GERMANY.

Fig. 117.—East Elevation of St. Paul's.Covent Garden.

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

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

Sir Christopher Wren is most frequently mentioned as the architect of St. Paul's Cathedral. This was commenced nine years after the great fire, and was thirty-five years in building. St. Paul's is the largest and finest Protestant cathedral in the world, and among all the churches of Europe that have been erected since the revival of Classical architecture, St. Peter's, at Rome, alone excels it (Fig. 118).

Fig. 118.—St. Paul's, London.From the West.

Although so many years were consumed in the building of St. Paul's, Sir Christopher Wren lived to superintend itall, and had the gratification of placing the topmost stone in the lantern of this splendid monument to his genius.

The western towers of Westminster Abbey are said to have been built after a design by Wren, but of this there is a doubt. Among his other works in church architecture are the steeple of Bow Church, London; the church of St. Stephen's, Walbrook; St. Bride's, Fleet Street, and St. James's, Piccadilly.

The royal palaces of Winchester and Hampton were designed by Wren, and many other well-known edifices, among which is Greenwich Hospital. He made some signal failures, but it is great praise to say, what is undoubtedly true, that, though he was a pioneer in the Renaissance architecture of England, and died a century and a half ago, no one of his countrymen has surpassed him, and we may well question whether any other English architect has equalled him.

Fig. 119.—St. George's Hall.Liverpool.

Churches, palaces, university buildings, and fine examples of municipal and domestic architecture are so numerous in England and other portions of Great Britain that we cannot speak of them in detail. The culmination of the taste for the imitation of Classical architecture was reached about the beginning of the present century, and among the most notable edifices in that manner are the British Museum, Fitzwilliam College, Cambridge, and St. George's Hall, Liverpool (Fig. 119).

A revival of Gothic Architecture has taken place in England in our own time. The three most prominent secular buildings in this style are Windsor Castle, the Houses of Parliament, and the New Museum, at Oxford. Of course, in the case of Windsor Castle, the work was a remodelling, but the reparations were so extensive as to almost equal a rebuilding. Sir Jeffry Wyatville had the superintendence of it, and succeeded in making it appear like an ancient building refitted in the nineteenth century—that is to say, it combines modern luxury and convenience in its interior with the exterior appearance of the castellated fortresses of a more barbarous age (Fig. 120).

Fig. 120.—Windsor Castle.

In the Houses of Parliament there was an attempt to carry out, even to the minutest detail, the Gothic style as it existed in the Tudor age, when there was an excess of ornament, most elaborate doorways, and the fan-tracery vaultings were decorated with pendent ornaments whichlook like clusters of stalactites. Sir Charles Barry was its architect. The present school of artists in England are never weary of abusing it; they call it a horror and declare its style to be obsolete. In fact, it is not the success at which Barry aimed; but it excels the other efforts to revive the Gothic in this day, not only in England, but in all Europe, and has many points to be admired in its plan and its detail, while the beauty of its sky-line must be admitted by all (Fig. 121).

Fig. 121.—The Houses of Parliament.London.

In the New Museum of Oxford, the Gothic is that of Lombardy, rather than the Early English. It is an example of the result of the teaching of Mr. Ruskin. It does not realize the expectations of those who advocated this manner of building, and has proved a great disappointment to the advanced theorists of a quarter of a century ago.

English architecture of the present day may be concisely described by saying that it is Gothic for churches, parsonage-houses, school-houses, and all edifices in which the clergy are interested or of which they have the oversight. On the other hand, palaces, town-halls, municipal buildings, club-houses, and such structures as come within the care of the laity, are almost without exception in the Classic style.

Neither of these orders seems to be exactly suited to the climate of England or to the wants of its people; therefore, neither would satisfy the demands of the ancients, who taught that the architecture of a nation should be precisely adapted to its climate and to the purposes for which the edifices are intended. In fact, the ancients carried their ideas of fitness so far that one could tell at a glance the object for which a structure had been designed; we know that it is not possible to comply with this law in this day, although it is doubtless in accord with the true ideal of what perfect architecture should be. At the present day there is little doubt that the edifices of the Church and clergy are far more praiseworthy and true architecturally than are those for secular and domestic uses.

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

When we begin to speak of modern German architecture at this point, we do not omit anything important, for the struggles of the Reformation, and the results of the Thirty Years' War were such, that no great architectural advances were attempted for a long time. Again, the division of Germany into many small principalities, and the establishment of many little courts so divided the wealth of the German people into small portions, that no one was rich enough to undertake large buildings. There was no one great central city as in France and England, and no one sovereign was rich enough to adorn his capital with splendid edifices or to be a magnificent patron of art and artists after the fashion of the "Grand Monarque" in France.

Before taking up the Revival, however, I wish, for two reasons, to give a picture of the Brandenburg Gate, at Berlin. This gate was erected between 1784 and 1792. It is important because such monuments are more rare in Germany than in other European countries, especially of the time in which this was built, and because it is one of the best imitations of Greek art that exists in any nation (Fig. 122).

Fig. 122.—The Brandenburg Gate.Berlin.

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

The effect of the German revival of Greek art is more plainly seen in Munich than in any other city. It is the capital of Bavaria, and one of its kings, Louis I., while he was young and had not yet become king, resided at Rome; he was a passionate lover of art, and he resolved that when he came to the throne he would make his capital famous for beautiful things. Above all, he desired to imitateall that he had most admired in the countries he had visited, and also the art of the ancients as he knew it from models and pictures. For this reason it happens that Munich is a collection of copies of buildings which have existed in other countries and in past ages, and as these buildings, which were first made in marble and stone, are mostly copied in plaster in Munich, much of their beauty is lost; and since these copied buildings are not used for the same purposes for which the ancient ones were intended, the whole effect of them is very far from pleasing or satisfactory. In fact, the result is just such as must always follow the imitation of a beautiful object, when no proper regard is paid to the use to be made of it. If, for example, a fine copy of a light and airy Swiss châlet should be madein the United States of America, and placed on some business street in one of our cities, and used for a bank building, we could not deny that it was an exact copy of a building which is good in its way; but it would be so unsuited to its position and its uses, that the man who built it there would be counted as insane or foolish. And this is the effect of the modern architecture of Munich; it seems as if King Louis must have been a madman to expend so much time and money in this absurd kind of imitative architecture, and yet it is very interesting to visit this city and see these edifices.

Of the Munich churches erected under Louis I. that of St. Ludwig is in the Byzantine order; the Aue-Kirche is in the pointed German Gothic, and the Basilica is like a Roman basilica of the fifth century. It resembles that ofSt. Paul's-without-the-Walls; it was begun in 1835 and completed in 1850. In a vault beneath this basilica Louis and his Queen, Theresa, are buried. The picture given here shows its extreme simplicity; its whole effect is solemn and satisfactory; still one must regret that since it is so fine up to a certain point, it should not have been made still finer (Fig. 123).

Fig. 123.—The Basilica at Munich.

The Ruhmeshalle, or Hall of Fame, at Munich, is an interesting and somewhat unique edifice. It is a portico of marble with forty-eight Doric columns, each twenty-six feet high. Against the walls are brackets holding busts of celebrated Germans who have lived since 1400. In front of the portico stands the colossal bronze statue of Bavaria. She is represented as a protectress with a lion by her side; in the right hand she holds a sword, and a chaplet in the left; it is sixty-one and a half feet high, and the pedestal raises it twenty-eight and a half feet more; inside, a staircase leads up into the head, where there are seats for eight persons. The view from the top of this statue is fine, andso extensive that in a favorable atmosphere the heights of the Alps can be discerned. The hill upon which the Ruhmeshalle is built is to the south of Munich, and is called the Theresienhöhe. The grand statue is intended to be the principal object of interest here, and the portico is made so low as to throw the figure out and show it off to advantage; altogether it is one of the most successful architectural works in Munich (Fig. 124).

Fig. 124.—The Ruhmeshalle.Near Munich.

The Glyptothek, or Sculpture Gallery, the Pinakothek, or Picture Gallery, the Royal Palace, the Public Library, the War Office, the University, Blind School, other palaces and secular buildings, all belong to the time of the Revival in Germany. The Ludwig Strasse, which King Louis fondly hoped to make one of the most beautiful avenues in the world, is—with its Roman arch at one end, and a weak copy of the Loggia dei Lanzi at the other—a tiresome, meaningless, architectural failure.

Fig. 125.—The Museum.Berlin.

The Museum of Berlin is a striking result of the same Revival of Classic architecture, and is far more splendid than anything in Munich (Fig. 125).

In Dresden the most important works in this style are the New Theatre and Picture Gallery. The last is almostan exact reproduction of the Pinakothek of Munich. All over Germany the effects of this Revival are more or less prominent, but I shall speak of but one other edifice, the Walhalla (Fig. 126).

Fig. 126.—The Walhalla.

This is also a Temple of Fame, and is situated about six miles from Ratisbon. It overlooks the River Danube from a height of more than three hundred feet. It was begun in 1830, and was twelve years in building, costing eight millions of florins. It is of white marble, and on the exterior is an exact reproduction of the Parthenon at Athens. The interior is divided into two parts by an entablature, which supports fourteen caryatides, made from colored marbles. These figures in turn support a second entablature, on which is a frieze in eight compartments, on which is sculptured scenes representing the history of Germany from its early days to the time of the introduction of Christianity. Along the lower wall there are one hundred busts of illustrious Germans who had lived from the earliest days of Germany down to those of the poet Goethe.

The grounds about the Walhalla are laid out in walks, and from them there are fine, extensive views. Taken by itself there is much to admire in the Walhalla. The sculptures arouse an enthusiasm about Germany, her history, and the men who have helped to make it, in spite of the strange unfitness with which the artists have mingled Grecian myths and German sagas. But aside from this sort of interest the whole thing seems incongruous and strangely unsuited to its position; one writer goes so far as to say of it that "Minerva, descending in Cheapside to separate two quarrelling cabmen, could hardly be more out of place." And yet it is true that the Walhalla is the only worthy rival to St. George's Hall, Liverpool, as an example of the possible adaptability of Greek or Roman Architecture to the needs and uses of our own days.

In speaking of theatres I will first give a list of the most important ones in Europe, as they are given by Fergusson in his "History of Modern Architecture."

The Opera House of La Scala, at Milan, is generally said to be the finest of all for seeing and hearing what goes on upon the stage: it was begun in 1776 and finished two years later. San Carlo, Naples, holds the second place, and was first erected in 1737, but was almost destroyed by fire in 1816, and was afterward thoroughly rebuilt.

The new Opera House of Paris is interesting to us because it has been built so recently and so much written and said of it that we are familiar with it. Any description that would do it justice would occupy more space than we can afford for it, but this cut (Fig. 127) gives an excellent idea of its size and exterior appearance. It is distinguished by great richness of material and profusion of ornament, its interior decorations being especially splendid. It has been criticised as lacking repose and dignity, but its elegance and magnificence compel admiration.

Fig. 127.—The New Opera House.Paris.

Music halls are only another sort of theatre, and have come into great favor in recent days, especially in England.The Albert Hall, South Kensington, is the finest music hall that has been erected. It seats eight thousand people, besides accommodating an orchestra of two hundred and a chorus of one thousand singers; it is one hundred and thirty-six feet from the floor to the highest part of the ceiling. This hall has some defects, but is so far successful as to prove that a theatre or music hall could be so constructed as to seat ten thousand persons and permit them to hear the music as distinctly as it is heard in many halls where only two or three thousand can be comfortable.

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

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

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

Fig. 128.—The United States Capitol.Washington.

The National Capitol at Washington, which is the principal edifice in the United States, was begun in 1793, when General Washington laid the foundation-stone; the main portion was completed in 1830; two wings and the dome have since been added, and its presentsize is greater than that of any other legislative building in the world, except the British Houses of Parliament (Fig. 128).

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

Several of the State Capitols illustrate the manner of building which I described above. This cut of the Capitol of Ohio is an excellent example of it (Fig. 129).

Fig. 129—State Capitol.Columbus, Ohio.

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

Fig. 130.—Sir William Pepperell's House.Kittery Point, Maine.

This fine old house (Fig. 130) shows the plain, homely, yet quaint style of many of the mansions of the Colonial period. It was built near the beginning of the last century, and occupied by Sir William Pepperell until his death. Its interior, with heavy wainscoting of solid mahogany, was more imposing by far than the exterior. The Van Rensselaer homestead at Albany is an excellent example of a more stately house, possessing much dignity and impressiveness.

The Middle period was a time when domestic architecture, still without any originality and losing much of the independence of the Colonial, copied more closely from foreign models. Some fine old mansions belong to this period, which covered the last years of the last century and the first half of this. The celebrated Cragie House at Cambridge, occupied by the poet Longfellow; "Elmwood," the home of James Russell Lowell; "Bedford House," in Westchester County, New York, the home of the Hon. John Jay, are to be referred to this period; and so is the imposing "Old Morrisania," at Morrisania, New York, the old Morris mansion (Fig. 131).

Fig. 131.—"Old Morrisania."Morrisania, New York.

It is modelled after a French château, and was erected by General Morris after his return from France in 1800. Itis one of the most striking among the mansions of its time, and both its interior and exterior are highly interesting.

These views serve to illustrate the want of anything like a regular style, of which I spoke above; but they show how many different forces were at work to influence building in the Modern period. This division is meant to extend to and include the present time, and so great is the diversity of styles now employed that in a work like this it would be idle to attempt anything like an enumeration of them, and still less to try and determine their origin and importance. I can only give you one example of the handsome and costly homes which are being built to-day, and leave you to observe others as you now see them everywhere about the country (Fig. 132). A modern writer on American architecture claims that in private dwellings an American order is gradually being developed by the changes made to adapt foreign forms to our climate, and especially to the brilliancy of the sunlight here. All this is so difficult to define, however, that it would be impossible to show it clearly in the limits of a book like this, even if it exists.

Fig. 132.—Residence at Irvington, New York.

What is called the "Queen Anne" style, modelled upon the English fashion of the time of that monarch, is very widely used in country houses at the present time, sometimes in conjunction with the Colonial, which also exists as an independent style. The tendency of domestic architecture is to make everything quaint and picturesque, though this is not so far carried to extremes as was the case a few years since.

In public buildings many splendid edifices have been erected of late years. The imitation of classic forms which was formerly the fashion, and which is so strikingly exhibited by Girard College, Philadelphia, is now almost entirely laid aside. A lighter, less constrained style, which may be called eclectic—which means selecting—because it takes freely from any and all styles whatever suits its purpose,is arising; and as this selecting is being every year more and more intelligently done, and as original ideas are constantly being incorporated with those chosen, the prospects for architecture are more promising than ever before in this country. The Casino, at Newport, is a fine example of a modern building; and the still more recent Casino in New York shows a fine example of the adapting of ideas from Saracenic architecture to American uses. The Capitol at Albany has many fine features, but it is the work of several designers who did not harmonize. Memorial Hall, at Cambridge, is one of the more striking of modern American buildings, but its sky-line—that is, its outline as seen against the sky—lacks simplicity and repose.

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

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

Abacus.—The uppermost portion of the capital of a column, upon which rested the weight above.

Aisle.—The lateral divisions of a church; more properly, the side subdivisions.

Amphitheatre.—A round or oval theatre.

Apse.—The semi-circular or polygonal termination to the choir or aisles of a church.

Arcade.—A series of arches supported on piers or columns.

Arch.—A construction of wedge-shaped blocks of stone or of bricks, of curved outline, spanning an open space.

Architrave.—(1) The lowest division of the entablature, in Classic architecture resting on the abacus. (2) The moulding used to ornament the margin of an opening.

Base.—The foot of a column or wall.

Basilica.—Originally a Roman hall of justice; afterward an early Christian church.

Buttress.—A projection built from a wall for strength.

Byzantine.—The Christian architecture of the Eastern church, sometimes called the round arched; named from Byzantium (Constantinople).

Capital.—The head of a column or pilaster.

Caryatid.—A statue of a woman used as a column.

Cathedral.—A church containing the seat of a bishop.

Cella.—That part of the temple within the walls.

Chamfer.—A slope or bevel formed by cutting off the edge of an angle.

Column.—A pillar or post, round or polygonal; the term includes the base, shaft, and capital.

Composite Order.—SeeOrder.

Corinthian Order.—SeeOrder.

Cornice.—The horizontal projection crowning a building or some portion of a building. Each classic order had its peculiar cornice.

Crypt.—A vault beneath a building.

Dome.—A cupola or spherical convex roof.

Doric Order.—SeeOrder.

Entablature.—In classic styles all the structure above the columns except the gable. The entablature had three members, the architrave or epistyle, the frieze, and the cornice.

Entasis.—The swelling of a column near the middle to counteract the appearance of concavity caused by an optical delusion.

Epistyle.—SeeArchitrave.

Façade.—The exterior face of a building.

Frieze.—The middle member of an entablature.

Gable.—The triangular-shaped wall supporting the end of a roof.

Gargoyle.—A projecting water-spout carved in stone or metal.

Hexastyle.—A portico having six columns in front.

Intercolumniation.—The clear space between two columns.

Ionic Order.—SeeOrder.

Metope.—The space between the triglyphs in the frieze of the Doric Order.

Minaret.—A slender tower with balconies from which Mohammedan hours of prayer are called.

Mosaic.—Ornamental work made by cementing together small pieces of glass, stone, or metal in given designs.

Nave.—The central aisle of a church; the western part of the church occupied by the congregation.

Obelisk.—A quadrangular monolith terminating in a pyramid.

Order.—An entire column with its appropriate entablature. There are usually said to be five orders: Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, and Composite; the first and last are, however, only varieties of the Doric and Corinthian developed by the Romans. The peculiarities of the orders have been described in the body of the book. When more than one order was used in a building, the heavier and plainer, the Doric and Tuscan, are placed beneath the others.

Pediment.—In classic architecture what thegable(which see) was in later styles.

Peristyle.—A court surrounded by a row of columns; also the colonnade itself surrounding such a space.

Pier.—A solid wall built to support a weight.

Pilaster.—A square column, generally attached to the wall.

Pillar.—SeeColumn.

Plinth.—A square member forming the lower division of the base of a column.

Polychrome.—Many-colored; applied to the staining of walls or architectural ornaments.

Quatrefoil.—A four-leaved ornament or opening.

Shaft.—The middle portion of a column, between base and capital.

Story.—The portion of a building between one floor and the next.

Triglyph.—An ornament upon the Doric frieze consisting of three vertical, angular channels separated by narrow, flat spaces.

Back to Index Next