Abbildungen der Seite
PDF

seems to think worthy his attention, and the sciences have only been patronised by the government in proportion to their bearing on those two absorbing points. But we shall perhaps revert to this in the following chapter.

[merged small][ocr errors]

365. No country exhibits more early, beautiful, or interesting specimens of Romanesque and pointed architecture, than Germany. The Rhine, and the southern parts of it which were under the sway of the Romans, are those, as we have already observed, in which these are principally to be found. Their history, however, has, sufficiently for general purposes, been traced under the sections of Byzantine or Romanesque and Pointed Architecture. The revival of the arts in Italy, as it did in other nations, here equally brought in the styles of the Italian schools, which, as elsewhere throughout Europe, have lasted to the present period; and will certainly endure until some general change in the habits of its different nations renders necessary or justifies some other style as a worthy successor to them. On this to speculate were a waste of time; though there be some, and those men of talent, who contemplate a millennium of architecture, by making every thing in style dependent on the new materials (cast-iron for instance) which it is now the practice to employ, and often, it must be conceded, most usefully. Whilst the pointed style lasted in Europe, Italy was occasionally indebted to the Germans for an architect. Thus, notwithstanding the denial of Milizia, Lapo, a German architect, was employed in the early stages of construction of Santa Maria del Fiore; and it is well authenticated that Zamodia a German, Annex of Friburg, and Ulric of Ulm, were employed on the cathedral at Milan. Franchetti (Storia e Descrizione del Duomo di Milano, 4to. Milan, 1821) asserts, that the first of these was engaged on it about 1391, the period of the golden age of pointed architecture in Germany; and the reputation of the Germans in this respect was at that time so great, that John and Simon of Cologne were actually carried into Spain for the purpose of designing and carrying into execution the cathedral at Burgos. It is at this period difficult to assign the cause of the nation so completely dropping astern, to use a nautical phrase, in the fine arts, and more particularly architecture. It was most probably the result of their political condition, and the consequent relative position they occupied in the affairs of Europe. But, whatever the cause, it is, in fact, most certain, that from the revival of the arts in Italy until near the end of the 18th century, Germany furnishes the names of few, if any, architects who are known beyond the limits of the country. Italy during the time in question seems to have repaid the nation for the early assistance received from them. At Fulda and Vienna, Carlo Fontana was extensively engaged; Guarini on the church of Santa Anna at Prague; Scamozzi on the cathedral at Salzburg; Andrew Pozzo, who died at Vienna in 1709, was there employed on several of the churches: Martinelli of Lucca was another of the number that were solicited to decorate the country with their works. Fischers, indeed, was a native; but his works, and especially his palace at Schönbrun, begun in 1696 for the Emperor Joseph, though not altogether without merit, is but a repetition of the extravagances of the school of Borromini; and equally so was the palace built by the same artist for Prince Eugene at Vienna, in 1711. (Essai d'Architecture Historique, Leipsig, 1725.) Pietro Cart, who built the bridge at Nuremberg, Neuman, Bott, and Eosander of Prussia, are the only native architects of the period recorded by Milizia.

366. But it was not only from Italy that the Germans drew their architects: France contributed a supply to the country in the persons of Blondel, who was there much employed towards the end of the 17th century; Robert de Cotte and Boffrand in the first part of that following. It is therefore, from what has been stated, impossible to give any independent account of the architecture of Germany. The Germans had none. Whoso were their architects, they were the followers of a style which contemporaneously existed in France and Italy even down to the bizarreries of that which prevailed in the time of Louis XV.; and it is a very curious fact, that whilst Germany was seeking the aid of architects from France and Italy, England could boast of professors of the art whose fame will endure while printing remains to spread knowledge amongst mankind. During the last century, Germany appears to have risen in this respect from its slumber, and to have produced some men of considerable architectural abilities. Of these was Carl Gotthard Langhans who was born in 1732, and built the celebrated Brandenburg gate at Berlin, which, though formed much on the model of the Propylea at Athens, and therefore on the score of originality not entitled to that praise which has been so unsparingly exhausted upon it, proves that a vast change had begun in Germany as respected matters of taste in ar

chitecture. Copies prove sad poverty of imagination on the part of the artist copying; and all, therefore, that can be said in favour of such an expedient as that under consideration is, that better forms being submitted in this example to the Germans, it created a dawn of taste to which they had long been strangers. The inaccurate work of Le Roy, which had preceded that of Stuart and Revett on the antiquities of Athens, was the means through which Langhans wrought and tried his successful experiment. In France, as we have already observed, Antoine had tried the employment of the Grecian Doric at Paris, but without the impression produced by Langhans. This architect died at Berlin in 1808, and is, perhaps, entitled to be considered as the father of good architecture in Germany, where he met the highest patronage and encouragement. Knoblesdorff, who died in 1753. had, it must be allowed, prepared in some measure the change which was effected; but neither he nor his successor are known in the world of art beyond the confines of their own country. The names of Boumann, Goutard, Naumann, and others of much merit occur to us; but the examples which they have left are not of the class that justify specimens for presentation to the reader in a general work of this nature. None of them rise so high as to be put in competition with the examples of the French school; and from the circumstance of the principal works of Germany at Munich, Berlin, &c. having been executed by artists still living, we feel precluded here from allusion to them; because, if we were to enter on an examination of them, we must detail their defects as well as their beauties. An extraordinary species of bigotry has laid hold on some in relation to them, which time will temper; and the world, as it always does, will ultimately come to a right judgment of the rank they are entitled to occupy as works of art. In the other branches of the arts the Germans are rising fast; but there is withal an affectation of the works of the middle ages in their productions, which, impressed as they are with great beauties, are not sufficiently pure to prognosticate the establishment of schools which will sweep all "fore them, as did those of Italy.

[ocr errors]

$67. What has been said in the preceding section on the architecture of Germany is equally applicable to that of Spain and Portugal, whose architects were educated, if not in the schools of Italy, yet on the principles that guided them. Still, the pre-eminence in architecture on the revival of the arts must be given to these countries over the contemporaneous buildings erected in Germany, and more especially to those of Spain. Under Ferdinand and Isabella, both greatly attached to the fine arts, the pointed style gave way to the architecture then in esteem in Italy; and Juan de Olotzaga, a native of 13iscay, is, we believe, entitled to the merit of having first introduced it about 1400 in the design for the cathedral of Huesca in Aragon. Pedro de Gumiel is supposed to have been the architect of Santa Engracia at Zaragossa, 1476–1517, but is known as the artist who designed the college of S. Ildefonso at Alcala, a splendid building in a mixed and impure style, commenced March 14, 1498. In this the orders were employed. The edifice consists of three courts : the first Doric, with an arcade and two orders above, in the lower whereof the Doric was repeated, and the upper was Ionic; the second court has thirty-two Composite columns, with arcades; and the third is designed with thirtysix Ionic columns, beyond which is the theatre. The church is of the Ionic order, and contains the monument of Cardinal Ximenes, the founder, considered one of the finest in Spain. The names of Juan, Alonso, and Fra Juan d'Escobedo continue in their works the history of the art in Spain, wherein a style between the pointed and Italian prevailed during the greater part of the reign of Charles V. Juan Gil de Hontanon, at the end of the 15th century, appears in Spain as an architect of much celebrity. He made a design for the cathedral at Salamanca, which was submitted to the judgment of four of the then most eminent architects of the country–Alonso de Covarrubias, the architect of the church at Toledo; Maestro Filippo of that of Seville; with Juan di Badajoz of that of Burgos. This cathedral at Salamanca is 378 ft. long, and has a nave and two series of aisles on each side. The nave is 130 ft. high, and 50 ft. wide. Rodrigo Gil de Hontanon, •on of the above-named architect, had the execution of this church, which was commenced in 1513. Juan Gil de Hontanon commenced 1522–25 the cathedral of Segovia, very similar to that of Salamanca, except that it is more simple, and in a purer style. It is equal in size and grandeur to those of Toledo and Seville. Between 1560 and 1577 it was continued by Rodrigo Gil; then carried on by Francisco Campo Aguero, who died in 1660; to whom succeeded F. Biadero, who died in 1678. Respecting Hontanon, Don Antonio l’onz observes, in the 10th volume of his Travels in Spain, that he must have been a clever architect, and well acquainted with the Greek and

t’h v P. II. SIP.ANISII AND PORTUGUESE. 1.59

Roman styles which in his time were beginning to revive; but that, like many other artists. lie was obliged in some measure to humour the taste of those who employed him: he therefore adopted the Gothic style, without the ornaments and details. The efforts of the a chitects of t is period were not confined altogether to church building; for in 1552 Pedro de Uria constructed a bridge at Almaraz over the Tagus, which may vie with the most extraordinary works of that class. Two large pointed arches form the bridge, which is 580 ft. long, 25 ft. wide, and 134 ft. high. The opening of one of the arches is 150 ft., that of the other 119 ft. The piers are lofty towers, that in the centre standing on a high rock. An inscription gives the date of erection 1552, and imports that it was constructed *t the expense of the city of Placentia. 368. Alonso de Covarrubias, the architect of the church of Toledo, seems to have usel in it a Gothic sort of style, though when he flourished the Roman orders had become known and used. This Alonso was in considerable employ, as was his assistant, Diego Siloe, who built the church at Granada, with the monastery and church of San Girolamo in that city. This cathedral has a nave and two aisles; and in it the Corinthian order, though defective in height, is used. The cupola is well designed. Both Siloe and his master loaded their buildings with sculptures to excess, from a seeming notion that beauty and richness were the same or inseparable. Alonzo Berruguette was another architect of the 16th century who was deservedly employed. He went to Italy in 1500, there to pursue his studies in the arts of painting and sculpture as well as architecture, and was at Florence when Michael Angelo and Leonardo da Vinci exhibited their cartoons. He was the architect of Charles W.; and it is supposed that he designed the palace at Madrid, begun by Henry II., continued by Henry III., and splendidly rebuilt by Charles V., but no longer in existence. Berruguette erected the gate of San Martino, which is the principal one at Toledo. It is of the Doric order, with the royal arms on the exterior, and a statue of Santa Leocadia in the interior. There are great simplicity and elegance in the composition of this work. The palace of Alcala, the residence of the archbishop of Toledo, is attributed to him; a building not wanting in magnificence, though defective in its detail. A great portion of the cathedral of Cuença is said to be by Berruguette; but not the façade, which was erected in 1699 by Josef de Arroyo, and afterwards continued by Luis Arriaga. There is considerable effect about the cloister, which is well and ingeniously decorated. This architect, it is thought, had some part in the Pardo, which was rebuilt in 1547; where are still allowed to remain,—notwithstanding the additions by Philip II. of the miserable eastern and western façades—the portieoes of Ionic columns, with their low stone arches. Though the windows are greatly too far apart, and too small in the lower story, the stairs difficult of ascent, yet, upon the whole, the edifice is not ill arranged or executed. At the period whereof we here speak there was a prodigious passion among the Spaniards for large screens and altars in the churches; in thes? the taste of Berruguette was most conspicuous. In the use of the orders, which he fully understood, he was remarkably fond of employing them over one another. The cathedral at Seville was principally rebuilt by Fernan Ruiz, who was much engaged in the city, and especially on enlarging or raising the well known tower called “La Giralda.” This singular edifice was begun in the 11th century, the original idea of it being given by the architect Geber, a native of Seville, to whom the invention of algebra is attributed; and also the design of two other similar towers, one in Morocco, and the other at R.bata. The tower of which we are now speaking was at first 250 ft. high, and 50 ft. wide, and was without diminution as it rose. The walls are 8 ft. thick of squared stones from the level of the pavement; the rest for 87 ft. is of brick. In the centre of this tower is a smaller one, the interval between the two towers being 23 ft., which serves for the ascent— one so convenient that two persons abreast can mount it on horseback. The central tower does not diminish; but as the edifice rises in height the walls gather over, so as to allow the passage of only one person. Upon the Moors of Seville negotiating their surrender, one of the conditions of it was, that this tower should not be destroyed; to which Don Alfonso, the eldest son of the king, answered, that if a portion of it were touched, not a man in Seville should survive. In the earthquake of 1395 it was partially injured, and remained in the state of misfortune that then occurred until 1568, when, by the authorities, Fernan Ruiz received the commission to raise it 100 ft. higher. This height he divided into three parts, crowning it with a small cupola or lantern : the first division of his addition is of equal thickness with the tower on a plinth, whence six pilasters rise on each façade, between which are five windows, over which is an entablature surmounted by balustrades; the second division is lower, with the same ornament; and the third is octagonal with pilasters, over which the cupola rises, crowned with a bronze statue of Faith, vulgarly called “La Giralda.” Ruiz by this work augmented his fame; and notwithstanding the earthquakes which have since occurred, it has, fortunately enough, been preserved. We have, however, to apologise to our readers for this, which is anecdote, and not quite in order to be placed here, because partly connected with a period we have long since left. Pictorially speaking, the tower of “La Giralda” is a splendid object, and the apology was, perhaps, unnecessary. The age of Charles V. in Spain was Augustan for its architecture. By his mandate the palace was raised at Granada, a work of Machuca, another architect of this period. The principal façade is rustic, with three large gates, and eight Doric columns on pedes'als sculptured with historical bassi-rilievi. The second story is Ionic with eight columns, over which are pilasters. The internal vestibule is on a circular plan, with a portico and gallery on columns of the same order. Milizia, from whom we have extracted all our notices on the architecture of Spain in this age, regrets that the arches spring from the columns. Though we cannot commend such a practice, we should be sorry, in certain cases, to see a veto put upon it, because the practice is occasionally compatible with fine effect. 369. Towards the end of the sixteenth century appears in Spain an artist, by name Domingo Teotocopuli, by birth a Grecian, and a disciple of Tiziano V celli. He became, under his master, a good painter; but is known in Spain rather as a cel, brated architect in his day. At Madrid, and in Toledo, he executed many works of merit; but his grand work was the church and monastery of the Bernardine monks of San Domingo di Silos. in which he employed his talents in architecture, painting, and sculpture, the whole being from his hand. 370. Garzia d'Emere and Bartolomé di Bustamante, the later especially, would require an extended notice in the history of the art in Spain, if our limits permitted us to enter on their merits. The latter was the architect of the hospital of San Juan Bautista, founded by its archbishop in 1545, near Toledo. We should continue the account if buildings existed from which features different from the contemporaneous works in the rest of Europe could be extracted; but the fact is, that the progress of the art has already been told in other countries, and its success in Spain would be but a repetition in minor degree of what has already been said. Still we consider some notice must be taken of Juan Bautista of Toledo, who died in 1567, an architect and sculptor of surpassing merit; and as he was the architect who gave the designs for the Escurial, we shall not apologise for transcribing the account of him given by Milizia. 371. Having studied at Rome, he was invited to Naples by Don Pedro di Toledo, then viceroy there, who employed him as architect to the Emperor Charles V. in many important works in that city, whence he was called by Philip II. to become architect of all the royal works in Spain, and especially of the Escurial, which that monarch was anxious to erect in the most magnificent style. For this purpose he left Naples, and in 1563 commenced, upon his own design, the Escurial, which he continued to superintend till his death in 1567. In this great undertaking he was succeeded by Juan de Herrera, his pupil, who finished it. Those, therefore, says the author whom we quote, that attribute this work to Luis de Fox, to Branante, to Vignola, and other architects who may have given designs for it, are unacquainted with the subject. The wonders related of the Escurial, as to the number of its doors and windows, are not tales to be here recounted; and the attempt, indeed, at exaggeration is vastly silly, because it is on so grand a scale that the simple truth imparts quite sufficient knowledge for conveying an idea of its splendour. The motives of Philip II. in founding this structure were twofold,—first, the injunction of his predecessor Charles W., who was desirous of constructing a tomb for the royal family of Spain; and secondly, of erecting an edifice of colossal dimensions to commemorate the famous victory of S. Quintin, achieved on the festival of San Lorenzo, the saint to whose interposition the king attributed his success. "I he situation chosen to receive it was beautiful. It is at the distance of a few miles from Madrid, at the foot of the Carpentani mountains, by which the two Castiles are divided. The plan of the edifice is said to resemble a gridiron, the instrument of martyrdom of San Lorenzo, of which the handle is the projection in the eastern façade; we confess, however, we have some difficulty in tracing the resemblance. It is divided internally into fifteen courts, varying considerably in size; many of them are decorated with porticoes and galleries, and contain in all upwards of eighty fountains. The materials are granite very well wrought; the roofs partly covered with lead and l artly with slave. The cupola of the church is of stone. The four angles of the main plan are distinguished by towers r sing four stories, besides those in the roofs, above the general fronts; besides which there are four others flanking the cupola. Parts of the building are in much better taste than others; but such an enormous pile of building cannot be otherwise than imposing, more especially, too, if there be anything like symmetry and regularity in the parts. Towards the west the principal façade is 740 feet long and 60 feet in height. The towers at the angles just mentioned rise to the height of 200 feet. This façade, like the others, has five stories of windows, which necessarily of themselves, from the way in which they are arranged, have the effect of cutting it up into minute divisions. The central compartment of it is 140 feet in length, and consists of two orders of half columns; the lower has eight semi-columns, which are Doric standing on a plinth, and in the central intercolumniation is the door; the other intercolumniations are filled with niches and windows in three stories. The upper order consists of four Ionic columns on pedestals, and is surmounted by a pediment. This upper order has two stories of nicnes in its intercolumniations, in the upper central one whereof is placed the statue of San Lorenzo. The two minor doors in this façade are also made features in the design. The façade towards the east has the projecting handle of the gridiron to which we have alluded, in which part is contained the palace; and westward of it the great chapel or church, with its cupola rising above the mass, to complete the composition. Towards the south the length is 580 ft., similar to the length on the north. On entering from the central gate of the western façade, the monastery is divided from the college by a large vestibule, from which three large arched openings lead into the king's court: this is 230 ft. long, and 136 ft. wide, surrounded by buildings of five stories, and ornamented with pilasters. At the eastern end of this court is the entrance to the church, over whose vestibule or pronaos are the libraries. To it a flight of seven steps crosses the whole width of the court; and from the landing rises a Doric arcaded porch of five openings, three whereof belong to the central compartment and lead to the church, the other two leading to the monastery and the college. Behind the porch the façade of the church rises, and is flanked by two towers, which respectively belong to the monastery and college, and are ornamented above the general height of the buildings of the court with two orders of pilasters, being terminated by small cupolas. The interior of the church is Doric, and is in plan a Greek cross. The nave is 53 ft. and the aisles are 30 ft. wide. Its whole length is 364 ft., its width 230, and height 170. From the intersection of the nave and transepts the cupola rises, 66 ft. in diameter, and 330 ft. in height from the pavement to the cross. Its exterior is composed with a square tambour or drum, if it may be so called, from which the order rises. The choir is only 30 ft. high, and its length but 60 ft. In point of taste and dimensions, the church is inferior to several in other parts of Europe. The presbytery, we should have stated, is raised, so as to form almost another church, and seemingly without relation to the principal one. The staircase which leads to the Pantheon, and which possesses considerable magnificence, is placed between the church and the antesacristy : we are not aware why this name has been given to the sepulchre of the kings of Spain. It is nearly under the high altar. The chamber appropriated to the reception of the kings is 36 ft. diameter, and 38 ft. in height, richly encrusted with various marbles and metals, and ornamented with sixteen double Corinthian pilasters on pedestals, arranged octagonally; and between them are recesses, with the sarcophagi, amounting to twenty-six, that is, four in each of six sides, and two over the entrance which faces the altar of the l{esurrection. This is a fair specimen of the style which prevailed in Spain under the reigns of Philip IV. and Charles II. The college, the seminary, and the royal palace occupy the rest of the building. In 1773, many additions were made to the buildings about the Escurial for the Infants Don Antonio and Don Gabriele, by Villaneuva, an Italian architect, and by them the palace was much improved. Juan de He rera, who died in 1597, besides his employinent at the building just described, contributed greatly to the advancement of the art by the execution of the many commissions with which he was entrusted. The bridge of Segovia, at Madrid. is by him; as is the royal pleasure-house at Aranjuez, begun under Philip II. and finished by Charles III.,—a work which, though far from pure, exhibits great architectural ability. His successor at the Escurial was Francesco de Mora, by whom, at Madrid, is the Pal ice de los Consejos, the most splendid edifice which that capital can boast Instead of a central doorway, it has two at its flanks, of the Doric order, with appropriate decorations. In the beginning of the seventeenth century, the great square of Madrid was erected after the designs of Juan Gomez de Mora, and is admirable for its grandeur and swimmetry. This architect built at Alcala the church and college of the Jesuits, which, Milizia says, is a magnificent and well-proportioned edifice. It is of two orders, and the material employed in the façade is granite. The royal convent of the Augustins, at Madrid. is also attributed to him. 372. Early in the eighteenth century Felipe Ivara, or Juvara, a native of Messina, had very great employ, we might almost say throughout Europe. He became the pupil of Fontana, and afterwards, on his visiting Spain, seems to have established a school there. He built the façade of the royal palace of S. Ildefonso, looking towards the gardens. lvara died in 1735, at Madrid, whither he had been invited by Philip V. to rebuild the palace, which had been consumed by fire. The work was afterwards entrusted to Sacchetti, a pupil of Ivara. It is on a very large scale, and was most solidly constructed. 373. We have thought it necessary to give the above succinct account of the architecture of Spain, which did not, however, produce, after the revival of the arts in Europe, any works, except in respect of dimensions, comparable with those of Italy. The abuses in them are almost universally carried to an extent scarcely credible; it is, therefore, useless to refer the reader or student to them as models. It almost seems as if from Italy pure architecture had not had time to spread itself before it became tinctured with the corruptions of Borromini; which, not only in Spain and Portugal, but throughout Germany, and even France, were diffused with incredible rapidity. Llaguno and Cean-Bermudez, Noticias de los Arquitectos, &c., de España, 4 vols. 4to., Madrid, 1829. G. E. Street, Some Account of Gothic Architecture in Spain, 8vo., 1865. M

« ZurückWeiter »