Table Of Content2
This Dover edition, first published in 1987, is an unabridged republication of the
work as first published in English by Sampson Low, Marston, Searle and
Rivington, London, in 1877 (vol. I) and 1881 (vol. II) (original French edition,
Entretiens sur l’architecture, completed 1872 in two text volumes and an “Atlas”
of engraved plates). In the present edition: the 38 double-page plates have been
reproduced directly from the “Atlas” (A. Morel et Cie, Paris, 1864) rather than
from the London edition, to achieve greater quality; the French labeling of these
plates has been translated into English (for the first time); plates XXVII and XXVIII
(originally monochrome in the Paris and London editions) and XXXVI (originally
in full color in both those editions) appear here in black-and-white; some of the
plates have been slightly relocated for reasons of space; the numbering of the plates
has been somewhat regularized, and the list of plates made more complete; the
erratum bound in to the London edition has here been corrected directly in the text,
and a number of new corrections made.
Library of Congress Cataloging-in-Publication Data
Viollet-le-Duc, Eugène-Emmanuel, 1814-1879.
Lectures on architecture.
Translation of: Entretiens sur l’architecture.
Originally published: London : Sampson Low, Marston, Searle, and Rivington,
1877-1881.
Includes index.
1. Architecture. I. Title.
NA2520.V5613 1987
720
87-20087
9780486144344
Manufactured in the United States by Courier Corporation
25520403
www.doverpublications.com
3
Table of Contents
Title Page
Copyright Page
Table of Figures
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.
THE AUTHOR’S PREFACE.
LECTURE I.
LECTURE II.
LECTURE III.
LECTURE IV.
LECTURE V.
LECTURE VI.
LECTURE VII.
LECTURE VIII.
LECTURE IX.
LECTURE X.
4
Table of Figures
FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
FIG. 5
FIG. 6
FIG. 9
FIG. 10
FIG. 10bis
FIG. 11
FIG. 12
FIG. 13
FIG. 14—Part
FIG. 17
FIG. 18
FIG. 19
FIG. 20
FIG. 21
FIG. 52
FIG. 23
FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
FIG. 5
FIG. 6
FIG. 7
FIG. 10
FIG. 11
FIG. 12
FIG. 13
FIG. 14
FIG. 15
FIG. 16
FIG. 17
FIG. 18
FIG. 20
FIG. 21
5
FIG. 22
FIG. 23
FIG. 24
FIG. 25
FIG. 26
FIG. 27
FIG. 28
FIG. 29
FIGS. 30
FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
FIG. 5
FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
FIG. 5
FIG. 6
FIG. 7
FIG. 8
FIG. 11
FIG. 12
FIG. 13
FIG. 14
FIG. 15
FIG. 16—Portico
FIG. 17
FIG. 18
FIG. 19
FIG. 20
FIG. 21
FIG. 22
FIG. 23
FIG. 1
FIG. 2
FIG. 3
FIG. 4
6
TRANSLATOR’S PREFACE.
I HAVE undertaken this translation with the sanction of the author, under the
conviction that, although his admirable work is already widely known and
appreciated, there are many to whom an English version would be acceptable.
The general reader as well as the student will find these Lectures highly
interesting and instructive. The author has a profound knowledge of his subject, and
discusses it from a strictly philosophical point of view; but he elucidates it so ably
that any person of average mental culture can comprehend him. Clearing the ground
of that confusion of ideas which has hitherto so unhappily obscured elementary
conceptions of Art, he discusses its nature and origin, referring the latter to
instinctive tendencies; and proceeds to show that none of the various forms of
Architecture can lay an exclusive claim to artistic excellence. Tracing architectural
art from its beginnings, he follows it through the Greek and Roman Periods and the
Middle Ages down to the days of the Renaissance. He adduces evidence in the
course of his investigation to prove that the development of Art is independent of
that of other branches of civilisation, and illustrates the immutable principles upon
which that development depends. He then shows the application of these principles
to the novel requirements of modern architecture, exemplifying several new and
admirable methods of construction, and pointing out the course which beginners in
Architecture should pursue in their elementary studies, and subsequently in
composition.
While every page of the work illustrates important truths in Art, or in Nature as
related to it, the author never loses an opportunity of insisting upon those which are
liable to be forgotten. While commenting on faults, he shows how to avoid them, by
referring to the misconceptions in which they have originated; and calls special
attention to the notion of “Revival,” as it is commonly understood, and which in its
essence is clearly akin to the justly depreciated Renaissance. He condemns it as the
fundamental error of our times, which renders fruitless so much earnest labour and
enthusiasm, and effectually hinders the formation of a School of Architecture. In
exposing this fallacy he proves that a reproduction of the mere forms or methods of
the past must be devoid of genuine vitality, and that it is to analysis and the
application of principles, and not to the imitation of forms, that we must look for
a true revival.
If these Lectures were attentively read by our young architects, we should, I am
persuaded, soon observe an improvement in Architecture; we should have better
construction and more sensible work, less pretension and more Art. Nor can their
7
perusal by amateurs fail to raise the standard of criticism.
With regard to the translation itself I have endeavoured to follow out the
principles laid down by Dr. Newman :—“While every care must be taken against
the introduction of new, or the omission of existing ideas in the original text, yet in
a book intended for general reading, faithfulness may be considered simply to
consist in expressing in English the sense of the original, the actual words of the
latter being viewed mainly as directions into its meaning, and scholarship being
necessary in order to gain the full insight which they afford; and next, that, where
something must be sacrificed, precision or intelligibility, it is better in a popular
work to be understood by those who are not critics, than to be applauded by those
who are.”
I wish to take this opportunity of expressing my deep obligations to Mr. John
Sibree, M.A. Univ. Lond., for the assistance he has rendered me by his able and
careful revision of my manuscript for the press. My thanks are also due to my friend
Mr. Charles Wethered of Stroud, for his helpful advice, sympathy, and
encouragement during the progress of a work undertaken in the midst of
professional engagements not always the most favourable to literary pursuits.
BENJAMIN BUCKNALL,
ARCHT.
8
THE AUTHOR’S PREFACE.
RATHER more than a year ago, yielding to the earnest solicitations of my friends
and brother architects, I determined upon opening a studio for pupils and delivering
a course of lectures on Architecture. The undertaking appeared to me to have no
particular interest except for those who should wish to frequent the studio or attend
the lectures. In my simplicity I thought that all I had to do was to hire a studio and
set about preparing an oral course to the best of my ability. But in the Republic of
Arts (a Republic after the fashion of that of Venice) matters are not so easily
managed. At the outset rooms were freely offered for my lectures, and everybody
expressed a willingness to send me pupils. But when I was ready, the rooms were
not : I was urged to make a beginning, and received many fair words, but no
material aid. Now I am a very indifferent petitioner; so, after some attempts—not
very persistent, I must confess—I went home and quietly waited. I soon understood
the reason of this decline of interest. Certain Professors of the École des beaux-
arts and of the Bibliothèque impériale wished to do me the honour of attacking my
“tendencies” by preventive measures. A professional work which I am just
publishing, and whose scope embraces only one of the phases of architectural art,
was regarded by a Professor of Archæology, deeply versed in the study of Greek
antiquities,—a clever and erudite man,—as designed to be the vehicle of exclusive
and therefore “dangerous” dogmas. The learned Professor is especially displeased
(why, does not appear) at my having drawn attention to an art foreign to his studies,
but which belongs to us as much as Greek art belonged to the Greeks, or Roman art
to the Romans. In disputing our claim to a strictly lawful right, however, the author
of the clever tirade of which this work was the object, brought nothing really to
bear against my opinions but simple assertions to the contrary. This was something,
certainly; but for us who have our compasses in our hands and geometry at our
service, it is not enough. Perhaps, before protesting on behalf of imperilled
civilisation, and setting up for its champions, it would have been more reasonable
to examine whether, after all, the barbarians were really at the gates. A cry of alarm
where there is no enemy at all, or when his forces and means of attack are
unknown, can only serve to throw an army into confusion. My friends began to
intimate a general rising in arms—a fierce impending conflict; and both sides were
hoping for a goodly sight of broken lances. Now tumult is the foe to study ; and I
love study and detest tumult. I therefore allowed the storm to blow over ; which,
meeting no resistance, spent its rage in vain. I put the manuscript of my lectures
back into my portfolio, and gave my mind to other matters. And now I am perfectly
willing to leave the professional chair to those who occupy it with an ability to
9
which I do not aspire, and an authority which is indisputable.
Our art gains nothing by these fruitless strifes, which turn upon words rather than
things ; while by engaging in them artists lose a little of that good sense which is so
needful to us all. But there are eternal principles which it is the duty of each of us,
according to his several capacity, to exalt above those passions of the Schools that
are so unworthy to occupy the attention of sincere and earnest men. Renouncing the
honours of a chair which I foresaw would only prove an arena for controversies I
had no leisure to carry on, and which I deem useless at the best, I have resolved to
offer to my friends, my fellow-architects, my pupils, and my provincial and foreign
correspondents, whose sympathy and encouragement are to me such a valuable
support, these Lectures on Architecture. The indulgent readers to whom I have just
referred, and even those to whom an adversary is perhaps necessary to give them
an opportunity of displaying their zeal for what they deem the “good cause”—that
of Civilisation and Progress—will, I trust, acknowledge that my chief object is
Truth, and that, if I am liable to any accusation, it is that of not belonging to any
school. It is true, that alone is enough to array them all against me.
In the present day “specialities” alone are recognised. It is not imagined that a
savant, an artist, or a man of letters can move in a wide circle. Each is confined
within a narrow sphere, beyond which he cannot pass without losing a great part of
his importance in the eyes of the public. If an artist, for instance, has in the course
of his profession manifested certain preferences (and who is there that has not
preferences ?), immediately he is classed, “labelled,” as it were : he is not
consulted or employed, or his capacity acknowledged, except within the range
which those predilections are supposed to have marked out for him. If he protests
against the limitation which opinion imposes upon his knowledge and tastes, his
protest is unheeded. His adversaries, or those who regard themselves as such, if he
endeavours to take a single step in their direction, are eager to thrust him back
within the narrow circle traced around him ; for every one thinks it his interest to
make his neighbour’s sphere as narrow as possible, and is ready to declare him a
trespasser the moment he ventures beyond it. These sentiments appear to me
perverse in themselves, hurtful to the interest of Science, Art, and Letters, and
unjust to individuals. I will not, however, undertake to criticise sentiments against
which I have long deemed it vain to struggle : it is evident that my range seemed too
wide, seeing that it has been so vehemently contested.
My hesitation in offering to the public general ideas on Architecture arose from
the following dilemma : “Either my teaching must limit itself to the circle to which I
am supposed to be restricted, and will thus rest on too narrow a basis, and in fact
be more dangerous than useful; or, in advancing beyond that circle, I shall lose the
confidence which every author or professor ought to inspire in those who read or
listen to him, if he wishes his instructions to be profitable.”
Hence the scruples which have long restrained me,—scruples which the kindly
10
