Abbildungen der Seite
PDF
EPUB

"

the works occurs in 1241, 25th Henry III., for certain works to be done at Windsor; in later times it appears in connection with the palaces at Westminster and elsewhere; and such an appointment it will be remembered was held by William of Wykeham, in 1356, and by Geoffrey Chaucer, in 1389. The "devizor " already named, although it occurs sc carly as about 1470, is a title to which but one name has been attached, that of John of Padua, on the faith of a passage in Walpole's Anecdote:

320. These careful notices are concluded by the statement that "there is one circumstance respecting nearly all these officers which perhaps needs a passing comment. Very many of them were either ecclesiastics or were rewarded with ecclesiastic preferment. But it must be remembered that, during the period to which our attention has been confined, the church was the only field for exertion open to those of the nobility and gentry who were not inclined to embrace the profession of arms; it also afforded a means by which to obtain a livelihood; therefore the clergy, so called, would thus secure the offices at the disposal of the monarch and of the nobility. Some names, however, appear to have been unconnected with the church." It might be added that in late times in France, eminent architects were appointed abbés, and from their establishments derived the funds for the remuneration of their services. "It is very difficult to understand the duties of these officers. The overseer would be, perhaps, the most easily explained, but his Latin designation as used in the Records, is unknown to us unless the Latin word “Supervisor " has been the one the translators have found. The English word supervisor, if that of steward be questionable, is, perhaps, best kept for those who, acting on behalf of others, as Wykeham for the monarch, have yet no grounds to be considered the designers of the building. The master of the works, as he was called in the monastic establishments, and later in Scotland, held the place of the English king's chief professional man, and was, no doubt, one of the talented advisers of the day. The king's clerk of the works clearly stood in the place of the architect. The master or keeper of the fabric was probably the keeper of the whole structure; and the keeper of the works was, perhaps, only the custodian of the particular works then in progress; the edifice, under those circumstances, being developed by the master of the works or by the master mason. But there is one officer of whom we should desire to know much, but of whom nothing whatever is known; this is the devizor of buildings."

[ocr errors]

321. We would refer the student to the paper by Mr. Ferrey, read at the same society in 1864, Some remarks upon the works of the early medieval architects, Gundulph, Flambard, William of Sens, and others. The subject will be well concluded by quoting the result of Mr. Street's enquiry into the designers of the buildings in Spain. He states in his Account of Gothic Architecture in Spain, 1865, p. 464, that “it is often, and generally thoughtlessly, assumed that most of the churches of the middle ages were designed by monks or clerical architects. So far as Spain is concerned, the result at which we arrive is quite hostile to this assumption, for in all the names of architects that I have noticed there are but three who were clerics. In our own country it is indeed commonly asserted that the bishops and abbots were themselves the architects of the great churches built under their rule. Gundulph, Flambard, Walsingham, and Wykeham, have all been so described. but I suspect upon insufficient evidence; and those who have devoted the most study and time to the subject seem to be the least disposed to allow the truth of the claim made for them. The contrary evidence which I am able to adduce from Spain certainly serves to confirm these doubts. In short, the common belief in a race of clerical architects and in ubiquitous bodies of freemasons, seems to me to be altogether erroneous.' This work treats very minutely on the position of the designer of the buildings in Spain. (See par. 395.) 322. Among other matters connected with the progress of the art. Stieglitz, in 1834, brought to the notice of the public, the marks on courses of stone in many buildings in Germany, and elsewhere, called “mason's marks," which by some have been supposed to be the personal marks of the masters of the works, but which are, in fact, nothing more than directions to the setters, and, indeed, are used by masons up to the present hour. Some of these, however, are curious in form and figure, and were most probably determined by the lodges. Their forms are principally rectangular, of forty-five degrees, of the equilateral triangle, of the intersection of horizontal and perpendicular lines, and circular. Some of them have so great a resemblance to Runic characters, that therefore it has been argued the Anglo-Saxons taught the Germans architecture, and that they cultivated the art, and had masonic lodges among themselves, at a very early period; but this seems rather unreasonable; neither is it likely that the natives of this island were the chief artists employed on foreign cathedrals, though some may have been. That these marks, however, were used from some traditional knowledge has also been urged. Thus the mark, the cruciform hammer of Thor, is found in the minster at Bâle, and repeated in the sixteenth century in the church at Oschatz. This mark abounds in a great variety of phases,-on medals, on annulets, in the museum of the Royal Academy of Copenhagen; and on many Runic monuments, as mentioned by Hobhouse in his illustrations of Childe Harold. It is also found on the sacred jar of the Vaishnavas (Asiatic Researches, vol. viii.). At the Château de

Coucy (13th century) is found 4, the Runic letter S. One mark of frequent recurrence

is, an inverted Runic T. It may be seen at Fribourg, at the beautiful church of St. Catherine at Oppenheim, and at Strasburg, connected with the letter N. Without founding any hypothesis upon the singular agreement of these marks with the sixteen letters of the Runic alphabet, it is at least a curious matter for further examination. Hobhouse, as above mentioned, states, that a character resembling the hammer of Thor is found in some Spanish inscriptions, and he seems to think it bears affinity to fig. 161. which is often drawn by boys in Italy, though no meaning is ascribed to it; this figure is found at New Shoreham church; Archeological Journal, vii., p. 390.

Fig. 161

322a. The carliest lodge of which we have any authentic knowledge, was that of Strasburg. Erwin von Steinbach seems to have been at the head of it; he appears also to have been the first secular architect of importance that arose, and to have had privileges of great importance conceded to him by the emperor, Rodolph of Hapsburg. This lodge was regularly constituted, with power, round a certain extent of territory, to maintain order and obedience among the workmen under its jurisdiction. In 1278, Pope Nicholas III. granted to the bedy a bull of absolution, which was renewed by his successors up to the time, in the fourteenth century, when Benedict XII. occupied the papal chair. Το Iodoque Dotzinger, master of the works at Strasburg in 1452, the merit seems attributable of so forming an alliance between the different lodges of Germany, as to induce a greater uniformity of practice. Whether from the central lodge of Strasburg, whence certainly branched lodges at Cologne, Vienna, and Zurich, branched also the lodges of France, England, and Italy, in which last named country one existed at Orvieto, it is now perhaps too difficult a task to discover.

3226. Much stress has been laid upon the marks, which are found upon the faces and beds of stones in nearly all countries. In fig. 162. are given several of these fanciful forms, as we

[merged small][ocr errors][merged small][ocr errors][ocr errors][subsumed][ocr errors][merged small][merged small][merged small]

maintain them originally to have been. a and b, are from the interior and exterior of the nave of Gloucester cathedral. c, Malmesbury abbey church. d, Furness abbey. e, Poitiers, in France. f, St. Radigonde. 9. Cologne cathedral; and h, Roman altars at Risingham: these are all from Mr. G. Godwin's paper in the Archæologia, vol. xxx. i, from Segovia cathedral; k, Tarragona cathedral; and 1, Veruela cathedral; are given, with many others, by Mr. G. E. Street in his Gothic Architecture of Spain. Numerous examples are given in the Freemasons' Monthly Magazine, &c. new series, 1862, and in the Builder Journal for 1863. Perhaps the fact of their occurrence, as in the present day, is simply due to their being the marks or signs by which each mason recognises the particular stone for the correct workmanship of which he is answerable. On large works a list is kept of them by the foreman, and any new man having a mark similar to one already on the list, has to make a distinctive difference. An eminent practical mason assured us that from the character of the mark he could tell at once the kind of stone on which it was made.

A general history of POINTED ARCHITECTURE is placed at page 233; the PRACTICE OF POINTED ARCHITECTURE is placed in Book III., together with much relative information and illustration in PRINCIPLES OF PROPORTION, in the same Book.

SECT. XVI.

ITALIAN ARCHITECTURE.

323. The commencement of a new era in architecture first dawned in Florence, and then soon spread its meridian light ever Italy and the rest of Europe. The French have well applied the term renaissance to its commencement. It is with us denominated that of the

rerival of the arts. The Florentines had at an early period, according to Villani, determined to erect in their city a monument which should surpass all that had bef re appeared; in 1294 Arnolfo di Lapo (according to Vasari), but Arnolfo di Cambio da Colle (according to Molini), had so prepared his plans that the first stone was laid Sept. 8, 1296, and the name of Sta. Maria del Fiore was then given to it. The works were stopped 1310 on the death of Arnolfo. In 1324 Giotto was capomaestro, who, dying

1336, his design for the campanile was carried out by Taddeo Gaddi, who died 1366. In 1355 Francisco Talenti, as capomaestro, was ordered to make a model to show how the chapels in the rear were to be disposed correct without any defect. On June 19, 1357, the foundations of a new and larger church were begun by Talenti. Andrea Orcagna, Bucozzo, Taddeo Gaddi and other architects of talent were consulted in turn, and in 1376 the last of the four arches was completed; the central tribune with its five chapels were completed 1407; and in 1421 the armatures (centering?) of the last tribune were taken down (The Times, May 12, 1887). This edifice, though conmenced before the revival of the arts, is one of particular interest and instruction in the history of architecture, and one wherein is found a preparation for changing the style then prevalent into one sanctioned by the ancient principles of the art. Fig. 163. shows the plan, and fig. 164

[graphic][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][subsumed][merged small][merged small][merged small]

the half section and half elevation of it. The walls are a'most entirely cased with marble. The whole length of it is 454 feet; from the pavement to the summit of the cross is nearly 387 feet; the transept is nearly 334 feet long; the height of the nave 153 feet, and that of the side aisles 963. In 1407 Brunelleschi was consulted with others as to the dome, but was not appointed until 1420; he nearly completed the drum at his death in 1446. The church was consecrated March 25, 1436, and the works ceased in 1474. The façade, destroyed in 1588, was rebuilt from a design by E. de Fabris, and unveiled in May 1886. The revival of architecture is so connected with the life of Brunelleschi, that a few passages in the latter will assist us in giving information on the former. He was born in 1377, and was intended by his father, Lippo Lippi, a notary of Florence, to succeed him in his own profession; but the inclination of the youth being bent towards the arts, the parent with reluctance placed him with a goldsmith, an occupation then so connected with sculpture that the greatest artists of the time applied themselves to the chasing and casting ornaments in the precious metals. Brunelleschi became skilful as a sculptor, but determined to devote himself to architecture, in which the field was then unoccupied. In company with Donatello he therefore visited Rome, and applied himself with ardour to the study of the ruins in the Eternal City, where he first began to meditate upon the scheme of uniting by a grand cupola the four arms of the Duomo at Florence. During his residence he settled in his mind the propor.ions of the orders of architecture from the classic examples which the city afforded, and studied the science of construction as practised by the ancients; from them he learnt that perfect accordance which always exists between what is useful and what is beautiful, both of which are reciprocally subordinate to each other. Here he discovered the principles of that nice equilibrium, equally requisite for the beauty no less than for the solidity of an edifice. He returned to Florence in 1407. In this year the citizens convoked an assembly of architects and engineers to deliberate upon some plan for finishing the Duomo. To this assembly Brunelleschi was invited, and gave his advice for raising the base drum or a tic story upon which the cupola should be placed. It is not in.portant here to detail the jealousies of rivals which impeded his project; nor, when the

[blocks in formation]

commission was at length confided to him, the disgraceful assignment to him of Lorenzo Ghiberti as a colleague, whose incapacity for such a task our architect soon made manifest. Suffice it to say, that before his death he had the satisfaction to see the cupola finished, with the exception of the exterior of the drum under the cupola; for whose decoration, as well as for the lantern with which he proposed to crown the edifice, he left designs, which, however, were lost. One of the directions he left on his death particularly insisted upon the necessity of following the model he had prepared for the lantern, and that it was essential that it should be constructed of large blocks of marble so as to prevent the cupola from opening; an advice which experience has since proved in other cases to be far from sound. This cupola is octagonal on the plan, as will be seen by reference to the figures, and is 138 feet 6 inches in diameter, and from the cornice of the drum to the eye of the dome of the height of 133 feet 3 inches. Before it nothing had appeared with which it could be fairly put in comparison. The domes of St. Mark and that at Pisa are far below it in grandeur and simplicity of construction. In size it only yields to St. Peter's at Rome, for which it is probable it served as a model to Michael Angelo; for in both, the inner and outer cupolas are connected in one arch at their springing. It is moreover well known that Buonarroti's admiration of it was so great that he used to say that to imitate it was indeed difficult, to surpass it impossible. Vasari's testimony of it shall close our account of this magnificent structure: "Se puo dir certo che gli antichi, non andarono mai tanto alto con lor fabriche, ne si messono a un risico tanto grande, che eglino volessino combattere col cielo, come par veramente ch' ella combatta, veggendosi ella estollere in tant' altezza che i monti intorno a Fiorenza paiono simili a lei. E nel vero pare, che il cielo ne abbia invidia poiche di continuo le saette tutto il giorno la percuotono." It might be supposed that such a work was sufficient to occupy the whole of Brunelleschi's time; not so: the Duke Filippo Maria engaged him on the fortifications at Milan, besides which

-

He

he was employed on several other military works; a proof of the great diversity of talent he possessed. It is, therefore, from the extensive employ he enjoyed, not only in Florence, but in many other parts of Italy, quite certain that he infused a new taste into its buildings, and that he is justly entitled to the title of the Restorer of Architecture in Europe. died, and was buried in the church he had raised in 1444. He left a number of scholars, among whom Luca Fancelli and Michelozzo were perhaps the ablest. These pupils spread throughout Italy the effects of the vast change that had been thus begun; a taste for architecture was excited; its true principles became known; and in a short space of time, as if the matter had been one of arrangement between them, the illustrious house of Medici, the dukes of Milan, and the princes and nobility of the country contended who should most patronise its professors. The learned began to expound to artists the books of Vitruvius, the only writer among the ancients whose works on that subject have come down to us. 324. Leo Battista Alberti, of the ancient and illustrious family of the Alberti of Florence, succeeded Brunelleschi in carrying on the great change of which we have been speaking, and was, indeed, a great contributor to the art, not only by his literary labours on architecture, in which he displays profound erudition, knowledge of construction, and an intimate acquaintance with the works of the ancients, but also by the distribution, elegance, grace, and variety, which his designs exhibit. His book, De Re Edificatoriâ, is the foundation of all that has been since written on the art, and deserves careful perusal by every one who studies for the purpose of practice. We shall here present a short account of it, which, in imitation of Vitruvius, he divided into ten books.

325. The first book treats on the origin and utility of architecture; the choice of the soil and situation for placing buildings; the preparation, measurement, and suitable division according to their nature, of the edifices to be erected; of columns and pilasters; of the different kinds of roofs, doors, and windows, their number and size; of the different sorts of staircases and their landings; of the sewage or drains, and of suitable situations for them respectively. In the second book the subjects are, the choice of materials; the precautions to be taken before beginning a building; the models, of whatever description, that should be made; the choice of workmen; the trees fit for use, and the season in which they should be felled; the methods for preventing rot, and susceptibility of fire; of stone in its varieties; the different sorts of bricks, tiles, lime, sand, and mortar. The third book treats of construction; foundations according to the varieties of soil; encroachments; the carrying up and bond of masonry; rough and rubble work; on the different sorts of masonry; on the inlaying and facing of walls; on beams, joists, and the method of strengthening them; on floors, arches, and vaults; the covering of roofs, pavements, and the season for beginning and completing certain works. The fourth book is confined to the philosophy of the art, showing the causes which influence mankind in the adoption of modes of building according to the climate, the soil, and the habits or government of a people. It, however, treats of the proper position of a city; of the size to be given to it; of the form of the walls; of the customs and ceremonies of the ancients as applied to this point; of fortifications, bastions or towers, gates and ramparts; bridges, both of timber and stone; sewers, ports, harbours, and squares requisite in a city. The fifth book contains instructions for the erection of palaces for peaceable, and castles for absolute princes; for the houses required by a republic; large and small religious edifices; academies, public schools, hospitals, and palaces for senators. In it are given some hints on military and naval architecture, on farm buildings, and country houses. In the sixth book Alberti treats on architectural ornament, columns, and the method of adjusting their proportions. After some observations on the principles of beauty, on taste, and on the mode of improving it, he enters shortly on the history of architecture. These are followed by several chapters on the doctrine of mechanics, machines, the method of raising and working columns, polishing them, imitations in stucco and incrustation in thin layers, and matters of that nature. The seventh book continues the discussion on ornaments in architecture, but chiefly in respect of columns, showing the edifices in which the use of them is suitable; and, in imitation of Vitruvius in his directions relative to temples, our author dilates on buildings for ecclesiastical purposes. He shows what sorts of columns and pilasters are best suited to them, how far the employment of statues is proper, and how they should be sculptured. The eighth book is on roads and their decorations, tombs, pyramids, columns, altars, epitaphs, &c. In it he turns to the subjects of streets, cities, ornaments appropriate to gates, ports, arches, bridges, crossways, markets, public squares, walks, porticoes, theatres, amphitheatres, circi, libraries, colleges, baths, &c.; and the style in which public buildings should be constructed and decorated. The ninth book is a continuation of the preceding one; but in this he speaks in addition of the appropriate decoration of royal palaces, and of the ornaments respectively suitable to city and country dwellings, and of the paintings and sculpture that should be employed in them. In the tenth and last book the principal subject is the finding a supply of water for buildings both in town and country, and it closes with some useful hints on the aid of architecture to domestic economy. This truly great man constructed many works in different cities of Italy, some of which still remain to

« ZurückWeiter »