344

ficult to accomplish what was achieved by the builders of the middle ages. In edifices erected at the present day, the Grecian and Gothic outlines are commonly employed to the exclusion of the rest. In choosing between them, the fancy of the builder, more than any positive rule of fitness, must direct the decision. Modern dwelling-houses have necessarily a style of their own, as far as stories and apartments, and windows and chimneys, can give them one. No more of the styles of former ages can be applied to them, than what may be called the unessential and decorative parts. In general, the Grecian style, from its right angles and straight entablatures, is more convenient, and fits better with the distribution of our common edifices, than the pointed and irregular Gothic. The expense, also, is generally less, especially if any thing like thorough and genuine Gothic is attempted, a thing, however, rarely undertaken, as yet, in the U. States. But the occasional introduction of the Gothic outline, and the partial employment of its ornaments, has undoubtedly an agreeable effect, both in public and private edifices; and we are indebted to it, among other things, for the spire, a structure exclusively Gothic, which, though often misplaced, has become an object of general approbation, and a pleasing landmark to cities and villages. (For further information, see, among other works, Bigelow's Technology, Boston, 1829, p. 112-152, from which the above article is extracted, with the exception of the first paragraph.)

ARCHITECTURE, history of. The first habitations of men were such as nature afforded, with but little labor on the part of the occupant, and sufficient to satisfy his simple wants,-huts, grottos and tents. But as soon as men rose above the state of rude nature, formed societies, and cultivated the soil, they began to build more durable and more commodious habitations. They wrought the materials with more care, fitted the parts together more closely and neatly, prepared bricks of clay and earth, which they first dried in the air, and afterwards baked by the fire; they smoothed stones, and joined them, at first without cement. After they had learned to build houses, they began to erect temples for their gods, who first dwelt with them in caverns, huts and tents. These temples were larger and more splendid than the habitations of men. Thus architecture became a fine art, which was first displayed on the temples; afterwards, on the habitations of princes, and public

buildings, and, at last, with the progress of wealth and refinement, became a universal want of society. The haughty palace appeared in the place of the wretched hut of reeds and clay; the rough trunk was transformed into a lofty column, and the natural vault of a cavern into the splendid Pantheon. Colonnades, halls, courts, and various ornaments now appeared. Stieglitz contends that the fundamental forms of the ancient Egyptian and Grecian architecture probably originated in structures of stone, and not from those of wood, as Hirt maintains in his History of the Architecture of the Ancients. The most ancient buildings of the Indians were modelled on the structure of caverns. To the most ancient nations known to us, among whom architecture had made some progress, belong the Babylonians, whose most celebrated buildings were the temple of Belus, the palace and the hanging gardens of Semiramis; the Assyrians, whose capital, Nineveh, was rich in splendid buildings; the Phoenicians, whose cities, Sidon, Tyre, Aradus and Sarepta, were adorned with equal magnificence; the Israelites, whose temple was considered as a wonder of architecture; the Syrians and the Philistines. No architectural monument of these nations has, however, been transmitted to us. But we find subterraneous temples of the Hindoos, hewn out of the solid rock, upon the islands Elephanta and Salsetta. Of the Persian architecture, the ruins of Persepolis still remain; of the Egyptian, obelisks, pyramids, temples, palaces, sepulchres; of the Etruscan, some sepulchres and portions of city-walls.— The character of this elder architecture was immovable firmness, gigantic height, prodigal splendor, which excited admiration and astonishment, but comparatively little pleasure. The Greeks were the first who passed from the rough and gigantic to a noble simplicity and dignity. The Doric order of columns characterizes this first period. The greatest masters, Phidias, Ictinus, Callicrates and others, encouraged and supported by Pericles, emulated each other, as soon as peace at home and abroad was restored. The beautiful temple of Minerva was erected upon the Acropolis of Athens, also the Propylæum, the Odeum, and other splendid buildings. An equal taste for the arts arose in the Peloponnesus and in Asia Minor. A high degree of simplicity was united with majestic grandeur and elegance of form. The beauties of architecture were displayed not only in tem

ples, but also in theatres, odeums, colonnades, market-places and gymnasia. The Ionic and Corinthian columns were added to the Doric. At the end of the Peloponnesian war, the perfection of architecture was gone. A noble simplicity had given place to excess of ornament. This was the character of the art at the time of Alexander, who founded a number of new cities. But a strict regularity hitherto prevailed in the midst of this overcharged decoration. After the death of Alexander, 323 B. C., the increasing love of gaudy splendor hastened the decline of the art more and more. In Greece, it was afterwards but little cultivated, and, in the edifices of the Seleucidæ in Asia, and of the Ptolemies in Egypt, an impure taste prevailed. The Romans had no temples, or similar public edifices, equal to the Grecian master-pieces, although they had early applied their industry to other objects of architecture, viz., to aqueducts and sewers. The capitol and the temple of the capitoline Jupiter were erected by Etruscan architects. But, soon after the second Punic war, 200 B. C., they became acquainted with the Greeks. Sylla was the first who introduced the Grecian architecture to Rome; and he, as also Marius and Cæsar, erected large temples in this and in other cities. But under Augustus the art first rose to the perfection of which it was capable at that time. He encouraged the Greek artists, who had exchanged their country for Rome, and erected, partly from policy, many splendid works of architecture. Agrippa built temples (the Pantheon), aqueducts and theatres. Private habitations were adorned with columns and marble. Splendid villas were built, of which the rich Romans often possessed several. The interior was adorned with works of art, obtained from Greece. The walls were covered with thin marble plates, or were painted, and divided into panes, in the middle of which were represented mythological or historical subjects. They were also surrounded with the most elegant borders. These borders were what we call grotesques. Almost all the successors of Augustus embellished the city more or less, erected splendid palaces and temples, and adorned, like Adrian, even the conquered countries with them. Constantine the Great transferred the imperial residence from Rome to Constantinople, so that nothing more was done for the embellishment of Rome. -But, at the time when the Romans received the art from the Greeks, it had already lost, among the latter, its perfec

345

tion and purity. In Rome, it rose, indeed, in a short time, to its former height, but soon degenerated, with the continuallyincreasing magnificence of the emperors, into extravagance of ornament. About this time, the Roman or Composite column originated, which was employed in temples and splendid buildings. In the time of Nero, whose golden palace is celebrated, the exterior and interior of the buildings were profusely adorned. Adrian, who encouraged artists as much as possible, was not able to restore a noble and simple taste in architecture. Instead of imitating the beautiful models already existing, the endeavor, in his time, was to invent new styles, and to embellish the beautiful more and more. Now originated the many curved and twisted ornaments, the high pedestal under the columns, the numerous bass-reliefs on the exterior of buildings, the flutings of the columns, the reduction of the same according to a curved line, the coupled columns, the reduced pilasters behind the columns, the small columns between larger ones, the round and cut pediments, and the concave friezes. Thus the art was practised from the time of Vespasian to the reign of the Antonines. Works were produced, in this period, which may still be considered as master-pieces, but which want the great and noble style of the Greeks. In the provinces, taste became still more corrupt. Architecture declined continually after the Antonines; more ornaments were continually added, which is proved particularly by the arch of the goldsmiths, so called, in Rome. Alexander Severus, indeed, himself a connoisseur, did something for its improvement, but it rapidly declined under his successors. The buildings of this time are either overcharged with mean and trifling ornaments, as those of Palmyra, erected about 260 A. D., or they border on the rude, like those of Rome, erected under Constantine. Little was done, under the following emperors, for the embellishment of the cities, on account of the continually disturbed state of the empire. Justinian, however, built much. His principal edifice was the church of St. Sophia, at Constantinople. The beautiful works of ancient architecture were almost entirely destroyed by the Goths, Vandals, and other barbarians, in Italy, Spain, Greece, Asia and Africa; and whatever escaped destruction remained in neglect. Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, a friend of the arts, endeavored to preserve and restore the an cient buildings, and even erected several

346

new ones, the ruins of which are still to be seen in Ravenna and Verona. We may consider this period as the era of the origin of modern art. We see a new style taking place of the ancient classical architecture, and eventually extending as far as the conquests of the Goths, through Italy, France, Spain, Portugal, a part of Germany, and even to England, whither, however, the Goths did not penetrate. Whether this modern architecture, which is called Gothic, originated from the Germans, is not decided. We find, in the buildings erected under Theodoric, nothing attempted but simplicity, strength, and the display of national taste in their exterior (the interior is unknown to us). But the buildings erected during the Lombard dominion in Italy (from 568), and all the monastic architecture of that time, have been erroneously called Gothic. Since the error was perceived, it has been distinguished, by the name of the old Gothic, from the proper Gothic, which is called the modern Gothic. The Lombards entertained no respect for antiquities, and neither spared nor preserved them. Whatever they built was tasteless and faulty. On the exterior of their churches they placed small semicircular columns; and small pillars in a row along the cornice of the pediments; in the interior, coarse pillars united by semicircular arches; the small windows and doors were finished with semicircles; the columns, capitals and arches were often overlaid with incongruous sculpture; the roofs of the naves covered with beams and boards, which were afterwards changed into arches, and, on this account, often required arched buttresses on the outside. This Lombard style in architecture clearly proves the decline of science and art. It was employed, in the 17th century, in Pavia, the chief city of the Lombard kingdom, in the erection of the churches of St. John and St. Michael; at Parma, in the church of St. John; at Bergamo, in the church of St. Julia; in the chapel of Altenötting, in Bavaria; in the castle of Nuremberg, in the Scottish church at Ratisbon, &c. The architects driven from Constantinople (Byzantium) were the first who combined with it the use of the Ionic pedestals and columns, provided with capitals formed according to their own taste, among which were twisted ones. In this Lombard-Byzantine style were erected the cathedrals of Bamberg, Worms and Mentz, also the church Miniato al Monte, near Florence, and the most ancient part of the minster of Stras

burg. Cupolas were afterwards added, as used in the East, and these, as well as the tasteless capitals, and the many slender pillars and minarets, of which we often see 2 rows, one on another, indicate the proper Byzantine or Oriental style of architecture. In this style were erected, besides the church of St. Sophia in Constantinople, and others, the church of St. Mark, in Venice, the Baptisterium and the cathedral of Pisa, and the church of St. Vitalis, in Ravenna. The Normans, who had settled in Sicily, built the cathedral of Messina upon the foundation of an old temple, a huge but tasteless edifice, in which, by means of the changes made in different centuries, we may observe, at the same time, the rise and fall of the art. The Vandals, Alans, Suevi and Visigoths had penetrated into Spain and Portugal: the Arabs and Moors expelled them in the 8th century, and destroyed the kingdom of the Goths. The Mussulman conquerors had, at that time, almost exclusive possession of the arts and sciences. Saracen architects rose in Greece, Italy, Sicily, and other countries: after some time, many Christians, particularly Greeks, joined them, and formed together a fraternity, who kept secret the rules of their art, and whose members recognised one another by particular signs. (See Freemasons.) At this period, three different styles of architecture prevailed-the Arabian, a peculiar style, formed after Greek models; the Moorish, which originated in Spain, out of the remains of Roman edifices; and the modern Gothic, which originated in the kingdom of the Visigoths, in Spain, through the mixture of the Arabian and Moorish architecture, and flourished from the 11th until the 15th century. The 2 first styles differ but little from each other: the Moorish style is principally distinguished from the Arabian by arches in the form of a horse-shoe. But the Gothic, or old German, is very different. Swinburne mentions the following marks of distinction: The Gothic arches are pointed; the Arabian, circular: the Gothic churches have pointed and straight towers; the mosques terminate in globes, and have here and there minarets, covered with a ball or a cone: the Arabian walls are adorned with Mosaic and stucco, which we find in no ancient church in the Gothic style. The Gothic columns often stand united in groups, over which is placed a very low entablature, upon which arches are erected; or the arches stand immediately upon the capitals of the col

348

in the 12th century, a German architect, named William (Guglielmo), and, in the 13th, Jacob, with the surname Capo, who died in 1262, and his pupil or son, Arnolf, are mentioned as having built churches and convents in Florence. The modern Gothic style passed from the churches and abbeys to the castles, palaces, bridges and city gates, many of which were built in this manner; e. g., in Milan, 16 city gates of marble, and several new palaces; in Padua, 7 bridges, and 3 new palaces; in Genoa, 2 docks and a splendid aqueduct; and the town of Asti, in 1280, almost entirely. Architecture was continually improving in Italy, particularly in the 14th century. Galeazzo Visconti finished the great bridge at Pavia, and built a palace which had not then its equal. About the same time, the famous cathedral of Milan was erected. The marquises of Este erected handsome edifices at Ferrara, and Albert the splendid palace at Belsiore. In Bologna, the great church of St. Petronius was begun, and, in Florence, the famous tower of the cathedral. The 15th century, in which the study of ancient architecture was revived, was greatly distinguished. The dukes of Ferrara, Borso and Ercole of Este, were active patrons of architecture. Duke Francesco embellished Milan with the ducal palace, the castle Porta di Giove, the hospital and other edifices. Ludovico Sforza erected the buildings of the university at Pavia and the hospital of Milan. The popes adorned Rome, and Lorenzo de' Medici, Florence, with splendid buildings. The artists returned to the monuments of antiquity, and studied their beautiful forms and just proportions. The most illustri ous architects of this time were Filippo Brunelleschi, who built, at Florence, the dome of the cathedral, the church S. Spirito, and the palace Pitti, besides many edifices at Milan, Pisa, Pesaro and Mantua; Battista Alberti, who wrote, at the same time, on architecture; Michelozzi Bramante, who commenced the building of St. Peter's; Michael Angelo Buonaotti, who erected its magnificent dome; and Giocondo, who built much in France, and afterwards directed, with Raphael, the building of the church of St. Peter's. These were followed by others, who ceeded in their spirit-Palladio, Scamozzi, Serlio, Barozzio, known by the name of Vignola. They are the founders of the existing taste in architecture. That, however, they studied their art in those works of antiquity which had already deviated from the early purity and elevated

pro

grandeur, is evident in their buildings, from the many curved and twisted ornaments, the circular, irregular and cut pediments, the coupled columns, high pedestals, and other things, which were unknown to architecture at the time of Pericles. Thus a new period in architecture had begun in Italy. Italian masters, and young artists sent to Italy, introduced the Roman taste into foreign countries, which gradually supplanted the Gothic.-Since that time, architecture has experienced different destinies in different countries. It has risen and declined at different periods; yet laudable attempts have been made, in recent times, to advance it to its true perfection, though we cannot affirm that they have succeeded every where.-In America, the pure Grecian architecture is gradually prevailing, either because this style is founded on plainer principles than the others, or because the Grecian really deserves to be called a republican style, since it is better adapted than the Gothic to small buildings, and does not require large and splendid edifices (a great number of which can never exist in a democracy), in order to display all its beauty. (For an account of modern architecture in different countries, see the respective articles.)

ARCHIVES; a collection of written documents, containing the rights, privileges, claims, treaties, constitutions, &c., of a family, corporation, community, city or kingdom; also, the place where such documents are kept. There are, accordingly, private and public or state archives. Archives were known among the most ancient people. The Israelites, Greeks and Romans had them in their temples, and the Christians, at first, preserved important manuscripts with the sacred vessels and relics, till proper places were assigned to them. Those governments which transact every thing by writing have, of course, much larger archives than others; thus the archives in every branch of government in Prussia and Austria are immense.-According to Wageinselius, the archives of the German empire contain very few documents before the time of the emperor Rodolph of Hapsburg (who was elected in 1273), or even of the subsequent century. At the end of the 15th century, and at the beginning of the 16th, under Maximilian I, the archives of the empire received a new form, and have been preserved with great care. Some historians, (e. g., Schmidt, in his History of the Germans), have made the most diligent