Table Of ContentThe Project Gutenberg EBook of A History of Architecture in all Countries,
Volume 1, 3rd ed., by James Fergusson
This eBook is for the use of anyone anywhere in the United States and most
other parts of the world at no cost and with almost no restrictions
whatsoever. You may copy it, give it away or re-use it under the terms of
the Project Gutenberg License included with this eBook or online at
www.gutenberg.org. If you are not located in the United States, you'll have
to check the laws of the country where you are located before using this ebook.
Title: A History of Architecture in all Countries, Volume 1, 3rd ed.
From the Earliest Times to the Present Day
Author: James Fergusson
Editor: Richard Phené Spiers
Release Date: November 1, 2017 [EBook #55871]
Language: English
Character set encoding: UTF-8
*** START OF THIS PROJECT GUTENBERG EBOOK A HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE ***
Produced by Albert László, Sonya Schermann and the Online
Distributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net (This
file was produced from images generously made available
by The Internet Archive)
Transcriber’s Note
The cover image was created by the transcriber and is placed in the public domain. Scale bars marked '1 in.'
have been added to illustrations for which a scale is given (e.g. 50 ft. to 1 in.) to indicate the size of the image as
printed in the original book. Ditto marks have been replaced by the text they represent. Some corrections have
been made to the printed text. These are listed in a second transcriber’s note at the end of the text.
ELEVATION OF FAÇADE OF COLOGNE
CATHEDRAL.
A
HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE
IN ALL COUNTRIES,
FROM THE EARLIEST TIMES TO THE PRESENT DAY.
By JAMES FERGUSSON, D.C.L., F.R.S., M.R.A.S.,
FELLOW ROYAL INST. BRIT. ARCHITECTS,
&c. &c. &c.
Section of the Parthenon, showing the Author’s views as to the
admission of light.
IN FIVE VOLUMES.—Vol. I.
THIRD EDITION.
Edited by R. PHENÉ SPIERS, F.S.A.,
FELLOW ROYAL INST. BRITISH ARCHITECTS.
LONDON:
JOHN MURRAY, ALBEMARLE STREET,
1893.
The right of Translation is reserved.
FERGUSSON’S ARCHITECTURE.
Third Edition, with 330 Illustrations, 2 vols., medium 8vo, 31s. 6d.
A HISTORY CF THE MODERN STYLES OF ARCHITECTURE.
By the late JAMES FERGUSSON, F.R.S.
A New Edition, Revised and Enlarged. With a Special Account of the
Architecture of America.
By ROBERT KERR, Professor of Architecture at King’s College, London.
BY THE SAME.
New and Cheaper Edition, with 400 Illustrations, medium 8vo., 31s. 6d.
A HISTORY OF INDIAN AND EASTERN ARCHITECTURE.
LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.
EDITOR’S PREFACE TO THE THIRD EDITION.
A sketch of the life of the late Mr. James Fergusson, and an article by Prof. Kerr on the peculiar qualifications with which
he was endowed for the position he took as an architectural historian, having appeared in the preface of the third edition of
the “History of the Modern Styles of Architecture,” published in 1891, it is not necessary to do more than refer to them. A
brief summary, however, of the several works he published on the History of the Architectural Styles may possibly be of
some interest here as a record.
Mr. Fergusson’s first work dealing with the History of the Styles of Architecture was a large octavo volume, published
in 1849, under the title of “An Historical Enquiry into the True Principles of Beauty in Art, more especially with reference
to Architecture.” About one-third of the volume was devoted to an introduction, to which Mr. Fergusson attached so
much importance that, in his preface he stated he considered it to be the text, and the rest of the work (viz., the description
of the various styles) merely the illustration of what was there stated. The pith of this introduction was subsequently
published in his later works, and a valuable chapter added to it on “Ethnography as Applied to Architecture.” The work
contained only the history of the Early Styles from Egyptian to Roman, but it had been the intention of its author to treat of
the Christian, Pagan, and Modern Styles of Architecture in subsequent volumes.
This intention was never carried out, but the book formed the basis of another work published in 1855, entitled, “The
Handbook of Architecture,” which included the history of the Indian, Chinese, Assyrian, Egyptian, Greek, Roman,
Sassanian, and Saracenic Styles, in the first volume, and of Christian Art in the second. A second edition, a reprint only of
this, appeared in 1859, and shortly afterwards, in 1862, a third volume was published, dealing with the History of the
Modern Styles. On the revision and expansion of the work in 1873, this third volume became the fourth as hereinafter
explained.
In 1865 and 1867 the materials of the “Handbook” were rearranged to form an historical sequence, instead of a
topographical one, and a new work was published under the title of the “History of Architecture”; the first part devoted to
Ancient Architecture from Egyptian to Roman; the second to Christian; and the third part to Pagan Architecture, including
Saracenic, Indian, Chinese, and Mexican.
In 1874 a second edition of this work appeared (from which the whole of the Indian and Chinese sections were omitted
and published separately in 1876 as a third volume, under the title of “Indian and Eastern Architecture”), and many
additions were made to the Assyrian and Byzantine chapters.
In the present edition (1893), which constitutes the third edition of the “History of Architecture,” the editor has
endeavoured to the best of his ability to follow the course which Mr. Fergusson himself adopted in publishing new editions,
viz., to rewrite those portions which subsequent discoveries had proved to be either incorrect or doubtful. For instance, in
Egyptian Architecture the accurate measurements of the pyramids made by Mr. Flinders Petrie, and his correction of
Lepsius’s theories as regards the Labyrinth, have placed information at the editor’s disposal which was unknown to Mr.
Fergusson. Corrections of this kind are inserted in the text. On the other hand, absolutely nothing new has appeared on
Assyrian Architecture, and, therefore, Mr. Fergusson’s theories respecting the restoration of the Assyrian palaces have
been retained; the tendency of the opinion of archæologists having, however, developed rather in the direction of vaulted
roofs to the principal halls, footnotes have been appended giving the views of foreign archæologists on the subject,
between which and Mr. Fergusson’s views the student is left to judge.
In Persian work the accuracy of Mr. Fergusson’s views respecting the arrangement of the plans of the Persian palaces,
which were first promulgated in 1855, has been confirmed by later explorations at Persepolis, Susa, and Pasargadæ, and
footnotes giving the records of the same are appended.
The results of recent discoveries in Greece and Italy have been recorded, sometimes in the text, sometimes in footnotes;
and changes have been made in the chapter on Parthian and Sassanian Architecture, M. Dieulafoy’s photographs having
enabled the editor to correct some of the woodcuts copied from Coste’s illustrations.
Important changes have been made in the Second Part, devoted to Christian Architecture; the Byzantine style has been
placed first, not only for chronological reasons as the first perfected Christian style, but from the impossibility of otherwise
following the development of the Early Christian styles in Italy during the fifth and following centuries.
The Romanesque, or Early Christian, style in Italy has been included in Book II., together with the later developments of
style in that country; this has enabled the editor to bring the description of St. Mark’s, Venice, into the first chapter under
Italy, to which chronologically it belongs, instead of placing it after the Pointed Italian Gothic style. The Italian Byzantine
chapter has been omitted, and the two or three buildings described under it transferred to the Byzantine-Romanesque
chapter. By the new arrangement it is possible now to follow almost chronologically the various phases of style in Italy.
In the Book on the Byzantine style, some of the examples in Jerusalem ascribed to Constantine have been transferred to
Justinian’s time; but this has naturally followed another very important change—the description of the so-called Mosque of
Omar, the Dome of the Rock, has been transferred to the Saracenic style. It is well known that Mr. Fergusson had few
supporters in his theories respecting the builders of this structure, and Prof. Hayter Lewis’s work has now removed all
doubt as to its having been the work of the Caliph Abd el Melik and his followers. This change has necessitated a
complete revision of the description of the Holy Sepulchre, for which Prof. Willis’s and Prof. Hayter Lewis’s works have
furnished the chief authorities.
Various corrections have been made in the dates ascribed to the Mosques in Cairo, and the French Expedition in Tunis
has enabled the editor to add a plan and view of the great Mosque of Kerouan, the most sacred Mahomedan edifice after
v
vi
vii
that of Mecca, and the one great early example of which scarcely anything was known.
About forty woodcuts have been specially prepared for this new edition, half of which are of subjects not before
illustrated, the remainder replacing those which were defective or absolutely incorrect. In addition to these, various
alterations where required have been made to other woodcuts.
The several authorities consulted have been acknowledged in the course of the work, but the editor desires here to
express his obligations to Mr. Fitzroy Doll, Mr. G. H. Birch, and Mr. Arthur Hill for advice on the German, English, and
Irish sections respectively.
viii
PREFACE TO SECOND EDITION.
During the period that has elapsed since the first edition of this work was published,[1] no important work on the History of
Architecture has appeared which throws any new light on either the theory or practice of the art, and, except in India, no
new buildings have been discovered and no monographs published that materially add to our general stores of knowledge.
The truth of the matter appears to be that the architectural productions of all the countries mentioned in these two
volumes have been examined and described to a sufficient extent for the purposes of the general historian. A great deal of
course remains to be done before all the information required for the student of any particular style can be supplied, but
nothing of any great importance probably remains to be discovered in the countries of the Old World, nor anything that is
at all likely to alter any views or theories founded on what we at present know.
The one exception to this satisfactory state of things is our knowledge, or rather want of knowledge, regarding the
history of the ancient architecture of the New World, treated of in the last few pages of this work. No important addition
has lately been made to the little we knew before, and it is now to be feared that Mr. Squier’s long-expected work on the
Antiquities of Peru may never see the light, at least not under the auspices of its author, and the Count de Waldeck’s work
adds very little, if anything, to what we knew before. What is really wanted is that some one should make himself
personally acquainted with all the various styles existing between the upper waters of the Colorado and the desert of
Atacama to such an extent as to be able to establish the relative sequence of their dates and to detect affinities where they
exist, or to point out differences that escape the casual observer. Photography may in the next few years do something
towards enabling stay-at-home travellers to do a good deal towards this, but photography will never do all, and local
knowledge is indispensable for the exact determination of many now obscure questions. The problem is in fact identical
with that presented to Indian antiquaries some thirty years ago. At that time we knew less of the history of Indian
architecture than we now know of American, but at the present day the date of every building and every cave in India can
be determined with almost absolute certainty to within fifty, or at the outside one hundred, years; the sequence is
everywhere certain, and all can be referred to the race and religion that practised that peculiar style. In America there are
the same strongly marked local peculiarities of style as in India, accompanied by equally easily detected affinities or
differences, and what has been done for India could, I am convinced, easily be accomplished for America, and with even
more satisfactory and more important results to the history and ethnography of that great country.
The subject is well worthy of the attention of any one who may undertake it, as it is the only means we now know of by
which the ancient history of the country can be recovered from the darkness that now enshrouds it and the connexion of
the Old world with the New—if any existed—can be traced, but it is practically the only chapter in the history of
architecture which remains to be written.
Notwithstanding this paucity of new material, the completion of M. Place’s great work on Khorsabad, Wood’s
explorations at Ephesus, Dr. Tristram’s travels in Moab, with other minor works, and new photographs of other places,
have furnished some twenty or thirty woodcuts to this work, either of new examples or in substitution for less perfect
illustrations. More than this, the experience gained in the interval from reading, and personal familiarity with buildings not
before visited, especially in Italy, have enabled me to add considerably to the text and to correct or modify impressions
based on less perfect information. These, with a careful revision of the text throughout, will, it is hoped, be found to render
this edition an improvement to a considerable extent over that which preceded it.
As mentioned in the preface to the volume containing the History of the Modern Styles of Architecture, the scheme of
the present edition is that the two volumes now published shall contain a description of all the ancient styles of architecture
known to exist either in the Old or New world, except India.
In the first edition the Indian styles occupied about 300 pages, and were illustrated by 200 woodcuts. In the present one
it is proposed to double the extent of the text and to add such further illustrations as may be found requisite fully to illustrate
the subject. When this is done it will form a separate volume, either the third of the general History of Architecture, or a
complete and independent work by itself, and sold separately. If nothing unforeseen occurs to prevent it, it is expected that
the work will be published before the end of next year (1875).
The History of the Modern Styles of Architecture, published last year, will then form the fourth and concluding volume
of the work, or may be considered as a complete and independent treatise, and, like the volume containing the History of
Indian Architecture, will be sold separately.
As stated in the preface to the first edition, it was originally intended that chapters should be added on what were then
known as Celtic or Druidical remains. When, however, the subject came to be carefully looked into for that purpose, it
was found that the whole was such a confused mass of conflicting theories and dreams, that no facts or dates were so
established that they could be treated as historical. The consequence was that the materials collected for the purpose were,
in 1872, published in a separate volume, entitled ‘Rude Stone Monuments,’ in the form rather of an argument than of a
history.
As was to be expected, a work of that nature, and which attacked the established faith in the Druids, has been exposed
to a considerable amount of hostile criticism, but nothing has yet appeared that at all touches the marrow of the question,
or invalidates any of the more important conclusions therein arrived at. On the other hand, everything that has since come
to light has tended to confirm them in a most satisfactory manner. Colonel Brunon’s researches, for instance, at and around
the Madras’en, in Algeria, have proved that the tumuli in that cemetery belong to Roman times.[2] In India sculptured and
ix
x
xi
xii
inscribed dolmens have been dug up and photographed, so that their age is no longer doubtful, and others, as archaic in
form as any, are found belonging to reigning families of chiefs, and still used by them. Last, not least, Dr. Schliemann’s
explorations at Hissarlik have deprived the prehistoric advocates of one of their most plausible arguments. At a depth of
81⁄2 metres from the surface he found the remains of a walled city, with paved streets, and rich in gold, silver, and copper,
with their alloys electron and bronze, and every sign of a high civilization. Above this, through four or five metres of
successive deposits, indicating probably a duration of twice as many centuries, no trace of metal was found, but, as he
expresses, an “ungeheure menge,” and, in another place, a “kolossale menge,” an unlimited number of rude stone
implements of every sort. Above this again, the remains of the Greek city of Ilium Novum.
If this were the case in Asia Minor in historic times, it is in vain to argue that, when the imported civilization of the
Romans passed away, the Britons may not have returned to their old faith and old practices, and adhered to them till a new
conquest and a new faith led to their being finally abandoned. It may, or it may not, have been so, but till some better
argument than has yet been brought forward is adduced to prove that it was not so, the à priori argument of improbability
will not now avail much. Whenever the facts, as stated in the ‘Rude Stone Monuments,’ are admitted, or any better set of
conclusions substituted for them, their history may be added as a fifth volume to this work. Till then, people must be
content with the hazy nihilism of the prehistoric myth.
xii
FROM THE PREFACE TO THE FIRST EDITION.
Although the present work may in some respects be considered as only a new edition of the ‘Handbook of Architecture,’
still the alterations, both in substance and in form, have been so extensive as to render the adoption of a new title almost
indispensable. The topographical arrangement, which was the basis of the ‘Handbook,’ has been abandoned, and a
historical sequence introduced in its place. This has entirely altered the argument of the book, and, with the changes and
additions which it has involved, has rendered it practically a new work; containing, it is true, all that was included in the
previous publication, but with a great deal that is new and little that retains its original form.
The logical reasons for these changes will be set forth in their proper place in the body of the work; but meanwhile, as
the Preface is that part of it which should properly include all personal explanations, I trust I may not be considered as
laying myself open to a charge of egotism, if I avail myself of this conventional licence in explaining the steps by which this
work attained its present form.
It was my good fortune to be able to devote many years of my life to the study of Architecture—as a fine art—under
singularly favourable circumstances: not only was I able to extend my personal observations to the examples found in
almost all the countries between China and the Atlantic shore, but I lived familiarly among a people who were still
practising their traditional art on the same principles as those which guided the architects of the Middle Ages in the
production of similar but scarcely more beautiful or more original works. With these antecedents, I found myself in
possession of a considerable amount of information regarding buildings which had not previously been described, and—
what I considered of more value—of an insight into the theory of the art, which was certainly even more novel.
Believing this knowledge and these principles to be of sufficient importance to justify me in so doing, I resolved on
publishing a work in which they should be embodied; and, in furtherance of this idea, sixteen years ago I wrote a book
entitled ‘The True Principles of Beauty in Art.’ The work was not—nor was it intended to be—popular in its form. It was
an attempt of a young author to do what he thought right and best, without consulting the wishes of the public on the
subject, and the first result, as might have been—and indeed was—anticipated, was that no publisher would undertake it.
In consequence of this, only the first volume was published by Longmans in 1849, and that at my own expense and risk.
The event proved that the booksellers were right. The book did not sell, and it became a question whether it was worth my
while to waste my time and spend my money on a work which the public did not want, or whether it would not be wiser to
abandon it, and wait for some more favourable opportunity. Various circumstances of no public interest induced me at the
time to adopt the latter course, and I felt I could do so without any breach of faith, as the work, as then published, was
complete in itself, though it had been intended to add two more volumes to the one already published.
Some years afterwards a proposal was made to me by Mr. Murray to utilise the materials collected for the more
ambitious work in the more popular form of a Handbook of Architecture. The work was written in a very much more
popular manner than that I had previously adopted, or than I then liked, or now think worthy of the subject; but the result
proved that it was a style much better suited to the public demand, for this time the work was successful. Since its
publication in 1855 a large number of copies have been sold; the work has now for some years been out of print, and a
new edition is demanded. Under these circumstances the question arose, whether it would be better to republish the
Handbook in its original form, with such additions and emendations as its arrangement admitted of, or whether it would not
be better to revert to a form nearly approaching that adopted in the ‘True Principles,’ rather than that followed in the
composition of the Handbook, as one more worthy of the subject, and better capable of developing its importance.
The immense advantages of the historical over the topographical method are too self-evident to require being pointed
out, whenever the object is to give a general view of the whole of such a subject as that treated of in these volumes, or an
attempt is made to trace the connexion of the various parts to one another. If the intention is only to describe particular
styles or separate buildings, the topographical arrangement may be found more convenient: but where anything beyond this
is attempted, the historical method is the only one which enables it to be done. Believing that the architectural public do
now desire something more than mere dry information with regard to the age and shape of buildings, it has been
determined to remodel the work and to adopt the historical arrangement.
In the present instance there does not seem to be the usual objection to such a rearrangement—that it would break the
thread of continuity between the old and the new publication—inasmuch as, whichever method were adopted, the present
work must practically be a new book. The mass of information obtained during the last ten years has been so great that
even in the present volume a considerable portion of it had to be rewritten, and a great deal added. In the second volume
the alterations will be even more extensive. The publication of the great national work on Spanish antiquities,[3] of
Parcerisa’s ‘Beauties, &c., of Spain,’[4] and, above all, Mr. Street’s work,[5] have rendered Spanish architecture as
intelligible as that of any other country, though ten years ago it was a mystery and a puzzle. Schulz’s[6] work has rendered
the same service for Southern Italy, while the publications of De Vogüé[7] and Texier[8] will necessitate an entirely new
treatment of the early history of Byzantine art. The French have been busily occupied during the last ten years in editing
their national monuments; so have the Germans. So that in Europe little of importance remains to be described. In Asia,
too, great progress has been made. Photography has rendered us familiar with many buildings we only knew before by
description, and both the Hindu and Mahomedan remains of India are now generally accessible to the public. Colonel
Yule’s[9] work on Burmah and M. Mouhot’s[10] on Siam have made us acquainted with the form of the buildings of those
countries, and China too has been opened to the architectural student. When the Handbook was written there were many
places and buildings regarding which no authentic information was available. That can hardly be said to be the case now as
respects any really important building, and the time, therefore, seems to have arrived when their affiliation can be pointed
xiii
xiv
xv
xvi
out, if it ever can be, and the study of architecture may be raised from dry details of measurements to the dignity of an
historical science.
In the present work it is intended that the first two volumes shall cover the same extent of ground as was comprised in
the two volumes of the ‘Handbook,’ as originally published, with such enlargement as is requisite to incorporate all recent
additions to our knowledge; and chapters will be added on Celtic—or, as they are vulgarly called, Druidical—remains
omitted in the ‘Handbook.’ The ‘History of Modern Architecture’ will thus form the third volume of the work; and when—
if ever—it comes to be reprinted, it is intended to add a Glossary of architectural terms, and other matters necessary to
complete the book. When all this is done, the work will be increased from 1500 pages, which is the number comprised in
the three volumes as at present published, to more than 2000 pages, and the illustrations will be augmented in at least an
equal ratio.[11] Notwithstanding all this, it is too evident that even then the work can only be considered as an introduction
to the subject, and it would require a work at least ten times as large to do full justice even to our present knowledge of the
history of architecture. Any one at all familiar with the literature of the subject can see at once why this is so. Viollet le Duc,
for instance, is now publishing a dictionary of French architecture from the eleventh to the sixteenth century. The work will
consist, when complete, of ten volumes, and probably 5000 illustrations. Yet even this will by no means exhaust the history
of the style in one country of Europe during the five centuries indicated. It would require at least as many volumes to
illustrate, even imperfectly, the architectural history of England during the same period. Germany would fill an equal
number; and the mediæval architecture of Italy and Spain could not be described in less space.
In other words, fifty volumes and 20,000 woodcuts would barely suffice to complete what must in the present work be
compressed into 500 pages, with a like number of illustrations.
Under these circumstances it will be easily understood that this book is far from pretending to be a complete or
exhaustive history of the art. It is neither an atlas nor a gazetteer, but simply a general map of the architectural world, and
—if I may be allowed the small joke—on Mercator’s projection. It might with propriety be called an abridgment, if there
existed any larger history from which it could be supposed to be abridged. At one time I intended to designate it ‘An
Historical Introduction to the Study of Architecture, considered as a Fine Art;’ but though such a title might describe
correctly enough the general scope of the work, its length is objectionable, and, like every periphrasis, it is liable to
misconstruction.
The simple title of ‘History’ has therefore been adopted, under the impression that it is entitled to such a denomination
until at least some narrative more worthy of the subject takes its place. Considering the limits it thus became necessary to
impose on the extent of the work, it must be obvious that the great difficulty of its composition was in the first place to
compress so vast a subject into so small a compass; and next, to determine what buildings to select for illustration, and
what to reject. It would have been infinitely easier to explain what was necessary to be said, had the number of woodcuts
been doubled. Had the text been increased in the same ratio a great many things might have been made clear to all, which
will now, I fear, demand a certain amount of previous knowledge on the part of my readers. To have done this, however,
would have defeated some of the great objects of the present publication, which is intended to convey a general view of
the history and philosophy of the subject, without extending the work so as to make it inconveniently large, or increasing
the price so as to render it inaccessible to a large number of readers. The principle consequently that has been adopted in
the selection of the illustrations is, first, that none of the really important typical specimens of the art shall be passed over
without some such illustrations as shall render them intelligible; and, after this, those examples are chosen which are
remarkable either for their own intrinsic merit, or for their direct bearing in elucidation of the progress or affinities of the
style under discussion; all others being sternly rejected as irrelevant, notwithstanding the almost irresistible temptation at
times to adorn my pages with fascinating illustrations. The reader who desires information not bearing on the general thread
of the narrative must thus have recourse to monographs, or other special works, which alone can supply his wants in a
satisfactory manner.
It may tend to explain some things which appear open to remark in the following pages, if I allude here to a difference of
opinion which has frequently been pointed out as existing between the views I have expressed and those generally received
regarding several points of ancient history or ethnology. I always have been aware that this discrepancy exists; but it has
appeared to me an almost inevitable consequence of the different modes of investigation pursued. Almost all those who
have hitherto written on these subjects have derived their information from Greek and Roman written texts; but, if I am not
very much mistaken, these do not suffice. The classic authors were very imperfectly informed as to the history of the
nations who preceded or surrounded them; they knew very little of the archæology of their own countries, and less of their
ethnography. So long, therefore, as our researches are confined to what they had written, many important problems remain
unsolved, and must ever remain as unsolvable as they have hitherto proved.
My conviction is, that the lithic mode of investigation is not only capable of supplementing to a very great extent the
deficiencies of the graphic method, and of yielding new and useful results, but that the information obtained by its means is
much more trustworthy than anything that can be elaborated from the books of that early age. It does not therefore terrify
me in the least to be told that such men as Niebuhr, Cornewall Lewis, or Grote, have arrived at conclusions different from
those I have ventured to express in the following pages. Their information is derived wholly from what is written, and it
does not seem ever to have occurred to them, or to any of our best scholars, that there was either history or ethnography
built into the architectural remains of antiquity.
While they were looking steadily at one side of the shield, I fancy I have caught a glimpse of the other.
It has been the accident of my life—I do not claim it as a merit—that I have wandered all over the Old World. I have
seen much that they never saw, and I have had access to sources of information of which they do not suspect the
xvii
xviii
existence. While they were trying to reconcile what the Greek or Roman authors said about nations who never wrote
books, and with regard to whom they consequently had little information, I was trying to read the history which these very
people had recorded in stone, in characters as clear and far more indelible than those written in ink. If, consequently, we
arrived at different conclusions, it may possibly be owing more to the sources from which the information is derived than to
any difference between the individuals who announce it.
Since the invention of printing, I am quite prepared to admit that the “litera scripta” may suffice. In an age like the
present, when nine-tenths of the population can read, and every man who has anything to say rushes into print, or makes a
speech which is printed next morning, every feeling and every information regarding a people may be dug out of its books.
But it certainly was not so in the Middle Ages, nor in the early ages of Greek or Roman history. Still less was this so in
Egypt, nor is it the case in India, or in many other countries; and to apply our English nineteenth century experience to all
these seems to me to be a mistake. In those countries and times, men who had a hankering after immortality were forced
to build their aspirations into the walls of their tombs or of their temples. Those who had poetry in their souls, in nine cases
out of ten expressed it by the more familiar vehicle of sculpture or painting rather than in writing. To me it appears that to
neglect these in trying to understand the manners and customs, or the history of an ancient people, is to throw away one-
half, and generally the most valuable half, in some cases the whole, of the evidence bearing on the subject. So long as
learned men persist in believing that all that can be known of the ancient world is to be found in their books, and resolutely
ignore the evidence of architecture and of art, we have little in common. I consequently feel neither abashed nor ashamed
at being told that men of the most extensive book-learning have arrived at different conclusions from myself—on the
contrary, if it should happen that we agreed in some point to which their contemporary works did not extend, I should
rather be inclined to suspect some mistake, and hesitate to put it down.
There is one other point in which I fancy misconception exists, of a nature that may probably be more easily removed by
personal explanation than by any other means. It is very generally objected to my writings that I neither understand nor
appreciate the beauties of Gothic architecture, and consequently criticise it with undue severity. I regret that such a feeling
should prevail, partly because it is prejudicial to the dissemination of the views I am anxious to promulgate, but more
because at a time when in this country the admiration of Gothic art is so nearly universal, it alienates from me the best class
of men who love the art, and prevents their co-operating with me in the improvement of our architecture, which is the great
object which we all have at heart.
If I cannot now speak of Gothic architecture with the same enthusiasm as others, this certainly was not the case in the
early part of my career as a student of art. Long after I turned my attention to the subject, I knew and believed in none but
the mediæval styles, and was as much astonished as the most devoted admirer of Gothic architecture could be, when any
one suggested that any other forms could be compared with it. If I did not learn to understand it then, it was not for want
of earnest attention and study. I got so far into its spirit that I thought I saw then how better things could be done in Gothic
art than had been done either in the Middle Ages or since; and I think so now. But if it is to be done, it must be by free
thought, not by servile copying.
My faith in the exclusive pre-eminence of mediæval art was first shaken when I became familiar with the splendid
remains of the Mogul and Pathan emperors of Agra and Delhi, and saw how many beauties of even the pointed style had
been missed in Europe in the Middle Ages. My confidence was still further weakened when I saw what richness and
variety the Hindu had elaborated not only without pointed arches, but indeed without any arches at all. And I was cured
when, after a personal inspection of the ruins of Thebes and Athens, I perceived that at least equal beauty could be
obtained by processes diametrically opposed to those employed by the mediæval architects.
After so extended a survey, it was easy to perceive that beauty in architecture did not reside in pointed or in round
arches, in bracket capitals or horizontal architraves, but in thoughtful appropriateness of design and intellectual elegance of
detail. I became convinced that no form is in itself better than any other, and that in all instances those are best which are
most appropriate to the purposes to which they are applied.
So self-evident do these principles—which are the basis of the reasoning employed in this book—appear to me, that I
feel convinced that there are very few indeed even of the most exclusive admirers of mediæval art who would not admit
them, if they had gone through the same course of education as has fallen to my lot. My own conviction is, that the great
difference which seems to exist between my views and those of the parties opposed to them arises almost entirely from this
accident of education.
In addition to this, however, we must not overlook the fact that for three centuries all the architects in Europe concurred
in believing that the whole of their art began and ended in copying classical forms and details. When a reaction came, it
was not, unfortunately, in the direction of freedom; but towards a more servile imitation of another style, which—whether
better or worse in itself—was not a style of our age, nor suited to our wants or feelings.
It is perhaps not to be wondered at, that after three centuries of perseverance in one particular groove, men should have
ceased to have any faith in the possibility of reason or originality being employed in architectural design. As, however, I can
adduce in favour of my views 3000 years of perfect success in all countries and under all circumstances, against 300 years
of absolute failure in consequence of the copying system, though under circumstances the most favourable to success in
other respects, there seems at least an à priori probability that I may be right and that the copyists may be mistaken.
I may be deceiving myself, but I cannot help fancying that I perceive signs of a reaction. Some men are becoming aware
of the fact that “archæology is not architecture,” and would willingly see something done more reasonable than an attempt
to reproduce the Middle Ages. The misfortune is, that their enlightenment is more apt to lead to despondency than to hope.
“If,” they ask, “we cannot find what we are looking for in our own national style, where are we to look for it?” The
obvious answer, that it is to be found in the exercise of common sense, where all the rest of the world have found it, seems
xix
xx
xxi
to them beside the mark. Architecture with most people is a mystery—something different from all other arts; and they do
not see that it is and must be subject to the same rules as they all are, and must be practised in the same manner, if it is to
be successful.
Whether the nation will or will not soon awaken to the importance of this prosaic anti-climax, one thing at least seems
certain and most hopeful. Men are not satisfied with what is doing; a restless, inquiring spirit is abroad, and if people can
only be induced to think seriously about it, I feel convinced that they will be as much astonished at their present admiration
of Gothic town-halls and Hyde Park Albert Memorials, as we are now at the Gothic fancies of Horace Walpole and the
men of his day.
NOTE.
Although every possible care has been taken in selecting the best authorities for the statements in the text of the work, as
well as the subjects for illustration, still no one acquainted with the state of the literature of architecture will need to be told
that in many branches few materials exist for a correct description of the style, and that the drawings which are available
are frequently so inexact, and with scales so carelessly applied, that it is impossible at times to avoid error. The plans
throughout the book are on too small a scale to render any minute errors apparent, but being drawn to a uniform scale of
100 feet to 1 inch, or 1⁄1200 of the real size, they are quite sufficient as a means of comparison, even when not
mathematically correct. They suffice to enable the reader to judge of the relative size of two buildings by a mere inspection
of the plans, as correctly as he could by seeing the buildings themselves, without actually measuring them in all their details.
As a general rule, the sections or elevations of buildings, throughout the book, are drawn to a scale double that of the
plans, viz., 50 feet to 1 inch, or 1⁄600 of the real dimensions; but, owing to the great size of many of them, it has been found
impossible to carry out this in all instances: where it has not been effected the departure from the rule is always noted,
either below the woodcut or in the text.
No lineal dimensions are quoted in the text except such as it is believed can be relied upon, and in all instances these are
reduced to English feet. The superficial measures also in the text, like the plans, are quite sufficient for comparison, though
not to be relied upon as absolutely correct. One great source of uncertainty as regards them is the difficulty of knowing at
times what should be included in the building referred to. Should, for instance, the Lady Chapel at Ely be considered an
integral part of the Cathedral, or the Chapter-house at Wells? Should the sacristies attached to Continental cathedrals be
considered as part of the church? or such semi-detached towers as the south-western one at Bourges? What constitutes
the temple at Karnac, and how much of this belongs to the Hypostyle Hall? These and fifty other questions occur in almost
every instance which may lead two persons to very different conclusions regarding the superficial dimensions of a building,
even without the errors inherent in imperfect materials.
When either the drawing from which the woodcut is taken was without a scale, or the scale given could not be
depended upon, “No scale” has been put under the woodcut, to warn the reader of the fact. When the woodcut was either
too large for the page, or too small to be distinct if reduced to the usual scale, a scale of feet has been added under it, to
show that it is an exception to the rule.
Capitals, windows, and details which are meant to illustrate forms or construction, and not particular buildings, are
drawn to any scale that seemed best to express the purpose for which they are inserted; when they are remarkable for
size, or as individual examples, a scale has been added; but this is the exception, not the rule.
Every pain has been taken to secure the greatest possible amount of accuracy, and in all instances the sources from
which the woodcuts have been taken are indicated. Many of the illustrations are from original drawings, and of buildings
never before published.
xxii
CONTENTS OF VOL. I.
INTRODUCTION.
Page
Part I.—Section I. Introductory.—II. Beauty in Art.—III. Definition of Architecture.—IV. Mass.—V.
Stability.—VI. Durability.—VII. Materials.—VIII. Construction.—IX. Forms.—X. Proportion.—XI.
Carved Ornament.—XII. Decorative Colour.—XIII. Sculpture and Painting.—XIV. Uniformity—XV.
Imitation of Nature.—XVI. Association.—XVII. New Style.—XVIII. Prospects
3
PART II.—ETHNOGRAPHY AS APPLIED TO ARCHITECTURAL ART.
I. Introductory
52
II. Turanian Races—Religion, Government, Morals, Literature, Arts, and Sciences
55
III. Semitic Races—Religion, Government, Morals, Literature, Arts, and Sciences
64
IV. Celtic Races—Religion, Government Morals, Literature Arts, and Sciences
70
V. Aryan Races—Religion, Government, Morals, Literature, Arts, and Sciences
75
VI. Conclusion
83
PART I.—ANCIENT ARCHITECTURE.
Introductory
87
Outline of Egyptian Chronology
90
BOOK I.—EGYPTIAN ARCHITECTURE.
I. Introductory
91
II. The Pyramids and Contemporary Monuments—Tombs—Temples
97
III. First Theban Kingdom—The Labyrinth—Tombs—Shepherds
110
IV. Pharaonic Kingdom—Thebes—Rock-cut Tombs and Temples—Mammeisi—Tombs—Obelisks—
Domestic Architecture
118
V. Greek and Roman Period—Decline of art—Temples at Denderah—Kalábsheh—Philæ
139
VI. Ethiopia—Kingdom of Meroë—Pyramids
147
BOOK II.—ASSYRIAN ARCHITECTURE.
I. Introductory
151
II. Chaldean Temples
157
III. Assyrian Palaces—Wurka—Nineveh—Nimroud—Khorsabad—Palace of Sennacherib, Koyunjik—Palace
of Esarhaddon—Temples and Tombs
168
xxiii
xxiv
IV. Persia—Pasargadæ—Persepolis—Susa—Fire Temples—Tombs
194
V. Invention of the Arch
214
VI. Judea—Temple of Jerusalem
219
VII. Asia Minor—Historical notice—Tombs at Smyrna—Doganlu—Lycian Tombs
229
BOOK III.—GRECIAN ARCHITECTURE.
I. Greece—Historical notice—Pelasgic art—Tomb of Atreus—Other remains
240
II. Hellenic Greece—History Of the Orders—Doric Temples in Greece—Doric Temples in Sicily—Ionic
Temples—Corinthian Temples—Dimensions of Greek Temples—Doric order—Ionic order—Corinthian order
—Caryatides—Forms of temples—Mode of lighting temples—Temple of Diana at Ephesus—Municipal
architecture—Theatres—Tombs—Cyrene
251
BOOK IV.—ETRUSCAN, ROMAN, PARTHIAN AND SASSANIAN ARCHITECTURE.
I. Etruria—Historical notice—Temples—Rock-cut tombs—Tombs at Castel d’Asso—Tumuli—The arch
289
II. Rome—Introduction
302
III. Roman Architecture—Origin of style—The arch—Orders: Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, Composite—Temples
—The Pantheon—Roman Temple at Athens—at Baalbec
305
IV. Basilicas, Theatres and Baths—Basilicas of Trajan and Maxentius—Provincial basilicas—Theatre at Orange
—Colosseum—Provincial amphitheatres—Baths of Diocletian
327
V. Triumphal Arches, Tombs, and other Buildings—Arches at Rome; in France—Arches at Trèves—Pillars of
Victory—Tombs—Minerva Medica—Provincial tombs—Eastern tombs—Domestic Architecture—Spalato—
Pompeii—Bridges—Aqueducts
347
VI. Parthian and Sassanian Architecture—Historical notice—Palaces of Al Hadhr and Diarbekr—Domes—
Serbistan—Firouzabad—Tâk Kesra—Palaces at Mashita—Rabbath Ammon, etc.
389
PART II.—CHRISTIAN ARCHITECTURE.
BOOK I.—BYZANTINE ARCHITECTURE.
I. Introductory
415
II. Basilicas—Churches at Bethlehem, Jerusalem, and Thessalonica—Rectangular churches in Syria and Asia
Minor, with wooden roofs and with stone vaults
419
III. Circular or Domical Buildings—Circular churches with wooden roofs and with true domes in Syria and
Thessalonica—Churches of SS. Sergius and Bacchus and Sta. Sophia, Constantinople—Civic Architecture—
Tombs
432
IV. Neo-Byzantine Style—Sta. Irene, Constantinople—Churches at Ancyra, Trabala, and Constantinople—
Churches at Thessalonica and in Greece—Domestic Architecture
453
V. Armenia—Churches at Dighour, Usunlar, Pitzounda, Bedochwinta, Mokwi, Etchmiasdin, and Kouthais—
Churches at Ani and Samthawis—Details
466
xxv
VI. Rock-cut Churches—Churches at Tchekerman, Inkerman, and Sebastopol—Excavations at Kieghart and
Vardzie
481
VII. Mediæval Architecture of Russia—Churches at Kief—Novogorod—Moscow—Towers
484
BOOK II.—ITALY.
I. Introductory—Division and Classification of the Mediæval Styles of Architecture in Italy
500
II. Early Christian Style—Basilicas at Rome—Basilica of St. Peter—St. Paul’s—Basilicas at Ravenna—St.
Mark’s, Venice—Dalmatia and Istria—Torcello
504
III. Circular Romanesque Churches—Circular Churches—Tomb of Sta. Costanza—Churches at Perugia,
Nocera, Ravenna, Milan—Secular buildings
542
IV. Lombard and Round-arched Gothic—Chapel at Friuli—Churches at Piacenza, Asti, and Novara—St.
Michele, Pavia—St. Ambrogio, Milan—Cathedral, Piacenza—Churches at Verona—Churches at Toscanella—
Circular Churches—Towers
558
V. Byzantine-Romanesque—Cathedral of Naples—San Miniato, Florence—Cathedrals of Pisa and Zara—
Cathedrals of Troja, Bari, Bittonto—San Nicole, Bari—Cloisters of St. John Lateran—Baptistery of Mont St.
Angelo—San Donato, Zara—Towers—Civic Architecture
582
VI. Pointed Italian Gothic—Fresco paintings—Churches at Vercelli, Asti, Verona, and Lucca—Cathedral at
Siena—Sta. Maria, Florence—Church at Chiaravalle—St. Petronio, Bologna—Cathedral at Milan—Certosa,
near Pavia—Duomo at Ferrara
607
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS.
NO.
PAGE
Frontispiece.—Elevation of Façade of Cologne Cathedral.
Vignette to Title-page.—Section of the Parthenon, showing the Author’s views as to the
admission of light.
1-6.
Diagrams (technical)
8-34
7.
Section of Great Pyramid
98
8.
Section of King’s Chamber and of Passage in Great Pyramid
101
9, 10.
Pyramid of Sakkara
103
11.
Doorway in Tomb at the Pyramids
106
12.
Sarcophagus of Mycerinus
106
13.
Plan of Temple near the Sphinx
107
14.
Plans of houses, Kahun
113
15.
Tomb at Beni-Hasan
114
16.
Proto-Doric Pillar at Beni-Hasan
115
17.
Reed Pillar from Beni-Hasan
115
18.
Lotus Pier, Zawyet-el-Mayyitûr
115
19.
Rameseum at Thebes
120
20.
Central pillar, from Rameseum
121
21.
Section of Palace of Thothmes III., Thebes
123
22.
Plan of Hypostyle Hall at Karnac
124
23.
Section of central portion of same
124
24.
Caryatide Pillar, from the Great Cou...
