Project Gutenberg's How to Study Architecture, by Charles H. Caffin This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere 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/license Title: How to Study Architecture Author: Charles H. Caffin Release Date: December 2, 2019 [EBook #60830] Language: English Character set encoding: UTF-8 *** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK HOW TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE *** Produced by Chuck Greif and the Online Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This file was produced from images available at The Internet Archive) Contents. Glossary Index Bibliography List of Illustrations (In certain versions of this etext [in certain browsers] clicking on the image will bring up a larger version.) (etext transcriber's note) HOW TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE HOW TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE BY CHARLES H. CAFFIN Author of “How to Study Pictures,” “The Story of French Painting,” “The Story of Dutch Painting,” “The Story of Spanish Painting,” “Appreciations of the Drama,” “Art for Life’s Sake,” etc. AN ATTEMPT TO TRACE THE EVOLUTION OF ARCHITECTURE AS THE PRODUCT AND EXPRESSION OF SUCCESSIVE PHASES OF CIVILISATION WITH ILLUSTRATIONS {i} {ii} {iii} NEW YORK DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY 1917 COPYRIGHT, 1917 BY DODD, MEAD AND COMPANY, Inc. ACKNOWLEDGMENT The author gratefully acknowledges the critical assistance given to him on certain points by Professor William H. Goodyear, W. Harmon Beers and William Warfield; and his indebtedness to Caroline Caffin for compiling the index and to Irving Heyl for several architectural drawings. For some of the illustrations he has put himself under obligations to the following publications, through the courtesy of the Librarian of the Metropolitan Museum of Art—“Histoire de l’Art,” by Perrot et Chipiez; “Assyrian Sculptures,” by Rev. Archibald Paterson; “Monuments Modernes de la Perse,” by Pascal Coste; “Ruins of the Palace of Diocletian at Spalato” by R. Adams, and “The Annual of the British School at Athens.” CONTENTS Book I INTRODUCTION CHAPTER PAGE I Preliminary Considerations 3 II Primitive Structures 13 Book II PRE-CLASSIC PERIOD I Egyptian Civilisation 25 II Egyptian Architecture 38 III Chaldæan, Assyrian and Babylonian Civilisation 56 IV Chaldæan, Assyrian and Babylonian Architecture 65 V Persian Civilisation 74 VI Persian Architecture 80 VII Minoan or Ægean Civilisation 88 VIII Minoan or Ægean Architecture 95 Book III CLASSIC PERIOD I Hellenic Civilisation 105 II Hellenic Architecture 116 III Roman Civilisation 147 IV Roman Architecture 163 Book IV POST-CLASSIC PERIOD I Early Christian Civilisation 187 II Early Christian and Byzantine Architecture 193 III Muhammedan, also Called Saracenic Civilisation 212 IV Muhammedan Architecture 220 V Early Mediæval Civilisation 232 VI Early Mediæval or Romanesque Architecture 241 Book V GOTHIC PERIOD I Later Mediæval Civilisation 263 II Gothic Architecture 270 {iv} {v} {vii} {vi} {viii} III Gothic Architecture in France 281 IV Gothic Architecture in England and Wales 287 V Gothic Architecture in Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain 301 VI Gothic Architecture in Italy 310 Book VI THE RENAISSANCE PERIOD I Renaissance Civilisation 319 II Renaissance Architecture in Italy 338 III Renaissance Architecture in Italy—Continued 357 IV Renaissance Architecture in France 375 V Renaissance Architecture in Germany, the Netherlands, and Spain 391 VI Renaissance Architecture in England and American Colonial Architecture 410 Book VII POST-RENAISSANCE PERIOD I Classical and Gothic Revivals 435 II The Modern Situation 454 Glossary: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, Z 479 Index: A, B, C, D, E, F, G, H, I, J, K, L, M, N, O, P, Q, R, S, T, U, V, W, X, Z 497 ILLUSTRATIONS FACING PAGE Stonehenge. Salisbury Plain, England 12 Section and Plan of Treasury of Atreus 12 Teocalli or “House of God,” at Guatusco 12 Section of Pyramid 38 Modelsof Mastabas 38 Types of Egyptian Columns 38 Temple-Tomb of Rameses II at Abou-Simbel 38 Plan of Ramesseum 38 Model of Hypostyle Hall at Karnak 39 Peripteral Sanctuary, at Philæ 39 Temple of Edfou. Entrance to Hypostyle Hall 39 Example of Carved Decoration 39 “Sargon’s Castle.” Conjectured Restoration 66 Part of “Lion Frieze” and “Frieze of Arches” 66 Details of Wall Decoration at Koyunjik 67 Tomb of Darius I, Persepolis 80 Palace of Darius I, Persepolis. Conjectured Restoration 80 Type of Persian Columns 81 Hall of One Hundred Columns, Persepolis. Conjectured Restoration 81 The Palaces of Persepolis. Conjectured Restoration 81 Wall Decoration in Palace of Cnossus 94 Lion Gateway at Mycenæ 94 Plan of Acropolis of Tiryns 94 Part of Staircase in Palace of Cnossus 95 Council Chamber, with Gypsum Throne, Palace of Cnossus 95 Some Temple Plans—Hellenic 116 Hellenic Orders (Columns and Entablatures) 116 {ix} Roman Orders (Columns and Entablatures) 116 Model of the Acropolis 116 Model of the Parthenon (restored) 116 The Parthenon 117 Temples at Pæstum 117 Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, Athens 117 Temple of Nike Apteros, Athens 117 Portico of the Caryatides, Erechtheion 117 Detail of Ornament—Hellenic 117 Statues in the Round of Persephone and Demeter from the East Pediment of the Parthenon 117 Figures in High Relief from Procession of Worshipers. Frieze of the Parthenon 117 Plan of House of Pansa, Pompeii 117 Plan of Theatre of Dramyssus 117 Roman Forum, Conjectured Restoration 162 Maison Carrée, Nîmes 162 Arch of Constantine 162 Pantheon, Rome 162 Section of the Pantheon 162 Colosseum, Rome 162 Section of Colosseum 162 Basilica of Constantine 163 Roman Vaulting; from Baths of Diocletian 163 Gothic Vaulting; from Salisbury Cathedral 163 Theatre of Orange, France. Conjectured Restoration 163 Plan of Theatre of Orange, France. Conjectured Restoration 163 Porta Aurea—Golden Gate—Palace of Diocletian 163 Pont-du-Gard, Aqueduct Near Nîmes 163 Peristyle and Court of the House of the Vettii 163 Wall Paintings in the House of the Vettii 163 S. Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna 192 S. Apollinare-in-Classe, Ravenna 192 Church of Kalb-Lauzeh, Syria 193 Church of Turmanin, Syria 193 Tomb of Galla Placidia 202 Interior of San Vitale, Ravenna 202 Diagram Showing Pendentives 202 Section of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, Constantinople 202 Section of S. Sophia, Constantinople 202 Diagram showing how a dome rests on eight piers enclosing an octagon, by niches or squinches 202 Exterior of S. Sophia, Constantinople 203 Interior of S. Sophia, Constantinople 203 Plan of S. Sophia, Constantinople 203 Plan of S. Mark’s, Venice 203 Exterior of St. Mark’s, Venice 203 Mosque of El Azhar, Cairo 220 Suleimaniyeh or Mosque of Suleiman 220 Arcades of the Mosque, now Cathedral, of Cordova 220 Court of the Lions, Alhambra, Spain 220 Palace of Ispahan, Persia. Conjectured Restoration of Pavilion of Mirrors and Gardens 221 College of Shah Hussein, Restoration; Ispahan, Persia 221 Mosque of Akbur, Futtehpore-Sikri, India 221 {x} {xi} Taj Mahal, Agra, India 221 Pisa Cathedral, Campanile and Baptistry 240 Interior of Pisa Cathedral 240 S. Ambrogio, Milan 240 S. Michele, Pavia 240 The Certosa, or Church of the Carthusian Order, Pavia 240 Church of Vézelay, France 240 Church of Abbaye-aux-Dames, Caen 240 Remains of the Church of Cluny Abbey 240 Church of the Apostles, Cologne 241 Doorway of Salamanca Cathedral 241 Anglo-Saxon Tower, Earl’s Barton, Northamptonshire 241 Iffley Church, near Oxford 241 S. John’s Chapel, Tower of London 241 Nave of Durham Cathedral 241 Peterborough Cathedral 241 English Romanesque Detail 241 Sculptured Details from Amiens Cathedral Doorway 270 Skeleton Structure, showing method of vaulting, by means of pointed arch, and concentration of thrusts and counter- thrusts 270 Gothic Detail 270 Gothic Detail 270 Gothic Detail 270 Gothic Detail 271 Gothic Detail 271 Gothic Detail 271 Exterior and Interior Views of Lichfield Cathedral Showing the Nave Widening 271 Notre Dame, Paris, Plan 280 Amiens Cathedral, Plan 280 Amiens Cathedral 280 Notre Dame, Paris 280 Rouen Cathedral 280 Rheims Cathedral 280 Interior of Notre Dame Cathedral 281 Interior of Amiens Cathedral 281 Interior of Rheims Cathedral 281 Hôtel de Bourgtheroulde, Rouen 281 House of Jacques Cœur 281 Sainte Chapelle, Paris 281 Nave of Norwich Cathedral 286 Salisbury Cathedral, Interior 286 York Minster, West Façade 286 Lincoln Cathedral 286 Wells Cathedral, West Façade 287 Winchester Cathedral 287 Henry VII’s Chapel, Westminster 287 Westminster Hall, Timber Roof 287 Strasburg Cathedral 300 Ratisbon Cathedral 300 Town Hall of Munster 300 Cathedral of S. Gudule, Brussels 300 Cologne Cathedral 300 {xii} Cloth Hall of Ypres 300 Town Hall, Louvain 301 Town Hall, Brussels 301 Mechlin Cathedral 301 Antwerp Cathedral 301 Toledo Cathedral 301 Burgos Cathedral 301 Siena Cathedral, Interior 310 San Miniato, Florence; Marble Façade 310 Cathedral of Florence and Campanile 310 Doge’s Palace, Venice 310 Siena Cathedral, Campanile attached 311 Orvieto Cathedral, West Façade 311 Milan Cathedral 311 Milan Cathedral, Interior 311 Pazzi Chapel, S. Croce, Florence 338 Santa Maria Novella, Florence 338 Strozzi Palace, Florence 338 Caprarola Palace 338 Gvimane Palace, Venice 339 Basilica Vicenza 339 Doge’s Palace, Venice; Renaissance Portal 339 S. Maria della Salute, Venice 339 Riccardi Palace, Florence 356 Palazzo Vecchio, Florence 356 Ca d’Oro, Venice 356 Vendramini Palace, Venice 356 Farnese Palace, Rome 356 Court of the Farnese Palace 356 Capitol Palaces, Rome 357 Library of S. Mark, Venice 357 S. Spirito, Florence 357 S. Andrea, Mantua 357 S. Peter’s, Rome 357 Interior of S. Peter’s, Rome 357 Château de Blois. Gothic part built by Louis XII 374 Maison François I, Paris 374 Château de Blois. Part added by Francis I 374 Château de Chambord 374 Luxembourg Palace 375 Plan showing growth of Louvre 375 Pavilion de l’Horloge, Louvre 375 Castle of Heidelberg 390 Another View of the Heinrichsbau 390 Bremen City Hall 390 Pellershaus, Nüremburg 390 Antwerp City Hall 390 Liège, Court of Palais de Justice 390 College of Santa Cruz, Valladolid 391 Court of the Casa de Zaporta 391 Court of the College of Alcala de Henares 391 {xiii} {xiv} Elevation and Plan of uncompleted Palace Charles V 391 The Escoriál 391 Plan of The Escoriál 391 Wollaton Hall, Nottinghamshire 410 Banqueting Hall, Whitehall 410 Haddon Hall, Derbyshire 410 Haddon Hall; the Long Gallery 410 S. Paul’s Cathedral, London 411 S. Mary-le-Bow, Cheapside, London 411 Old Charlton, Kent 411 Georgian Chimney piece and overmantel 411 Christ Church, Philadelphia 428 Home of the Poet Longfellow, Cambridge, Mass. 428 Washington’s Home at Mount Vernon 429 Another Southern Colonial example, Montgomery, Ala. 429 La Madeleine, Paris 436 S. George’s Hall, Liverpool 436 Panthéon, Paris 436 Arc de l’Etoile, Paris 436 Opera House, Paris 436 State House, Boston 436 Capitol at Washington 436 City Hall, New York 437 St. Thomas, New York 437 Houses of Parliament 437 Plan of the Houses of Parliament 437 Scotland Yard 454 Woodburn Hall, New Windsor, N. Y. 454 Trinity Church, Boston 454 County Buildings, Pittsburg 454 The Breakers, Newport, R. I. 454 Detail of residence of Mr. Thomas Hastings, Westbury, Long Island 454 Schiller Theatre Building, Chicago 455 Woolworth Building 455 Steel Cage Construction. Scene in lower New York 455 BOOK I HOW TO STUDY ARCHITECTURE CHAPTER I PRELIMINARY CONSIDERATIONS Architecture, Sculpture, and Painting share the distinctive title of the Fine Arts, or, as the Italians and French more fitly call them, the Beautiful Arts; the arts, that is to say, of beautiful design. They are known by their beauty. By their beauty they appeal to the eye and through the eye to the mind, stirring in us emotions or feelings of pleasure—a higher {xv} {xvi} {1} {2} {3} kind of pleasure than that which is derived solely from the gratification of the senses—the kind which is distinguished as æsthetic. The term æsthetic is derived from a Greek word, meaning perception. Originally it described the act of perceiving “objects” by means of the senses—“objects” meaning anything that can be perceived through the senses. But the term æsthetic has come to have another meaning, especially in respect to sense-perceptions derived from seeing and hearing. It means that the perception gives us pleasure, because it stirs in us a sense of beauty. It may do so without any conscious activity on the part of our mind. We may be absorbed in the delight of the sensation; or it may appeal to our mind—to our memory or imagination—in such a way as to set us thinking and feeling not only about the immediate “object” but also about something which our mind associates with it. For example: by simple sense-perception we discover that one tree is taller than another, or that one tree is an elm, another a silver birch. Our perception may stop there; but not if we are in a mood to contemplate. Then the perception that one tree is taller than the other may be followed by the feeling that the taller tree gives us more satisfaction. It may seem to us to be a better proportioned tree: its parts are more pleasingly related to the whole mass; or it may seem to be in a fitter relation to the spot it occupies and to the other “objects” near it. Again, having ascertained by pure sense-impression that one tree is an elm and the other a silver birch, we may find ourselves thinking about the qualities of difference presented by the two trees. With what splendid assurance the elm trunk rears up! How majestically the branches radiate from it and bear their glorious masses of abundant foliage! On the other hand, how dainty are the stems and branches of the silver birch, how delicately graceful the sprays of tiny leaves! “How sensitive!” perhaps we say. For to our imagination the slender tree may seem to be endowed with senses that respond to every movement of the air, to every glancing of the sunlight. In all these cases we have gone beyond mere sense-perception. We are no longer interested only in the “object.” Our interest has become subjective. We are interested in the subject not the object of the verb, to perceive—the subject who perceives, in this case, ourself; how the thing affects oneself; how it stirs in one a sense of beauty. By this time our thoughts may have been withdrawn from the concrete object and have passed on to “abstract” ideas, suggested by the object. It is grandeur of growth, as embodied in the elm, fragile tenderness, as expressed in the birch, that absorb our thought; and the wonder also how qualities so different can survive the rude shocks of nature, and find, each its special function in the scheme of nature’s beauty. In thus feeling external objects through our own experience of life and our own sense of beauty, we are employing the sense- perception that is specially called æsthetic. And it is in the degree to which objects of architecture, sculpture, or painting have the capacity of stimulating this æsthetic appreciation that they properly belong in the company of the Fine Arts. Architecture is the science and art of building structures that, while in most cases they serve a useful purpose, are in all cases designed and built with a view to beauty. Their motive is beauty as well as utility. In certain instances, as, for example, the triumphal arch, the motive may seem to have been solely one of beauty. On the other hand, when we recall that the arch was erected as a memorial to some great man or some great exploit—the Arch of Titus, for example, commemorating this general’s capture of Jerusalem—the imposing dignity of the structure, by compelling attention and exciting admiration, would actually serve the purpose for which it was erected. Indeed, the distinction which people are apt to draw between the useful and the beautiful is not necessarily so sharp as is supposed and is largely founded upon ignorance or a mistaken attitude toward life. The tendency to be satisfied with the utility of a thing and to regard beauty as a fad, impractical and wasteful, shows that, although our civilisation may have progressed in some respects, it has fallen back in others. For there is nothing more surely certain in the history of human progress, than that, while primitive man had to exercise his ingenuity in providing for the necessities of life and in the making of tools, implements, utensils, and so forth to achieve his needs, he was not satisfied that his work should be merely useful. He had a mind to make it pleasing in shape and by means of ornament. And this attention to beauty grew as men grew in civilisation, becoming most conspicuous as their civilisation reached its highest point; and continued through the ages, until machinery began to replace the individual craftsman. For the individual craftsman, responsible for making a thing from start to finish, must, if he is worth a hill of beans, take a personal pride in making it as well as he can. As the Bible relates of the Supreme Creator, “And God saw everything that he had made and, behold, it was very good.” And the craftsman, so long as he is free to create out of his own knowledge and his own feeling, must be able to feel this, because there is an instinct in him, an imperative need of his own nature, that he shall be proud of his work. It is a wonderful fact of human nature that when it works freely, putting forth all its capacities, it is prompted by this instinct, not only to make useful things but also to make them well and as beautiful as may be. But gradually machinery took away the workman’s control of his work. He ceased to design, lay out, and carry through all the details of his work to a finish. He has come to be intrusted with only a part of the operation, and that is performed under the control of a machine that turns out the work with soulless uniformity. The craftsman has degenerated into a repeater of partial processes; he has become the servant of a machine; a cog in a vast mechanical system. And, with the development of high power machines the output of production has been increased, until quantity rather than quality has tended to become the ambition of the system. It has followed as a logical result of this taking away from millions of men and women the privilege of being individual craftsmen, creators of their own handiwork, that they have grown indifferent to the quality of the work turned out; taste, which means the ability to discriminate between qualities, has diminished and a general indifference to the element of beauty has ensued. Of all the Fine Arts, Architecture is closest to the life of man. It has been developed out of the primitive necessity of providing shelter from the elements and protection against the assaults of all kinds of aggressors. And chief among the aggressors against which primitive man sought to defend himself were the mysterious forces of nature which his imagination pictured as evil spirits. To ward off these and to enlist the support of kindly spirits represented a necessity of life that developed through fetish worship into some positive conception of religion. This need was embodied in structures, which, originating in the selection or erection of a single stone, gradually became composed of an aggregation of stones variously disposed, in heaps, in geometric groups of single stones, or in the placing of stones horizontally upon two or more vertical supporting stones. {4} {5} {6} {7} In these crude devices to mark the burial places of dead heroes and to provide for the necessities of religion, primitive man used the stones as he found them, with a preference for those of enormous size, to ensure permanency. Meanwhile, in the huts that he erected for the living, it is reasonable to suppose that, when available, the more perishable material of timber was employed. And here, again, he would use at first the smaller limbs, planting them in the ground in a circle or square and drawing them together at the top, so that they took the shape of a heap of stones; and covering them with skins, so that they became the prototype of the tent. Then gradually he would employ stouter timbers, planting them upright and keeping them in place at the top with horizontal timbers. On these would be laid transverse beams to form a roof; the spaces between the beams, as between the uprights of the walls, being filled in with wattles of twigs or reeds and rendered still more impervious to weather by a coating of clay or mud. The efforts of primitive builders, it is true, are rather of archæological than of architectural significance, yet they have this much to do with architecture, that in them are to be discovered the rudiments of the art. For by the time that man had superimposed a stone horizontally upon two vertical ones, he had hit upon the principle of construction, now variously styled “post and lintel” or “post and beam” or “trabeated,” that is to say, “beam” construction. The embryo was conceived that in the fulness of time would be developed into the trabeated design of the Egyptian temple and the column-and-entablature design of Classic architecture. From the colossal, monolithic form, still preserved, for example, in Stonehenge, there is a direct progression to the highly organised perfection of the Parthenon. It is this fact that makes the study of architecture so vitally interesting. Its evolution has proceeded, stage by stage, with the evolution of civilisation. Having its roots in necessity, it has expressed the phases of civilisation more directly and intimately than have the other Fine Arts; while the comparative durability of the materials in which it has been embodied has caused more of its records to survive. Even out of the fragments of architecture it is possible for the imagination to visualise epochs of civilisation long since buried in the past; while the memorials that have been preserved in comparative integrity stand out through the misty pages of history as object lessons of distinct illumination. Accordingly, one purpose of this book represents an attempt to study the evolution of architecture in relation to the phases of civilisation that it immediately embodied; to find in the monuments of architecture so many “sermons in stone”—discourses upon the character, conditions of life, the methods and the ideals of the men who reared and shaped them. And this involves the second purpose, that we shall try to study architecture as it actually evolved in practice. Remembering that it originated in the need of making provision for certain specific purposes, in a word, that its motive primarily was practical, moreover, that from the first it has been the product of invention, we will try to study it in relation to man’s gradual mastery of material and the processes of building. We will regard architecture in its fundamental significance as the science and art of building; tracing, as far as is possible, the stages by which man has met the problems imposed upon him by the purpose of the structure and by the conditions of the material available; how he gradually surmounted the difficulties of building, step by step improving upon his devices and processes and thereby creating new principles of construction, and, further, how the practical operations of one race and period were carried on, modified, or developed by other races, under different conditions and in response to differences of needs and ideals. And, while thus studying architecture as the gradual solution of practical problems of construction we will also keep constantly in mind the stages by which as man’s skill in building progressed, so also did his desire to make his structures more and more expressive of his higher consciousness of human dignity. How age after age built not only to meet the needs of living but also to embody its ideals of the present and the future life; how hand in hand with growing skill in workmanship was evolved superior achievement in artistic beauty. Our methods of study shall follow, as far as possible, the architect’s order of procedure. Given a site and the commission of erecting thereon a building for a specific purpose, the architect first concerns himself with the plans: the ground plan, and, if the building be of more than one story, the several floor plans. He lays out in the form of a diagram the lines that enclose the building and those that mark the divisions and subdivisions; indicating by breaks in the lines the openings of doors and windows and by isolated figures the position of columns or piers which he may be going to use for support of ceilings and roofs. The disposition of all these particulars will be determined not only by the purpose of the building, but also by the character of the site and by the nature of the materials and method of construction that the architect purposes to employ. Then, having acquired the habit of thinking of a building as having originated in a plan, we will follow the building as it grows up out of the plan, taking vertical form in what the architect calls the elevation, or, when he is speaking specifically of the outside of the building, the façades. Sometimes we shall study one of the diagrams, which he calls a section, when he imagines his building intersected by a vertical plane that cuts the structure into two parts. The one between the spectator and the cutting plane is supposed to be removed, and thus is laid bare the system of the interior construction-work. In studying the exterior of a building, therefore, we shall keep in mind the interior disposition, arising out of the planning, and acquire the habit of looking on the outside of a building as logically related to the interior. The design of a building will come to mean to us not a mere pattern of façade, arbitrarily invented, but an arrangement of vertical and horizontal features, of solid surfaces and open spaces, that has grown out of the interior conditions and proclaims them. In a word, we shall regard a work of architecture as an organic growth; rooted in the plan, springing up in accordance with constructive principles; each part having its separate function, and all co-ordinated in harmonious relation to the unity of the whole. For we shall find that unity of design is a special element of excellence in architecture; a unity secured by the relations of proportion, harmony and rhythm established between the several parts and between the parts and the whole. And, since architecture is primarily an art of practical utility, all these relations are equally determined by the principle of fitness; in order that each and every part may perform most efficiently its respective function in the combined purpose of the whole edifice. For this is the first and final criterion of organic composition. {8} {9} {10} {11} {12} [Image unavailable.] STONEHENGE. SALISBURY PLAIN, ENGLAND Primitive Use of Post and Beam Construction. Pp. 8, 16 [Image unavailable.] SECTION AND PLAN OF “TREASURY OF ATREUS” At Mycenæ. Example of “Tholos” or Bee-Hive Construction. P. 14 TEOCALLI OR “HOUSE OF GOD” At Guatusco, Costa Rica. P. 20 CHAPTER II PRIMITIVE STRUCTURES The various remains that exist of prehistoric structures, though scattered widely over different parts of the world, present a general similarity of purpose and design. The earliest examples of domestic buildings are the lake-dwellings which have been discovered at the bottom of some of the Swiss lakes, as well as in other countries both in the Eastern and Western hemispheres. They consist of huts, rudely constructed of timber, erected on piles, sometimes in such numbers as to form a fair-sized village. Their purpose was apparently to afford security against sudden attacks of enemies, the danger of wild beasts and snakes and the malaria and fever of the swampy shores, while bringing the inhabitants nearer to their food supply and offering a crude but ready means of sanitation. The system still survives among the natives of many tropical countries and has its analogy in the boat-houses that throng the Canton River in China. More important, however, archæologically as well as in relation to the subsequent story of building, as it gradually developed into the art of architecture are: the single huge stone, known as a Menhir; the Galgal or Cairn of stones piled in a heap; the Tumulus or Barrow, composed of a mound of earth and the Cromlech. The single stone seems to have been regarded as an object of veneration and a fetish to ward off evil spirits. It may have been the primitive origin of the Egyptian obelisk, the Greek stele and the modern tombstone. From the galgal and barrow may have been developed the pyramids of Egypt and the truncated pyramid which we shall find to be the foundation platforms of temples in various parts of the world while the cromlech is the prototype of temples. Two stones were set upright and a third was placed upon the top of them. This represents in rudimentary form the so-called “post and beam” principle of temple construction. Sometimes two or four uprights were surmounted by a large flat stone. It had the appearance of a gigantic table and is called a Dolmen. It is conjectured that this was a form of sepulchral-chamber, in which the corpse was laid, being thus protected from the earth that was heaped around the stones into a mound. If so, the Dolmen is the origin of the sepulchral chamber that was embedded in the Egyptian pyramid. Meanwhile, an intermediary stage between the highly developed pyramids and the primitive dolmen is represented in the Altun- Obu Sepulchre, near Kertsch in the Crimea. Here the mound is faced with layers of shaped stones, with which also the chamber and the passage leading to it are lined. The ceilings of both are constructed of courses of stone, each of which projects a little beyond the one beneath it, until the diminishing space is capped by a single stone. In the angle of masonry thus formed is discoverable the rudimentary beginning of the arch. It is also convenient here to note, though it anticipates our story, the more elaborate example of this principle of roofing which is shown in the so-called Treasury of Atreus at Mycenæ in Greece. In this instance, moreover, there is a farther approximation toward the arch, since the projections of the stones have been cut so as to present a continuous line. And these contour lines are slightly concave and meet at the top in a point, for which reason this class of tomb is known as bee-hive. Another form of this method of angular roofing is seen in an Arch at Delos, which is part of a system of masonry that is known as Cyclopean, after the name of the one-eyed giant whom Ulysses and his followers encountered in Sicily, during their return from {13} {14} {15} Troy. For the masonry is composed of large blocks of unshaped stone, the interstices of which are filled in with smaller stones. Here, too, the actual arch is composed of a repetition of huge, upright monoliths, supporting a series of single blocks, set up one against the other at an angle. While, however, these primitive forms of roof construction prefigure the later development of the true arch, the student is warned in advance that they represent rather a feeling of the need of some such method of construction than any approach to a solution of the problem. For the latter, as we shall find later, consisted in discovering how to counteract the thrust of the arch; its tendency, that is, to press outward and collapse; whereas in the primitive construction this danger was evaded by embedding the roof in a mass of masonry or earth that made lateral strains impossible. The system, in fact, was more like that employed in shoring up the excavations in modern tunnelling and mining. Meanwhile, this rude method of spanning an opening with more than one piece of stone was the primitive germ of the later development of arch, vault, and dome construction, just as the placing of a single horizontal stone on two upright ones is the prototype of columns and entablature. Thus the instinct of man, in earliest times, reached out toward the two fundamental principles of architectural construction. The most interesting examples of primitive structure are the so-called Cromlechs, of which that of Stonehenge, in England, is the best preserved. The unit of this and like remains is the “post and beam” formation, composed of a block of stone, supported on two uprights. In the case of Stonehenge this formation was repeated so as to form a continuous circle one hundred feet in diameter. Within this was a concentric circle, composed of smaller slabs, which enclosed a series of five separate post and beam structures on a horse- shoe plan. The latter is repeated by another series of slabs and in the centre stands the flat altar stone. Seventeen stones of the outer circle, varying from sixteen to eighteen feet in height, are still standing and in part connected by their beam slabs. This impressive memorial stands on Salisbury Plain, eight miles north of the cathedral city of Salisbury, in the neighbourhood of which are many barrows. Was it then the temple of a burying place of mighty chieftains or was it erected in memory of some great victory in honour of the dead heroes and the nation’s god? According to Geoffrey of Monmouth (A.D. 1154) who is supposed to have compiled much of his history from Celtic legends, Stonehenge is a Celtic Memorial, erected to the glory of the Celtic Zeus. Rhys, in his “Celtic Heathendom,” accepts the probability of this account and adds: “What sort of temple could have been more appropriate for the primary god of light and of the luminous heavens than a spacious open-air enclosure of a circular form like Stonehenge? Nor do I see any objection to the old idea that Stonehenge was the original of the famous temple of Apollo in the island of the Hyperboreans, the stories about which were based in the first instance most likely on the journal of Pytheas’ travels.” Pytheas was a Greek navigator and astronomer of the second half of the fourth century B.C., who was a native of the Greek colony of Massilia (Marseilles) and visited the coasts of Spain, Gaul, and Britain. Situated some twenty miles to the north of Stonehenge is the Abury or Avebury monument. Its remains comprise two circles, formed of menhirs, which are enclosed within a large outer circle of monoliths, about 1250 feet in diameter. This was further surrounded by a moat and rampart, which suggest that the structure may have served at once the purposes of a place of assembly and a stronghold. At Carnac, in the old territory of Brittany, in France, are the remains of about 1000 menhirs, some of which reach a height of 16 feet, disposed in parallel straight rows, forming avenues nearly two miles long. They are unworked blocks of granite, set in the ground at their smaller ends. The neighbourhood also abounds with tumuli, dolmens, and later monuments that belong to the Polished Stone Age. Furthermore, remains of such monuments as we have been describing are found in Scandinavia, Ireland, North Germany (in Hannover and the Baltic Provinces); also in India and Asia Minor, in Egypt, on the northwest of Africa and in the region about the Atlas Mountains. This fact, assuming that the monuments are of Celtic origin, testifies to the wide-spread migrations of this important branch of the Indo-European family which in prehistoric times swept westward in successive waves. It is known that this race also overflowed into Northern Italy and Spain. That none of their monuments of the Rough Stone and Polished Stone ages exist in these countries seems to point to the migration thither having been made at a later period. From the time that the Celtic race finds its way into recorded history it has been recognised as pre-eminently characterised by artistic genius. The rude menhirs, under the combined influences of Christianity and art were in time replaced by Stone Crosses that in form closely approximate the thickset simplicity of the monolith, but are embellished with carved ornament. And the latter in its detail is evidently akin to the motives of decoration found upon the weapons and earthenware of the Bronze Age, combined with the interlace of lines, suggested by the example of weaving, and the use of motives derived from plant forms. These same principles of decoration were applied to the metal-work in which the Celt excelled and later to the decorated manuscripts in which he reached so high a degree of artistry. The Celtic artists in time also introduced human and animal figures into their designs, but always treated them solely as motives of decoration and never with the purpose of representing them naturally. The prevalence of these decorative motives in ancient Asiatic and European ornament may have been due to the extended migrations of the Celts. But not necessarily; for they are equally to be found in the primitive ornament of the South Sea Islanders, North American Indians, and the inhabitants of Peru, Mexico, and Central America. Primitive man, in fact, shows a tendency to similarity of motives and methods at corresponding stages of his evolution. In the last three countries have been discovered some of the most remarkable remains of the Polished Stone Age and the Bronze Age. For it was to this stage—after how many centuries of development is only a matter of conjecture—that the mighty nations of the Incas, Aztecs, and others had attained, when the Spanish invaders in the sixteenth century overcame them and wiped out their civilisations. Hitherto the most famous example has been the ruins of Cuzco, the imperial city of the Incas in Peru, which was captured by Pizarro; but the exploration of Professor Hiram Bingham has recently unearthed, also in Peru, Machu Picchu, a city of refuge, perched almost inaccessibly on the heights of the Andes. It is the belief of the explorer that this is the traditional city of Tampu Tocco, {16} {17} {18} {19} to which a highly civilised tribe retreated, when they were hard pressed by barbarian enemies and from which, legend says, they descended later to conquer Peru and found the city of Cuzco, under the leadership of “three brothers who went out from three windows.” Now Tampa means a place of temporary abode and Tocco means windows; and in the principal plaza of this newly discovered city has been found a temple with three windows. Thus it is possible that it was actually a deserted city at the time of the Spanish invasion, held in reverence as the cradle city of the Incas. Anyhow, it escaped the knowledge and the ravages of the Spaniards and retains to-day its primitive state, unmixed with the additions of any subsequent civilisation. It occupies an immense area, only rivalled by that of Cuzco, and is constructed of stones, many of which weigh several tons, hewn into shape with stone hammers. Large portions of the mountain sides are built up with terraces, which were used for agricultural purposes and suggest an analogy with the “hanging gardens” of Babylon. No less than a hundred flights of steps connect the various parts of the city, which is divided into wards or “clan groups” by walled enclosures, enclosing houses and sometimes a central place of worship. The typical design of the houses is much like that of an Irish cabin—a ground story and a half story with gabled ends, each pierced by a small window. The wooden roofs have disappeared, but the stones, bored with a hole, to which the timbers were lashed, are still in place. In the burial caves bronze objects of fine workmanship have been discovered. Among other noted remains of early buildings is the Teocalli or “House of the God” of Guatusco in Costa Rica. It shows a truncated pyramid of masonry, rising in steps, the top forming a platform on which the temple stands. A still more important example of this form of structure must have been the Teocalli of Tenochtitlan, the ancient name of Mexico City. Built about 1446, it was destroyed by the Spaniards and part of its site is now occupied by the Cathedral. According to accounts it comprised a truncated pyramid, measuring at the top, which was 86 feet from the ground, 325 by 250 feet. In the ascent it was necessary to pass five times round the structure by a series of terraces. On the platform were several ceremonial buildings, the terrible image of the god Huitzilopochtli, supposed to be the one that is now in the Museum of Mexico City, and the sacrificial stone. Upon the latter were sacrificed immense numbers of human victims; report saying, though no doubt with exaggeration, that at the dedication of the temple seventy thousand were slaughtered to appease the sanguinary appetite of this hideous idol. The exteriors of the latest remains of Central America and Mexican primitive civilisation are embellished with ornament, the motives of which exhibit curved and rectangular meanders and interlacings, derived from the example of weaving and plaiting, as well as vegetable and animal forms. Often, as in the Casa de Monjas in Yucatan, the ornament is so profuse that it obscures the character of the structure, while the forms are fantastic and extravagant and in some instances horribly grotesque. Their intention apparently was to strike awe into the spectator. Most of what we have been studying in this chapter comes under the head of archaeology rather than of art. Nevertheless, since it represents the gradual approach of civilisation toward the artistic conception, it is well worth attention. BOOK II PRE-CLASSIC PERIOD CHAPTER I EGYPTIAN CIVILISATION The most ancient civilisation known to us is that of Egypt, and the knowledge of it is mainly derived from its architectural remains and the sculpture, painting, and inscriptions with which they are decorated. In addition, there are the records written upon papyri, the Biblical books of Exodus, and the history of Manetho, an Egyptian priest, who lived about 250 B.C. By this time Egypt had been subdued by Alexander the Great and had passed under the rule of the Ptolemies. So Manetho wrote in Greek, but only fragments of his work have survived, through quotations made from it by Eusebius, Josephus, and other historians. It is from all these materials that scholars have endeavoured to piece together some sort of connected history of the period covered by Manetho; the difficulty being increased by the fact that the Egyptian system of chronology reckoned by dynasties and computed the time by the years of the reigning sovereign, beginning anew with each succession. Furthermore, the inscriptions omit references to any interruptions that occurred in the sequence of the dynasties; recording only the periods of Egyptian supremacy and leaving out those in which the country suffered from the domination, short or long, of foreign conquerors. Accordingly, while Manetho names the first ruler of the First Dynasty as Menes, there is nothing but the conjecture of scholars as to the date; and the latter has been variously estimated as from 3892 to 5650 years before Christ. It will be a help at the outset to summarise the Dynasties under two heads: (A) those of Independent Egypt; (B) those of Subject Egypt. A. Dynasties of Independence. 1. I-X—The Ancient Empire; Capital, Memphis in Lower Egypt. Lasted about 1500 years. 2. XI-XIII—The Middle Empire, or First Theban Monarchy; Capital, Thebes in Upper Egypt. Lasted about 900 years. 3. XIV-XVII—Hyksos Invaders occupy Lower Egypt; the Egyptian princes rule as vassal princes in Upper Egypt: from 400- 500 years. {20} {21} {23} {22} {24} {25} {26} 4. XVIII-XX—The New Empire or Second Theban Monarchy. The Great Epoch of Egyptian power and art. Lasted about 600 years and ended about 1000 B.C. B. Dynasties of Subjection. 5. XXI-XXXII—The Period of Decadence under various foreign rulers; sometimes called the Saitic Period, because the first conquerors, the Libyans, made their capital at Sais. Lasted from about 1000-324 B.C. 6. XXXIII—The Ptolemaic Period of Greek rule, following the Conquest of Egypt by Alexander the Great; 324-31 B.C. 7. XXXIV—The Roman Rule: Egypt a Province of the Roman Empire; 31 B.C. to 395 A.D. At the latter date it became a part of the Eastern Roman Empire. In 389 the emperor, Theodosius, issued an edict proclaiming that Christianity was to be recognised as the religion of Egypt. In consequence of this change all knowledge of the old form of writing gradually disappeared and the antiquities of Egypt remained a sealed book for some fourteen centuries. The commencement of the modern interest in Egypt, as a mine of historical, archæological, and artistic lore, dates from Napoleon Bonaparte’s invasion, for he took with him a body of savants to explore the topography and nature of the country and its antiquities. The results of their labours were published in 1809-13 in twenty-five volumes, illustrated with 900 engravings. Meanwhile, in 1799, Captain Boussard, an engineer under Bonaparte, had discovered in the trenches a tablet of black basalt, inscribed with three kinds of writing, one of which was Greek. From the name of the village near which it was found it is called the Rosetta Stone and is now in the British Museum. Various attempts were made to decipher through the Greek the other two scripts, which were, respectively, hieroglyphic and the demotic or popular writing-form of ancient Egypt. Finally, the clue was discovered by the French scholar, Champollion. He found there had been three kinds of characters which represented successive developments of one system of writing: that in the hieroglyphic each letter was represented by a picture-form; that in the hieratic or priestly writing, these forms were represented in a freer and more fluent way, which was further simplified in the demotic characters, used generally by the scribes. Two of these had been repeated as nearly as possible in the Greek text. It is out of this discovery that Egyptology, or the science which concerns itself with the writing, language, literature, monuments, and history of ancient Egypt, is being gradually developed. Yet the subject is still involved in great uncertainty, owing to the difficulty in discovering principles of grammar, so that the translations of one scholar vary from those of others and all reach only the general sense, without assurance of accuracy. The civilisation of a country is always largely determined by its geographical character and the latter, in the case of Egypt, is of exceptional significance. Herodotus called Egypt the “Gift of the Nile.” The great river created it and has continued to preserve it. For the country comprises a narrow strip of soil varying from 4 to 16 miles in width, bordering the two sides of the stream, and extending in ancient times, as far as the second cataract, a distance of some 900 miles; approximating, that is to say, the distance from New York to Chicago or from London to Florence. It is bounded by rocky hills, and, as it reaches the Mediterranean, fans out into a delta of flat lands, the various streams being kept in place by dykes. The only thing that has saved this country from being swallowed up in the desert is the annual rise of the river, succeeding the tropical rains in the interior and the melting of the snow in the mountains of Abyssinia. This floods the lowlands and leaves behind an alluvial deposit, so richly fertile that the soil, warmed by constant sunshine, yields three harvests annually. Meanwhile, it is a remarkable fact that the records of ancient times tally with those of to-day, both showing that the amount of the rise varies but little from year to year. Before considering how these natural features of the country affected the civilisation of its inhabitants, a fact is to be noted. At the point of time when Manetho commenced his history of the Egyptians, variously estimated from about 4000 to about 6000 years before the Christian Era, they appear as a people already possessed of a high degree of civilisation, surrounded by inferior races. An immense interval of progress separates them from the earliest conditions that we considered in the previous chapter. By what stages did they reach this footing of superiority and through what length of time; moreover, what was the origin of their race? To these questions of profound interest there is no answer forthcoming. Some recent scholars are disposed to believe that the civilisation of Egypt, as we first meet with it, had been preceded by a still more remote civilisation in Babylonia; but as yet they have not shaken the accepted view that priority in civilisation belongs to the Land of the Nile. So far as knowledge exists, civilisation appeared first in Egypt and by a wonderful combination of circumstances, continued up to historic times. The tenacity of the civilisation of the Egyptians is a counterpart of the tenacity of character of the people, as a result primarily of their natural surroundings. Within the limits of Upper and Lower, that is to say of Southern and Northern Egypt, the Nile has no tributaries. Consequently, there was at first no urge to the inhabitants to push outward; and every inducement to cling to their own strip of territory. Moreover, since the periodic river floods were constant, there was every in...