Chapter 14: Notes

Footnote 295:

See Note [97], Chapter 5.

Footnote 296:

Somewhat fuller accounts of English commercial architecture in this
period will be found in Hitchcock, ‘Victorian Monuments of Commerce’,
_Architectural Review_, CV (1949), 61-74, and in Hitchcock, _Early
Victorian Architecture_, Chapters XI and XII. Most of the English
buildings mentioned in this chapter are illustrated either in the book
or the article.

Footnote 297:

See Weisman, W., ‘Commercial Palaces of New York’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XXXVI (1954), 285-302.

Footnote 298:

See Bogardus, J., _Cast Iron Buildings: Construction and Advantages_,
New York, 1856.

Footnote 299:

See Hitchcock, H.-R., ‘Early Cast Iron Façades’, _Architectural
Review_, CIX (1951), 113-16.

Footnote 300:

See Weisman, W., ‘Philadelphia Functionalism and Sullivan’, _Journal
of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XX (1961), 3-19.

Footnote 301:

See Sturges, W. K., ‘Cast Iron in New York’, _Architectural Review_,
CXIV (1953), 233-8.

Footnote 302:

See Peterson, C., ‘Ante-bellum Skyscraper’, _Journal of the Society of
Architectural Historians_, IX (1950), 27-9; X (1951), 25. The Jayne
Building, begun by Johnston, was completed by Thomas U. Walter. It has
unfortunately been demolished since 1958.

Footnote 303:

See Woodward, G., ‘Oriel Chambers’, _Architectural Review_, CXIX
(1956), 268-70. Fine measured drawings by students of the University
of Liverpool School of Architecture were published in _Architectural
History_, II (1959), 81-94.

Footnote 304:

See Note [277], Chapter 13.

Footnote 305:

See Weisman, W., ‘New York and the Problem of the First Skyscraper’,
_Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, XII (1953),
13-20. For a rather different opinion, see Webster, J. C., ‘The
Skyscraper: Logical and Historical Considerations’, _Journal of the
Society of Architectural Historians_, XVIII (1959), 126-39.

Footnote 306:

It is worth noting that neither cast-iron façades nor the vertical
articulation of the Philadelphia buildings of the fifties was used in
either case. Both developments of the mid century proved cul-de-sacs
since the New York architects followed the established modes of the
sixties for monumental buildings in these first two skyscrapers. In
the same years 1873-4, however, Hunt did build the five-storey edifice
at 478-482 Broadway in New York with an all cast-iron front, employing
a sort of attenuated ‘giant order’ subsuming the three middle storeys.

Footnote 307:

Giedion first called attention to the importance of ‘balloon-frame’
construction in _Space, Time and Architecture_ in 1941; but see Field,
W., ‘A Re-examination into the Invention of the Balloon Frame’,
_Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians_, II (1942), 3-29.

Footnote 308:

See Randall, G., _The Great Fire of Chicago and its Causes_, Chicago
[1871].

Footnote 309:

See Hope, H., ‘Louis Sullivan’s Architectural Ornament’, _Magazine of
Art_, XL (1947), 110-17. Sullivan thought of his early ornament as
somehow ‘Egyptian’, but it is not very easy to see why. A later, so
far unpublished study by Etel Kramer seems to establish, contrary to
his own statements, that Sullivan owed a good deal to the theories of
Owen Jones and that his ornament matured, earlier than has hitherto
been supposed, in 1884-5.

Footnote 310:

This is not the same as the Revell Store.

Footnote 311:

Several more storeys were added later and appear in many of the
published views.

Footnote 312:

One must say ‘metal’, because structural steel was only gradually
replacing cast and wrought iron at this time; all these types of
ferrous material were probably used in the Home Insurance, the
Rookery, and other skyscrapers of the mid eighties. Two books by W.
Birkmire, _Architectural Iron and Steel_, New York, 1891, and
_Skeleton Construction in Buildings_, New York, 1893, best present the
technical aspects of large-scale metal construction as it matured in
the eighties and early nineties.

Footnote 313:

An American edition of this book appeared in 1880. See Note [309],
_supra_.

Footnote 314:

I owe this suggestion to Vincent Scully.

Footnote 315:

Incidentally, the signature Frank L[loyd] Wright on the drawings for a
rather Richardsonian group of three masonry houses in Chicago,
designed in the Adler & Sullivan office in 1888 for Victor L.
Falkenau, suggests that it was Sullivan’s brilliant draughtsman, as it
was Jenney’s assistant on the Leiter Building, who was responsible for
this example of overt Richardsonian influence.

Footnote 316:

The discovery by Condit that this building was begun in 1890 seemed to
lend it a special importance, up until then unrecognized. But the text
gives the correct dating.

Footnote 317:

It is so generally assumed that Sullivan’s mature style is without
historical antecedents that the even more definitely _quattrocento_
character of the entrance here, as well as of those of the Guaranty
Building, is rarely noted.

Footnote 318:

The five southernmost bays are an addition made in 1906 by D. H.
Burnham & Co. They follow, with some slight diminution in the
bay-width, Sullivan’s original design.

The form of the Burnham firm’s name in these years is significant of
the increasing anonymity of architectural practice in America as the
scale of operation increased (see Chapter 24).

Footnote 319:

See _Purcell and Elmslie Architects_ (Walker Art Gallery Exhibition
Catalogue), Minneapolis, 1953, and Gebhard, D., ‘Louis Sullivan and
George Grant Elmslie’, _Journal of the Society of Architectural
Historians_, XIX (1960), 62-8, and _A Guide to the Existing
Architecture of Purcell and Elmslie_, Roswell, N. M., 1960.

Footnote 320:

Of more interest than the skyscraper is a smaller and earlier Singer
Building, also by Flagg. Flagg was one American who retained contact
with the French tradition of exposed metal construction as well as
with the academic aspects of ‘Beaux Arts’ design as his first Singer
Building illustrates.

Footnote 321:

See Schuyler, M., ‘The Work of N. LeBrun & Sons’, _Architectural
Record_, XXVII (1910), 365-80. The Metropolitan Tower is, of course,
the work of a firm not of a single architect; LeBrun himself had been
dead for some years.

Footnote 322:

See Schuyler, M., ‘“The Towers of Manhattan” and Notes on the
Woolworth Building’, _Architectural Record_, XXX (1913), 98-122.

------------------------------------------------------------------------