated on the plan,
-but the choir enclosure is shown in the form of a circle cut out on the
-east to open into the sanctuary, and on the west to communicate with
-the nave. The dome (Fig. <a href="#i_236">135</a>) is in two shells of masonry, the inner
-one being hemispherical with a circular opening in its crown, and the
-outer one a pointed oval supporting a lantern. The drum is thick, and
-although the vault springs from very near the top, a strong continuous
-abutment in the form of a solid ring of masonry, with concave outline,
-is built up against it. The<span class="pagenum" id="Page_236">[236]</span> dome is kept solid up to the haunch of the
-inner shell, so that this inner shell is abundantly secured, while the
-outline of the outer shell, from the point where it clears the solid
-mass below, has a form that would exert a minimum of thrust, though it
-would hardly be secure without a binding chain. It is noticeable that
-the inner face of the drum is not vertical, but inclined inward in the
-form of a truncated cone, which considerably strengthens it against any
-tendency to yield to the force of thrust in the dome.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_236">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_236.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 135.</span>&mdash;Section of Wren’s rejected scheme
-for St. Paul’s.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The scheme was clearly based on the model of St. Peter’s in Rome,
-to which frequent reference is made in _Parentalia_ as having
-been in the mind of the architect as he developed his idea. The dome
-partakes of the character of Bramante’s design on the one hand, and
-of that of Michael Angelo, as finally constructed, on the other. The
-likeness to Bramante’s scheme (Fig. <a href="#i_048">23</a>, p. 48) is in the form of the
-inner shell, and its adjustment to the supporting drum. The likeness
-as to adjustment is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_237">[237]</span> not, indeed, very close; for Wren has raised the
-springing so that it is almost at the top of the drum, but he has
-fortified it with a continuous abutment which, though of different
-outline, has substantially the same structural effect. The likeness
-to St. Peter’s is further shown in the encircling order of the inner
-face of the drum, which occurs in both Bramante’s scheme and in that
-of Michael Angelo. There can be little doubt that Wren had studied
-Bramante’s design in Serlio’s book, and had appreciated its structural
-merits. But he wished, in emulation of Michael Angelo, to make his
-dome externally more imposing, and he therefore raised its springing
-level as we see, and adopted from Michael Angelo’s scheme the idea of
-a double dome. The external outline from the top of the drum to the
-haunch of the vault is too nearly the same as the corresponding part of
-Michael Angelo’s design to be considered as an accidental coincidence.
-The structural difference between the two is indeed great, since the
-concave portion in Wren’s design is a continuous ring, while in that
-of Michael Angelo it is an isolated and insignificant abutment. Wren’s
-scheme is thus superior in point of constructive merit, since it
-provides continuous resistance to continuous thrust. It will be seen
-that the two shells of Wren’s projected dome correspond to the inner
-and outer shells of Michael Angelo’s model (Fig. <a href="#i_054">26</a>, p. 54), and thus
-in reproducing the main idea of this model Wren merely omitted the
-middle shell. He thus gave a wider divergence to the two vaults as they
-rise than occurs in the actual dome of St. Peter’s. He also omitted the
-well which in St. Peter’s connects the two shells at the crown.</p>
-
-<p>A single order of pilasters adorns both the interior and the exterior
-of the church itself, the one on the outside being raised on a high
-basement and crowned with a plain attic; and a portico in the form of a
-temple front, with its order raised on high pedestals, gives emphasis
-to the west façade.</p>
-
-<p>This design appears to have been rejected, to Wren’s great chagrin, as
-we learn from the following passage in _Parentalia_: “The surveyor
-in private conversation, always seem’d to set a higher value on this
-design, than any he had made before or since; as what was labour’d with
-more study and success; and, (had he not been over-rul’d by those,
-whom it was his duty to obey), what he would have put in execution
-with more Cheerfulness,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_238">[238]</span> and Satisfaction to himself.... But the
-Chapter, and some others of the Clergy thought the Model not enough of
-a Cathedral-fashion; to instance particularly, in that, the Quire was
-design’d circular, &amp;c.... The Surveyor then turn’d his Thoughts to a
-Cathedral-form, (as they call’d it) but so rectified, as to reconcile,
-as near as possible, the Gothick to a better Manner of Architecture;
-with a Cupola, and above that, instead of a Lantern, a lofty Spire, and
-large Porticoes.”</p>
-
-<p>I think that had the first design been accepted Wren would not have
-carried it out without material modifications. For he was too good an
-engineer not to have seen that the form and adjustment of the dome were
-seriously defective from a structural point of view. However this may
-be, the dome which he actually built is, as we shall see, fundamentally
-different in character (though it is not very different in either
-internal or external shape), and it is different in a way that no
-outside influences could have compelled.</p>
-
-<p>The most noticeable feature of the second design is that part which
-rises over the crossing, and consists of a vast frustum of a dome
-supporting a tall buttressed drum, which in turn is surmounted by
-a smaller dome of oval outline, from the crown of which rises a
-telescopic spire of six stages with a strongly marked cornice to each.
-It was in this design that he is said to have sought to “reconcile the
-Gothic to a better Manner.” What he meant by this I do not know. Wren
-can hardly have supposed that he was effecting such a reconciliation
-by this remarkable combination of dome and spire. But in the actual
-cathedral of St. Paul we shall find some features that may, in part,
-explain his meaning.</p>
-
-<p>It is noticeable that the west façade of this design is a close copy,
-with modifications of proportions and minor details, of the façade
-by Inigo Jones (Fig. <a href="#i_231">134</a>, p. 231), which the fire had weakened or
-destroyed, and which Wren had much admired. This design was approved,
-and the king’s warrant for its execution was issued May 1st, 1675. But
-it is said that “the king was pleased to allow him the liberty in the
-prosecution of his work, to make some variations, rather ornamental
-than essential, as from time to time he should see proper.”<a id="FNanchor_176" href="#Footnote_176" class="fnanchor">[176]</a> The
-actual building shows how largely Wren availed himself of this liberty.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_238fp" style="max-width: 452px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate XI</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_238fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">DOME OF ST. PAUL’S</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">London</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_239">[239]</span></p>
-
-<p>The cathedral of St. Paul as it now stands was never embodied in any
-set of drawings. Starting with a few rough sketches the scheme was
-developed as the work proceeded, the master being always present to
-direct the work. Wren was at the start what would now be called an
-amateur, but by degrees he learned his art in the best possible way,
-not in the office or drawing-room, but on the scaffold in close contact
-with the works. It was thus that Brunelleschi had worked on the dome of
-Florence, and Michael Angelo on St. Peter’s.</p>
-
-<p>The plan of the existing St. Paul’s has no beauty comparable to that of
-St. Peter’s (Fig. <a href="#i_067">31</a>, p. 67). It has a long nave with a short transept
-near the middle, a semicircular apse, and two western towers. Both
-nave and transept have side aisles, and in the angles formed by the
-towers, which project beyond the aisles in the manner that is common
-in the mediæval churches of England, are a consistory court and a
-morning chapel, while in the angles of the crossing three vestries and
-a stair-turret are set. Thus the Greek cross plan which Wren appears
-to have first intended, “a long body with aisles” having been “thought
-impertinent, our religion not using processions,” was widely departed
-from in conformity with the popular feeling that the first plan
-“deviated too much from the old Gothick form of Cathedral Churches,
-which they (the people) had been used to see and admire in this
-country.”</p>
-
-<p>In the elevation a great dome, in outline not very unlike the one first
-intended, rises over the crossing; the nave and aisles are vaulted
-with small domes on pendentives of peculiar form, and the piers of the
-interior are faced with a great Corinthian order of pilasters. That
-Wren worked with constant reference to St. Peter’s as the main source
-of his inspiration, is clearly enough manifested in the general scheme,
-though there are many points of difference between the two monuments,
-apart from the great difference of scale. Other sources of influence
-are, however, also apparent.</p>
-
-<p>The most interesting feature of St. Paul’s cathedral is, of course,
-the great dome (Plate <a href="#i_238fp">XI</a>), which is one of the most remarkable of the
-series of modern domes that began with the dome of Brunelleschi. In
-general external form it recalls Bramante’s diminutive circular temple
-of San Pietro in Montorio, and it is not unlikely that Wren derived
-the idea from the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_240">[240]</span> woodcut of that design in Serlio’s book, or in that
-of Palladio. Wren has, of course, altered and amplified the scheme in
-adaptation to his vast scale and lofty proportions, but the general
-composition of the two is substantially the same, though the internal
-structure is entirely different. The leading features of the exterior,
-the encircling order crowned with the balustrade, and the dome rising
-over it surmounted by the lantern, are those of Bramante’s design.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_240">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_240.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 136.</span>&mdash;Section of the dome of St. Paul’s.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The structural system of this dome (Fig. <a href="#i_240">136</a>) is peculiar. From eight
-piers arches and pendentives are turned, forming the circular bed
-from which the drum rises to a great height, and from a level far
-below the top of this drum a dome of masonry, of slightly oval form is
-sprung. The drum is double, and the inner wall, which carries the dome,
-inclines inward, as in the rejected design, up to the springing level,
-and above this it rises vertically against the haunch of the dome. From
-the haunch a hollow cone of masonry is<span class="pagenum" id="Page_241">[241]</span> carried up far above the crown
-of the dome, where it is cut off and covered with a small segmental
-dome surmounted by a tall lantern of stone. The system is devised
-with a view to stability. The cone shape of the inner drum gives it
-resistance to the dome thrusts, and these thrusts are further fortified
-by a solid filling of masonry between the smaller cone above and the
-vault reaching more than halfway from the springing to the crown.
-The outer drum is a solid wall up to a level but little higher than
-the apex of the timber roof of the nave, where it forms a stylobate
-for the encircling Corinthian order. But the two drums are connected
-by heavy abutments across the interval between them, one behind each
-column of the encircling order, with a heavier buttress filling every
-fourth intercolumniation (Plate <a href="#i_238fp">XI</a>). The inner drum rises in diminished
-thickness above the entablature of the outer one in the form of an
-attic with an order of pilasters and square openings between. From this
-attic rises a false dome of timber, surrounding and concealing the
-great cone which is the real support of the lantern.</p>
-
-<p>This remarkable scheme embodies the last notable attempt to solve
-the great dome problem with which the architects of the Renaissance
-had struggled from the time of Brunelleschi. But the problem is
-incapable of a satisfactory solution. It is impossible to make a large
-unbuttressed dome stand securely except by the extraneous means of
-binding chains. Wren has not attempted to do such a thing. He was too
-good an engineer to follow in the footsteps of Brunelleschi and Michael
-Angelo. His dome is well buttressed, but it is therefore necessarily
-hidden from view. To raise another dome of masonry from the cornice
-of the drum for external effect, and to crown such a dome with a
-stone lantern fifty feet high, he saw to be impossible with safety.
-A semblance of such a dome was, however, necessary to his scheme. He
-had been charged to make a dome “conspicuous above the houses,” and he
-therefore surrounded the cone, the true support of the lantern, with a
-wooden counterfeit of a dome upon which he makes the beholder believe
-that the lantern rests. The system is thus a monstrous architectural
-deceit. We have criticised Michael Angelo for springing a great dome
-from the top of a drum, but he cannot be reproached for deception.
-His dome is a real dome of masonry, and does carry the lantern as it
-appears to,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_242">[242]</span> though, as we have seen, insecurely, except for so long
-as the binding chains can be made to save it from collapse. Wren would
-not build a dome in this inherently weak manner. He preferred to design
-his masonry construction on sound principles, which would not allow
-an external dome, and to enclose this within the wooden counterfeit.
-And it may here be remarked that most modern domes, modelled after St.
-Peter’s and St. Paul’s, are wooden constructions and carry lanterns of
-wood. They are thus entirely safe, but they have not the monumental
-character of great architectural works.</p>
-
-<p>In general external effect the dome of St. Paul’s has much merit, if it
-does not justify the extravagant remark of Mr. Loftie that it is the
-“noblest dome in Christendom.”<a id="FNanchor_177" href="#Footnote_177" class="fnanchor">[177]</a></p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_242">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_242.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 137.</span>&mdash;Vaulting of St. Paul’s.</p>
-  </div>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_242fp" style="max-width: 550px">
-     <p class="p2 right">Plate XII</p>
-     <img
-    class="p0"
-    src="images/i_242fp.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm">INTERIOR OF ST. PAUL’S</p>
-     <p class="p0 center sm">London</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>The proportions of the interior of the church (Plate <a href="#i_242fp">XII</a>) are
-admirable, and give a better effect of scale than the larger scheme of
-St. Peter’s. But the details exhibit more of those aberrations that are
-inherent in the architecture of the Renaissance. The vaulting of the
-nave (Fig. <a href="#i_242">137</a>) is in oblong compartments with their long axes running
-transversely, and the small domes, which are low spherical segments
-instead of hemispheres, therefore leave considerable <span class="pagenum" id="Page_243">[243]</span>intervals at
-each end of each compartment, over which segments of barrel vaulting,
-of a form generated by the elliptical lunettes of the clerestory, are
-turned. The pendentives thus have a peculiar shape, and are segments
-of a hemisphere cut by four vertical planes coinciding with the sides
-of the vault compartment, by a horizontal plane at the base of the
-dome, and by the interpenetrating barrel vaults. The compartments are
-separated by transverse ribs, and these, together with the groins
-formed by the meeting of the pendentives and the interpenetrating
-lunette vaults, give a somewhat mediæval effect to the vaulting conoid.
-In other words the lines of the groins and the lunette arches form a
-combination not unlike that of Gothic vaulting. This may have been one
-of the points in which Wren fancied that he could “reconcile the Gothic
-to a better manner.”</p>
-
-<p>In the great order Wren has departed from the scheme of St. Peter’s
-in giving only one pilaster to each pier of the nave, though in the
-larger piers under the great dome he has set them in pairs. Under
-the archivolts of the great arcade and under the aisle vaulting the
-smaller pilasters are coupled, while in St. Peter’s they are single.
-With the details of these orders the architect took great liberties
-in utter disregard of the canons of Vitruvius and the neo-classic
-authorities. The crowns of the great arches reach high above the
-capitals of the pilasters, so that a complete entablature cannot pass
-over them. It would not, of course, do to allow the archivolts to cut
-into an entablature, and Wren has therefore omitted the architrave
-and frieze in the intervals of the order, and has included them only
-in a ressaut over each pilaster, the cornice alone being carried over
-the arch. To give the vaulting its admirable elevation without unduly
-magnifying the great order, as Michael Angelo did in St. Peter’s, an
-attic is interposed, but to spring a vault from an attic wall is an
-architectural barbarism; though it is perhaps no greater one than to
-spring it from an entablature, as the architects of the Renaissance
-had done from Brunelleschi down. In the small order of the aisles the
-entablature is simplified, and has only an architrave and cornice;
-while a member, like a diminutive attic, in retreat of the cornice, is
-interposed at the impost. It looks as if this had been done in order to
-raise the springing of the arches so that no part of them would be cut<span class="pagenum" id="Page_244">[244]</span>
-off from view by the salience of the cornice; and it was apparently in
-part for the same reason that the attic was interposed in the nave.
-The motive is commendable. The effect of vaulting rising directly
-from a salient cornice Wren may justly have felt to be a bad one, but
-to avoid it while using classic details necessitates these strange
-inconsistencies.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_244">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_244.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 138.</span>&mdash;Crossing pier and impost, St.
-Paul’s.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Among numerous other aberrations of this pseudo-classic scheme is the
-treatment of the segmental archivolts of the small half domes that
-open out of the oblique sides of the great octagon at the crossing.
-The orders of the crossing piers have complete entablatures (Fig.
-<a href="#i_244">138</a>), and the archivolts in question are in two parts answering to the
-frieze and cornice of these entablatures, which they intersect in the
-awkward manner shown in the figure. To have mitred the cornice of the
-archivolt to that of the order would have left the pilaster beneath
-with an incomplete entablature, and the architect preferred to run the
-cornice through the archivolt in this unsightly way. Such were some
-of the further makeshifts to which the designers of the Renaissance
-had to resort in their efforts to apply the classic orders to uses for
-which they were not adapted. But all such aberrations in the use of
-classic elements are superficial and open. A more radical violation of
-architectural veracity is found in the manner in which the buttress
-system is concealed. The thrusts of the nave vaulting are met by a
-series of flying buttresses carried over the aisle roof in Gothic
-fashion (Fig. <a href="#i_245">139</a>). But it would not do to have flying buttresses
-appear in an ostensibly classic system, and Wren accordingly hid them
-from sight by a screen wall made to look like an upper story in the
-general view of the exterior. It is not until one mounts to the terrace
-of<span class="pagenum" id="Page_245">[245]</span> the drum, and looking down finds the space between the clerestory
-and outer wall open to the sky, that he discovers the buttresses
-there, and realizes the deceitful character of the architectural
-scheme. Perhaps this illustrates another point in which Wren “sought to
-reconcile the Gothic to a better manner.” A similar treatment occurs
-in that part of the nave of St. Peter’s which was built by Maderno.
-Michael Angelo’s great external order had obliged him, as we saw (p.
-<a href="#Page_68">68</a>), to carry up the aisle wall to the height of the clerestory, but
-he filled up the space over the aisle with his small embedded dome
-(Fig. <a href="#i_069">32</a>, p. 69). In Maderno’s part the dome is omitted, and the space
-over the aisle vaulting is left open to the sky as in St. Paul’s. But
-the buttresses of St. Peter’s are solid cross walls with no suggestion
-of Gothic form. In the vaulting of the apse Wren has followed the
-quasi-mediæval form adopted by Michael Angelo in the apse of St.
-Peter’s, dividing it into three shallow cells on converging ribs rising
-from the stumpy pilasters of the attic.</p>
-
-  <div class="figcenter" id="i_245">
-     <img
-    class="p2"
-    src="images/i_245.jpg"
-     alt="" />
-     <p class="p0 center sm"><span class="smcap">Fig. 139.</span>&mdash;Half section of the nave of St.
-Paul’s.</p>
-  </div>
-
-<p>Of the architectural treatment of the exterior as a whole little need
-be said further than that it has no relation to the real form of the
-building. The masking of the buttress system by the false wall, and
-the application of orders without any structural use or expression
-in harmony with the real structure, are entirely in keeping with the
-spirit the Renaissance.</p>
-
-<p>Wren’s other churches exhibit a medley of elements from spurious Gothic
-to pseudo-classic in manifold irrational combinations,<span class="pagenum" id="Page_246">[246]</span> such as can
-be found in the works of few other architects. These churches with
-their vaultings of wood and plaster&mdash;whether in the form of domes on
-pendentives, sprung from the entablatures of classic orders, as at St.
-Stephen’s, Walbrook, or with Welsh vaulting on simulated cross ribs
-of plaster, as at St. Bride’s, Fleet Street, or with barrel vaulting
-on an attic, as at St. Peter’s, Cornhill,&mdash;it would be superfluous,
-as well as tiresome, to examine in detail. Nor is it worth while to
-analyze the spires of these churches. Spires made up of superimposed
-stories with classic entablatures in telescopic adjustment, like St.
-Bride’s, or temples of Vesta crowned with flying buttresses holding up
-neo-classic tabernacles surmounted by obelisks, like St. Mary-le-Bow,
-are hybrid compositions of utterly barbaric character, notwithstanding
-the excellent portions for which they have been justly admired.</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_247">[247]</span></p>
-
-<h2>CHAPTER XV<br />
-<span class="subhed">CONCLUSION</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>I think it must be clear, in the light of the foregoing considerations,
-that the architecture of the Renaissance is an art without consistent
-principles. We have seen that it assumed a great variety of phases at
-different times and in different localities; but that it was never
-either really classic or structurally truthful. While professing to
-aim at restoring the “good ancient manner,” the neo-classic designers
-rarely conformed to any ancient standards save, at most, in some
-details of their compositions. They designed for the most part, as we
-have seen, on a basis of mediæval forms, and overlaid their structures
-with a facing of details derived, indeed, from classic sources, but
-altered, mixed, and misapplied in all manner of unclassic ways. Of true
-classic art, _i.e._ Greek art of the best time of Greek culture,
-they had, as before remarked (p. <a href="#Page_4">4</a>), no knowledge. By the “good ancient
-manner” they meant the imperial Roman manner. But even this they
-did not faithfully follow. The wide departure from ancient modes of
-design so constantly manifested in the neo-classic architecture has
-not escaped notice by modern writers, who are wont to speak of it as
-showing that the revivalists were not servile copyists, but inventive
-designers adapting the ancient elements to new conditions. But there is
-no justification for this view. As to essential forms of building there
-were no new conditions to be met. In seeking to change architecture
-superficially by an application of classic details the neo-classicists
-erred. They ought to have seen that classic details do not lend
-themselves to new uses. Their very perfection for classic use unfits
-them for any other. To distort and misadjust them, as the architects of
-the Renaissance did, is not to adapt them. There was no true adaptation
-of classic elements in Renaissance design. Such adaptation involves
-creative modifications which so transform original elements<span class="pagenum" id="Page_248">[248]</span> that to a
-superficial view they are not recognizable in the resulting forms. The
-mediæval architects, through a long series of logical changes, growing
-out of their remarkable structural evolution, magnificently transformed
-the classic orders in a creative way. This the neo-classicists failed
-to perceive, and because the mediæval details and adjustments did
-not conform with those of Roman antiquity, they felt justified in
-calling them barbaric, while it was they themselves who were guilty of
-architectural barbarism.</p>
-
-<p>The architects of the Renaissance were strangely inconsistent. While in
-practice constantly violating the principles of classic design, they
-were in theory ardently advocating these principles; and finding strict
-canons of proportion laid down in the writings of Vitruvius, they
-attached, as theorists, great importance to such canons. Thus arose the
-elaborate systems of rules for the orders embodied in the writings of
-Vignola, Palladio, and many others.</p>
-
-<p>The influence of these short-sighted and mechanical Italian rules
-has been great in modern times. The formidable body of architectural
-dogma, contained in the literature of the Renaissance on this subject,
-has been so widely accepted as authoritative that modern art has
-been largely shaped by it. The so-called Palladian style of the
-seventeenth century was derived mainly from the Italian books, and
-the more recent teaching has been so implicitly based on the writings
-of Vignola and Palladio that few architects of academic training have
-thought of questioning the belief that the formulas of these writers
-constitute the only true basis of correct design. Yet the fact that
-these rules are arbitrary, and not in accord with the true principles
-of ancient art, has occasionally been recognized. Thus in a book of
-the eighteenth century, devoted in the main to the inculcation of the
-Palladian doctrines,<a id="FNanchor_178" href="#Footnote_178" class="fnanchor">[178]</a> the following remarks occur: “As it was
-from the works of the antient architects that the several orders were
-deduced, those who had studied and found their different characters
-then became desirous of establishing from the same source their
-proportions.... Perceiving consummate beauty in what they saw, they
-sought to build upon that perfection certain fixed and invariable
-rules, by the observing of which others might be sure of attaining the<span class="pagenum" id="Page_249">[249]</span>
-same excellence.... But when they came to examine more of those works,
-they found the antients had not confined themselves to any such laws;
-and therefore that it was impossible to build such rules upon their
-works.... The young student is confused by reading a variety of authors
-on the subject. Among a number of the best of these each delivers what
-he esteems to be the most true and perfect proportion, but in each this
-differs. All have founded their maxims upon something in the antique,
-but, some having taken in the same order one piece, and some another,
-these proportions vary extremely; for the antients so varied in their
-works. Palladio is understood to be the best and greatest of these
-authors, we shall therefore deliver his as the general and received
-proportion in each order; but upon a general review of the several
-remains in which that order is preserved, we shall add what is the
-mean or middle proportion of the several parts, calculating from them
-all. The modern architects too strictly and scrupulously follow these
-antients; they did not so closely or servilely copy one another.”<a id="FNanchor_179" href="#Footnote_179" class="fnanchor">[179]</a>
-Such recognition of the difference between the theorists’ rules of
-the orders and the ancient orders themselves is rare in the modern
-literature of architecture. But the remedy proposed to relieve the
-student from the confusion arising from the perusal of different
-authors each of whom “delivers what he esteems to be the most true and
-perfect proportion” is of little efficacy in practice; for the mean or
-middle proportion would still impose a fixed rule, and the true artist
-does not work by rules of any sort. The proportions of a genuine work
-of art are determined by a sense of proportion that is governed by laws
-too fine to be formulated, and which no rules can reach. It is his
-natural sense of proportion, developed by observation and exercise,
-that more than anything else makes an artist. Prescription may serve
-in mechanical processes, but not in the production of works of art.
-We may get Palladian formalism by rules, but no architecture of vital
-character. A system of proportions that may be good in one case cannot
-be good in any other, and therefore it is that “the antients” so varied
-in their works. That rules are useless to an artist the Italian writer
-Baldinucci, in his book on the proportions of the human figure,<a id="FNanchor_180" href="#Footnote_180" class="fnanchor">[180]</a>
-has well remarked. He says<span class="pagenum" id="Page_250">[250]</span> on this point: “It is true that all these
-proportions, whether in painting or in sculpture, must be subject to
-the correction of the eye, so that proportions ought to be adopted
-always with its approval, notwithstanding all fixed rules, seeing that
-this has been the custom of all the best artists, confirmed by the
-memorable saying of the great Buonarroti that it is necessary for the
-master to have the compass in his eye.”<a id="FNanchor_181" href="#Footnote_181" class="fnanchor">[181]</a></p>
-
-<p>In the light of what we have seen I think it must appear that the
-claims which have been advanced for the architecture of the Renaissance
-as the only architecture of correct principles since that of classic
-antiquity, and as an architecture in comparison with which the Gothic
-art of the Middle Ages should be considered as the barbarous product
-of an unenlightened age, are without justification. The mistaken
-notions of the Italian writers of the fifteenth and sixteenth
-centuries (labouring under strange misapprehension of the principles
-of classic art on the one hand, and ignorance of the true Gothic on
-the other) have been too much inculcated in our own time; and the
-belief that classic art offers suitable models for modern uses, and
-that the architecture of the Renaissance embodies classic principles,
-has been accepted with too little examination of its grounds. A few
-of the most competent modern authors, while in the main disposed,
-by force of custom, to take a favourable view of the architecture
-of the Renaissance, have occasionally shown a juster sense of its
-real character. Thus the recent Italian writer Melani says:<a id="FNanchor_182" href="#Footnote_182" class="fnanchor">[182]</a> “We
-always admire the beautiful productions of the art of the Renaissance,
-because we are accustomed to value the good wherever it is found; but
-when we think of the absurdity of this art, and still worse, of the
-consequences to which it has given rise, we cannot but deplore so much
-ill-directed energy.”</p>
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_251">[251]</span></p>
-
-<h2>APPENDIX<br />
-<span class="subhed">CONDITION OF THE DOME OF ST. PETER’S</span></h2></div>
-
-<p>The mathematicians, after describing the dome and its supports, make
-the following statement of the condition in which they found it:<a id="FNanchor_183" href="#Footnote_183" class="fnanchor">[183]</a>&mdash;</p>
-
-<hr class="tb" />
-
-<p>1. La base esteriore A del tamburo si vede piena di spaccature, molte
-delle quali corrono unite in sù per tutto il tamburo medesimo, e per
-tutto l’attico, fino a nascondersi in _nd_ sotto i piombi non
-ancora scoperti. Da dette spaccature si diramano continui peli, che
-infrangono una quantità grandissima di travertini.</p>
-
-<p>2. Esse spaccature al fondo son piccolissime, e in sù van sempre
-crescendo. Piegano dagli arconi in giù verso i piloni.</p>
-
-<p>3. Nel Corridore CB, che gira dentro tutta la base si vedono sul muro
-esteriore BE molte aperture, che parimente venendo in giù piegano verso
-i piloni.</p>
-
-<p>4. Nello stesso muro esteriore pure dentro il corridore si vedono
-raddoppiate aperture orizontali verso il fondo B, che nell’alzarsi
-il pavimento sopra gli arconi, si seppelliscono sotto al medesimo,
-vedendosi ivi più che altrove lo stesso pavimento separato dal muro
-esteriore; qual disunione è generale per tutto il corridore.</p>
-
-<p>5. Dette aperture orizontali passano tutta la grossezza BA del muro
-esteriore della base, come si vede nelle porte, che metton fuora,
-rialzandosi tutto il muro dalla parte interiore verso B, e rimanendo l’
-appoggio solamente verso A; anzi verso B tra una spaccatura orizontale
-e l’ altra in qualche luogo si levano colle mani senza sforzo
-considerabile i mattoni non più premuti.</p>
-
-<p>6. Delle spaccature verticali se ne vede una sola nel muro interiore C.</p>
-
-<p>7. La volta E del medesimo corridore è tutta spaccata in mezzo con una
-generale apertura, che gira attorno da per tutto.</p>
-
-<p>8. Essa apertura passa tutta la grossezza EF della volta, vedendosi
-generalmente nel mattonato F sotto gli archetti de’ contraforti, e
-per tutto attorno il ripiano, per cui si gira il tamburo; e perche vi
-pioveva giù nel corridore, detto mattonato fu rassettato non è un’ anno.</p>
-
-<p>9. Nel luogo di tal rassetto si vedono nuovi distacchi de’ mattoni
-rimessi; anzi in qualche sito si vedono rotti i mattoni nuovi sopra l’
-apertura antica, e in qualche luogo di nuovo piove giù nel corridore.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_252">[252]</span></p>
-
-<p>10. I sedici contraforti FG si vadon rotti con moltissime aperture, che
-nel salire piegano in dentro; le medesime rompono per mezzo gran numero
-di travertini di essi contraforti e quelli del cornicione _m_.</p>
-
-<p>11. Sopra l’archetto F sono assai più tenui, e nell’andare in sù
-crescono notabilmente.</p>
-
-<p>12. Molte di queste aperture, si vede, che sono state stuccate,
-essendosi poi riaperte le stuccature, e dilatate, e molte altre vi
-sono, dove non vi è vestigio di stuccatura.</p>
-
-<p>13. In due archetti verso la cima de’ muri dritti F, che li sostengono,
-si vede la parte superiore venuta in fuora notabilmente, e in un di
-essi in modo particolare il muro FG distaccato nella cantonata più
-sensibilmente dal tamburo. Simil moto orizontale di alcuna parte venuta
-un poco più in fuora, si vede anche nel muro esteriore A della base.</p>
-
-<p>14. Gli architravi _r_ delle sedici finestre son rotti tutti a
-riserva di uno, o due, ma dove è intero l’architrave, è rotto uno
-stipite. In tutte poi son rotte le cornici sopra l’architrave, e i
-travertini de’ muri sopra, e sotto le finestre, e a lato verso i
-contraforti hanno moltissime aperture, e peli, che li infrangono.</p>
-
-<p>15. In uno stipite di finestra _a_ è degna di considerazione
-un’apertura verticale, che cominciando al basso nella faccia voltata
-all’altro stipite, piega un poco in dentro.</p>
-
-<p>16. Tutte le scale a lumaca, per cui si sale dentro al tamburo, sono
-affatto dissetate, vedendosi rotti e distaccati gli scalini. In una di
-queste, per cui si sale ordinariamente ben rassettata, si vedono molti
-stangoni di ferro, e paletti, che reggono gli scalini rotti.</p>
-
-<p>17. Entrando fra le due Cupole per il corridoretto K, si vedono delle
-aperture verticale negli spicchi fra’ muri T de’ costoloni, e si
-seppelliscono sotto K, dove le due Cupole son unite; le medesime anche
-rompono gli architravi e soglie delle porte e finestre. Lo spicchio che
-corrisponde sopra il pilone della Veronica, principalmente verso il
-mezzo delle scale T, è dissestato molto. Di tali aperture ci vien detto
-da chi le ha contate tutte con diligenza, trovarsene 37 nella Cupola
-esteriore, 39 nell’interiore.</p>
-
-<p>18. Sotto il Cupolino nel corridoretto O si vedono rotte le faccie de’
-muri de’ costoloni, seguitando per essi muri le spaccature orizontali
-OP, dove più alte, dove più basse, e continuando in alcun luogo fra lo
-spicchio della Cupola esteriore e il muro del costolone.</p>
-
-<p>19. Pure nella volticella di esso corridore si vedono delle aperture,
-che passano verso _u_ sotto gli archetti de’ contraforti del
-Cupolino, e in alcune delle finestre del collo della Cupola si vedono
-rotti gli architravi, con degli altri movimenti nel muro interiore.</p>
-
-<p>20. I medesimi contraforti in Q hanno molte aperture, che terminano
-verso il mezzo delle finestre.</p>
-
-<p><span class="pagenum" id="Page_253">[253]</span></p>
-
-<p>21. Tutti i pilastrini di dentro tra le finestre in R a mezza altezza
-in circa si vedono rotti, e alcuni in due luoghi orizontalmente,
-restando con detta generale apertura tutto il Cupolino diviso
-orizontalmente per mezzo.</p>
-
-<p>22. Passando ora alla parte interiore della Cupola, in tutti i sedici
-spicchi si vedono de’ peli, o delle aperture verso S nelle cornici
-tonde de’ Serafini di mosaico e nelle bislunghe degli Angeli, molte
-delle quali aprono considerabilmente i mosaici stessi.</p>
-
-<p>23. Nello spicchio sopra il pilone della Veronica si vede una
-grandissima apertura S_q_YZ. Essa passa sotto il cornicione Z nel
-fregio, dove è assai tenue; và sempre dilatandosi fino all’impostatura
-della Cupola in q, indi di nuovo si ristringe morendo in cima sotto il
-Cupolino stesso. Sopra il pilone del Longino, che resta in faccia, vi
-è un’altra simile spaccatura assai sensibile, anche a guardarla giù
-dalla Chiesa. Sopra gli altri due piloni pure, benche alquanto minore
-è tale, che dalla Chiesa vi passa un vento assai gagliardo, e in varj
-altri spicchi pur sene vedono. Dette aperture dividono, e distaccano le
-figure de’ mosaici, fino a farne cader qualche pezzo.</p>
-
-<p>24. Gli architravi di quasi tutte le finestre in X sono rotti.</p>
-
-<p>25. Ne’ Pilastri del tamburo si vedono delle aperture orizontali, in
-_b_, per cui s’aprono le commessure de’ travertini de’ quali sono
-incrostati.</p>
-
-<p>26. Ne’ mosaici sopra il cornicione Z si vedono alcuni leggieri peli
-orizontali, benche non troppo sensibili.</p>
-
-<p>27. I due arconi attorno al pilone della Veronica anno sulla cima in
-mezzo un leggier pelo, senza però che si discosti una parte dall’altra,
-o l’una scenda sotto l’altra; e sotto il cornicione tra l’arco de’
-SS. Simone e Giuda, e il pilone della Veronica scende un pelo, che
-muore assai prima di giungere all’arco. Detto pelo si vede dalla parte
-di fuori sopra la volta della Chiesa nel muro del tamburo inalzato
-sull’arco stesso, e parimente i peli de’ due arconi nella parte
-superiore de’ medesimi si riscontrano, ma tenuissimi.</p>
-
-<p>28. In varj luoghi tanto di fuora, quanto fra le due Cupole si vedon
-rotti, o distaccati alcuni pezzi di marmo a coda di rondine messi in
-questi ultimi anni attroverso alle spaccature per vedere se la fabrica
-faceva moto.</p>
-
-<p>29. I paletti de’ cerchi L che cingono la Cupola interiore, si vedono
-in alcuni luoghi rimossi dal sito verticale per più once.</p>
-
-<p>30. Di fuora nell’ordin’ Attico da _m_ fino ad _n_ si vedono
-in più siti delle aperture orizontali nelle commessure de’ travertini
-rialzati un tantino, e un simil moto si riscontra in alcuni stipiti
-delle finestre esteriori nel corridoretto K, che gira tra le due Cupole.</p>
-
-<p>31. Questo è ciò, che abbiamo veduto cogli occhi nostri. Di più
-fatti esaminare i pilastri _b_ col piombino si è trovato, che
-sbilanciano in fuora, altri tre once, altri due e mezza, ed altri
-meno, e altrettanto in circa<span class="pagenum" id="Page_254">[254]</span> sbilanciano pur’ in fuora i pilastri
-de’ contraforti G, che stanno attaccati al tamburo. Ma de’ pilastri
-esteriori de’ medesimi contraforti alcuni sbilanciano un tantino in
-dentro, altri stanno a un di presso a piombo.</p>
-
-<p>32. La gran spaccatura sopra il pilone della Veronica sul cornicioncino
-dell’Attico in _h_ è di quattro once, e vene sono due vicinissime,
-in cui essa diramasi di un’oncia e mezza fra tutte due. Quella in
-faccia sopra il Longino è di due once e mezza. Ivi le spaccature in
-giro sono in numero 27, e tanto grosse, che messe insieme si trovano di
-22 once, e poco più sù di 24.</p>
-
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2>INDEX</h2>
-</div>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Aachen, dome,
-    <a href="#Page_11">11</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Abutments, lack of, in the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Agnolo, Baccio d’, his work on the Palazzo Bartolini, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his innovation in framing window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Aisles, treatment of façade over the, in ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">in ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Alberti, Leon Batista, said by Milizia to be regarded as one of the principal restorers of the architecture of antiquity,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his use of the Roman triumphal-arch design as a model for his façades,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–43</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">applied himself to writing on, rather than practising architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_108">108</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his influence seen in Bramante’s works,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-  <li>ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38–42</a> (cut and plate),
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Rucellai, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_108">108</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Angelo, Michael,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">design for the tomb of Pope Julius II.,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his work on St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53–65</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">date of his appointment as architect of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his alterations of Bramante’s plan,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his admiration for the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on the Pantheon dome,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">defects in his scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his makeshifts,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">windows of Palazzo Farnese, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Angle, Roman treatment of the,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">pilasters on the,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78–81</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Arabesque, Renaissance in imitation of Roman,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Arcades, of the court of Palazzo Farnese, use of Roman combination of arch and entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cloister of Santa Maria della Pace, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of La Rochefoucauld, France, Flamboyant arches framed with pilasters,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Arch, the radical nature of the change wrought in architecture
-by the introduction of, was never grasped by the imperial Roman designers,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Roman triumphal, used as a model of Renaissance façades,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–43</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to a continuous arcade,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of Flamboyant depressed or three-centred form,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Architectural carving of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167–178</a> (cuts).</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Carving">Carving, Architectural</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Architectural shams, use of, in the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_132">132</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Architecture, the communal and individual spirit in,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">its division into three distinctive styles and two classes,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">proper meaning of the term,
-    <a href="#Page_15">15<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">structural integrity a fundamental prerequisite of good,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">use of structural members without structural meaning
-violates the true principles of architectural design,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">mechanical rules cannot reach the law of the proportions
-of a genuine work of art,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_249">249</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">conscious effort to be original in, is inevitably disastrous,
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the noblest, has always been mainly a social, communal, and
-national, not a personal product,
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Arezzo, church of Santissima Annunziatta,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">nave,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Arnolfo, his design for the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Artificial elements in architectural ornamentation, use of,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Assisi, church of Santa Maria degli Angeli,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">date,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">general plan,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">chapels,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">influence of St. Peter’s in,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Athens, the Propylæa, spacing of the columns of the order,
-    <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">National Museum, leafage of capital from Epidaurus,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Attic wall, use in an interior as a support for vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of the façade of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of Michael Angelo’s dome of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Baalbek, Pantheon of,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">breaking of the pediment,
-    <a href="#Page_94">94</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Baccio d’Agnolo, architect of tower of Santo Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Balconies, with balustrades,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Baldinucci, _Lettera di Filippo Baldinucci Intorno
-al modo di dar Proporzione alle Figure_, etc.,
-    <a href="#Page_249">249<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on rules of proportion in art,
-    <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Barley, ear of, in Renaissance and in Greek carving compared,
-    <a href="#Page_169">169</a> (plate and cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Barrozzi, Giacomo. <i>See</i> <a href="#Vignola">Vignola</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Beltrami, Luca, _Il Pantheon_,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Benedict XIV, Pope, his inquiries as to the safety of the
-dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Bernini, Wren’s meeting with him at Paris,
-    <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Berty, Adolphe, _Les Grands Architectes Français de la Renaissance_,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Lescot,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on De l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Bettini, Giovanni, his work on the church of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Blind arcade, forms proper decoration for mediæval interiors,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Bloomfield, Reginald, <i>A History of Renaissance
-Architecture in England</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Bologna, Palazzo Bevilacqua,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">window openings of mediæval form without central shaft,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Bourges, house of Jacques Cœur, a forerunner of the Renaissance châteaux,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Bramante, his birth and early work,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Tempietto of San Pietro in Montorio,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44–46</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his work on St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47–53</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his use of the Pantheon and Basilica  of Maxentius as models,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49–52</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">alteration of his scheme by others,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49<sup>3</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53–55</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">weakness of his scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">accused of poor workmanship,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Santa Maria della Consolazione at Todi,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74–77</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">his work on the cathedral of Como,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Satiro, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">cloister of Santa Maria della Pace, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112–114</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Brescia, Palazzo Comunale,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">of the broletto type,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Martinengo, peculiar and meaningless style of window opening,
-    <a href="#Page_166">166</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Municipale, leafage of capitals,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Brunelleschi, the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10–25</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_48">48</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his own account of the dome quoted,
-    <a href="#Page_18">18<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his great ability,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his scaffolding,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">why he led the way in a wrong direction,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">character of his work in general,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his use of the orders,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26–32</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_175">175</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the Pitti palace, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Pazzi or the Quaratesi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">leafage of capital,
-    <a href="#Page_175">175</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Bullant, _Reigle Géneralle de Architecture_,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his reproduction of the order of a Roman temple in the
-portico of the château of Écouen,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Buttresses, in support of domes,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of a circular Gothic vault,
-    <a href="#Page_57">57<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">concealing of, in St. Paul’s, London,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Byzantine architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">term loosely applied,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the dome on pendentives is the distinguishing structural feature of,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">their domes were properly constructed,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">scheme prevails in Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Caen, church of St. Pierre, exterior of apse with Lombard
-Renaissance details applied to a Flamboyant structural scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Cambridge, England, Caius College, gate of honor, neo-classic features,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Carving">Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167–178</a> (cuts):</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Sculpture of the human figure on Renaissance buildings has little proper
-architectural character,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Relief carving,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167–178</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">pictorial treatment of,
-    <a href="#Page_158">158</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">a great deal is in close imitation of Roman models,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the best is superior to that of ancient Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">conventionalization of forms,
-    <a href="#Page_169">169</a> (plate and cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">formal convolutions of,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the finish, in many cases, mere surface smoothing,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">two schemes which are used with wearisome repetition,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">arrangement of composition and treatment of details
-often artificial and inorganic,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_173">173</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the finest forms those of foliation,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">leafage of capitals,
-    <a href="#Page_175">175–178</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">artificial convention of the ridges which mark the
-subdivisions of the leaf surface,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the grotesque is uniformly weak and characterless,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176–178</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">_Putti_ are without particular merit as design,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Casati, _I Capi d’Arte di Bramante da Urbino nel Milanese_,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Cecchini, _Opinione Intorno lo Stato della gran Cupola del Duomo di Firenze_,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on the stability of the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23<sup>3</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Celled vault, a Gothic circular,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">nature of its construction,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56–59</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li>Chains, binding,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Chambers, Sir William, _Treatise on the Decorative Part of Civil Architecture_,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Chimney-stacks in shape of Doric columns in Elizabethan houses,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Church, the, in Middle Ages and Renaissance period,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1–3</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Church architecture, of the Florentine Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26–43</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the Roman Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66–101</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the Renaissance in North Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135–153</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Clamps, metal, used in masonry,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of St. Peter’s dome,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Classic inspiration in the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Classic models, the classic style which was followed in
-the Renaissance was that of the decadent Greek schools as represented in Roman copies,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">misuse of,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Claudian aqueduct,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Coffering, Roman, in interior of church of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Colonnade of Bramante’s scheme for St. Peter’s dome,
-    <a href="#Page_51">51</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Columns">Columns, small, free-standing, placed by Sansovino
-on each side of the pier to bear the archivolt,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">often spoken of as an innovation of Sansovino and
-Palladio, but instances of it occur in Græco-Roman architecture of Syria,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">peculiar form of, claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_201">201–206</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">practically the same column occurs in Serlio’s book,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">an ancient adumbration of this form occurs in the Porta Maggiore, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_205">205</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">other Italian examples of the same column,
-    <a href="#Page_205">205</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">mention of its use in England,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_222">222</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">notion that the Ionic order was designed after female proportions,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Communal spirit of the Middle Ages,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Como, cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144–149</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">description of exterior,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">details are mediæval Lombard modified by neo-classic elements,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">portals, illogical use of arch and entablature in,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">window openings, variety of illogical forms in,
-    <a href="#Page_148">148</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">tapering jamb shafts,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Consoles, reversed over the aisle compartments of an exterior,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Constantinople, Hagia Theotokos, dome,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">church of St. Sophia, dome mentioned,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Conventionalization of forms in relief carving of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_168">168</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Corinthian capitals,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Corner pilasters,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78–81</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Cornice, of St. Peter’s, Rome, dwarfs the effect of altitude,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">breaking of,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93–95</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Cosimo de’ Medici,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Court, circular, of Vignola, influences De l’Orme and Jones
-in building the courts of the Tuileries and Whitehall,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Cunningham, _The Lives of the Most Eminent British Painters, Sculptors, and Architects_,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_226">226</a> ff.;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on the unsubstantial structures of the Renaissance in England,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">De l’Orme, Philibert, _Le Premier Tome de l’Architecture_,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>2</sup></a> ff.,
-    <a href="#Page_209">209</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">a man with little artistic genius,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_209">209</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">overestimated by Viollet le Duc,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Adolphe Berty on,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">studied the antique in Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his work on the Tuileries,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200–207</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">peculiar form of column claimed by him as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_201">201–206</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his doorway, with use of the peculiar column,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">description of doorway quoted from his book,
-    <a href="#Page_209">209</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Delaborde, Viscount, quoted,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7<sup>3</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Della Porta,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade of ch. of the Gesù, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Dolcebono, architect, Church of Monastero Maggiore, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Domes, construction of early,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10–15</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">hidden externally by drum and timber roof,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_11">11</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Byzantine, on pendentives,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_29">29<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">polygonal,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">pointed in outline,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">octagonal,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">hemispherical,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>3</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Arabian,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">binding chains,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_241">241</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the thrust,
-    <a href="#Page_15">15<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">why a dome cannot have the character of a Gothic vault,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56–59</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">proper mode of constructing, settled by the ancient Romans and Byzantines,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">attempt of the architects of the Renaissance to solve the great dome problem,
-    <a href="#Page_241">241</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_242">242</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">most modern domes modelled after St. Peter’s and St. Paul’s are wooden constructions,
-    <a href="#Page_242">242</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of Hagia Theotokos, Constantinople,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10–25</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">design of Arnolfo,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">modelled on dome of Baptistery,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">details of construction,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16–20</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">magnitude of the work,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">stability of,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of Florence Baptistery, details of construction,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a> (cut),</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">dome of Florence cathedral derived from,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">vault of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, not a dome,
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">vault of ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">St. Paul’s, London, rejected scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_235">235</a> (cut),</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">likeness to Bramante’s scheme for St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a> (cut),</li>
-  <li class="i2">likeness to Michael Angelo’s scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_237">237</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">present structure,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a> (plate),</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">recalls Bramante’s San Pietro in Montorio, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">structural system of,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239–242</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Santa Maria delle Grazie, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">vault of the chapel of St. Peter Martyr, ch.
-of Sant’Eustorgio, Milan, like vault of chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Biagio at Montepulciano,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Pisa cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Antonio San Gallo’s design for St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Tempietto, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cath. of Salamanca approaches the nature of a Gothic vault,
-    <a href="#Page_57">57–59</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Todi,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Domestic architecture. <i>See</i> <a href="#Palace">Palace architecture</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Doorway, of De l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of Serlio,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Drum, of a dome, raised above the springing of the dome,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10–14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">dome set on the top of,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the central vault of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Tempietto of San Pietro in Montorio, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Du Cerceau, engraving of the Fountain of the Innocents, Paris,
-    <a href="#Page_195">195</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">work of Lescot on the Louvre,
-    <a href="#Page_197">197</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">work of De l’Orme on the Tuileries,
-    <a href="#Page_201">201</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_221">221<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">project for the château of Charleval,
-    <a href="#Page_209">209</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Durm, _Die Dom Kuppel in Florenz_,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">_Die Baukunst der Renaissance in Italien_,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on domes,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>East end of the Redentore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Elizabethan Art,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216–225</a> (cuts).</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#England">Renaissance in England</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">England, Renaissance in, Architecture of the,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216–246</a> (cuts).</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#England">Renaissance in England</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Burghley House, chimneys in the form of a Doric order,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Cranborne Manor-House, porch and façade illustrate Elizabethan neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_222">222</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Hardwick Castle, mention of,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Kirby Hall, façades of the court,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218–220</a> (cut),</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">pilasters supporting nothing but miniature pedestals,
-    <a href="#Page_219">219</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">window openings said to have been inserted by Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">porch, description of,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">its scheme a variation of Lescot’s Louvre pavilions,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">gables of Flemish or Dutch origin,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Longford Castle,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">French influence in,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">resemblance to château of Chambord, France,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Lower Walterstone Hall, window illustrating Elizabethan neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Stanway House, gatehouse portal, neo-classic features,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Tixall Castle, gatehouse, neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_222">222</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Westwood Park, porch in the form of a Roman triumphal arch,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Wollaton Hall, neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">chimney-stacks in the semblance of Doric columns,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">portal,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Entablature, passing through the arch impost,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">in Roman art,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">springing of a vault from,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Vignola’s,
-    <a href="#Page_85">85</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">removing of, between the ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to a continuous arcade,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">breaking of,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_199">199</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">used with the arch illogically in the portals of north Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence, running through the impost,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">façade of ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_40">40</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome, the two parts
-which have no _raison d’être_ under a vault have been omitted,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of San Biagio, Montepulciano, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Gesù, Rome, has no ressauts except at the crossing,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of St. Paul outside the wall, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">St. Peter’s, Rome, interior, dwarfs the effect of its altitude,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">façade of ch. of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, placed above small pilasters of the archivolts,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">The Redentore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Todi,
-    <a href="#Page_75">75</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_76">76</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Entablature block, in Roman art,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">in ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">in façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_36">36</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">in nave of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Entasis of columns in church of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Façades, of the Badia of Fiesole,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">old St. Paul’s cathedral, London, incongruous mixture of,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230–232</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Whitehall, London, banqueting hall,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Westminster front,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a> (cut),</li>
-  <li class="i2">circular court,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–42</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of the Gesù, Rome, Vignola’s,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92–95</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Della Porta’s,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86–88</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, description of,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112–114</a> (cut),</li>
-  <li class="i2">projecting bays at each end,
-    <a href="#Page_113">113</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">portal of almost Greek purity of design,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Massimi, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114–116</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Scuola di San Marco (Venice),
-    <a href="#Page_156">156–158</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Santa Maria dei Miracole, Venice, a marvel of excellence in mechanical execution,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_152">152</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Fiesole, church of the Badia, façade,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">likeness to chapel of the Pazzi,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Filarete, Antonio, Ospedale Maggiore, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">arabesque on door-valves of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Fine Arts, of an epoch, the expression of its conditions,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the Renaissance, spirit of,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the Middle Ages, spirit of,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Flamboyant Gothic style of Castle Châteaudun,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Florence">Florence, condition in Middle Ages and in Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Board of Works of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Badia, façade,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Baptistery, dome, details of construction,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">forms inspiration for dome of the Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">attic wall,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Ghiberti gates, inorganic composition with over-naturalism in details,
-    <a href="#Page_173">173</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Cathedral of, dome,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10–25</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">design of Arnolfo,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">modelled on the dome of the Baptistery,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">details of construction,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16–20</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">its rib system gives it nothing of Gothic character,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">shell,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">rib system,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">binding chains,
-    <a href="#Page_19">19</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">magnitude of the work,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">deliberations of the Board of Works,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">scaffolding,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">is fundamentally false in principle,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">stability of,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">lantern,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">has nothing of classic Roman character,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">its octagonal form,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">its fine features,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1" id="Chapel_Pazzi">Chapel of the Pazzi,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26–32</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">its central vault,
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">interior,
-    <a href="#Page_28">28–30</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">Byzantine in form,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders of,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">portico,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">panelled attic wall,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">false use of the orders,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">leafage of capitals,
-    <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of Santa Croce, pulpit, carving of,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">leafage of capitals,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2"><i>See</i> <a href="#Chapel_Pazzi">Chapel of the Pazzi</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of Sant’ Jacopo Soprarno,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of San Lorenzo,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">celled vault,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">mediæval features,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of Santa Maria del Fiore, false front of wood mentioned,
-    <a href="#Page_120">120</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of Santa Maria Novella,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35–38</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">mediæval features,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">portal,
-    <a href="#Page_36">36</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">tower,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of Santo Spirito,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">spire-like tower of,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">pseudo-classic details,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">lantern,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Museum, Roman arabesque used as model for Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">pilaster with carving of a meaningless and artificial composition,
-    <a href="#Page_173">173</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Bartolini,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Gondi,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">arcades of the court,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">leafage of capitals,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Guardagni,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Mozzi,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Pitti palace, its façade as monotonous as the Claudian aqueduct, which it resembles,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the Quaratesi,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Riccardi,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a> (cut and plate),</li>
-  <li class="i2">moderation shown in,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_110">110</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">arcades of interior court,
-    <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Rucellai,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_108">108</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">application of classic orders,
-    <a href="#Page_108">108</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">rustication of the masonry,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">resemblance between Palazzo Cancelleria and,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Strozzi,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">cornice,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i2">fortress-like character,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the Strozzino,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Vecchio,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Florentine Renaissance, church architecture of the,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26–43</a> (cuts and plate);</li>
-  <li class="i1">palace architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102–111</a> (cuts and plate).</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Renaissance_architecture">Renaissance architecture</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Foliation, the finest feature of Renaissance architectural carving,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Fontana, Carlo, cited on dome of Pisa,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on stability of Florence dome,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Michael Angelo,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on safety of St. Peter’s dome,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">_Il Tempio Vaticano e sua Origine_, etc., Discritto dal Cav. Carlo Fontana, etc.,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on short-sighted admiration of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on binding chains,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>France, Châteaux of, <i>see</i> <a href="#Renaissance_France">Renaissance in France</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Castle Châteaudun, portal and bay in the Flamboyant Gothic style,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Château of Azay le Rideau,
-    <a href="#Page_182">182–187</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">general description,
-    <a href="#Page_182">182–184</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">portal and bay of characteristic French Renaissance design in which
- neo-classic details are worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184–187</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_186">186</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">one of the finest monuments of the early Renaissance in the country,
-    <a href="#Page_187">187</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">portal,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Château of Blois, cornice with neo-classic and mediæval elements combined,
-    <a href="#Page_182">182</a>, (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">court façade,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188–190</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">superimposed orders of pilasters of the court façade ornamented with bead mouldings,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">polygonal staircase tower,
-    <a href="#Page_190">190</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">garden façade,
-    <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">open gallery of,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Château of Chambord, its multiplicity of soaring
-features resembles a late Gothic building,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">resemblance of Longford Castle, England, to,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Château of Charleval,
-    <a href="#Page_209">209–213</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">exterior façade, pilasters which have no entablature to support,
-    <a href="#Page_210">210</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">unmeaning variation of the detail of the several bays,
-    <a href="#Page_210">210</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">interior façade, the division of the building into two stories
-not expressed on the outside,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">court of Kirby Hall, England, resembles,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Château of Chenonceaux, portal where Flamboyant idea is
-treated in neo-classic details,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Château of Écouen, architectural scheme is comparatively simple,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">in the portico of the court is reproduced the order of a Roman temple
-without admixture of mediæval details or Italian corruptions,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Château of Fontainebleau follows the general character of early French Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Château of La Rochefoucauld, arcades of the court where Flamboyant
-arches are framed with pilasters,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">open gallery,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Château of St. Germain en Laye,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_193">193</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">buttresses,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Villers Cotterets, column claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_202">202</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">French architecture, Renaissance influence upon,
-    <a href="#Page_179">179</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>French Renaissance. <i>See</i> <a href="#Renaissance_France">Renaissance in France</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Frieze, problem of the arrangement of metope and triglyph at the end of,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of library of St. Mark, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a> (cut).</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Galleries, open, covered by extension of the main roof in French châteaux,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Genoa, portal containing columns claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Geymüller, Baron H. von, _Die ursprünglichen Entwürf für Sanct Peter in Rom_,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49<sup>2</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gisors, Church of SS. Gervais and Protais, the west front Flamboyant Gothic with
-incongruous Renaissance details,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gotch, <i>Architecture of the Renaissance in England</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on Kirby Hall, England,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">on Longford Castle, England,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">on Tixall Castle,
-    <a href="#Page_222">222</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">on Stanway, Westwood Park, Wollaton Hall,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Gothic, King James’s,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gothic architectural carving, has at once an appropriate
-architectural character and a high degree of excellence in the development of form,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">foliation,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the grotesque,
-    <a href="#Page_177">177</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">_Gothic architecture, development and character of_ cited,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on dome of Salamanca,
-    <a href="#Page_57">57<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on early stage of apsidal vault development,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gothic architecture, one of the three distinctive styles of architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">beauty and structural logic of,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of wooden ties,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">why a dome cannot have the character of a Gothic vault,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56–59</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">variety which arises through some new constructive idea,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">French Renaissance châteaux in which distorted neo-classic
-details are worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Wren’s scheme to reconcile the Gothic to a better manner,
-    <a href="#Page_238">238</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gothic art forms a new French order, a true evolution out
-of the ancient orders superbly adapted to new conditions,
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Goujon, sculptures of the fountain of the Innocents, Paris,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Greek architectural carving, vitality of,
-    <a href="#Page_169">169</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_171">171</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">beauty of leafage,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Greek architecture, the classic style which was followed
-in Renaissance architecture was that of the decadent Greek schools as represented
-in Roman copies,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the only proper use of the classic order made in,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Greek coin (of Metapontum), conventionalized ear of
-barley on, compared with Renaissance carving,
-    <a href="#Page_169">169</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Greek sculpture on buildings is in a measure
-independent of the building on which it is placed,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Grotesque, the, in architectural carving, the
-northern races only capable of conceiving it in an imaginative way,
-    <a href="#Page_177">177</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">in Renaissance architecture uniformly weak and characterless,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_177">177</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li>Guasti, _Santa Maria del Fiore_,
-    <a href="#Page_13">13<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on Brunelleschi’s account of the dome of Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_18">18<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Gubbio, his work on the ducal palace, Venice, arabesque after Roman model,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a> (cut).</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Hermæ, of façade of the Gesù, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of the Tuileries, Paris,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Human figure, in sculpture, on buildings,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">has little proper architectural character in the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Impost, continuous,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Individuality, element of, in Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">as developed by Middle Ages and by Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Innocent XI, Pope, his inquiries as to the safety of the dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Intellectual movement in the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ionic volutes,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Italian domestic architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">unwise admixture of classic elements in,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">spirit of display in,
-    <a href="#Page_105">105</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Italian genius for painting,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Jamb shafts, tapering,
-    <a href="#Page_137">137</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Jones, Inigo, his work on Kirby Hall, England,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">influence of Vitruvius and Palladio on,
-    <a href="#Page_226">226</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">travel and study in Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">_Stonehenge Restored_,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Whitehall,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227–230</a> (plate and cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Banqueting Hall, London,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">had no true conception of the principles of classic art,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">old St. Paul’s west front,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230–232</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">the spirit of his architecture theatrical,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Julius II, Pope, the building of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_46">46</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Kent, William, _The Designs of Inigo Jones, consisting
-of Plans and Elevations for Publick and Private Buildings_,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">scheme for the palace of Whitehall, London,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">old St. Paul’s cathedral, west front,
-    <a href="#Page_231">231</a> (cut).</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Lantern of Florence dome,
-    <a href="#Page_25">25</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">St. Peter’s, Rome, Bramante’s plan,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Leafage, Greek and Roman compared,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174–176</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Lescot, Pierre,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Fountain of the Innocents, Paris,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194–196</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">influence of Serlio,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">west wing of the Louvre,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196–200</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Letarouilly, _Edifices de Rome Moderne_,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Loftie, W. J., _Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher Wren_,
-    <a href="#Page_242">242<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Lombard blind arcade recalled in the ch. of Santa Maria dei Miracole, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Lombard Romanesque architecture, towers,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Lombard Romanesque, style modified by neo-classic
-elements mark the Renaissance architecture of northern Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">a porch which forms a model from which an illogical
-Renaissance portal is derived,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li>Lombardi, the,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">architectural carving of,
-    <a href="#Page_169">169</a> (plate).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Lombardo, Martino, Scuola di San Marco, Venice, façade,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Lombardo, Pietro,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Santa Maria dei Miracole, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a> (plate).</li>
-
-  <li>Lombardo, Tullio,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch of San Salvatore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">London, St. Paul’s cathedral, west front of old structure by Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Wren ordered to submit designs for the restoration of,
-    <a href="#Page_234">234</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">his drawings for the new structure,
-    <a href="#Page_235">235–238</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">rejected scheme with details of its dome,
-    <a href="#Page_235">235</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">likeness of dome to Bramante’s scheme for St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">likeness to Michael Angelo’s scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">façade of the second design a close copy of Inigo Jones’s,
-    <a href="#Page_238">238</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">present structure never embodied in any set of drawings,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">plan has no beauty comparable to that of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">comparison of, with St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_241">241</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">plan and elevation,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">dome,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239–242</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">recalls Bramante’s San Pietro in Montorio,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">structural system of,
-    <a href="#Page_240">240</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">vaulting of the nave has somewhat the effect of Gothic vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">use of attic wall in support of vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">neo-classic orders of the interior,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">intersecting of archivolt and entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">concealing of the buttresses,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">vaulting of the apse,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Whitehall, Banqueting Hall,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="i2">of Palladian design,
-    <a href="#Page_228">228</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders of the façade,
-    <a href="#Page_228">228</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">scheme for the palace illustrated by Kent,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">plan is French in character rather than Italian,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">order of the basement has a structural character,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade of circular court, orders of,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of St. Stephen’s,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">ch. of St. Bride’s,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">ch. of St. Mary-le-Bow,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">ch. of St. Peter’s, Cornhill,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Longhena, architect, Palazzo Pesaro, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Maderna, the western bays of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Majano, Benedetto da, the Palazzo Strozzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Mantua, church of Sant’ Andrea,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38–42</a> (cut and plate);</li>
-  <li class="i1">erected and ornamented on Roman models,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">nave,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="i1">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">its interior one of the finest of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">its scheme foreshadows that of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–42</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">early use of so-called colossal order,
-    <a href="#Page_40">40</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">resemblance of central arch to that of ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">panelled pilasters,
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">reflection of, seen in Bramante’s church of San Satiro of Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Martin, _Hist. de France_,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">_Mathematici, Parere di tre, sopra i danni che si sono trovato nella cupola di S.
-Pietro, etc._,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Mathematicians’ report on the condition of St. Peter’s dome in 1742,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Mediæval art, structural forms of, formed, for the most part, the basis
-of Renaissance design,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">considered false and barbaric by the neo-classicists,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">its architects transformed the classic orders in a creative way,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Melani, _Architettura Italiana_,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_250">250<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on architecture of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_250">250</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Metope, problem of making half a metope fall at the
-end of the frieze,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li>Michelozzi, The Riccardi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">praised by Vasari,
-    <a href="#Page_105">105</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the Strozzino, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">chapel of St. Peter Martyr, ch. of Sant’Eustorgio, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">his work in Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Middle Ages, conditions of the,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">spirit of, and that of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5–6</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">individuality of,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Middleton, _Ancient Rome_,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on the dome of the Pantheon,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Milan, church of Sant’Eustorgio, chapel of St. Peter Martyr,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">circular celled vault,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of San Lorenzo mentioned,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of Santa Maria delle Grazie,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">description of exterior,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">dome,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">its encircling arcade suggests the encircling
-colonnade of the dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of Monasterio Maggiore,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">compound window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church and sacristy of San Satiro,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138–140</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">reflects ch. of St. Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_138">138</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">orders of the interior of the sacristy,
-    <a href="#Page_139">139</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Ospedale Maggiore,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">larger features are of mixed and debased
-mediæval character with no application of classic orders,
-    <a href="#Page_164">164</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Brera, arches sprung from pairs of
-columns connected by short entablatures,
-    <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Milanesi, cited,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Milizia, _Memorie degli Architetti_, etc., quoted,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on Alberti,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on use of entablature block,
-    <a href="#Page_36">36</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on safety of the dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58<sup>4</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on the strengthening of the dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">on ch. of Consolazione at Todi,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">on spire-like tower of ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on Vignola,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">on dome of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">on window openings framed with orders, crowned with pediments,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Sansovino,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Vignola,
-    <a href="#Page_128">128</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on De l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Montalembert, cited,
-    <a href="#Page_5">5<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Montepulciano, church of San Biagio,
-    <a href="#Page_77">77–83</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">interior,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78–80</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Doric order,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of pilasters on the angles,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">exterior,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81–83</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">dome,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">panels of upper story,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">towers,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Naples museum, composite capital showing Roman leafage,
-    <a href="#Page_175">175</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Nave of ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Nelli, _Discorsi di Architettura_,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Brunelleschi’s scaffolding,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on stability of Florence dome,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23<sup>3</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Neo-classicists, their confidence in the art of Roman
-antiquity as the embodiment of all true principles of architectural design,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Neo-pagan spirit of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_8">8</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Nicholas V, Pope, rebuilding of basilica of St. Peter,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Norton, C. E., <i>Church Building in the Middle Ages</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on building of the dome of the Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Openings, mediæval Florentine form,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of domestic architecture in Perugia,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">reveals are shallow in earlier buildings,
-    <a href="#Page_104">104</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cathedral of Como, variety of illogical forms in,
-    <a href="#Page_148">148</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Window_openings">Window openings</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Order and symmetry of a mechanical kind seen in Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Order, colossal, so-called, early use of,
-    <a href="#Page_40">40</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Order, classic, use of without structural meaning in
-Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Brunelleschi’s use of,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">unsuitable for a building of mediæval character,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">disposition of, in various Renaissance façades,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">misapplication and distortion of by Italians of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">used with propriety by the Greeks alone,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the usual size of, compared with that of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Vignola’s treatise on the Five Orders,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the proportions of the, altered by Vignola,
-    <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Vitruvius quoted on maintaining the purity of,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">inappropriate in a church interior,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">application of, in palace architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Renaissance innovation in spacing the columns of,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">podium introduced beneath,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">where the columns of, act somewhat as buttresses,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">aberrations and makeshifts made necessary by efforts to
-apply the classic orders to uses for which they were not adapted,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">transformed by the mediæval architects in a creative way,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">De l’Orme’s claim of having invented a new order, which he
-called the French order,
-    <a href="#Page_202">202</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Of the Parthenon, Athens,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">the Temple of the Sun at Baalbek,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">Palazzo Rucellai, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_108">108</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">St. Paul’s, London, interior, difficulties of combining
-neo-classic style of, with the high vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_244">244</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Whitehall, banqueting hall, London,
-    <a href="#Page_228">228</a> (plate),
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_40">40</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">ch. of San Biagio at Montepulciano,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">Duomo of Pienza,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">St. Peter’s, Rome, interior,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">dwarfs the effect of magnitude in the interior,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">size compared with that of the Parthenon and Pantheon,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">diminishes the effect of altitude of the vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, podium introduced beneath,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">innovation in spacing the columns of,
-    <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">court of Palazzo Farnese, Rome, treatment of the capital,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">ch. of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice, raised on pedestals,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i3">placed under the archivolts,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">library of St. Mark, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">Palazzo Contarini, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Palazzo Vendramini, Venice, full orders in all three
-stories of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>,</li>
-  <li class="i3">arrangement in lateral bay of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">town hall portico of Vicenza, the columns of, act
-somewhat as buttresses,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Columns">Columns</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Ornamentation, architectural, use of artificial elements in,
-    <a href="#Page_172">172–174</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of forms drawn from organic nature,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Carving">Carving, architectural</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Oxford, St. Mary’s Church, porch, mentioned,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Sheldonian theatre, Wren quoted on,
-    <a href="#Page_234">234</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Padua, town hall, Palladio’s scheme for town hall
-of Vicenza derived from,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Painting, Italian genius for,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">most Renaissance architects were painters and sculptors,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_96">96</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Palace">Palace architecture of the Renaissance, Florentine,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102–111</a> (cuts and plate);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Roman,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112–134</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of North Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154–166</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Venetian,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154–163</a> (cuts).</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Renaissance_architecture">Renaissance architecture</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Palladian architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">introduced into England by Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_227">227</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">far from true to classic design,
-    <a href="#Page_228">228</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">rules are arbitrary and not in accord with the
-true principles of ancient art,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Palladio, <i>Quattro libri dell’Architettura di Andrea Palladio</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_96">96<sup>4</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his influence greater than that of any other architect of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on his study of architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_96">96</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on his admiration of his own work,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his compositions based on order and symmetry of a mechanical kind,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">concerned with the superficial appearance in architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Francesco della Vigna, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97–100</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of the Redentore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Valmarana, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Loggia Bernarda, Vicenza,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Colleone-Porta, Vicenza,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Porta-Barbarano, Vicenza,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the portico of the town hall, Vicenza,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130–132</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pallaiuolo, Simone, Palazzo Guardagni, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Palustre, Leon, <i>L’Architecture de la Renaissance</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on the entablature of St. Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Paris, Church of St. Etienne du Mont, of Flamboyant
-Gothic form, with neo-classic west front and central portal,
-    <a href="#Page_213">213</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">portal with columns modelled after those claimed by
-De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of St. Eustache, a Gothic structure overlaid
-with Renaissance details,
-    <a href="#Page_213">213</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Fountain of the Innocents,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194–196</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">a reproduction of the scheme of a Roman triumphal arch,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Hotel Cluny, a forerunner of the Renaissance châteaux,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Louvre, Lescot’s work on the west wing,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196–200</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_198">198</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the salient pavilions, have no function,
-    <a href="#Page_198">198</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">breaking of the entablature in,
-    <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">sculptured festoons heavy and formal,
-    <a href="#Page_199">199</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palace of the Tuileries, work of De l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200–207</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">peculiar form of column claimed by De l’Orme as his invention,
-    <a href="#Page_201">201–206</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">basement arcade,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">attic story,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Parthenon, metal clamps in masonry,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">effect of a dome erected on,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pavia, Church of the Certosa, general description of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136–137</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Lombard Romanesque forms with pseudo-classic elements engrafted on them,
-    <a href="#Page_137">137</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_137">137</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro, portal framed
-by structural members without structural meaning,
-    <a href="#Page_148">148</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Pazzi, Chapel of the. <i>See</i> <a href="#Florence">Florence</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Pediment, breaking of the,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93–95</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">one placed within another,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of Baalbek,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Pellegrini, Palazzo Brera, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_166">166</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Perugia, domestic architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of S. Bernardino, general description of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">affords a rare instance of the use of colour in Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Peruzzi, Baldassare, his plan for St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Massimi, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114–116</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Piers, pierced transversely and longitudinally,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Lorenzo, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of Blois, France, polygonal staircase tower,
-    <a href="#Page_190">190</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome, alternate system,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Todi,
-    <a href="#Page_75">75</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_76">76</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of San Giorgio Maggiore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of St. Mark, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Salvatore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pietra Santa, Giacomo da, said to have built the ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pilaster strips, form proper decoration for mediæval structures,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Pilasters, coupling of,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">use of, in the treatment of the angles of buildings,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78–81</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">the panelling of,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of Kirby Hall, England, support nothing but miniature pedestals,
-    <a href="#Page_219">219</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">portico of the chapel of the Pazzi,
-    <a href="#Page_31">31</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">National Museum, Florence, meaningless and artificial design in carving,
-    <a href="#Page_173">173</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of Azay le Rideau, France, combination of pseudo-Gothic and neo-classic forms,
-    <a href="#Page_186">186</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">façade of ch. of Sant’Andrea of Mantua,
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">San Biagio, Montepulciano, use of, on the angles in interior,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Contarini, Venice, grouping of those of three different proportions and magnitudes,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Pisa cathedral, dome,
-    <a href="#Page_12">12</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pisan Romanesque architecture, of façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Poleni, <i>Memorie Istoriche delle Gran Cupola del Tempio Vaticano</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his strengthening of the dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_62">62</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on poor work of Bramante,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pollaiuolo, Simione, called Il Cronaca, court and cornice of Palazzo Strozzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Pontoise, church of St. Maclou, remarkable Renaissance north portal,
-    <a href="#Page_214">214</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Porches, church of San Zeno of Verona, a model from which
-an illogical form of Renaissance portal is derived,
-    <a href="#Page_146">146</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Cranborn Manor-House, England, illustrates Elizabethan
-neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_222">222</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Kirby Hall, England,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">resemble Louvre pavilions,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Portals, from Serlio, in which the entablature is removed between the ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">illogical use of arch and entablature in the portals of north Italy,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">illogical Renaissance portal derived from the porch of San Zeno of Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_146">146</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">unreason of Renaissance portals compared with those of Greek or Gothic art,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of cath. of Como, illogical use of arch and entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_145">145</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Stanway House (England) gatehouse, neo-classic features,
-    <a href="#Page_223">223</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Wollaton Hall, England, illustrates Elizabethan neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_36">36</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_41">41</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of Azay le Rideau, France, neo-classic details worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of Chenonceaux, France, Flamboyant and neo-classic forms combined,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of San Pietro in Cielo d’Oro, Pavia,
-    <a href="#Page_148">148</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Cancelleria, Rome, of almost Greek purity of design,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Scuola di San Marco, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Porta del Palio, Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_125">125</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Portico, château of Écouen, the order of a Roman temple is produced without admixture of mediæval details or Italian corruptions,
-    <a href="#Page_192">192</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Raphael, plans for St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47<sup>2</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ravenna, ch. of San Vitale mentioned,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Relief carving of the Renaissance, <i>see</i> <a href="#Carving">Carving,
-Architectural, of the Renaissance</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Renaissance, conditions of,
-    <a href="#Page_1">1</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">intellectual movement in,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_8">8</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">neo-pagan revival in,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_8">8</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">its spirit as manifested in its fine arts,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_8">8</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">its architects were sculptors and painters,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">art of painting in,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Renaissance_architecture">Renaissance architecture, element of individuality in,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the classic style which was followed was that of the
-decadent Greek schools as represented in Roman copies,
-    <a href="#Page_4">4</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">architects were generally also painters and sculptors,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_96">96</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">a surface architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_6">6</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">little heed given to structural propriety,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of the classic order,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">passing of the entablature through the arch imposts,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of stucco,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">alternation of wide and narrow intervals,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">misapplication of the classic orders,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the designers worked on a foundation of mediæval
-ideas from which they could not free themselves,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of Roman models,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">breaking of the pediment,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">use of structural members without structural meaning,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">entablature removed between the ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">later architecture the work of men of little genuine artistic inspiration,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">architectural shams extensively produced by later architects,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_132">132</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">attempt to make half a metope fall at the end of the frieze,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121–122</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">barbaric compositions of frequent occurrence in later,
-    <a href="#Page_124">124</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">based on order and symmetry of a mechanical kind,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">independent personal effort to be original at the bottom of most of the mistakes of,
-    <a href="#Page_206">206</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">no architects of, had a true conception of the principles of classic art,
-    <a href="#Page_230">230</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">theatrical in its spirit,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">no true adaptation of classic elements in Renaissance design,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">great influence of short-sighted and mechanical Italian rules in modern times,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_250">250</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">claims advanced for it as the only architecture of correct
-principles since that of classic antiquity are without justification,
-    <a href="#Page_250">250</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">sculpture of, <i>see</i> <a href="#Carving">Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="England">Renaissance architecture, in England,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216–246</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Elizabethan art,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216–225</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">its best features were of native growth out of the
-mediæval feudal castle and the latest phase of perpendicular Gothic,
-    <a href="#Page_216">216</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_225">225</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">use of classic details,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218–225</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">flimsiness of material in interiors and ornamental details,
-    <a href="#Page_217">217</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">buildings have little foreign character in plan and
-outline, but neo-classic forms are confined to ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">strange aberrations of design wrought by foreigners and native craftsmen,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218–225</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">fantastic gables features of the more showy architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Flemish and Dutch ornamental workers,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the design and execution of the buildings were performed by building craftsmen,
-    <a href="#Page_224">224</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_225">225</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Work of Jones and Wren,
-    <a href="#Page_226">226–246</a> (plate and cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">use of classic details becoming established,
-    <a href="#Page_226">226</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_228">228</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">acceptance of neo-classic style by the people,
-    <a href="#Page_228">228</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_233">233</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Renaissance architecture, Florentine; church architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_26">26–43</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">palace architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102–111</a> (cuts and plate).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1"><i>See</i> also <a href="#Renaissance_architecture">Renaissance architecture</a> and <a href="#Florence">Florence</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Renaissance_France">Renaissance architecture, in France, early,
-    <a href="#Page_179">179–193</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the French Renaissance château, conditions which gave rise to,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">evolved from the feudal castle of the Middle Ages,
-    <a href="#Page_180">180</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_201">201</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">factitious in composition,
-    <a href="#Page_179">179</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_181">181</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">distorted neo-classic details worked into a pseudo-Gothic scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_184">184</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">a survival of later Gothic habit of design is shown where
-the continuity of upright lines is obtained in the use of superimposed pilasters with
-ressauts in the entablatures,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_190">190</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">has a distinctly French expression,
-    <a href="#Page_179">179</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_193">193</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">later French Renaissance given a more marked neo-classic
-dress by Lescot and De l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_194">194–215</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">misuse of structural forms in ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_199">199</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">excessive profusion of ornament,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">church architecture, Gothic structural forms largely
-entwined with a misapplication of classic details,
-    <a href="#Page_213">213–215</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Renaissance architecture, Lombard,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136–149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">neo-classic influences confined largely to ornamental details,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">illogical scheme of openings which became characteristic of,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144–149</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Renaissance architecture, North Italian, profusion of ornament
-a marked characteristic of,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Lombard Romanesque forms modified by neo-classic features
-mark the character of,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">church architecture of the,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135–153</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">mixture of mediæval and pseudo-classic forms,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">palace architecture of the,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154–166</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">later architecture of the, based on the art of Palladio and Vignola,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Renaissance_architecture">Renaissance architecture</a>.</li>
-
-  <li id="Venetian">Renaissance architecture, Venetian,
-    <a href="#Page_135">135</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">church architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149–153</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">palace architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154–163</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">its most characteristic architecture is that of the
-palaces of the grand canal,
-    <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the usual scheme of the front that of a wide central
-bay wholly occupied by openings flanked by lateral bays with a solid wall on
-either side of an opening,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">neo-classic influences confined largely to ornamental details,
-    <a href="#Page_136">136</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">illogical scheme of openings which became characteristic of,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144–149</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">drew some of its material from Florentine and Lombard sources,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">later architecture follows the measurably uniform style
-of Vignola and Palladio,
-    <a href="#Page_153">153</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">overlaying with heavy orders the typical unequal main
-divisions of the palace fronts,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ressauts, irrational use of,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of façade of Santa Maria Novella, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of San Francesco of Rimini,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of ch. of Santa Maria degli Angeli, Assisi,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Rhenish Romanesque style of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ribs, system of, in Florence dome,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16–19</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">in Gothic vaulting have nothing of the character of dome ribs,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of St. Peter’s dome, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">of cath. of Salamanca,
-    <a href="#Page_57">57</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_58">58</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Riccio, Antonio, his work on east side of the court of the Ducal Palace, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a> (plate).</li>
-
-  <li>Rimini, San Francesco of, church of,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">modelled on the arch of Septimius Severus,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Roman arch and entablature scheme applied to a continuous arcade,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Roman architecture, furnished models for Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_40">40</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of entablature block in,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">use of the arch in,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the ressaut,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">triumphal arch design a model for Renaissance façades,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–43</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">treatment of the angle,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Roman architectural carving, furnished models for Renaissance work,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">tasteless and meaningless designs,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">leafage of, compared with Greek leafage,
-    <a href="#Page_174">174</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Roman Renaissance, church architecture of the,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66–101</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">palatial architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112–134</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Renaissance_architecture">Renaissance architecture</a> and <a href="#Rome">Rome</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Romanesque architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_7">7</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Rhenish Romanesque style of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Rome">Rome, its monuments the inspiration of Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_247">247</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">St. Peter’s, rebuilding and demolishing of the old basilica,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">work of Rossellino,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">work of Bramante,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47–53</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_63">63</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_70">70</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">date of the beginning of building,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">general plan,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">the plans of Raphael and Peruzzi,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">work of Michael Angelo,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54–65</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">work of Maderna,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">short-sighted admiration of,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">design of Antonio San Gallo,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">influence of, seen in other churches,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">arabesque on door-valves,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Wren’s scheme for St. Paul’s based on the model of,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_237">237</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">comparison of, with St. Paul’s,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_241">241</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i2">Dome,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44–65</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">use of the Pantheon and the Basilica of Maxentius as models,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49–52</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i3">drum,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">abutments,
-    <a href="#Page_50">50</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">colonnade,
-    <a href="#Page_51">51</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">lantern,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">buttresses,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">design of Michael Angelo,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53–65</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">his alterations of Bramante’s scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53–55</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">attic,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i3">vault shells,
-    <a href="#Page_54">54</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">ribs,
-    <a href="#Page_55">55</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">binding chains,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_62">62</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">ruptures in,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60–63</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">mathematicians’ report of the condition of the structure in 1742,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">violation of laws of stability in,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">strengthening of Bramante’s work,
-    <a href="#Page_64">64<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">its beauty exaggerated,
-    <a href="#Page_65">65</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">likeness of Wren’s scheme of St. Paul’s to,
-    <a href="#Page_236">236</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i2">Exterior,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68–70</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">makeshifts necessitated by the use of the colossal order,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68–70</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">aisle walls carried to the height of the clerestory,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">domes over the aisles,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68–70</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i2">Interior, Bramante’s scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">Michael Angelo’s work,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66–70</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_66">66</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">effect of magnitude dwarfed by the colossal order,
-    <a href="#Page_53">53</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_67">67</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">great size of the structural parts,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">part of the vault hidden by the cornice,
-    <a href="#Page_68">68</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent3">its ornamentation a cheap deception,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i3">ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of the Gesù,
-    <a href="#Page_91">91–95</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Vignola’s plan given in his book on the Five Orders,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">interior, general scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92–95</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">broken pediments of,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">scroll work and hermæ,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">reversed consoles,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">tablets,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of Sant’Agostino,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72–74</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">its architects,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">date,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">the general style is Rhenish Romanesque,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">nave,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">Renaissance ornamental details,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_73">73</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">truncated pediment,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">tablets in wall surface,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">dome,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86–89</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">dome,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86–88</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">likeness to the Pantheon,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of San Biagio, entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of Santa Maria della Pace, cloister arcade,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of St. Paul outside the wall, entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_30">30<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">The Tempietto,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44–46</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">the dome and its drum,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">resemblance to the temple of Vesta,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">dome of St. Paul’s, London, recalls,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Arch of Septimius Severus used as model of façades by Alberti,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–43</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">treatment of angle in,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Arch of the Silversmiths,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Arch of Titus, scheme of, used by Sansovino in the
-Loggetta of the Campanile, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1" id="Maxentius">Basilica of , columns and arches,
-    <a href="#Page_37">37</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">as model for St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Baths of Caracalla, entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_29">29</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Pantheon,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_15">15<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_87">87</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">said to be taken as model for dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">grandeur of,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">as model for Bramante’s dome of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">its internal character,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">abutments,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">not a homogeneous structure,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Porta Maggiore, form of column similar to that
-claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_205">205</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Temple of Peace. <i>See</i> <a href="#Maxentius">Basilica of Maxentius</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Theatre of Marcellus, its façade followed by
-Sansovino for the library of St. Mark’s,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Cancelleria, façade,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112–114</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings, north Italian,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">podium introduced beneath each order,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">spacing of the columns of the order,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">projecting bays at each end,
-    <a href="#Page_113">113</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">portal of almost Greek purity of design,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">court,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Farnese,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116–118</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">window openings framed by structural members without
-structural meaning,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">removal of entablature between ressauts over window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">court, treatment of columns,
-    <a href="#Page_118">118</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Girand Torlonia,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window opening, north Italian,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Massimi, façade described,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114–116</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">wall above basement unbroken by pilasters or string courses,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">portico,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">spacing of columns and pilasters of basement,
-    <a href="#Page_114">114</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_115">115</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ronsard, his poem on Lescot cited,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Roof, timber, built over early domes,
-    <a href="#Page_10">10</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_11">11</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Rossellino, his use of the orders in the Duomo of Pienza,
-    <a href="#Page_42">42</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_43">43</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his work on the basilica of St. Peter, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ruptures, in the dome of Florence cathedral,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">in the dome of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_59">59</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_60">60–63</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">not necessarily alarming in a properly constructed vault,
-    <a href="#Page_62">62<sup>2</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Rustication of masonry,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a>;</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Salamanca, cathedral of, dome, how it approaches
-and differs in nature from a Gothic vault,
-    <a href="#Page_57">57–59</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li>San Gallo, Antonio, the elder,
-    <a href="#Page_90">90</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his work on ch. of San Biagio, Montepulciano, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78–83</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santissima Annunziatta, Arezzo,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">San Gallo, Antonio, the younger, his design for St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Farnese, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">San Gallo, Giuliano da, designed Palazzo Gondi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">leafage of capital,
-    <a href="#Page_176">176</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>San Giovanni, Florence Baptistery,
-    <a href="#Page_14">14</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Sanmichele, Porta del Palio, Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_125">125</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Canalla, Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria, Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Bevilacqua, Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_127">127</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Sansovino">Sansovino (Jacopo Tatti), his predilection for classic forms,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_120">120</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">library of St. Mark, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his attempt to make half the metope fall at the end of the frieze,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">small free-standing column placed on each side of the
-pier to bear the archivolt, often spoken of as an invention of,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Loggetta of the Campanile, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his use of a form of column claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_205">205</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Scaffolding said to have been employed by Brunelleschi,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21<sup>3</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Scamozzi,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">peculiar form of compound window, sometimes called his invention,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Scrollwork, of façade of the ch. of the Gesù, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_93">93</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Sculpture, on buildings, has in Gothic art only an
-appropriate architectural character, and a high degree of excellence in the
-development of form,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Greek, is in a measure independent of the building on which it is placed,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of the human figure in Renaissance art, has little proper architectural character,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">relief carving of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167–178</a> (cuts).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1"><i>See</i> <a href="#Carving">Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Sebastiano, architect of ch. of Sant’Agostino, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_72">72</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Serlio, <i>Regole Generali di Architettura di Sebastiano Serlio</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on the work of Bramante on St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_49">49</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on corner pilasters,
-    <a href="#Page_79">79</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on the removal of the entablature between the ressauts,
-    <a href="#Page_117">117</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">influence on Lescot,
-    <a href="#Page_196">196</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his column practically the same as that claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_203">203</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Sgrilli, <i>Descrizione e Studj dell’Insigne Fabbrica di S. Maria del Fiore</i>, quoted,
-    <a href="#Page_23">23</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Siena, Palazzo Pubblico,
-    <a href="#Page_102">102</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Soane Museum, John Thorpe’s drawings,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218<sup>2</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Spavento, church of San Salvatore, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Spire, Gothic, far removed from anything proper to classic composition,
-    <a href="#Page_83">83</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Steeples, Wren’s,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">are the outcome of the Renaissance spire-like towers,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Strozzi, Filippo,
-    <a href="#Page_110">110</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Stucco, use in Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_32">32</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_132">132</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Syria, St. Simeon Stylites, use of the free-standing
-column under the archivolts,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Basilica of Shakka, form of window opening reproduced
-in architecture of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Tablets, rectangular in façade surface,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ugly shapes of, in the façade of The Gesù, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">of Vignola,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li>Tatti, Jacopo. <i>See</i> <a href="#Sansovino">Sansovino</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Thorpe, John, his plans show a French influence,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_220">220</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">little is known of him,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218<sup>2</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Kirby Hall, England,
-    <a href="#Page_218">218–220</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Longford Castle,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Thrust, the, of a dome,
-    <a href="#Page_15">15<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_24">24</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_52">52</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Ties, wooden used in Gothic buildings,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>2</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Tivoli, temple of Vesta, resemblance of the Tempietto, Rome, to,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_45">45</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Todi, church of Santa Maria della Consolazione,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74–77</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">the scheme is Byzantine,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">dome,
-    <a href="#Page_74">74</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_75">75</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">interior,
-    <a href="#Page_75">75</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_75">75–77</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_75">75</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_76">76</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">exterior,
-    <a href="#Page_77">77</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">similarity between the sacristy of San Satiro, of Milan, and,
-    <a href="#Page_140">140</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">between cath. of Como and,
-    <a href="#Page_144">144</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Towers, spire-like, of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">scheme based on the Lombard Romanesque tower and the
-mediæval campanile,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of ch. of San Biagio at Montepulciano,
-    <a href="#Page_78">78</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of ch. of Santo Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_81">81</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Giotto’s,
-    <a href="#Page_82">82</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Triglyph, problem of the arrangement of, at the end of the frieze,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Triumphal arch used as a model of Renaissance façades,
-    <a href="#Page_38">38</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_39">39–43</a> (cuts).</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li class="hangingindent">Vanvitelli, his placing of binding chains around the
-dome of St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_62">62</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Variety, unmeaning, different from that which results
-from an active inventive spirit,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Vasari, <i>Le Opere di Giorgio Vasari</i> quoted,
-    <a href="#Page_16">16</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on Brunelleschi’s account of the dome of Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_18">18<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_22">22<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited,
-    <a href="#Page_33">33<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_110">110</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on Alberti’s work,
-    <a href="#Page_35">35</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_44">44</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on rebuilding St. Peter’s, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_47">47</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his short-sighted admiration of St. Peter’s,
-    <a href="#Page_71">71</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Michelozzi,
-    <a href="#Page_105">105</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">cited on the Palazzo Strozzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Vault, Gothic, why a dome cannot have the character of a,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_21">21</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56–59</a> (cuts).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Vaults, the nature of the construction of a
-circular-celled vault on Gothic principles,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56–59</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of the chapel of the Pazzi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_27">27</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_28">28</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_56">56</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of San Spirito, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_34">34</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">chapel of St. Peter Martyr, ch. of Sant’Eustorgio, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Venetian Renaissance. <i>See</i> <a href="#Venetian">Renaissance, Venetian</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Venice, church of The Redentore, general scheme,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">east end,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of S. Fantino,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of San Francesco della Vigna façade,
-    <a href="#Page_100">100</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of San Giorgio Maggiore,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">nave,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">piers,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders raised on pedestals,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">placed under the archivolts,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_98">98</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade,
-    <a href="#Page_99">99</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_101">101</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of Santa Maria Formosa reproduces features of
-St. Andrea of Mantua with details of the character of the Lombardi,
-    <a href="#Page_153">153</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of Santa Maria dei Miracoli,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">refinement in details,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">façade a marvel of excellence in mechanical execution,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_152">152</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">Lombard blind arcade recalled in decoration of the façade,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">carving of ear of barley and flower stalks,
-    <a href="#Page_169">169</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="i2">carved mask from a pilaster,
-    <a href="#Page_178">178</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of St. Mark, piers pierced longitudinally and transversely,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Church of San Salvatore,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">peculiar pier supports of the barrel vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">use of an attic as support for vaulting,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">its system is that of the ch. of St. Mark,
-    <a href="#Page_151">151</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Church of San Zaccaria, general description of interior,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">singular column of nondescript character,
-    <a href="#Page_150">150</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palaces of the grand canal, finest are those of the later mediæval period,
-    <a href="#Page_159">159</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Contarini,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">details of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">grouping of pilasters of three different proportions and magnitudes,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Corner-Spinelli,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">window openings, mediæval features, incompleted circle in the tympanum space,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">pilasters, panelling of,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Cornaro, description of the front,
-    <a href="#Page_124">124</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">unequal main divisions of the front overladen with heavy orders,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Ducal Palace, east side of the court,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="i2">façade described in detail,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">window openings described,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_155">155</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">north side of court, window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_155">155</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">giant’s stair, fine execution of,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">arabesque after Roman model,
-    <a href="#Page_167">167</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">grotesque creatures in the relief of the Scala d’Oro,
-    <a href="#Page_177">177</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Grimani, façade,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Pesaro,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Valmarano,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Vendramini,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">full orders in all three stories,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">grouping of mediæval window openings,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">balconies,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">disproportion of topmost entablature,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Library of St. Mark,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">arrangement of the metope in the frieze,
-    <a href="#Page_121">121</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i2">orders,
-    <a href="#Page_122">122</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i2">frieze and balustraded balconies,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">free-standing column under the archivolt in the order of the upper story,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Loggetta of the Campanile,
-    <a href="#Page_123">123</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Scuola di San Marco, description of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156–158</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">portal, described, unreason of its composition,
-    <a href="#Page_156">156</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">carvings,
-    <a href="#Page_157">157</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Scuola di San Rocco, façade described,
-    <a href="#Page_158">158</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i2">portal,
-    <a href="#Page_159">159</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">window openings with mediæval features and others
-with pseudo-Corinthian colonnettes,
-    <a href="#Page_159">159</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">The Zecca, form of column claimed by De l’Orme as his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_205">205</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Verona, church of San Zeno, porch and portal,
-    <a href="#Page_146">146</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Bevilacqua, description of façade,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_127">127</a> (cut).</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Canalla,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo del Consiglio,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a> (plate);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">presents a mediæval broletto scheme dressed out in Renaissance details,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">in respect to its finest qualities it belongs to the Middle Ages,
-    <a href="#Page_163">163</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Pompei alla Vittoria,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>.</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Porta del Palio, description of façades,
-    <a href="#Page_125">125</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Vicenza, Town hall portico by Palladio,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130–132</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">use of free-standing columns under the archivolts,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent2">columns of the great orders act somewhat as buttresses,
-    <a href="#Page_131">131</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Colleone-Porta,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Porta-Barbarano,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Valmarano,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a>.</li>
-  <li class="i1">Loggia Bernarda,
-    <a href="#Page_133">133</a> (cut).</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Vignola">Vignola, <i>I Cinque Ordini d’Architettura</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_84">84</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_85">85</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">entablature which he calls his own invention,
-    <a href="#Page_85">85</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his unclassic and incongruous combinations,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">eliminates mediæval forms,
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">tablet from,
-    <a href="#Page_95">95</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">great influence of his writings,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ch. of Sant’Andrea di Ponte Molle, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86–89</a> (cuts),
-    <a href="#Page_92">92</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of Santa Maria degli Angeli, Assisi,
-    <a href="#Page_89">89</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">ch. of the Gesù, Rome,
-    <a href="#Page_91">91–95</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Caprarola, near Viterbo,
-    <a href="#Page_128">128</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Violette-le-Duc, <i>S. V. Château</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_171">171<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_181">181<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1"><i>Entretiens sur l’Architecture</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207<sup>3</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on French architects of the Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_179">179<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on château of Chambord,
-    <a href="#Page_191">191</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on De l’Orme,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his genius more scientific than artistic,
-    <a href="#Page_200">200<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on the château of Charleval,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_212">212</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">errs in his reasoning in his discourse on Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211–213</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Villani, quoted,
-    <a href="#Page_2">2</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Villari, cited,
-    <a href="#Page_3">3<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Viterbo, Palazzo Caprarola, near Viterbo, general description of,
-    <a href="#Page_128">128–130</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">a source of inspiration to later architects of trans-alpine Renaissance,
-    <a href="#Page_130">130</a>.</li>
-
-  <li>Vitruvius,
-    <a href="#Page_85">85</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on the orders,
-    <a href="#Page_86">86</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">taken by Palladio as his master,
-    <a href="#Page_96">96</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_97">97</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">later Renaissance architects based their practice on the writings of,
-    <a href="#Page_119">119</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">cited on meaningless Roman ornamental designs,
-    <a href="#Page_170">170<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">notion that the Ionic order was designed after female proportions, derived from,
-    <a href="#Page_207">207<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<ul>
-  <li>Walpole, Horace, <i>Anecdotes of Painting</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_226">226</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on Inigo Jones,
-    <a href="#Page_226">226</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_229">229</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on faults of Jones’s façade of old St. Paul’s, London,
-    <a href="#Page_231">231</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Ware, Isaac, <i>A Complete Body of Architecture</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248<sup>1</sup></a>,
-    <a href="#Page_249">249<sup>1</sup></a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quoted on the rules of ancient architects,
-    <a href="#Page_248">248</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_249">249</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Wenz, Paul, <i>Die Kuppel des Domes Santa Maria del Fiore zu Florenz</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_20">20<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Willis, his term “continuous impost” used,
-    <a href="#Page_188">188<sup>1</sup></a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent" id="Window_openings">Window openings, framed by structural members without structural meaning,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">a peculiar form of compound, sometimes called an invention of Scamozzi,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_143">143</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the same form occurs in the basilica of Shakka,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">tapering jamb shafts,
-    <a href="#Page_137">137</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_142">142</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_149">149</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">illogical scheme of, which became characteristic of
-Lombard and Venetian Renaissance architecture,
-    <a href="#Page_148">148</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">mediæval form of those in Venetian palaces,
-    <a href="#Page_159">159</a> (cut),
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Lower Walterstone Hall, England, illustrates
-Elizabethan neo-classic ornamentation,
-    <a href="#Page_221">221</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of Azay le Rideau, France, Flamboyant Gothic
-and neo-classic forms combined,
-    <a href="#Page_186">186</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">château of Charleval, France, unmeaning variation of details,
-    <a href="#Page_210">210</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_211">211</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Bartolini, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Guardagni, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_107">107</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">the Quaratesi, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_106">106</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">the Riccardi, Florence, mediæval in their larger
-features, but with tapering jamb shafts,
-    <a href="#Page_103">103</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Rucellai, Florence,
-    <a href="#Page_109">109</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Ospedale Maggiore, Milan,
-    <a href="#Page_165">165</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of the Certosa of Pavia, tapering jamb shafts,
-    <a href="#Page_137">137</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Cancelleria,
-    <a href="#Page_112">112</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">of Palazzo Farnese, Rome, framed by structural
-members without structural meaning,
-    <a href="#Page_116">116</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Ducal Palace, Venice, east side of court,
-    <a href="#Page_154">154</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">north side, pseudo-Corinthian order of,
-    <a href="#Page_155">155</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Contarini, Venice, grouping of the pilasters,
-    <a href="#Page_161">161</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Corner-Spinelli, Venice, mediæval features,
-incomplete circle in the tympanum space,
-    <a href="#Page_160">160</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Corneri, Venice,
-    <a href="#Page_124">124</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Vendramini, Venice, grouping of, in the bays of the façade,
-    <a href="#Page_162">162</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Scuola di San Rocco, Venice, with mediæval features and
-with pseudo-Corinthian colonnettes,
-    <a href="#Page_159">159</a> (cut);</li>
-  <li class="i1">Palazzo Bevilacqua, Verona,
-    <a href="#Page_126">126</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_127">127</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">Palazzo Branzo, Vicenza, a peculiar form of compound
-window, sometimes called an invention of Scamozzi,
-    <a href="#Page_134">134</a>.</li>
-
-  <li class="hangingindent">Wren, Sir Christopher, <i>Parentalia, or Memoir of the
-Family of the Wrens</i>,
-    <a href="#Page_232">232<sup>3</sup></a> ff.;</li>
-  <li class="i1">professor of astronomy at Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_233">233</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">quotations from a letter written during his visit to Paris,
-    <a href="#Page_233">233</a>;</li>
-  <li class="i1">quoted on his Sheldonian theatre, Oxford,
-    <a href="#Page_234">234</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">ordered to submit designs for the restoration of old
-St. Paul’s cathedral, London,
-    <a href="#Page_234">234</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his drawings of plans for the new structure,
-    <a href="#Page_235">235–238</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">building of the present structure,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239–245</a> (cuts);</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his scheme to “reconcile the Gothic to a better manner,”
-    <a href="#Page_238">238</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_243">243</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">he learned his art on the scaffold in close contact with the works,
-    <a href="#Page_239">239</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his churches other than St. Paul’s exhibit a medley of
-elements from spurious Gothic to pseudo-classic in irrational combinations,
-    <a href="#Page_245">245</a>,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>;</li>
-  <li class="hangingindent1">his spires are hybrid compositions of barbaric character,
-    <a href="#Page_246">246</a>.</li>
-</ul>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2><b>Development and Character of Gothic Architecture</b></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="center sm"><b>By CHARLES HERBERT MOORE</b></p>
-
-
-<p class="center">Second Edition, Rewritten and Enlarged. With Ten Plates in Photogravure
-and more than 200 Illustrations in the Text</p>
-
-<p class="center"><i><b>8vo.&emsp;&emsp;Cloth.&emsp;&emsp;$4.50,&ensp;net</b></i></p>
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-
-<p>The new edition embodies a large amount of fresh material gathered
-at first hand from the monuments. A considerable number of early
-Gothic buildings of great importance, hitherto little known, have been
-examined; and much new light has thus been thrown upon the interesting
-subject of the early Gothic development. A new chapter on the sources
-of Gothic art has been inserted; the other chapters have been rewritten
-and much new matter incorporated. The work is thus much improved both
-as an exposition of the nature and character of Gothic art, and a
-comparative illustration of the various pointed systems of the Middle
-Ages.</p>
-
-<p>Many new illustrations in the text, and a considerable number of
-full-page plates, executed in the best manner of photographic
-reproduction, will be included.</p>
-
-<p class="p-left p1"><span class="smcap">The Nation</span> _says of the new edition_:</p>
-
-
-<p>“The treatise has evidently been remade from beginning to end, the old
-material being retained only so far as it was found to meet entirely
-the new demands.</p>
-
-<p>“As to the illustrations, they also have been minutely reconsidered,
-and the improvement in this respect is even more striking than in the
-text....</p>
-
-<p>“Those who have found the first edition of Mr. Moore’s work valuable
-will find it still more important to possess the second.”</p>
-
-
-<p>“We welcome Mr. Moore’s book with unalloyed satisfaction ... as of
-very great importance and value.... A book so comprehensive, so
-compact, so clear in statement, and so interesting in the treatment
-of its great subject is well suited not only to increase the general
-knowledge of Gothic architecture, but to become a text-book for special
-students.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">American Architect and Building News.</span></p>
-
-
-<p>“It is without question the most noteworthy work upon architecture yet
-written in America, as well as by one of the foremost contributors to
-the literature of the subject which has appeared in any country....</p>
-
-<p>“Mr. Moore’s book is an honor to American scholarship and
-investigation, and deserves the widest circulation among readers who
-possess any interest in what he succeeds in making a most interesting
-subject.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">Boston Daily Advertiser.</span></p>
-
-
-<p>“While the more appreciative readers of this volume will be found among
-students of architecture, no reader of taste or culture will find its
-pages without interest.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">The Transcript, Boston.</span></p>
-
-
-<p>“A very intelligent and sufficiently lucid discussion of fundamental
-principles ... distinguished by a clear, logical precision of
-statement, and by a boldness, and not unfrequently by an originality of
-deduction, such as cannot be found in the works of European scholars
-... lucid enough to commend themselves even to readers unfamiliar with
-the technical side of the subject. To such readers, also, the orderly
-development of the argument, the frequent, graphic illustrations, ...
-and above all, the exhaustive index, cannot fail to serve at once as an
-invitation to enter upon a charming field of study, and an inducement
-to stay until the last words are said.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">The Atlantic Monthly.</span></p>
-
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-<p class="center lg gesperrt">THE MACMILLAN COMPANY</p>
-
-<p class="center"><b>64–66 Fifth Avenue, New York</b></p>
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2><b>European Architecture</b></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="center">A HISTORICAL STUDY</p>
-
-<p class="center xs">BY</p>
-
-<p class="center sm">RUSSELL STURGIS, A.M., Ph.D., F.A.I.A.</p>
-
-<p class="center xs">_President of the Fine Arts Federation of New York; Post-President of the Architectural_
-_League of New York; Vice-President of the National_
-_Sculpture Society; etc._</p>
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-<p class="center">=8vo.&emsp;Illustrated.&emsp;$4.00=</p>
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-<p class="center p1">OUTLOOK</p>
-
-<p>“To the literature of architecture no American is better qualified to
-make a contribution of lasting value than Mr. Russell Sturgis.”</p>
-
-
-<p class="center p1">THE ARCHITECTS’ AND BUILDERS’ REVIEW</p>
-
-<p>“Mr. Sturgis tells his readers exactly what the purpose of his book is,
-and raises no expectations that are not fully realized.... It cannot
-be too widely known or too carefully studied.... Nothing Mr. Sturgis
-can say on the subject of architecture can fail to be interesting and
-instructive.... It is not too much to say that this single work forms
-the best introduction to the serious study of European architecture
-ever published.”</p>
-
-
-<p class="center p1">THE INDEPENDENT</p>
-
-<p>“In Mr. Sturgis’s ‘European Architecture’ rare good taste, simple
-truth, and great knowledge combine to satisfy eye and mind.”</p>
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-<p class="center">THE MACMILLAN COMPANY</p>
-
-<p class="center"><b>64–66 Fifth Avenue, New York</b></p>
-
-
-<hr class="chap x-ebookmaker-drop" />
-
-<div class="chapter">
-<h2><b>A DICTIONARY OF ARCHITECTURE AND BUILDING</b></h2>
-</div>
-
-<p class="center">Biographical, Historical, and Descriptive</p>
-
-<p class="center sm">By RUSSELL STURGIS, A.M., Ph.D.</p>
-
-<p class="center xs"><i>Fellow of the American Institute of Architects</i></p>
-
-<p class="center"><b>And many Architects, Painters, Engineers, and other expert Writers,
-American and Foreign</b></p>
-
-<p class="smcap center">In Three Octavo Volumes&mdash;Sold only by Subscription</p>
-
-<p class="center"><i>Cloth, $18.00 net per set&emsp;&emsp;Half morocco, $30.00 net per set</i></p>
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-<p class="center">_COMMENTS OF THE PRESS_</p>
-
-<p>“Ambitious in scope and ample in bulk, the present work bids for
-wide acceptance among the general as well as the technical public.
-It is practically the only considerable effort to supply encroaching
-demands for a compendium which shall be at once convenient as
-to form and complete in the matter of contents. The aim of its
-compilers has evidently been to strike an average between that which
-is popular and that which is for the specialist, and in this they
-have shown sagacity. Edited under the direct supervision of Mr.
-Russell Sturgis,&mdash;who has contributed a momentous proportion of the
-material,&mdash;the work has enlisted the services of some sixty current
-authorities.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">Critic.</span></p>
-
-
-<p>“Mr. Russell Sturgis is the editor of this important work, and has had
-the coöperation of such men as Dr. Cleveland Abbe, Edward Atkinson, E.
-H. Blashfield, Henry Van Brunt, ... and others, each of them eminent
-in some department of knowledge rendering his aid valuable. It is
-somewhat remarkable that there is in English no other dictionary of
-architecture, excepting a work in eight volumes said to have been begun
-about 1850 and to have been completed only ten years ago. There is
-room, therefore, for a modern, scholarly, and reasonably complete work
-of this class.</p>
-
-<p>“The present volume, the first of the three proposed, covers the
-letters A to E, inclusive. It is comprehensive, concise, although
-sufficiently full, untechnical, and easily used. The desirable line
-between too scrupulous terseness and too much elaboration of definition
-or description has been drawn ordinarily with great success. There
-is no hesitation to give space for desirable comment, as in what is
-written under ‘Builder,’ for instance, but brevity has been kept in
-view throughout the work, and its cross-references facilitate its use.
-The titles are in heavy type and at once catch the eye. Illustrations,
-numerous and appropriate, some of full-page size, abound, and all in
-all the work will meet very satisfactorily a real and important public
-need.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">Congregationalist.</span></p>
-
-
-<p>“Thanks to Mr. Russell Sturgis and a corps of competent assistants, we
-now have in ‘A Dictionary of Architecture and Building: Biographical,
-Historical, and Descriptive’ a much more valuable work than could have
-been hoped for.... Several things are at once noticeable about this
-work&mdash;the terseness and lucidity of its articles and definitions; the
-extraordinary range of its subjects, from the arch of Septimius Severus
-to modern apartment houses and tenements, and from St. Paul’s, London,
-and the Doge’s palace in Venice, to a crib for hay such as one finds
-in rural England, and a peasant’s hut in Asia Minor; the beauty of the
-illustrations, and particularly the readiness with which they elucidate
-the accompanying definitions and accounts; and the elaborate system of
-cross-references, through which a glance at an article on any phase of
-a given subject points the way at once to accounts of other related
-terms and their uses.</p>
-
-<p>“Perhaps the thoroughly modern spirit which dominates and inspires the
-whole work is the feature that distinguishes this book most strongly
-from the works in other languages which the seeker for definitions
-hitherto has perforce consulted. The writers of these articles are
-scholarly men, but they are something more than scholars. They are not
-living in the past; they are doing their work in the world to-day,
-and their point of view and their tone is a most satisfactory and
-practical mixture of culture with the recognition of the needs of
-the average American. An important feature of this work will be the
-series of articles on the typical architecture of different countries.
-Some of those in the present volume deal with the architectures of
-Australia, Denmark, and England, while, to judge from cross-references,
-the one in the final volume on the architecture of the United States
-will be ambitious, elaborate, and inclusive. The connection of this
-work with modern building is shown by the two long articles on the
-‘Apartment House’ and ‘Electrical Appliances.’ Modern edifices are as
-seriously considered as the ancient monuments described and pictured
-by Viollet-le-Duc.... Now that it has appeared, this dictionary, many
-of whose articles extend to the dimensions of those in encyclopædias,
-becomes indispensable in its field.”&mdash;<span class="smcap">Boston Herald.</span></p>
-
-<hr class="r25" />
-
-<p class="center"><b>THE MACMILLAN COMPANY, 64–66 Fifth Avenue, New York</b></p>
-
-
-<div class="footnotes"><h3>FOOTNOTES:</h3>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_1" href="#FNanchor_1" class="label">[1]</a> _Cronica di Giovanni Villani_, bk. 6, chap. 69.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_2" href="#FNanchor_2" class="label">[2]</a> Cf. Introduction to Villari’s _Niccolo Machiavelli and
-his Times_, London, 1878.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_3" href="#FNanchor_3" class="label">[3]</a> Cf. Montalembert, _Les Moines d’Occident_, vol. 2, p.
-488 _et seq._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_4" href="#FNanchor_4" class="label">[4]</a> Cf. my _Development and Character of Gothic
-Architecture_, pp. 304–306.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_5" href="#FNanchor_5" class="label">[5]</a> The Gothic of northern France of the twelfth and early
-thirteenth centuries, the only true Gothic art, is here meant.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_6" href="#FNanchor_6" class="label">[6]</a> The Viscount Delaborde, in his book _La Gravure en
-Italie avant Marc-Antoine_, Paris, 1883, p. 32, remarks on this
-with admirable discrimination as follows: “Certes, sous le pinceau
-de Botticelli, de pareils sujets [subjects drawn from Classical
-Mythology] gardent un caractère d’élégance tendre et de mélancolie
-presque analogue à la physionomie des scènes où figurent l’Enfant-Dieu
-et la Madone. Il y a loin de cette manière d’interpréter la Fable aux
-panégyriques violemment ou galamment licencieux que les hôtes les
-plus mal famés de l’Olympe obtiendront dans les siècles suivants; il
-y a loin des gracieuses inventions de Botticelli aux _lascivie_
-brutales de Jules Romain et d’Augustin Carrache ou aux gamineries
-mythologiques de Boucher et de ses pareils, et l’on a quelque peine
-aujourd’hui, en face d’aussi chastes tableaux, à comprendre la
-véhémence des reproches fulminés jadis par Savonarole.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_7" href="#FNanchor_7" class="label">[7]</a> The elevated domes of Arabian architecture are in many
-cases constructed of wood and stucco. When of masonry they are, I
-believe, either weighted within where the thrusts fall, or are bound
-with chains.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_8" href="#FNanchor_8" class="label">[8]</a> I have not examined the dome of Pisa closely on the spot,
-but I suppose it is bound with a chain, as we know was the custom at a
-later time. Cf. Fontana, vol. 2, P. 363.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_9" href="#FNanchor_9" class="label">[9]</a> There can be little doubt that the dome represented in
-this fresco embodies the original project of Arnolfo, though this
-has been questioned. Cf. Guasti, _Santa Maria del Fiore_, etc.,
-Florence, 1887, pp. lx-lxi.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_10" href="#FNanchor_10" class="label">[10]</a> This needs to be qualified. The thrusts of the dome being
-continuous logically call for continuous abutment, as in the Pantheon,
-but the intervals between the abutting members are so small that the
-resistance is practically continuous.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_11" href="#FNanchor_11" class="label">[11]</a> By its architectural character, I mean its character as a
-work of art. By the term “architecture” we properly mean not building
-merely, but the fine art of beautiful building.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_12" href="#FNanchor_12" class="label">[12]</a> This has been based on the affirmations of Vasari, who
-states that it was Brunelleschi’s purpose to “restore to light the good
-[_i.e._ the ancient Roman] manner in architecture,” and that he
-had “pondered on the difficulties” involved in vaulting the Pantheon.
-Cf. _Le Opere di Giorgio Vasari_, Milanesi edition, Florence,
-1880, vol. 2, p. 337.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_13" href="#FNanchor_13" class="label">[13]</a> A copy of this document is said to have been preserved
-for some time in the archives of the Board of Works, but it seems
-to have disappeared subsequently. It is given, however, by several
-writers, Vasari and Guasti among them. There are slight differences
-of wording and of measurements between the transcripts of these two
-authors. That of Guasti is the most intelligible, and seems to agree
-best with the monument. It reads as follows: “In prima: la cupola,
-dallo lato di dentro lunga a misura di quinto acuto, negli angoli sia
-grossa nella mossa da piè braccia 3¾, e piramidalmente si muri; sicchè
-nella fine, congiunta con l’occhio di sopra, che ha a essere fondamento
-e basa della lanterna, rimanga grossa braccia 2½. Facciasi un’altra
-cupola di fuori sopra questa, per conservarla dallo umido, e perchè
-la torni più magnifica e gonfiata; e sia grossa nella sua mossa da
-piè braccia 1¼, e piramidalmente segua, che insino all’occhio rimanga
-braccia ⅔.</p>
-
-<p>“El vano che rimarrà da l’una cupola all’altra, sia da piè braccia 2:
-nel quale vano si metta le scale per potere cercare tutto tra l’una
-cupola e l’altra; e finisca ’l detto vano a l’occhio di sopra braccia
-2⅓.</p>
-
-<p>“Sieno fatti ventiquattro sproni, che otto ne sieno negli angoli e
-sedici nelle faccie: ciascuno sprone negli angoli grosso dappiè braccia
-sette. Dalla parte di dentro, e di fuori, nel mezzo di detti angoli,
-in ciascuna faccia, sia due sproni; ciascuno grosso dappiè braccia
-quattro; e lunghe insieme le dette due volte, piramidalmente murate
-insieme insino alla sommità dell’occhio inchiuso dalla lanterna, per
-iguale proporzione.</p>
-
-<p>“I detti ventiquattro sproni con le dette cupole sieno cinti intorno
-di sei cerchi di forti macigni, e lunghi, e bene sprangati di ferro
-stagnato; e di sopra a detti macigni, catene di ferro che cingano
-d’intorno la detta volta, co’ loro sproni. Hassi a murare di sodo, nel
-principio braccia 5¼ per altezza; e poi seguano gli sproni, e dividansi
-le volte.</p>
-
-<p>“El primo e secondo cerchio, alto braccia 2; e ’l terzo e quarto, alto
-braccia 1⅓; e ’l quinto e sesto cerchio, alto braccia 1: ma ’l primo
-circhio dappiè sia, oltre a ciò, afforzato con macigni lunghi per lo
-traverso, si che l’una volta e l’altra della cupola si posi in su detti
-macigni.</p>
-
-<p>“E nell’altezza d’ogni braccia 12, o circa, delle dette volte, sieno
-volticciuole a botte tra l’uno sprone e l’altro, per andito alla detta
-cupola; e sotto le dette volticciuole, tra l’uno sprone e l’altro,
-sieno catene di quercia grosse, che leghino i detti sproni e cingano la
-volta dentro; e in su detti quercie una catena di ferro.</p>
-
-<p>“Gli sproni murati tutti di pietra di macigno e pietra forte, e le
-facce della cupola tutte di pietra forte, legate con sprone insino
-all’altezza di braccia 24: e da indi in su si muri di mattoni o di
-spugna, secondo che si delibererà per chi allora l’avrà a fare, più
-leggieri che pietra.</p>
-
-<p>“ ... Murinsi la cupola nel modo di sopra, senz’ alcuna armadura,
-massime insino a braccia 30; ma da indi in su, in quel modo che
-sarà consigliato e deliberato per quei maestri che l’avranno a
-murare: perchè nel murare la pratica insegna quello che si ha da
-seguire.”&mdash;Guasti, _La Cupola di Santa Maria del Fiore_, Florence,
-1857, pp. 28–30.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_14" href="#FNanchor_14" class="label">[14]</a> Durm, _Die Dom Kuppel in Florenz_, etc., Berlin,
-1887, Plate <a href="#i_016fp">I</a>, gives an admirable illustration of the internal system
-of this remarkable dome, and shows the masonry of the solid base with
-its clamps and chains, as described in the document quoted by Guasti
-(note, p. 18).</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_15" href="#FNanchor_15" class="label">[15]</a> This idea finds expression in the latest work that I have
-seen on the subject: _Die Kuppel des Domes Santa Maria del Fiore zu
-Florence_. Von Paul Wenz, Berlin, 1901, p. 52; also in Durm, _Die
-Baukunst der Renaissance in Italien_, p. 406.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_16" href="#FNanchor_16" class="label">[16]</a> For a full account of the deliberations held, as well as
-for much else of importance relating to the building of this dome, see
-Professor C. E. Norton’s _Church Building in the Middle Ages_, New
-York, Harper &amp; Brothers, 1880.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_17" href="#FNanchor_17" class="label">[17]</a> But while Brunelleschi appears to have had great natural
-constructive aptitude, he had not had a sound training or experience
-in construction. Such training would have taught him that it would not
-do, under any circumstances, to spring a vault from the top of a wall,
-and he ought to have learned this from his study of the ancient Roman
-monuments.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_18" href="#FNanchor_18" class="label">[18]</a> Nelli, _Discorsi di Architettura_, Florence, 1753,
-p. 74, reproduces an old drawing which purports to show the form of
-the scaffolding that Brunelleschi employed. This drawing bears the
-following inscription: “Questa Dimostrazione è di Filippo Brunelleschi
-Architetto fatta per e Ponti della Cupola di S. M’ra. del Fiore di
-Firenze nell’Anno M.CCCCXIX e fu quella che mostrò quando fu lasciato
-in libertà di dover esser solo nell’operazione di d.<sup>a</sup> cupola senza il
-Ghiberti suo compagno non avendola voluta dar fuori prima di non essere
-libero Architetto di d<sup>a</sup> Opera; come sentiranno nella sua Vita scritta
-da Diversi.” Brunelleschi, in his account of his intentions before the
-Board of Works (note, p. 19), would not explain his scheme for the
-scaffolding. He said merely that the vault was to be raised, without
-centring, to the height of 30 braccia, and from that level upwards, in
-the manner that should be advised by those who might then have the work
-in charge.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_19" href="#FNanchor_19" class="label">[19]</a> In his explanation of his scheme before the Board of
-Works, as given by Vasari, Brunelleschi begins as follows: “Considerato
-le difficultà di questa fabbrica, magnifici Signori Operaj, trovo che
-non si può per nessun modo volgerla tonda perfetta, atteso che sarebbe
-tanto grande il piano di sopra, dove va la lanterna, che mettendovi
-peso rovinerebbe presto.” _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 347.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_20" href="#FNanchor_20" class="label">[20]</a> It may be thought that this would condemn the use of
-metal clamps in masonry, such as were inserted in the walls of the
-Parthenon, or the wooden ties that were, in some cases, used in parts
-of Gothic buildings. But there is a wide difference between such use
-of clamps and ties, and the binding chains of the great domes of
-the Renaissance. In the Greek and Gothic work the masonry forms are
-favourable to stability independently of the clamps and ties. These
-were inserted either for security against unusual dangers, as from
-earthquakes, or for temporary security against rupture while the work
-was in progress, before the interaction of the parts of the system was
-fully established; but a dome without abutment violates the constant
-conditions of stability.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_21" href="#FNanchor_21" class="label">[21]</a> _Discrizione e Studj dell’Insigne Fabbrica di S. Maria
-del Fiore_, Florence, 1733, p. xxi.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_22" href="#FNanchor_22" class="label">[22]</a> _Memorie degli Architette_, etc., Florence, 1785,
-vol. 1, p. 190.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_23" href="#FNanchor_23" class="label">[23]</a> Fontana, Nelli, Cecchini, and others.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_24" href="#FNanchor_24" class="label">[24]</a> These ruptures were first observed in the year 1693
-(Nelli, _op. cit._, p. 13), and it was then advised by the
-architect Carlo Fontana to add a new chain of iron. Nelli, however,
-argued that the fissures had not arisen from thrust, but were due to
-a slight yielding of the foundations, and he urged that no chain be
-added, but that a bit of marble be dove-tailed into the vault across
-the opening, in order that any further movement might be detected
-by the breaking of this marble. For three years no further sign of
-disturbance was noticed, but a slight earthquake in 1697 broke a
-portion of the masonry of the outer face of the dome opposite the
-fissure across which the marble had been placed. It appears, however,
-to have been concluded that there was still no danger from thrust, and
-no new chain was inserted. Cecchini (_Opinione intorno lo Stato della
-gran Cupola del Duomo di Firenze_, published together with Nelli’s
-_Discorsi_, etc., p. 82) speaks of several cracks in both the
-inner and the outer shells of the vault, and also in the supporting
-piers, even down to the ground. But he agrees with Nelli in attributing
-these to movements of the foundations from which he concludes that no
-further danger is to be apprehended, and he affirms that the structure
-is entirely safe.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_25" href="#FNanchor_25" class="label">[25]</a> Cf. Nelli, _op. cit._, p. 73.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_26" href="#FNanchor_26" class="label">[26]</a> The thrusts of a hemispherical dome are, in some degree,
-restrained by the binding of its continuous courses of masonry under
-compression, but this is not enough for security, as experience has
-shown; and in a polygonal dome, like Brunelleschi’s, there is no such
-binding force, because there are no continuous circles of masonry.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_27" href="#FNanchor_27" class="label">[27]</a> The term “Byzantine” is often applied loosely to
-buildings in which only the ornamental details have a Byzantine
-character. But the primary and distinguishing structural feature of
-Byzantine architecture is the dome on pendentives. The Byzantine
-features of the Pazzi are involved with others derived from different
-systems, but they are very distinct. The central vault, though of
-Gothic form, is supported on pendentives, and the true dome on
-pendentives occurs, as we have seen, in the sanctuary and the porch.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_28" href="#FNanchor_28" class="label">[28]</a> The entablature does, however, occur under vaulting in
-some provincial Roman buildings, as in the Pantheon of Baalbek, where
-it forms the wall cornice from which the vaulting springs. But this,
-though not defensible, is less objectionable than the Renaissance
-scheme of an entablature passing through the imposts of archivolts.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_29" href="#FNanchor_29" class="label">[29]</a> As in the arch of the apse of St. Paul outside the wall
-at Rome, and in the Baptistery of Florence.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_30" href="#FNanchor_30" class="label">[30]</a> The character of these details will be discussed in the
-chapter on the carved ornament of the Renaissance.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_31" href="#FNanchor_31" class="label">[31]</a> Cf. Vasari, _Opere_, vol. 2, p. 368 _et seq._,
-and Milanesi’s foot-note, p. 370.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_32" href="#FNanchor_32" class="label">[32]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 200.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_33" href="#FNanchor_33" class="label">[33]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 541.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_34" href="#FNanchor_34" class="label">[34]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 201.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_35" href="#FNanchor_35" class="label">[35]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 201.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_36" href="#FNanchor_36" class="label">[36]</a> Vasari, _op. cit._, vol. 4, p. 152, and Milizia,
-vol. 1, p. 214.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_37" href="#FNanchor_37" class="label">[37]</a> Figures 21 and 22 are taken from Serlio,
-_D’Architettura_, book 3, Venice, 1560, pp. 25 and 40.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_38" href="#FNanchor_38" class="label">[38]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 7, p. 163.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_39" href="#FNanchor_39" class="label">[39]</a> Serlio, the architect (a younger contemporary of
-Bramante), _op. cit._, p. 33, tells us that Bramante, at his
-death, left no perfect model of the whole edifice, and that several
-ingenious persons endeavoured to carry out the design, among whom
-were Raphael and Peruzzi, whose plans he reproduces. That ascribed to
-Raphael has a long nave, while that said to be by Peruzzi has the form
-of the Greek cross with round apses and a square tower in each external
-angle. The whole question of Bramante’s scheme, and of the successive
-transformations to which the design for the edifice was subjected
-before its final completion, is fully discussed in the work of Baron
-H. von Geymüller, _Die ursprünglichen Entwürfe für Sanct Peter in
-Rom_, Wien and Paris, 1875–1880.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_40" href="#FNanchor_40" class="label">[40]</a> _Op. cit._, bk. 3, p. 37.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_41" href="#FNanchor_41" class="label">[41]</a> Serlio does not state on what authority this illustration
-is based, but there appears no reason to question its correctness. Its
-authenticity is discussed by Baron von Geymüller (_op. cit._, p.
-240 _et seq._), who accepts it as genuine.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_42" href="#FNanchor_42" class="label">[42]</a> The alterations that have been made at different times
-since the original completion of this interior are of no concern here.
-The arrangement was practically the same in Bramante’s time as it is
-now.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_43" href="#FNanchor_43" class="label">[43]</a> Some writers have supposed (cf. Middleton, _Ancient
-Rome_, Edinburgh, 1885, pp. 338–339) that the dome of the Pantheon
-is entirely of concrete, and without thrusts. We have no means of
-knowing its exact internal character, but there is reason to believe
-that it has some sort of an embedded skeleton of ribs and arches, with
-concrete filling the intervals. But if it were wholly of concrete, as
-Middleton affirms, it would not be safe without abutment; for, even
-supposing that a concrete vault may be entirely free from thrust in
-a state of integrity, there is always a chance of ruptures arising
-from unequal settlement, which might at once create powerful thrusts.
-However this may be, the fact is that the builders of the Pantheon took
-care to fortify it with enormous abutment, which would seem to show
-that they did not consider it free from thrust.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_44" href="#FNanchor_44" class="label">[44]</a> Michael Angelo’s model, on a large scale and finished in
-every detail, is preserved in an apartment of St. Peter’s.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_45" href="#FNanchor_45" class="label">[45]</a> Michael Angelo’s remark, quoted by Fontana (_Tempio
-Vaticano_, vol. 2, p. 315): “Imitando l’antico del Pantheon, e
-la moderna di Santa Maria del Fiore, corresse i difetti dell’uno, e
-dell’altro,” shows that he regarded as a defect the lowness of the
-Pantheon dome, which in point of construction is its capital merit,
-and that what he proposed to correct in the dome of Florence was its
-octagonal form, which is essential to its peculiar structural system.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_46" href="#FNanchor_46" class="label">[46]</a> A consistent exterior for such a vault would not, of
-course, be an unbroken drum, though a perfectly Gothic circular vault
-might be thus enclosed within a drum. A consistent external form
-would require salient buttresses against the lines of thrust, and the
-intervals between these buttresses would be open, as in a Gothic apse.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_47" href="#FNanchor_47" class="label">[47]</a> The outside of this vault is figured in my _Development
-and Character of Gothic Architecture_, 2d edition. New York and
-London. The Macmillan Co., 1900, p. 287.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_48" href="#FNanchor_48" class="label">[48]</a> Cf. my _Development and Character of Gothic
-Architecture_, p. 70 _et seq._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_49" href="#FNanchor_49" class="label">[49]</a> The turrets, built upon the supporting piers of the
-interior, give the outside of the drum the aspect of a massive lantern.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_50" href="#FNanchor_50" class="label">[50]</a> Cf. Poleni, _Memorie Istoriche delle Gran Cupola del
-Tempio Vaticano, e de’ Danni di essa, e de’ Ristoramenti loro_
-(Padua, 1768), p. 29.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_51" href="#FNanchor_51" class="label">[51]</a> Milizia, _op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 325.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_52" href="#FNanchor_52" class="label">[52]</a> _Parere di tre Mathematici sopra i danni che si sono
-trovato nella cupola di S. Pietro sul fine dell’Anno MDCCXLII. Dato per
-Ordine di nostro Signore Papa Benedetto XIV_, Rome, 1742.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_53" href="#FNanchor_53" class="label">[53]</a> See Appendix.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_54" href="#FNanchor_54" class="label">[54]</a> “Cominciato forsi poco dopo terminata la fabrica.” _Op.
-cit._, p. 13.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_55" href="#FNanchor_55" class="label">[55]</a> _Ibid._, p. 14.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_56" href="#FNanchor_56" class="label">[56]</a> _Ibid._, p. 15.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_57" href="#FNanchor_57" class="label">[57]</a> _Ibid._, p. 19.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_58" href="#FNanchor_58" class="label">[58]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, pp. 327–328.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_59" href="#FNanchor_59" class="label">[59]</a> It is true that fissures in a properly constructed
-vault are not necessarily alarming. Any vault may crack from unequal
-settlement of the supports. Gothic vaults are sometimes slightly
-ruptured in this way, but they are not thus endangered, because they
-are effectively buttressed. But fissures in a dome without abutments
-may be a sign of impending collapse.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_60" href="#FNanchor_60" class="label">[60]</a> _Ibid._, pp. 328–329.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_61" href="#FNanchor_61" class="label">[61]</a> _Ibid._, p. 388.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_62" href="#FNanchor_62" class="label">[62]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 399.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_63" href="#FNanchor_63" class="label">[63]</a> The principal work of Bramante’s immediate successors on
-the fabric itself appears to have been to strengthen the great piers,
-which seem to have been built too hastily, and on insecure foundations.
-Poleni tells that in order to strengthen these foundations, well-holes
-were dug under them and filled with solid masonry, and that arches were
-sprung between these sunken piers, consolidating the whole. _Op.
-cit._, p. 19.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_64" href="#FNanchor_64" class="label">[64]</a> _Ibid._, p. 19.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_65" href="#FNanchor_65" class="label">[65]</a> I call the end of the sanctuary “the east end” according
-to the nomenclature of the usual orientation. St. Peter’s, as is well
-known, does not conform to the general rule which has prevailed since
-the fifth century.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_66" href="#FNanchor_66" class="label">[66]</a> These vaults may have been begun by some of his
-predecessors. It is impossible to make out how far the building had
-been actually advanced by them.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_67" href="#FNanchor_67" class="label">[67]</a> The colossal order of the Temple of the Sun at Baalbek is
-so unique in scale, and so little known, that it does not influence our
-general notions of the size of a large classic order.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_68" href="#FNanchor_68" class="label">[68]</a> As it actually does in the western part of the nave built
-by Maderna.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_69" href="#FNanchor_69" class="label">[69]</a> _Le Vite_, etc., vol. 7, p. 249.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_70" href="#FNanchor_70" class="label">[70]</a> _Il Tempio Vaticano e sua Origine_, etc. Discritto
-dal Cav. Carlo Fontana, Rome, 1694, vol. 2, p. 406.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_71" href="#FNanchor_71" class="label">[71]</a> Letarouilly, _Edifices de Rome Moderne_, Paris,
-1860, p. 350.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_72" href="#FNanchor_72" class="label">[72]</a> Milizia, _op. cit._, vol. 1, p. 144, affirms that it
-is by Bramante.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_73" href="#FNanchor_73" class="label">[73]</a> Cf. Fontana, _op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 363.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_74" href="#FNanchor_74" class="label">[74]</a> Bk. 3, p. 54.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_75" href="#FNanchor_75" class="label">[75]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 240.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_76" href="#FNanchor_76" class="label">[76]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 239.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_77" href="#FNanchor_77" class="label">[77]</a> _Memorie_, etc., vol. 2, p. 36.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_78" href="#FNanchor_78" class="label">[78]</a> _I Cinque Ordini d’Architettura._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_79" href="#FNanchor_79" class="label">[79]</a> _Op. cit._, plate 32.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_80" href="#FNanchor_80" class="label">[80]</a> Bk. 1, chap. 1.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_81" href="#FNanchor_81" class="label">[81]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 30.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_82" href="#FNanchor_82" class="label">[82]</a> The drawings are found in the addendum to the edition of
-1617, plates 7 and 8.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_83" href="#FNanchor_83" class="label">[83]</a> Recent investigations, the results of which are set forth
-by Signor Beltrami (_Il Pantheon_, Luca Beltrami, Milan, 1898),
-have shown that the existing portico is of later date than either the
-rotunda or the rectangular front against which it is set.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_84" href="#FNanchor_84" class="label">[84]</a> “A l’intérieur, pourtourné de pilastres également
-Corinthiens, deux parties de l’entablement qui n’ont pas leur raison
-d’être sous une voute, c’est-à-dire la frise et la corniche, par
-un raffinement peu habituel aux Italiens, ont été supprimées.”
-_L’Architecture de la Renaissance_, par Leon Palustre, Paris,
-Quantin, p. 72.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_85" href="#FNanchor_85" class="label">[85]</a> _Quatro libri dell’Architettura di Andrea Palladio_,
-Venice, 1581.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_86" href="#FNanchor_86" class="label">[86]</a> _Le Vite_, etc., vol. 2, pp. 432–433.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_87" href="#FNanchor_87" class="label">[87]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 4, p. 444.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_88" href="#FNanchor_88" class="label">[88]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 537.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_89" href="#FNanchor_89" class="label">[89]</a> I believe I am correct in this. Photographs seem to
-show it clearly, but I have not verified this point in the monuments
-themselves.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_90" href="#FNanchor_90" class="label">[90]</a> _Op. cit_., vol. 1, p. 240.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_91" href="#FNanchor_91" class="label">[91]</a> _Le Vite_, etc., vol. 2, p. 433.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_92" href="#FNanchor_92" class="label">[92]</a> Cf. p. 144.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_93" href="#FNanchor_93" class="label">[93]</a> These ornamental features usually have, however, in
-Gothic art some real structural function.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_94" href="#FNanchor_94" class="label">[94]</a> _Op. cit._, bk. 3, p. 53.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_95" href="#FNanchor_95" class="label">[95]</a> _Milizia_, vol. 1, p. 346.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_96" href="#FNanchor_96" class="label">[96]</a> _Milizia_, vol. 1, pp. 346–347.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_97" href="#FNanchor_97" class="label">[97]</a> _Ibid_., p. 351.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_98" href="#FNanchor_98" class="label">[98]</a> “Sansovino lo sciolse con allungar il fregio quanto
-bastasse per supplire al difetto di quella porzione di metopa: ed il
-problema, e ’l ripiego sono un’inezia.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_99" href="#FNanchor_99" class="label">[99]</a> _Memorie_, etc., vol. 2, p. 34.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_100" href="#FNanchor_100" class="label">[100]</a> _I Quattro Libri dell’ Architettura_, bk. 3, p. 41.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_101" href="#FNanchor_101" class="label">[101]</a> “Non dubito che questa fabrica non possa esser comparata
-à gli edifici antichi e annoverata tra le maggiori, e le più belle
-fabriche che siano state fatte da gli antichi in quà, si per la
-grandezza, e per gli ornamenti suoi, come anco per la materia, che è
-tutta di pietra viva durisima, e sono state tutte le pietre commesse e
-legate insieme con somma diligenza.” _Op. cit._, bk. 3, p. 41.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_102" href="#FNanchor_102" class="label">[102]</a> They were grammatical, not in the sense of using the
-classic orders with correctness,&mdash;this, as we have seen, they did not
-do,&mdash;but in the sense of arranging their architectural details, such as
-they were, on a basis of grammatical order.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_103" href="#FNanchor_103" class="label">[103]</a> Sir William Chambers, in his _Treatise on the
-Decorative Part of Civil Architecture_, London, 1791, p. 121,
-referring to this form of opening, says, “It is an invention of
-Scamozzi’s.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_104" href="#FNanchor_104" class="label">[104]</a> Cf. Casati, _I Capi d’Arte di Bramante da Urbino nel
-Milanese_, Milan, 1870, p. 24 _et seq._ That the design of San
-Satiro was made by Bramante, Casati gives the evidence of a document
-printed in the year 1500 by the deputies of the church in which it
-is said, “ ... _Come vi si diede principio dopo l’anno 1470 con
-disegno del celebre Bramante_.” And he finds further confirmation of
-Bramante’s authorship in a commentary on Vitruvius by Cesare Cesariano,
-printed in Como in 1521, where this author states that the church
-and sacristy of San Satiro were designed by his preceptor, Donato of
-Urbino, called Bramante.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_105" href="#FNanchor_105" class="label">[105]</a> Salient ribs of stucco are carried up in the angles of
-the dome of the sacristy as they are in the vaulting of the apses of
-Todi.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_106" href="#FNanchor_106" class="label">[106]</a> Cf. Casati, _op. cit._, p. 44.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_107" href="#FNanchor_107" class="label">[107]</a> Cf., p. 134, the window sometimes called that of
-Scamozzi.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_108" href="#FNanchor_108" class="label">[108]</a> _Op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 434.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_109" href="#FNanchor_109" class="label">[109]</a> Melani, _Architettura Italiana_, vol. 2, p. 154.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_110" href="#FNanchor_110" class="label">[110]</a> Cf. _Architettura Italiana_, by Alfredo Melani,
-Milan, 1887, vol. 2, p. 157.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_111" href="#FNanchor_111" class="label">[111]</a> Coin of Metapontum.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_112" href="#FNanchor_112" class="label">[112]</a> Vitruvius, bk. 7, chap. 5, refers with disapproval to
-the tasteless and meaningless monstrosities embodied in the ornamental
-art of his time, and the remains of Roman reliefs offer many examples
-of such design.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_113" href="#FNanchor_113" class="label">[113]</a> The theory respecting the use of artificial elements
-in architectural ornamentation developed by Ruskin in his well-known
-chapter entitled, “The Lamp of Beauty,” in the _Seven Lamps of
-Architecture_, is, I believe, entirely right in principle, though
-the author is arbitrary in some of his conclusions and overemphatic in
-some of his statements.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_114" href="#FNanchor_114" class="label">[114]</a> The most authoritative French writers are misleading in
-affirming that no radical departure from their best building traditions
-was made by the French architects of the Renaissance. Thus Viollet
-le Duc (Dict., vol. 3, _s. v._ _Château_, p. 174) says of
-these architects, “Toujours fidèles a leurs anciens principes, ils
-ne sacrifièrent pas la raison et le bon sens.” But while affirming
-this, these same writers sometimes make admissions which so materially
-qualify the affirmation as to deprive it of its truth; thus the same
-author, remarking on the changes that were making in the character of
-the château, adds (p. 185), “Nous accordons que la tentative était
-absurde; mais la renaissance française est, à son début, dans les
-lettres, les sciences ou les arts, pleine de ces hésitations.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_115" href="#FNanchor_115" class="label">[115]</a> Martin, _Hist. de France_, vol. 7, pp. 378–382.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_116" href="#FNanchor_116" class="label">[116]</a> Cf. Viollet le Duc, _s. v._ _Château_, p. 190.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_117" href="#FNanchor_117" class="label">[117]</a> I use Willis’s term, “continuous impost,” for an impost
-in which the jambs pass into the arch without the interposition of a
-capital, and without change of profiling.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_118" href="#FNanchor_118" class="label">[118]</a> Du Cerceau’s plate (_Les Plus Excellents Bastiments
-de France_, vol. 2, plate 4) is incorrect, like most of his other
-plates, in giving the semicircular form to the openings of this façade.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_119" href="#FNanchor_119" class="label">[119]</a> _Reigle Géneralle de Architecture_, etc., Paris,
-1568.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_120" href="#FNanchor_120" class="label">[120]</a> Said by Palustre, _L’Architecture de la
-Renaissance_, p. 176, to have been “servilement imité du temple de
-Jupiter Stator.”</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_121" href="#FNanchor_121" class="label">[121]</a> These lower arches are concealed from view on the
-external façades by a basement wall.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_122" href="#FNanchor_122" class="label">[122]</a> Adolphe Berty, _Les Grands Architectes Français de la
-Renaissance_, Paris, 1860, p. 70.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_123" href="#FNanchor_123" class="label">[123]</a> Milizia, _Memorie_, vol. 1, p. 404.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_124" href="#FNanchor_124" class="label">[124]</a> Berty, _op. cit._, p. 71.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_125" href="#FNanchor_125" class="label">[125]</a> _Les Plus Excellents Bastiments de France_, plate
-69.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_126" href="#FNanchor_126" class="label">[126]</a> The lines of this poem which relate to Lescot are quoted
-by M. Berty in _op. cit._, pp. 66–68.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_127" href="#FNanchor_127" class="label">[127]</a> _Regole Generale di Architettura di Sebastiano
-Serlio._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_128" href="#FNanchor_128" class="label">[128]</a> _Op. cit._, plate 2.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_129" href="#FNanchor_129" class="label">[129]</a> Viollet le Duc, in his _Entretiens sur
-l’Architecture_, p. 362, says, “Philibert De l’Orme était peut-être
-l’artiste dont le goût était le plus sûr, le sentiment le plus vrai,
-les principes les plus sévères.” This estimate appears to me singularly
-short-sighted, but it is in keeping with the artistic limitations of
-its gifted author, whose great abilities did not, I think, include the
-finest powers of artistic judgment. Viollet le Duc’s own architectural
-projects, as illustrated in the _Entretiens_, are enough to
-show this. A truer estimate is given by M. Berty, in his _Life of
-De l’Orme_, as follows: “Ayant absolument rompu avec la tradition
-Gothique, toujours plein du souvenir des monuments romains qu’il avait
-étudiés en Italie, et qui constituaient pour lui la vraie architecture,
-De l’Orme, visant sans cesse à la majesté, n’atteignit souvent que la
-lourdeur. D’un autre côté, trop préoccupé de la recherche d’une beauté
-rationnelle qu’il demandait plutôt au calcul qu’au sentiment, procédé
-pernicieux qui égare à coup sûr, il ne peut éviter les bizarreries et
-même les gaucheries dans ses conceptions.... C’est sur le terrain de
-la science qu’il a vraiment dominé tous ses rivaux, en acquérant des
-droits incontestables à la reconnaissance de la postérité.” (_Les
-Grands Architectes Français_, etc., p. 36.) It was the scientific
-ability of De l’Orme that Viollet le Duc could best appreciate, his own
-genius being more scientific than artistic.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_130" href="#FNanchor_130" class="label">[130]</a> _Le Premier Tome de l’Architecture_, etc., Paris,
-1567.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_131" href="#FNanchor_131" class="label">[131]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 156.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_132" href="#FNanchor_132" class="label">[132]</a> The Tuileries was designed by De l’Orme for Catherine de
-Médicis.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_133" href="#FNanchor_133" class="label">[133]</a> _Op. cit._, facing p. 240.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_134" href="#FNanchor_134" class="label">[134]</a> Assuming that De l’Orme was born in the year 1515. Cf.
-Berty, _op. cit._, p. 1.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_135" href="#FNanchor_135" class="label">[135]</a> _Op. cit._, bk. 4, p. 26.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_136" href="#FNanchor_136" class="label">[136]</a> Cf. my _Development and Character of Gothic
-Architecture_, p. 304 _et seq._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_137" href="#FNanchor_137" class="label">[137]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 155. The fanciful notion that the
-Ionic order was designed after female proportions is derived from
-Vitruvius, bk. 3.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_138" href="#FNanchor_138" class="label">[138]</a> The roof is not shown in Du Cerceau’s print.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_139" href="#FNanchor_139" class="label">[139]</a> Viollet le Duc, I may say again, appears to me greatly
-to overestimate De l’Orme’s artistic powers when he says, “Dans les
-œuvres de Philibert De l’Orme on constate une étude attentive et
-soigneuse des proportions, des rapports harmonieux qui semblent les
-plus simples, mais qui cependent sont le résultat d’une connaissance
-parfaite de son art et des moyens mis à sa disposition,” and when he
-speaks of the Tuileries as follows: “C’était bien là une architecture
-de palais grande et noble par ses masses, précieuse par ses détails.”
-_Entretiens sur l’Architecture_, vol. 1, p. 363.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_140" href="#FNanchor_140" class="label">[140]</a> _Op. cit._, bk. 8, chap. 9. The pages here are not
-numbered.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_141" href="#FNanchor_141" class="label">[141]</a> It need hardly he said that such variety is very
-different from that which results from an active inventive spirit, as
-where in Gothic art some new constructive idea gives rise to change, or
-where in sculptured ornamentation a teeming fancy finds expression in
-varied forms.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_142" href="#FNanchor_142" class="label">[142]</a> _Entretiens_, vol. 1, p. 374.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_143" href="#FNanchor_143" class="label">[143]</a> But why should an architect wish to do any such thing?
-The fact that he did so shows again the factitious and unreasonable
-character of this Renaissance design.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_144" href="#FNanchor_144" class="label">[144]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 375.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_145" href="#FNanchor_145" class="label">[145]</a> _Essay on Building._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_146" href="#FNanchor_146" class="label">[146]</a> These houses are figured by Mr. Gotch in his
-_Architecture of the Renaissance in England_, plates 7, 12, 20,
-and 66.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_147" href="#FNanchor_147" class="label">[147]</a> _The Lives of the Most Eminent British Painters,
-Sculptors, and Architects_, London, 1831, vol. 4, p. 85.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_148" href="#FNanchor_148" class="label">[148]</a> _A History of Renaissance Architecture in England_,
-by Reginald Bloomfield, M.A., London, 1897, vol. 1, p. 3.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_149" href="#FNanchor_149" class="label">[149]</a> Almost nothing is known of John Thorpe beyond what may
-be gathered from his numerous drawings preserved in the Soane Museum.
-He was working during the latter part of the sixteenth century, and
-appears to have been the original designer of some of the larger houses
-of that time, the plans of which are contained in the Soane collection.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_150" href="#FNanchor_150" class="label">[150]</a> These windows are said by Gotch, _op. cit._, vol.
-1, p. 34, to have been inserted by Inigo Jones. An attic over the
-central bay is said to be also by him.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_151" href="#FNanchor_151" class="label">[151]</a> Gotch, plate 33.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_152" href="#FNanchor_152" class="label">[152]</a> Du Cerceau’s book was published in 1576, and Longford’s
-was begun in 1580. It is not unlikely, therefore, that Thorpe had
-studied the designs of Chambord and the Tuileries in the prints of this
-book.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_153" href="#FNanchor_153" class="label">[153]</a> Gotch, plate 92.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_154" href="#FNanchor_154" class="label">[154]</a> Gotch, plate 82.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_155" href="#FNanchor_155" class="label">[155]</a> _Ibid._, plate 86.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_156" href="#FNanchor_156" class="label">[156]</a> _Ibid._, plate 143.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_157" href="#FNanchor_157" class="label">[157]</a> Vol. 2, p. 260.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_158" href="#FNanchor_158" class="label">[158]</a> Cunningham’s _Lives of the Most Eminent British
-Painters, Sculptors, and Architects_, vol. 4, p. 71.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_159" href="#FNanchor_159" class="label">[159]</a> Cunningham, _op. cit._, p. 76.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_160" href="#FNanchor_160" class="label">[160]</a> A work undertaken at the request of the king, in which
-Jones reaches the astonishing conclusion that in Stonehenge we have the
-remains of a Roman temple of the Tuscan order. Cf. Cunningham, p. 106
-_et seq._</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_161" href="#FNanchor_161" class="label">[161]</a> Cunningham, _op. cit._, p. 115.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_162" href="#FNanchor_162" class="label">[162]</a> Cunningham, _op. cit._, vol. 2, p. 266.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_163" href="#FNanchor_163" class="label">[163]</a> _The Designs of Inigo Jones, consisting of Plans and
-Elevation for Publick and Private Buildings_, by William Kent,
-London, 1727.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_164" href="#FNanchor_164" class="label">[164]</a> Plates 1 to 52 inclusive.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_165" href="#FNanchor_165" class="label">[165]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 265.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_166" href="#FNanchor_166" class="label">[166]</a> _A History of Renaissance Architecture in England_,
-by Reginald Bloomfield, London, 1897, vol. 1, p. 122.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_167" href="#FNanchor_167" class="label">[167]</a> _Parentalia, or Memoir of the Family of the Wrens_,
-by Christopher Wren, London, 1750, pp. 269–270.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_168" href="#FNanchor_168" class="label">[168]</a> _Parentalia_, p. 142.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_169" href="#FNanchor_169" class="label">[169]</a> _Parentalia_, pp. 261–262.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_170" href="#FNanchor_170" class="label">[170]</a> Wren had been appointed surveyor-general and principal
-architect of the city of London after the great fire.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_171" href="#FNanchor_171" class="label">[171]</a> _Parentalia_, p. 335.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_172" href="#FNanchor_172" class="label">[172]</a> _Ibid._, p. 273.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_173" href="#FNanchor_173" class="label">[173]</a> _Ibid._, p. 277.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_174" href="#FNanchor_174" class="label">[174]</a> _Parentalia_, p. 278.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_175" href="#FNanchor_175" class="label">[175]</a> _Ibid._, p. 281.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_176" href="#FNanchor_176" class="label">[176]</a> _Parentalia_, p. 283.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_177" href="#FNanchor_177" class="label">[177]</a> W. J. Loftie, _Inigo Jones and Sir Christopher
-Wren_, London, Macmillan &amp; Co., 1893, p. 196.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_178" href="#FNanchor_178" class="label">[178]</a> _A Complete Body of Architecture_, by Isaac Ware,
-Esq., London, 1768.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_179" href="#FNanchor_179" class="label">[179]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 131.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_180" href="#FNanchor_180" class="label">[180]</a> _Lettera di Filippo Baldinucci intorno al modo di
-dar Proporzione alle Figure in Pittura e Scultura_, Leghorn, first
-published in 1802.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_181" href="#FNanchor_181" class="label">[181]</a> _Op. cit._, p. 10.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_182" href="#FNanchor_182" class="label">[182]</a> _Architettura Italiana_, Milan, 1887, vol. 2, p.
-140.</p>
-
-</div>
-
-<div class="footnote">
-
-<p><a id="Footnote_183" href="#FNanchor_183" class="label">[183]</a> The letters in this description refer to those of the
-illustration (Fig. <a href="#i_061">30</a>) in the text.</p>
-
-</div>
-</div>
-
-
-<p class="transnote">Transcriber’s Notes:<br />
-
-1. Obvious printers’, punctuation and spelling errors have been
-corrected silently.<br />
-
-2. Hyphenation has been rationalised. Inconsistent spelling (including
-accents) has been retained.<br />
-
-3. Some hyphenated and non-hyphenated versions of the same words have
-been retained as in the original.</p>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin-top:4em'>*** END OF THE PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK CHARACTER OF RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE ***</div>
-<div style='text-align:left'>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Updated editions will replace the previous one&#8212;the old editions will
-be renamed.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Creating the works from print editions not protected by U.S. copyright
-law means that no one owns a United States copyright in these works,
-so the Foundation (and you!) can copy and distribute it in the United
-States without permission and without paying copyright
-royalties. Special rules, set forth in the General Terms of Use part
-of this license, apply to copying and distributing Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works to protect the PROJECT GUTENBERG&#8482;
-concept and trademark. Project Gutenberg is a registered trademark,
-and may not be used if you charge for an eBook, except by following
-the terms of the trademark license, including paying royalties for use
-of the Project Gutenberg trademark. If you do not charge anything for
-copies of this eBook, complying with the trademark license is very
-easy. You may use this eBook for nearly any purpose such as creation
-of derivative works, reports, performances and research. Project
-Gutenberg eBooks may be modified and printed and given away&#8212;you may
-do practically ANYTHING in the United States with eBooks not protected
-by U.S. copyright law. Redistribution is subject to the trademark
-license, especially commercial redistribution.
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin-top:1em; font-size:1.1em; text-align:center'>START: FULL LICENSE</div>
-<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>THE FULL PROJECT GUTENBERG LICENSE</div>
-<div style='text-align:center;font-size:0.9em'>PLEASE READ THIS BEFORE YOU DISTRIBUTE OR USE THIS WORK</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-To protect the Project Gutenberg&#8482; mission of promoting the free
-distribution of electronic works, by using or distributing this work
-(or any other work associated in any way with the phrase &#8220;Project
-Gutenberg&#8221;), you agree to comply with all the terms of the Full
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; License available with this file or online at
-www.gutenberg.org/license.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 1. General Terms of Use and Redistributing Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.A. By reading or using any part of this Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic work, you indicate that you have read, understand, agree to
-and accept all the terms of this license and intellectual property
-(trademark/copyright) agreement. If you do not agree to abide by all
-the terms of this agreement, you must cease using and return or
-destroy all copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works in your
-possession. If you paid a fee for obtaining a copy of or access to a
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work and you do not agree to be bound
-by the terms of this agreement, you may obtain a refund from the person
-or entity to whom you paid the fee as set forth in paragraph 1.E.8.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.B. &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; is a registered trademark. It may only be
-used on or associated in any way with an electronic work by people who
-agree to be bound by the terms of this agreement. There are a few
-things that you can do with most Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-even without complying with the full terms of this agreement. See
-paragraph 1.C below. There are a lot of things you can do with Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works if you follow the terms of this
-agreement and help preserve free future access to Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works. See paragraph 1.E below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.C. The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation (&#8220;the
-Foundation&#8221; or PGLAF), owns a compilation copyright in the collection
-of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works. Nearly all the individual
-works in the collection are in the public domain in the United
-States. If an individual work is unprotected by copyright law in the
-United States and you are located in the United States, we do not
-claim a right to prevent you from copying, distributing, performing,
-displaying or creating derivative works based on the work as long as
-all references to Project Gutenberg are removed. Of course, we hope
-that you will support the Project Gutenberg&#8482; mission of promoting
-free access to electronic works by freely sharing Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-works in compliance with the terms of this agreement for keeping the
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; name associated with the work. You can easily
-comply with the terms of this agreement by keeping this work in the
-same format with its attached full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License when
-you share it without charge with others.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.D. The copyright laws of the place where you are located also govern
-what you can do with this work. Copyright laws in most countries are
-in a constant state of change. If you are outside the United States,
-check the laws of your country in addition to the terms of this
-agreement before downloading, copying, displaying, performing,
-distributing or creating derivative works based on this work or any
-other Project Gutenberg&#8482; work. The Foundation makes no
-representations concerning the copyright status of any work in any
-country other than the United States.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E. Unless you have removed all references to Project Gutenberg:
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.1. The following sentence, with active links to, or other
-immediate access to, the full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License must appear
-prominently whenever any copy of a Project Gutenberg&#8482; work (any work
-on which the phrase &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; appears, or with which the
-phrase &#8220;Project Gutenberg&#8221; is associated) is accessed, displayed,
-performed, viewed, copied or distributed:
-</div>
-
-<blockquote>
-  <div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-    This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
-    other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
-    whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms
-    of the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online
-    at <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>. If you
-    are not located in the United States, you will have to check the laws
-    of the country where you are located before using this eBook.
-  </div>
-</blockquote>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.2. If an individual Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work is
-derived from texts not protected by U.S. copyright law (does not
-contain a notice indicating that it is posted with permission of the
-copyright holder), the work can be copied and distributed to anyone in
-the United States without paying any fees or charges. If you are
-redistributing or providing access to a work with the phrase &#8220;Project
-Gutenberg&#8221; associated with or appearing on the work, you must comply
-either with the requirements of paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 or
-obtain permission for the use of the work and the Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-trademark as set forth in paragraphs 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.3. If an individual Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work is posted
-with the permission of the copyright holder, your use and distribution
-must comply with both paragraphs 1.E.1 through 1.E.7 and any
-additional terms imposed by the copyright holder. Additional terms
-will be linked to the Project Gutenberg&#8482; License for all works
-posted with the permission of the copyright holder found at the
-beginning of this work.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.4. Do not unlink or detach or remove the full Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-License terms from this work, or any files containing a part of this
-work or any other work associated with Project Gutenberg&#8482;.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.5. Do not copy, display, perform, distribute or redistribute this
-electronic work, or any part of this electronic work, without
-prominently displaying the sentence set forth in paragraph 1.E.1 with
-active links or immediate access to the full terms of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; License.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.6. You may convert to and distribute this work in any binary,
-compressed, marked up, nonproprietary or proprietary form, including
-any word processing or hypertext form. However, if you provide access
-to or distribute copies of a Project Gutenberg&#8482; work in a format
-other than &#8220;Plain Vanilla ASCII&#8221; or other format used in the official
-version posted on the official Project Gutenberg&#8482; website
-(www.gutenberg.org), you must, at no additional cost, fee or expense
-to the user, provide a copy, a means of exporting a copy, or a means
-of obtaining a copy upon request, of the work in its original &#8220;Plain
-Vanilla ASCII&#8221; or other form. Any alternate format must include the
-full Project Gutenberg&#8482; License as specified in paragraph 1.E.1.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.7. Do not charge a fee for access to, viewing, displaying,
-performing, copying or distributing any Project Gutenberg&#8482; works
-unless you comply with paragraph 1.E.8 or 1.E.9.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.8. You may charge a reasonable fee for copies of or providing
-access to or distributing Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-provided that:
-</div>
-
-<div style='margin-left:0.7em;'>
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You pay a royalty fee of 20% of the gross profits you derive from
-        the use of Project Gutenberg&#8482; works calculated using the method
-        you already use to calculate your applicable taxes. The fee is owed
-        to the owner of the Project Gutenberg&#8482; trademark, but he has
-        agreed to donate royalties under this paragraph to the Project
-        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation. Royalty payments must be paid
-        within 60 days following each date on which you prepare (or are
-        legally required to prepare) your periodic tax returns. Royalty
-        payments should be clearly marked as such and sent to the Project
-        Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation at the address specified in
-        Section 4, &#8220;Information about donations to the Project Gutenberg
-        Literary Archive Foundation.&#8221;
-    </div>
-
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You provide a full refund of any money paid by a user who notifies
-        you in writing (or by e-mail) within 30 days of receipt that s/he
-        does not agree to the terms of the full Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-        License. You must require such a user to return or destroy all
-        copies of the works possessed in a physical medium and discontinue
-        all use of and all access to other copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-        works.
-    </div>
-
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You provide, in accordance with paragraph 1.F.3, a full refund of
-        any money paid for a work or a replacement copy, if a defect in the
-        electronic work is discovered and reported to you within 90 days of
-        receipt of the work.
-    </div>
-
-    <div style='text-indent:-0.7em'>
-        &#8226; You comply with all other terms of this agreement for free
-        distribution of Project Gutenberg&#8482; works.
-    </div>
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.E.9. If you wish to charge a fee or distribute a Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work or group of works on different terms than
-are set forth in this agreement, you must obtain permission in writing
-from the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the manager of
-the Project Gutenberg&#8482; trademark. Contact the Foundation as set
-forth in Section 3 below.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.1. Project Gutenberg volunteers and employees expend considerable
-effort to identify, do copyright research on, transcribe and proofread
-works not protected by U.S. copyright law in creating the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; collection. Despite these efforts, Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works, and the medium on which they may be stored, may
-contain &#8220;Defects,&#8221; such as, but not limited to, incomplete, inaccurate
-or corrupt data, transcription errors, a copyright or other
-intellectual property infringement, a defective or damaged disk or
-other medium, a computer virus, or computer codes that damage or
-cannot be read by your equipment.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.2. LIMITED WARRANTY, DISCLAIMER OF DAMAGES - Except for the &#8220;Right
-of Replacement or Refund&#8221; described in paragraph 1.F.3, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation, the owner of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; trademark, and any other party distributing a Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; electronic work under this agreement, disclaim all
-liability to you for damages, costs and expenses, including legal
-fees. YOU AGREE THAT YOU HAVE NO REMEDIES FOR NEGLIGENCE, STRICT
-LIABILITY, BREACH OF WARRANTY OR BREACH OF CONTRACT EXCEPT THOSE
-PROVIDED IN PARAGRAPH 1.F.3. YOU AGREE THAT THE FOUNDATION, THE
-TRADEMARK OWNER, AND ANY DISTRIBUTOR UNDER THIS AGREEMENT WILL NOT BE
-LIABLE TO YOU FOR ACTUAL, DIRECT, INDIRECT, CONSEQUENTIAL, PUNITIVE OR
-INCIDENTAL DAMAGES EVEN IF YOU GIVE NOTICE OF THE POSSIBILITY OF SUCH
-DAMAGE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.3. LIMITED RIGHT OF REPLACEMENT OR REFUND - If you discover a
-defect in this electronic work within 90 days of receiving it, you can
-receive a refund of the money (if any) you paid for it by sending a
-written explanation to the person you received the work from. If you
-received the work on a physical medium, you must return the medium
-with your written explanation. The person or entity that provided you
-with the defective work may elect to provide a replacement copy in
-lieu of a refund. If you received the work electronically, the person
-or entity providing it to you may choose to give you a second
-opportunity to receive the work electronically in lieu of a refund. If
-the second copy is also defective, you may demand a refund in writing
-without further opportunities to fix the problem.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.4. Except for the limited right of replacement or refund set forth
-in paragraph 1.F.3, this work is provided to you &#8216;AS-IS&#8217;, WITH NO
-OTHER WARRANTIES OF ANY KIND, EXPRESS OR IMPLIED, INCLUDING BUT NOT
-LIMITED TO WARRANTIES OF MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR ANY PURPOSE.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.5. Some states do not allow disclaimers of certain implied
-warranties or the exclusion or limitation of certain types of
-damages. If any disclaimer or limitation set forth in this agreement
-violates the law of the state applicable to this agreement, the
-agreement shall be interpreted to make the maximum disclaimer or
-limitation permitted by the applicable state law. The invalidity or
-unenforceability of any provision of this agreement shall not void the
-remaining provisions.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-1.F.6. INDEMNITY - You agree to indemnify and hold the Foundation, the
-trademark owner, any agent or employee of the Foundation, anyone
-providing copies of Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works in
-accordance with this agreement, and any volunteers associated with the
-production, promotion and distribution of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-electronic works, harmless from all liability, costs and expenses,
-including legal fees, that arise directly or indirectly from any of
-the following which you do or cause to occur: (a) distribution of this
-or any Project Gutenberg&#8482; work, (b) alteration, modification, or
-additions or deletions to any Project Gutenberg&#8482; work, and (c) any
-Defect you cause.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 2. Information about the Mission of Project Gutenberg&#8482;
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; is synonymous with the free distribution of
-electronic works in formats readable by the widest variety of
-computers including obsolete, old, middle-aged and new computers. It
-exists because of the efforts of hundreds of volunteers and donations
-from people in all walks of life.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Volunteers and financial support to provide volunteers with the
-assistance they need are critical to reaching Project Gutenberg&#8482;&#8217;s
-goals and ensuring that the Project Gutenberg&#8482; collection will
-remain freely available for generations to come. In 2001, the Project
-Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation was created to provide a secure
-and permanent future for Project Gutenberg&#8482; and future
-generations. To learn more about the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation and how your efforts and donations can help, see
-Sections 3 and 4 and the Foundation information page at www.gutenberg.org.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 3. Information about the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation is a non-profit
-501(c)(3) educational corporation organized under the laws of the
-state of Mississippi and granted tax exempt status by the Internal
-Revenue Service. The Foundation&#8217;s EIN or federal tax identification
-number is 64-6221541. Contributions to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation are tax deductible to the full extent permitted by
-U.S. federal laws and your state&#8217;s laws.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation&#8217;s business office is located at 809 North 1500 West,
-Salt Lake City, UT 84116, (801) 596-1887. Email contact links and up
-to date contact information can be found at the Foundation&#8217;s website
-and official page at www.gutenberg.org/contact
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 4. Information about Donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary Archive Foundation
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; depends upon and cannot survive without widespread
-public support and donations to carry out its mission of
-increasing the number of public domain and licensed works that can be
-freely distributed in machine-readable form accessible by the widest
-array of equipment including outdated equipment. Many small donations
-($1 to $5,000) are particularly important to maintaining tax exempt
-status with the IRS.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-The Foundation is committed to complying with the laws regulating
-charities and charitable donations in all 50 states of the United
-States. Compliance requirements are not uniform and it takes a
-considerable effort, much paperwork and many fees to meet and keep up
-with these requirements. We do not solicit donations in locations
-where we have not received written confirmation of compliance. To SEND
-DONATIONS or determine the status of compliance for any particular state
-visit <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org/donate/">www.gutenberg.org/donate</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-While we cannot and do not solicit contributions from states where we
-have not met the solicitation requirements, we know of no prohibition
-against accepting unsolicited donations from donors in such states who
-approach us with offers to donate.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-International donations are gratefully accepted, but we cannot make
-any statements concerning tax treatment of donations received from
-outside the United States. U.S. laws alone swamp our small staff.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Please check the Project Gutenberg web pages for current donation
-methods and addresses. Donations are accepted in a number of other
-ways including checks, online payments and credit card donations. To
-donate, please visit: www.gutenberg.org/donate
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; font-size:1.1em; margin:1em 0; font-weight:bold'>
-Section 5. General Information About Project Gutenberg&#8482; electronic works
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Professor Michael S. Hart was the originator of the Project
-Gutenberg&#8482; concept of a library of electronic works that could be
-freely shared with anyone. For forty years, he produced and
-distributed Project Gutenberg&#8482; eBooks with only a loose network of
-volunteer support.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Project Gutenberg&#8482; eBooks are often created from several printed
-editions, all of which are confirmed as not protected by copyright in
-the U.S. unless a copyright notice is included. Thus, we do not
-necessarily keep eBooks in compliance with any particular paper
-edition.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-Most people start at our website which has the main PG search
-facility: <a href="https://www.gutenberg.org">www.gutenberg.org</a>.
-</div>
-
-<div style='display:block; margin:1em 0'>
-This website includes information about Project Gutenberg&#8482;,
-including how to make donations to the Project Gutenberg Literary
-Archive Foundation, how to help produce our new eBooks, and how to
-subscribe to our email newsletter to hear about new eBooks.
-</div>
-
-</div>
-</body>
-</html>
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/cover.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/cover.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6805b17..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/cover.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_011a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_011a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d4be0db..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_011a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_011b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_011b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 38bdc7b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_011b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_012.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_012.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 08d9d7f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_012.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_013.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_013.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ed7d4db..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_013.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_014.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_014.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3275a08..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_014.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_015.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_015.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 36f30e8..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_015.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_016fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_016fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2b196c3..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_016fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_017.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_017.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 97a742c..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_017.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_018a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_018a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3b82c93..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_018a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_018b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_018b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 498b2f1..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_018b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_026.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_026.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d6cdf41..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_026.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_027.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_027.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0fd4f72..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_027.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_028.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_028.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b6babf3..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_028.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_030.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_030.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 166acc0..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_030.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_032.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_032.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2e57c86..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_032.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_033.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_033.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3b0d11e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_033.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_034.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_034.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index acc1e8f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_034.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_036.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_036.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fe412b2..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_036.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_038fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_038fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1357e9d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_038fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_039.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_039.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2234b50..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_039.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_040.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_040.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 417bc52..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_040.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_041.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_041.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cc9876f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_041.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_045.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_045.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 318b303..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_045.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_046.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_046.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3721b39..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_046.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_048.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_048.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 239924a..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_048.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_050.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_050.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 897640d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_050.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_051.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_051.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 57e4816..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_051.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_054.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_054.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ae0fcfa..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_054.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_056.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_056.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7ea7262..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_056.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_057.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_057.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0d10bea..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_057.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_058.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_058.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3c16144..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_058.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_061.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_061.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dfb4812..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_061.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_062fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_062fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 257735f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_062fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_067.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_067.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4022fa4..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_067.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_069.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_069.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e4ecac9..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_069.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_072.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_072.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fbd09f1..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_072.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_073.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_073.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8087113..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_073.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_075.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_075.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9d18520..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_075.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_076.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_076.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 411d7e4..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_076.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_077.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_077.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 464395b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_077.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_078.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_078.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 33fb3b9..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_078.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_079.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_079.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c15a73a..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_079.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_080.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_080.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 46e0829..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_080.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_082.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_082.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 805b11d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_082.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_083.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_083.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b42e8c9..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_083.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_085.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_085.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8218722..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_085.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_086.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_086.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 66a844d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_086.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_087.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_087.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bcd1bfb..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_087.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_088.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_088.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b9a5bb9..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_088.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_090.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_090.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index edc59fd..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_090.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_091.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_091.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5214941..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_091.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_093.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_093.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ec55aca..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_093.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_094.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_094.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 38a47e5..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_094.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_095.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_095.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index dfa60cb..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_095.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_096.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_096.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cb7297a..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_096.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_098.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_098.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c705b3c..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_098.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_099.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_099.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2f50199..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_099.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_100.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_100.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3edd021..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_100.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_102fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_102fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a0b606..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_102fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_103a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_103a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 23dd323..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_103a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_103b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_103b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e4186fb..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_103b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_105.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_105.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3db25cb..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_105.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_108.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_108.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e73577b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_108.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_110.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_110.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1e83668..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_110.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_113.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_113.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b5a9c33..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_113.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_115.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_115.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 256cf1b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_115.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_117.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_117.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b45c8c6..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_117.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_118.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_118.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 6ba0f7c..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_118.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_120.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_120.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index eff1fe0..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_120.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_121.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_121.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 904a2c2..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_121.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_122.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_122.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 549473f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_122.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_123.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_123.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b898d77..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_123.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_124.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_124.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 00a56ac..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_124.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_125.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_125.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 775fcb9..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_125.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_127.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_127.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bc8df69..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_127.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_129.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_129.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index de14ff7..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_129.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_130.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_130.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a472a6b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_130.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_131.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_131.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 150a4fd..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_131.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_132.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_132.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4d8f3b7..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_132.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_133.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_133.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d949d72..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_133.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_134.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_134.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 53c4eab..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_134.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_134fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_134fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 2df0ae1..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_134fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_137.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_137.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8842e7e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_137.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_139.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_139.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bd7b35b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_139.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_141.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_141.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a389f4b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_141.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_143.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_143.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d2d6045..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_143.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_145.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_145.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7c10f72..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_145.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_146.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_146.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 182d8ff..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_146.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_147.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_147.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a6e5ba0..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_147.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_148.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_148.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4c8c52d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_148.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_150.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_150.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b379784..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_150.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_151a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_151a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index caa4dba..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_151a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_151b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_151b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1085eea..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_151b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_152.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_152.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ab03694..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_152.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_154fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_154fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index fce1460..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_154fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_155.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_155.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 85986d9..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_155.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_157.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_157.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 99f3fc0..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_157.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_158.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_158.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ff983d6..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_158.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_160fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_160fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ba0404e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_160fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_162.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_162.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 300a826..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_162.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_162fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_162fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index b87db63..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_162fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_164.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_164.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 8f5e925..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_164.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_165.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_165.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 136cbca..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_165.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_168.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_168.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 53d768b..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_168.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_168fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_168fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ddcae4d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_168fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_169.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_169.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 787fee6..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_169.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_170.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_170.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0cbdf96..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_170.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_171.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_171.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c6e44fe..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_171.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_172.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_172.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 35fa628..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_172.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_173.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_173.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f8006a1..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_173.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_174.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_174.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 84a17cc..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_174.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_175a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_175a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 38791aa..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_175a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_175b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_175b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 83addac..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_175b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_176a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_176a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e0b126a..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_176a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_176b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_176b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a13597..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_176b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_177a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_177a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 306aa3e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_177a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_177b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_177b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d00c3c6..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_177b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_177c.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_177c.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1e1cee0..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_177c.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_181.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_181.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index cd5b925..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_181.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_182.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_182.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 27a13fa..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_182.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_183.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_183.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index f039f1d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_183.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_185.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_185.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 7382bcc..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_185.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_187.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_187.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index acafa7d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_187.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_189.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_189.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 0879a46..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_189.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_195.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_195.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9a108b8..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_195.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_197.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_197.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9eceddc..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_197.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_198.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_198.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9483309..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_198.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_201.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_201.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index e6d5f18..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_201.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_202.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_202.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index bf39b4e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_202.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_203.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_203.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c9378a3..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_203.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_204.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_204.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9ee0875..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_204.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_205.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_205.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1f1f726..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_205.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_208.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_208.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ceae3dd..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_208.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_210.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_210.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c703e9d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_210.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_212.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_212.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index ae17af8..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_212.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_217.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_217.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index a5c806f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_217.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_219.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_219.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 9e21193..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_219.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_220.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_220.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 50e55c5..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_220.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_222a.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_222a.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 11212d8..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_222a.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_222b.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_222b.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 71daf7f..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_222b.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_224.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_224.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 495f528..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_224.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_228fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_228fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 071e3d3..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_228fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_230.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_230.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 5de8e64..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_230.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_231.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_231.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4d4a7fb..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_231.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_236.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_236.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 055abd8..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_236.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_238fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_238fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 3d4792d..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_238fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_240.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_240.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c8214ae..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_240.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_242.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_242.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 98b3c44..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_242.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_242fp.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_242fp.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 4c4c86e..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_242fp.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_244.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_244.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index 1cb83c2..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_244.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_245.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_245.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index c7598ee..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_245.jpg
+++ /dev/null
diff --git a/old/69619-h/images/i_ii.jpg b/old/69619-h/images/i_ii.jpg
deleted file mode 100644
index d6a4adb..0000000
--- a/old/69619-h/images/i_ii.jpg
+++ /dev/null