Chapter XXI: Act 1898: the official principal of the archbishop is required to (10)

Amongst other important mansions are Moreton Old Hall (1550-1559,
partly rebuilt in 1602; see HOUSE, Plate III., fig. 11) in Cheshire, a
fine house in half-timber; Knole House, Kent (1570), possibly also
designed by John Thorpe; Charlecote Hall (1572) near
Stratford-on-Avon; Burleigh House, Northamptonshire (1575), the most
remarkable feature in which is the great tower in the courtyard,
decorated with the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian orders superposed, the
design apparently suggested by a similar feature in the chateau of
Anet, France (published in du Cerceau); Apethorpe Hall,
Northamptonshire (1580); Montacute House, Somersetshire (1580-1600);
Castle Ashby, Northamptonshire (1583-1589); Brereton Hall, Cheshire
(1575-1586), in brick and stone; Westwood Park, Worcestershire (1590);
Wakehurst Place, Sussex (1590); Hardwick Hall, Derbyshire (1590-1597);
Longford Castle, Wiltshire (1591-1612); Cobham Hall, Kent (1594);
Dorton House, Buckinghamshire (1596); Speke Hall, Lancashire (1598),
partly in half-timber work; Holland House, Kensington (1606; wings and
arcades, 1624); Bolsover Castle, Derbyshire (1607-1613); Charlton
House, Kent (1607); Bramshill, Hampshire (1607-1612), an interesting
example of Jacobean architecture; Hatfield, Hertfordshire (1608-1611),
with an extremely fine courtyard (north side in brick and stone,
1621); Audley End, Essex (1610-1616), a great portion of which was
afterwards pulled down; Ham House, Surrey (1610), chiefly in brick;
Pinkie House, at Musselburgh in Midlothian (1613); Aston Hall near
Birmingham (1618-1635); Blickling Hall, Norfolk (1619); Heriot's
hospital, Edinburgh (1628-1659); and Lanhydroc, Cornwall (1636-1641),
which brings us down to the period of the pure Italian Revival
introduced by Inigo Jones.

We have already referred to the reproduction of the Classic orders,
superposed as an enrichment of the principal entrance doorways. In
addition to Burton Agnes and Burleigh House, there are endless
examples in mansions and country houses, but the most remarkable are
those at Oxford: in the old Schools, where coupled columns flank the
entrance gateway with the five orders superposed, and in Merton and
Wadham Colleges, with four orders (the Tuscan being omitted), in
neither case taking any cognizance of the levels of windows or string
courses of the earlier building to which they were applied, or serving
any structural purpose. The orders were all taken from one of the
pattern books, and in the Schools and in Merton College the rococo
ornament and strap-work found in Vredeman de Vries's work were copied
with more or less fidelity to the original. There are, however, two or
three buildings in Northamptonshire which are free from rococo work,
and in their design form a pleasant contrast, as much to the
elaboration of the buildings just described as to the cold formality
of the works of the later Italian style. Lyveden new buildings (1577),
the Triangular Lodge at Rushton, and the Market House at Rothwell, are
all examples in which the orders from Serlio or John Shute are
faithfully represented, and are of a refined character; in the first
named the entablatures only of the orders are introduced. In Rushton
Hall (1595) the cresting of the bow windows shows the evil influence
of Vredeman de Vries's pattern-book and of numerous designs by him and
other Belgian artists, which were printed at the Plantin press. Two
other publications of a similar rococo type were brought out in
Germany, one by Cammermayer (1564) and the other by Dietterlin (1594),
both at Nuremberg; neither of them would seem to have been much known
in England, but indirectly through German craftsmen they may have
influenced some of the work of the Jacobean period, and more
particularly the chimney pieces and the ceilings of the gallery and
other important rooms in which strap-work is found. Among the finer
examples of ceilings of early date are those of Knole, Kent; Haddon
Hall, Derbyshire; Sizergh Hall, Westmorland; South Wraxall Manor
House, Wiltshire; the Red Lodge, Bristol; Chastleton House; and Canons
Ashby--in the last three with pendants. Two of the best-designed
ceilings of modest dimensions are those of the Reindeer Inn at Banbury
and the Star Inn at Great Yarmouth. The principal decorative feature
of the reception rooms was the chimney-piece, rising from floor to
ceiling, in early examples being very simple--as those at Broughton
House and Lacock Abbey--but at a later date overlaid with rococo
strap-work ornament and misshapen figures, as at South Wraxall and
Castle Ashby. One of the most beautiful chimney-pieces is in the
ballroom at Knole, probably of Flemish design, but at Cobham Hall,
Hardwick, Hatfield and Bolsover Castle are fine examples in which
different-coloured marbles are employed, there being a remarkable
series at the last-named place.

The long gallery has already been incidentally mentioned. Its origin
has never been clearly explained; it was generally situated in an
upper storey, and may have been for exercise, like the eaves galleries
in Spain. The dimensions were sometimes remarkable; one at Ampthill
(no longer existing) was 245 ft. long; and a second at Audley End, 220
ft. long and 34 ft. wide. Of moderate length, the best known are those
of Haddon Hall, with rich wainscotting carried up to the ceiling,
Hardwick, Knole, Longleat, Blickling Hall and Sutton Place, Surrey.

In early work the staircases were occasionally in stone with circular
or rectangular newels, but the more general type was that known as the
open well staircase, with balustrade and newels in timber. Of these
the more remarkable examples are those at Hatfield; Benthall Hall,
Shropshire; Sydenham House, Devonshire; Charterhouse, London; Ockwells
Manor House, Berkshire; Blickling, Norfolk; and the Old Star Inn at
Lewes, Sussex.

One of the important features in the old halls was the screen
separating the hall from the passage, over the latter being a gallery;
the front of the screen facing the hall was considered to be its chief
decoration, and was accordingly enriched with columns of the Classic
orders, and balustrade or cresting over. The screens of Charterhouse
(London), Trinity College (Cambridge), Wadham College (Oxford), and
the Middle Temple Hall (London), are remarkable for their design and
execution. The great hammer-beam roof (1562-1572) in the last named is
the finest example of the Renaissance in existence (see ROOFS, Plate
I., fig. 25).

With the exception of chantry or other chapels added to existing
buildings, there was only one church built in the period we are now
describing, St John's at Leeds. This church is divided down the centre
by an arcade of pointed arches, virtually constituting a double nave,
and the rood-screen is carried through both. The window tracery and
the arcade show how the master-mason adhered to the traditional Gothic
style, but the rood-screen, notwithstanding its rococo decoration, is
a fine Jacobean work, eclipsed only by the magnificent example at
Croscombe, which, with the pulpit and other church accessories, dating
from 1616, constitutes the most complete example of that period.

Inigo Jones.

The pure Italian style, as it is sometimes called, was introduced into France probably by Serlio, and the result of its first influence is shown in the Louvre, begun in 1546. It entered Spain about 20 years later, under the rule of Philip II., and Germany about the same time, creating about 100 years later a reaction in Spain in favour of a less cold and formal style, and scarcely taking any root in Germany. In England its first appearance does not take place till 1619, when Inigo Jones, after his second visit to Rome, designed an immense palace, measuring 1150 ft. by 900 ft., of which the only portion built was the Banqueting House in Whitehall (Plate VI., fig. 75); a fine design, in which the emphasizing of the central portion by columns in place of pilasters is an original treatment not found in Italy, but of excellent effect. Unfortunately many subsequent designs of Inigo Jones were either not carried out or have since been destroyed; but nothing approached this admirable work in Whitehall.

Among his buildings still remaining are St Paul's, Covent Garden
(1631), a simple and massive structure which requires perhaps an
Italian sun to make it cheerful; York Stairs Water-gate (1626); the
front of Wilton House, near Salisbury (1633); the Queen's House,
Greenwich (1617), a very poor design; Coleshill, Berkshire; Raynham
Park, Norfolk, with weakly-designed gables and an entrance doorway
with curved broken pediment, which can scarcely be regarded as pure
Italian; and Ashburnham House, Westminster (the staircase of which is
extremely fine), carried out after his death by his pupil John Webb,
who, at Thorpe Hall, near Peterborough (1656), shows that he possessed
some of his master's qualities in his employment of simple and bold
details.

Wren.

Sir Christopher Wren, who follows, was by far the greatest architect of the Italian school, though curiously enough he had never been in Italy. His first work was the library of Pembroke College, Cambridge (1663-1664), followed by the Sheldonian theatre at Oxford, in the construction of the roof of which, with a span of 68 ft., he showed his great scientific knowledge. In 1665 he went to Paris, where he stopped six months studying the architectural buildings there and in its vicinity, and where he came across Bernini, whose designs for destroying the old Louvre (fortunately not carried out) were being started. On his return Wren occupied himself with designs for the rebuilding of the old St Paul's, but these were rendered useless by the great fire of the 22nd of September 1666, which opened out his future career. His plan for the reconstruction of the city was not followed, owing to the opposition of the owners of the sites, but he began plans for the rebuilding of the churches and of St Paul's cathedral. In his treatment of the former, where he was obliged to limit himself to the old sites, often very irregular, and in most cases to the old foundations, he adopted, perhaps quite unconsciously, one of the principles of ancient Roman architecture, and made the central feature the key of his plan, fitting the aisles, vestries, porches, &c., into what remained of the site; this central feature varied according to its extent and proportions, and sometimes from a desire to work out a new problem. The central dome was a favourite conception, the finest example of which is that of St Stephen's, Walbrook (1676); other domed churches are St Mary-at-Hill, St Mildred's, Bread Street, St Mary Abchurch (1681), where the dome virtually covers the whole area of the church, and St Swithin's, Cannon Street, an octagonal example. In St Anne and St Agnes, Aldersgate, the crossing is covered with an intersecting barrel vault; and in this small church, about 52 ft. square with four supporting columns, he manages to get nave, transept and choir with aisles in the angles. In those churches where there was sufficient length, the ordinary arrangement of nave and aisle is adopted, with an elliptical barrel vault over the nave, sometimes intersected and lighted from clerestory windows, the finest example of these being St Bride's, Fleet Street; other examples are St Mary-le-Bow (Cheapside), Christchurch (Newgate) and St Andrew's (Holborn). In St James's, Piccadilly, of which the site was a new one, the plan of nave and aisles with galleries over, and a fine internal design with barrel-vaulted ceiling, was adopted; the exterior is very simple, which suggests that Wren attached much more importance to the interior. It should be pointed out that in all these cases, the vaults, to which we have referred, were in lath and plaster, and consequently covered over with slate roofs, and as a rule the exteriors (which are rarely visible) were deemed to be of less importance. This is, however, made up for by the position selected for the towers, and in their varied design those of St Mary-le-Bow, St Bride's (Fleet Street) and St Magnus (London Bridge) are perhaps the finest of a most remarkable series.

The foundation stone of St Paul's cathedral was laid in 1675, and the
lantern was finished in 1710. The silhouette of the dome (Plate II.,
fig. 66), which is, of course, its principal feature, is far superior
to those of St Peter's at Rome, or the Invalides or Pantheon at Paris,
and the problem of its construction with the central lantern was
solved much more satisfactorily than in any other example. Wren
realized that the attempt to render a dome beautiful internally as
well as externally could only be obtained by having three shells in
its construction; the inner one for inside effect, the outer one to
give greater prominence externally, and the third, of conical form, to
support the lantern.

In plan, Wren's design (fig. 53) was in accordance with the
traditional arrangement of an English cathedral, with nave, north and
south transepts and choir, in all cases with side aisles, and a small
apse to the choir. The great dome over the crossing is, like the
octagon at Ely, of the same width as nave and aisles together. It
resembles the plan of that cathedral also in the four great arches
opening into nave, transepts and choir, with smaller arches between.
Instead of the great barrel vault of St Peter's, Rome, Wren introduced
a series of cupolas over the main arms of the cathedral, which enabled
him to light the same with clerestory windows; these are not visible
on the exterior, as they are masked by the upper storey which Wren
carried round the whole structure, in order, probably, to give it
greater height and importance; by its weight, however, it serves to
resist the thrust of the vaults transmitted by buttresses across the
aisles. The grouping of the two lanterns on the west front with the
central dome is extremely fine; the west portico is not satisfactory,
but the semicircular porticoes of the north and south transepts are
very beautiful features. Greater importance is given to the cathedral
by raising it on a podium about 12 ft. above the level of the pavement
outside, which enables the crypt under the whole cathedral to be
lighted by side windows.

The principal examples of the churches which followed are those of St
George's, Bloomsbury; St Mary Woolnoth; Christ Church, Spitalfields,
by Nicholas Hawksmoor; and St Mary-le-Strand (1714), and St
Martin's-in-the-Fields (1721), by James Gibbs. Gibbs's interiors are
second only to those of Wren, while Hawksmoor's are very weak; in both
cases, however, the exteriors are finely designed. Amongst subsequent
works are St John's, Westminster, and St Philips, Birmingham (1710),
by Thomas Archer; St George's, Hanover Square (1713-1714), by John
James; All Saints' church, Oxford, by Dean Aldrich; St
Giles-in-the-Fields (1731), by Henry Flitcroft; and St Leonard's,
Shoreditch (1736), by George Dance.

Sir Christopher Wren's chief monumental work was Greenwich hospital,
in the arrangement of which he had to include the Queen's House, and a
block already begun on the west side. His solution was of the most
brilliant kind, and seen from the river the grouping of the several
blocks with the colonnade and cupolas of the two central ones is
admirable.

Wren's next great work was the alterations and additions to Hampton
Court palace, begun in 1689, the east front facing the park (Plate
VI., fig. 77), the south front facing the river, the fountain court
and the colonnade opposite the great hall. Chelsea hospital
(1682-1692), the south front (now destroyed) to Christ's hospital
(1692), and Winchester school (1684-1687), are all examples in brick
with stone quoins, cornices, door and window dressings, which show how
Wren managed with simple materials to give a monumental effect. The
library which he built in Trinity College, Cambridge (1678), with
arcades on two storeys divided by three-quarter detached columns of
the Doric and Ionic orders, is based on the same principle of design
as those in the court of the Farnese palace at Rome by Sangallo, a
part of the palace which is not likely to have been known by him.

The results of the Italian Revival in domestic architecture were not
altogether satisfactory, for although it is sometimes claimed that the
style was adapted by its architects to the traditional requirements
and customs of the English people, the contrary will be found if they
are compared with the work of the 16th century. The chief aim seems to
have been generally to produce a great display of Classic features,
which, even supposing they followed more closely the ancient models,
were quite superfluous and generally interfered with the lighting of
the chief rooms, which were sacrificed to them. In fact there are many
cases in which one cannot help feeling how much better the effect
would be if the great porticoes rising through two storeys were
removed. This is specially the case in Sir John Vanbrugh's mansion,
Seaton Delaval, in Northumberland (1720); his other works, Blenheim
(1714) and Castle Howard (1702), are vulgarized also by the employment
of the large orders. The same defect exists in Stoneleigh Abbey,
Leamington, where the orders carried up through two and three storeys
respectively destroy the scale of the whole structure.

Among other mansions, the principal examples are Houghton in Norfolk
(1723), a fine work, the villa at Mereworth in imitation of the Villa
Capra near Vicenza, and the front of old Burlington House (1718),
copied from the Porto palace at Vicenza, by Colin Campbell; Holkham in
Norfolk and Devonshire House, London, by William Kent; Ditchley in
Oxfordshire, and Milton House near Peterborough, by Gibbs;
Chesterfield House, London, by Isaac Ware; Wentworth House in
Yorkshire (1740), and Woburn Abbey in Bedfordshire (1747), by Henry
Flitcroft; Spencer House, London (1762), by John Vardy; Prior Park and
various works in Bath by John Wood; the Mansion House, London, by
George Dance; Wardour in Wiltshire, Kedleston Hall in Derbyshire, and
Worksop in Nottinghamshire (1763), by James Paine; Gopsall Hall, Ely
House, Dover Street, London (1772), and Heveringham Hall in Suffolk,
by Sir Robert Taylor, to whose munificence we owe the Taylor Buildings
at Oxford; Harewood House in Yorkshire (1760), Lytham Hall in
Lancashire, and (part of) Wentworth House in Yorkshire, by John Carr;
and Luton Hoo (1767), now largely reconstructed, and Sion House
(1761), the best-known mansions by Robert Adam, who with his brothers
built the Adelphi and many houses in London. Adam designed a type of
decoration in stucco for ceilings and mantelpieces, the dies of which
are still in existence and are utilized extensively in modern houses.
His labours were not confined to buildings, but extended to their
decoration, furniture and fittings.

The works of Sir William Chambers were of a most varied nature, but
his fame is chiefly based on Somerset House in the Strand, London
(1776), with its facade facing the river, a magnificent work second
only to Inigo Jones's Whitehall, but infinitely more extensive and
difficult to design. He was also the author of a work on _The
Decorative Part of Civil Architecture_, which is still the standard
work on the subject in England. His pupil, James Gandon, won the first
gold medal given by the Royal Academy in 1769, and his principal work
was the Custom House in Dublin (1781). Newgate prison (1770), a
remarkable building now destroyed, was the chief work carried out by
George Dance, jun.

Other buildings not yet mentioned are the Alcove and Banqueting Hall
(Orangery) of Kensington Palace, by Wren; the Radcliffe library,
Oxford, by Gibbs, an extremely fine work both externally and
internally; Queen's College, Oxford, by Hawksmoor; the county hall,
Northampton, by Sir Roger Norwich; the town hall, Abingdon (1677),
designer unknown; the Ashmolean museum, Oxford (1677), by T. Wood;
Clare College, Cambridge, and St Catherine's Hall, Cambridge
(1640-1679), by Thomas and Robert Grumboll, master-masons; the custom
house, King's Lynn (1681), by Henry Bell; Nottingham Castle, designed
by the duke of Newcastle in 1674 and carried out by March, his clerk
of works--the central portion is finely proportioned, and it is only
in the pilasters at the quoins that one recognizes the amateur; two
houses in Cavendish Square, London (1717), on the north side, by John
James; Lord Burlington's villa (1740) at Chiswick, by William Kent,
which with its internal decorations is still perfect; the celebrated
Palladian Bridge at Wilton, by R. Morris; and last but not least, in
consequence of its great influence on modern architecture, Sparrowe's
house at Ipswich (1567-1662), the timber oriel windows of which are
now so often reproduced. (R. P. S.)

RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN GERMANY

The classical revival does not seem to have taken root in Germany much before the middle of the 16th century, some forty to fifty years later than in France, from which country it is said to have been introduced, and in some of the early work there is a great similarity to French examples, but without the refinement and variety of detail which one finds in the chateaux of the Loire and in many of the French towns. In the rood-screen of the cathedral at Hildesheim (1546), the court of the town hall at Gorlitz (1534), the portal of the Petershof at Halberstadt (1552), and the entrance gateway of the castle at Brieg (1553), one is able to recognize certain ornamental details and a similar superposition of pilasters in several storeys to that which is found in various towns in Normandy and on the Loire. In both countries the new style was engrafted on the last phase of the Gothic period, so forming at first a transitional style, which lasted about fifty years. Thus the lofty roofs which prevailed in the 15th century are developed further, but with this great divergence in the two countries. In France there are rarely gable ends, in Germany they are not only the chief characteristic feature of the main front, but are introduced in the side elevations in the shape of immense dormers with two or three storeys and rising the full height of the roof, as in the castle at Hamelschenburg near Hameln. Throughout Germany, therefore, the gable end and the dormer gable became the chief features on which they lavished all their ornamental designs, the main walls of the building being as a rule either in plain masonry, rubble masonry with stucco facing, or brick and stone. Other prominent features are the octagonal and circular oriel windows rising through two or three storeys at the corners of their buildings--rectangular bow windows in two or three storeys, which were allowed apparently to encroach on the pavement, and octagonal turrets or towers instead of circular as in France. In the vicinity of the Harz mountains, where timber was plentiful, a large proportion of the factories, houses and even public buildings, are erected in half-timber work with elaborate carving of the door and window jambs, projecting corbels, &c. At Hildesheim, Wernigerode, Goslar, &c., these structures are sometimes of immense size and richly decorated. Among early examples in stone, the porch added to the town hall of Cologne (1571), the projecting wings of the town halls at Halberstadt and Lemgo (1565), and the town halls at Posen (1550), Altenburg (1562-1567) and Rothenburg (1572-1590), are all picturesque examples more or less refined in design. In the last-named example the purer Italian style has exercised its influence in the principal doorway and in the arcaded gallery on the east front. This same influence shows itself in the courtyard of the town hall at Nuremberg, where the arcades of the two upper storeys might be taken for those of the courts of the palaces at Rome.

Amongst other 16th-century work there are two entrance gates at
Danzig, the Hohe Tor (1588), a fine massive structure, and the
Langgasse Tor (1600), more or less pure Italian in style. At Augsburg,
the arsenal (1603-1607), by the architect Elias Holl (1573-1646), is
of a bold and original design, and the town hall has magnificent
ceilings and wainscotting round the walls of the principal halls. This
brings us to the castle of Heidelberg (Plate VII., figs. 78, 79 and
80), which is looked upon by the Germans as the chef d'oeuvre of the
Renaissance in Germany. As seen from the great court it forms an
interesting study, there being the work of three periods: in the
centre the picturesque group of the older building (c. 1525), on the
right the Otto-Heinrichs-Bau (1556-1559), and on the left the
Friedrichs-Bau (1602-1607). Of the two the latter is the finer. The
architect of the Otto-Heinrichs-Bau would seem to have been undecided
whether to give greater prominence and projection to his pilasters and
cornices or to his windows with their dressings and pediments, so he
has compromised the matter by making them both about the same, and the
effect is most monotonous. In the Friedrichs-Bau, which is a
remarkable work, the pilasters are of great projection, with bold
cornices and simple windows well set back, while the tracery of the
ground-floor windows is a pleasant relief from the constant repetition
of pilaster window dressings. The gables also of the Friedrichs-Bau
break the horizontal sky-line agreeably. A more minute examination of
the decorative details, however, betrays the advent of a peculiar
rococo style of a most debased type, which throughout the 17th century
spread through Germany, and the repetition of the same details
suggests that it was copied from some of the pattern books which were
published towards the end of the 16th century, comprising
heterogeneous designs for title pages, door heads, frontispieces, and
even extending to new versions of the orders, which apparently
appealed to the German mason and saved him the trouble of invention.
These books, compiled by de Vries and Dietterlin, emanated from the
Low Countries, and their influence extended to England during the
Elizabethan period. At all events in Germany it would seem to have
arrested the purer Italian work, which we have already noticed, and
henceforth in the gable ends one finds the most extraordinary
accumulation of distorted forms which, though sometimes picturesque,
disfigure the German work of the 17th century. An exception might
perhaps be made in favour of the Peller'sche Haus in Nuremberg (1625),
one of the best houses of modest dimensions in Germany. The facade in
the Aegidien-Platz is a fine composition; inside is a very picturesque
court and staircase, and the painted ceiling and the wainscotting of
one of the rooms in woods of different colours, though not very pure
in style, are of excellent design and execution.

Some of the most characteristic work of this type exists at Hameln,
where the facades of the Rattenfangerhaus (1602), the Hochzeitshaus
(1610), and many other buildings, are covered with the most
extraordinary devices, leaving scarcely a foot of plain masonry as a
relief. The south front of the town hall of Bremen (1612) is in the
same style (Plate IV., fig. 70), relieved, however, by the fine large
windows of the great hall and the arcade in front, in which there is
some picturesque detail. Later in the century the degradation
increases until it reaches its climax in the Zwinger palace at Dresden
(1711), the most terrible rococo work ever conceived, if we except
some of the Churrigueresque work in Spain.

Among the most pleasing features in Germany are the fountains which
abound in every town; of these there are good examples at Tubingen,
Prague, Hildesheim, Ulm, Nuremberg, already famed for its Gothic
fountains, Mainz and Rothenburg. In the latter town, built on an
eminence, they are of great importance for the supply of the town, and
some of them are extremely picturesque and of good design.

Up to the present we have said nothing about the ecclesiastical
buildings in Germany, for the reason that the period between the
Reformation and the conclusion of the Thirty Years' War was not
favourable to church building. The only example worth mentioning is
the church of St Michael at Munich (1583-1597), and that more for its
plan than for its architecture. It has a wide nave covered with a
barrel vault, and a series of chapels forming semicircular recesses on
each side, the walls between acting as buttresses to the great vault.
The transept is not deep enough to have any architectural value, but
if at the east end there had been only an apse it would have been a
better termination than the long choir. The Liebfrauenkirche at
Dresden (1726-1745) has a good plan, but internally is arranged like a
theatre with pit, tiers of boxes, and a gallery, all in the worst
possible taste, and externally the dome is far too high and destroys
the scale of the lower part of the church. An elliptical dome is never
a pleasing object, and in the church of St Charles Borromeo, at
Vienna, there are no other features to redeem its ugliness. The
Marienkirche at Wolfenbuttel (1608-1622) has a fine Italian portal;
its side elevation is spoilt by the series of gable dormers, which are
of no possible use, as the church (of the _Hallenkirchen_ type) is
well lighted through the aisle windows. The portal of the
Schlosskapelle (1555) at Dresden is a fine work in the Italian style;
and lastly the church at Buckeburg, in a late debased style, is
redeemed only by the fact that it is built in fine masonry and that
the joints run through all the rococo details. (R. P. S.)

RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN BELGIUM AND HOLLAND

The Gothic development in the 15th century in Belgium, as evidenced in her magnificent town halls and other public buildings, not only supplied her requirements in the century following, but hindered the introduction of the Classic Revival, so that it is not till the second half of the 16th century that we find in the town hall of Antwerp a building which is perhaps more Italian in design than any work in Germany. There are, however, a few instances of earlier Renaissance, such as the Salm Inn (1534) at Malines; the magnificent chimneypiece, by Conrad van Noremberger of Namur, in the council chamber of the palais de justice at Bruges (1529); and the palais de justice of Liege (1533), formerly the bishop's palace, in the court of which are features suggesting a Spanish influence. The influence of the cinque-cento style of Italy may be noticed in the tomb of the count de Borgnival (1533) in the cathedral of Breda, and in the choir stalls of the church at Enkhuisen on the borders of the Zuyder Zee, both in Holland, and in the choir stalls of the cathedral of Ypres in Belgium; the carving of these bears so close a resemblance to cinque-cento work in design and execution that one might conclude they were the work of Italian artists, but their authors are known to have been Flemish, who must, however, have studied in Italy. Again, in the stained-glass windows of the church of St Jacques at Liege, the details are all cinque-cento, with circular arches on columns, festoons of leaves and other ornament, all apparently derived from Italian sources, but necessarily executed by Flemish painters, as stained-glass windows of that type are not often found in Italian churches.

Of public buildings in Belgium, the most noted example is that of the
town hall at Antwerp, designed by Cornelius de Vriendt (1564). It has
a frontage of over 300 ft. facing the Grande Place, and is an imposing
structure in four storeys, arcaded on the lower storey and the classic
orders above, with mullioned windows between on the three other
storeys, the uppermost storey being an open loggia, which gives that
depth of shadow obtained in Italy by a projecting cornice. It is
almost the only building in Belgium without the usual gable, the
centre block being carried up above the eaves and terminated with an
entablature supporting at each end a huge obelisk, and in the centre
what looks like the miniature representation of a church. The only
other classic building is the Renaissance portion of the town hall at
Ghent, which is very inferior to the older Gothic portion.

What is wanting in the town halls, however, is amply replaced by the
magnificence of the houses built for the various gilds, as for
instance those of the Fishmongers at Malines (1580), of the Brewers,
the Archers, the Tanners and the Cordeliers (rope-makers) at Antwerp,
and, in the Grande Place at Brussels, the gilds of the Butchers, the
Archers, the Skippers (the gable end of which represents the stern of
a vessel with four cannons protruding), the Carpenters and others.
Besides these, and especially in Antwerp, are to be found a very large
series of warehouses, which in the richness of their decoration and
their monumental appearance vie with the gilds in the evolution of a
distinct style of Renaissance architecture--a type from which the
architect of the present day might derive more inspiration than from
the modest brick houses of Queen Anne's time.

In domestic architecture, the best-preserved example of the 16th and
17th centuries is the Musee Plantin at Antwerp, the earliest portion
of which dates from 1535. This was bought by Ch. Plantin, who was
employed by Philip of Spain to print all the breviaries and missals
for Spain and the Netherlands; the fortune thus acquired enabled him
and his successors to purchase from time to time adjoining properties
which they rebuilt in the style of the earlier buildings. After 1637
the buildings followed the style of the period, but up to that date
they were all erected in brick with stone courses and window dressings
round a central court. Internally the whole of the ancient fittings
are retained, including those of the old shop, the show-rooms,
reception rooms and the residential portion of the house, with the
wainscotting and Spanish leather on the walls above, panelled
ceilings, chimney-pieces, stained glass, &c., the most complete
representation of the domestic style of Belgium.

Of ecclesiastical architecture in the Renaissance style there are
scarcely any examples worth noting. The tower of the church of St
Charles Borromeo at Antwerp (1595-1610) is a fine composition similar
in many respects to Wren's steeples, and the nave of St Anne's church
at Bruges is of simple design and good proportion. The Belgian
churches are noted for their immense pulpits, sometimes in marble and
of a somewhat degraded style. The finest features in them are the
magnificent rood-screens, in which the tradition of the Gothic
examples already quoted seems to have been handed down. In the
cathedral at Tournai is a fine specimen by Cornelius de Vriendt of
Antwerp (1572), and there is a second at Nieuport, both similar in
design to the example from Bois-le-Duc now in the Victoria and Albert
Museum; and in the church of St Leonard at Leau is a tabernacle in
stone, over 50 ft. high, in seven stages, with numerous figures by
Cornelius de Vriendt (1550).

In Holland, nearly all the principal buildings of the Renaissance date
from the time of her greatest prosperity when the Dutch threw off
their allegiance to the Spanish throne (1565). With the exception of
the palace at Amsterdam (1648-1655), an immense structure in stone
with no architectural pretensions, there are no buildings in Holland
in which the influence of the purer style of the Italian revival can
be traced. Internally the great hall of the palace and the staircase
in the Louis XIV. style are fine examples of that period.

The earliest Renaissance town hall is that of the Hague (1564),
situated at the angle of two streets, which is an extremely
picturesque building, in fact one of the few in which the architect
has known how to group the principal features of his design. The
Renaissance addition made to the old town hall of Haarlem is a
characteristic example of the Dutch style. The walls are in red brick,
the decorative portions, consisting of superimposed pilasters with
mullioned and transomed windows, cornices and gable end, all being in
stone. Inside this portion of the town hall, which is now a gallery
and museum, is an ancient hall (not often shown to visitors) in which
all the decorations and fittings date from the 17th century. There is
a second example of an ancient hall in the Stadthuis at Kampen, one of
the dead cities of the Zuyder Zee, which served originally as a court
of justice, and retains all its fittings of the 16th century,
including a magnificent chimneypiece in stone, some 25 ft. high and
dated 1543.

The town hall at Bolsward in Friesland is another typical specimen of
Dutch architecture, in which the red brick, alternating with stone
courses running through the semi-detached columns which decorate the
main front, has given variety to the usual treatment of such features.
The external double flight of steps with elaborate balustrade, and the
twisted columns which flank the principal doorway, are extremely
picturesque, if not quite in accordance with the principles of
Palladio or Vignola.

A similar flight of steps with balustrade forms the approach to the
entrance doorway (on the first floor) of the town hall at Leiden,
where the rich decoration of the centre block and its lofty gable is
emphasized by contrast with the plain design of the chief front.

In the three chief cities in Holland, the Hague, Amsterdam and
Rotterdam, there are few buildings remaining of 17th-century work, so
that they must be sought in the south at Dordrecht and Delft, or in
the north at Leiden, Haarlem, Alkmaar, Hoorn, Enkhuisen, or, crossing
the Zuyder Zee into Friesland, in Leeuwarden, Bolsward, Kampen and
Zwolle, the dead cities. In all these towns ancient buildings have
been preserved, there being no reason to pull them down. Of the
entrance gateways at Hoorn there is an example left, of which the
lower portion might be taken for a Roman triumphal arch, so closely
does it adhere to the design of those monuments, extending even to a
long Latin inscription in the frieze. The tower (1531-1652), built to
protect the entrance to the harbour, has no gateway. There are some
old buildings in Kampen, in one of which the entrance gateway is a
simple and fine composition in brick and stone, the chief
characteristics of the gateways here being the enormously high roofs
of the circular towers flanking them. A finer and more picturesque
grouping of roofs exists in the entrance gateway (Amsterdam Gate) at
Haarlem, which is perhaps, however, eclipsed by those of the Waaghuis
at Amsterdam with its seven conical roofs.

The Waaghuisen, or weighing-houses for cheeses, are, next to the town
halls, the most important buildings in Holland, and in fact vie with
them in richness of design. The example at Alkmaar possesses not only
an imposing front with gable in three storeys, but a lofty tower with
belfry. At Deventer the main building is late Gothic (1528), in brick
and stone, with an external double flight of steps and balustrades
added in 1643.

The Fleesch Halle (meat-market) at Haarlem, also in brick and stone,
is of a very rococo style, but notwithstanding all its vagaries
presents a most picturesque appearance.

The domestic architecture of Holland and the shop fronts retain more
of their original dispositions than will be found in any other
country. At Hoorn, Enkhuisen and other towns, there has virtually been
no change during the last 200 years. In the more flourishing towns as
Amsterdam and Rotterdam, the increasing prosperity of the inhabitants
led them in the latter portion of the 17th and in the 18th centuries
to adapt features borrowed from the French work of Louis XIV. and
Louis XV., without, however, their refinement, luxuriance or variety,
so that although substantial structures they are extremely monotonous
in general effect. (R. P. S.)

MAHOMMEDAN ARCHITECTURE

Before proceeding with "modern architecture," to which the styles now discussed have gradually led us, we have still another important architectural style to describe, in Mahommedan architecture. The term "Mahommedan" has been selected in preference to "Saracenic," because it includes a much wider field, and enables us to bring in many developments which could not well come under the latter title. It was the Mahommedan religion which prescribed the plan and the features of the mosques, and it was the restriction of that faith which led to the principal characteristics of the style. The term "Saracenic" could hardly be applied to the architecture of Spain, Persia or Turkey.

The earliest mosques at Mecca and Medina, which have long since passed
away, were probably of the simplest kind; there were no directions on
the subject in the Koran, and, as Fergusson remarks, had the religion
been confined to its native land, it is probable that no mosques
worthy of the name would have ever been erected. In the first
half-century of their conquest in Egypt and Syria the Mahommedans
contented themselves with desecrated churches and other buildings, and
it was only when they came among the temple-building nations that they
seemed to have felt the necessity of providing some visible monument
of their religion. The first requirement was a structure of some kind,
which should indicate to the faithful the direction of Mecca, towards
which, at stated times, they were to turn and pray. The earliest
mosque, built by Omar at Jerusalem, no longer exists, but in the
mosque of 'Amr at Cairo (fig. 54), founded in 643 and probably
restored or added to at various times, we find the characteristic
features which form the base of the plans of all subsequent mosques.
These features consist of (a) a wall built at right angles to a line
drawn towards Mecca, in which, sunk in the wall, was a niche
indicating the direction towards which the faithful should turn; (b)
a covered space for shelter from the sun or inclement weather, which
was known as the prayer chamber; (c) in front of the prayer chamber,
a large open court, in which there was a fountain for ablution; and
(d) a covered approach on either side of these courts and from the
entrance. The materials employed in the earlier mosque were all taken
from ancient structures, Egyptian, Roman and Byzantine, but so
arranged as to constitute the elements of a new style. The columns
employed were not always of sufficient size, and therefore in order to
obtain a greater height, above the capitals were square dies, carrying
ranges of arches, all running in the direction of Mecca; to resist the
thrust, wood ties were built in under the arches, so that the
structure was of the lightest appearance. The same principle was
observed in the mosque of Kairawan, in Tunisia (675), and in the
mosque of Cordova (786-985), copied from it. Similar wooden ties are
found in the mosque of El Aksa and the Dome of the Rock at Jerusalem
(built 691), so that they became one of the characteristics of the
style. For constructional reasons, however, this method of building
was not always adhered to, and in the mosque of Tulun (fig 55) in
Cairo (879), the first mosque in Egypt, built of original materials,
we find an important departure. The arcades, instead of running at
right angles to the Mecca wall, are built parallel with it, on account
of the great thrust of the arches, all built in brick (fig. 56). The
wood ties would have been quite insufficient to resist the thrust, and
in the case of this mosque were probably used to carry lanterns.

1. Kibla. 5. Fountain for Ablution
2. Mimbar. 6. Rooms built later.
3. Tomb of 'Amr. 7. Minaret
4. Dakka. 8. Latrines.]

The mosque of Tulun is the earliest example in which the pointed arch
appears throughout, and it forms the leading and most characteristic
constructional feature of the style in its subsequent developments in
every country, except in Barbary and Spain, where the circular-headed
horse-shoe arch seems to be preferred. As it is also the earliest
mosque in which the decoration applied is that which was by inference
laid down in the Koran, some allusion to the restrictions therein
contained, and the consequent result, may not be out of place. The
representation of nature in any form was absolutely forbidden, and
this applied generally to foliage of all kinds, and plants, the
representation of birds or animals, and above all of the human figure.
The only exceptions to the rule would seem to be those found in the
very conventional representations of lions carved over the gateways of
Cairo and Jerusalem and in the courts of the Alhambra. It was this
restriction which produced the extremely beautiful conventional
patterns which are carried round the arches of the mosque of Tulun,
and are found in the friezes, string-courses and the capitals of the
shafts, and when these patterns form the background of the text of the
Koran in high relief, in the splendid Arabic characters, it would be
difficult to find a more beautiful decorative scheme in the absence of
natural forms. As the mosque of Tulun was built by a Coptic architect,
and its decoration is evidently the result of many years of previous
developments, it is probably to the Copts that its evolution was due.
The second type of decoration is that which is given by geometrical
forms, and either in pavements or wall decorations in marble, or in
the framing of woodwork in ceilings, or in doorways, the most
elaborate and beautiful combinations were produced. The third type of
decoration is one which in a sense is found in the origin of most
styles, but which, restricted as the Mahommedans were to conventional
representations, received a development of far greater importance, and
in one of its forms--that known as stalactite vaulting--constitutes
the one feature in the style which is not found in any other, and
which, from the western coast of Spain to the east of India, at once
differentiates it from any other style.

A complete account, with illustrations of the origin of the stalactite
will be found in the _Journal of the Royal Institute of British
Architects_ (1898) The earliest example is found in the tomb of
Zobeide, the favourite wife of Harun al-Rashid, at Bagdad, built at
the end of the 8th century. This tomb, octagonal in plan, and of
modest dimensions, was vaulted over by a series of niches in nine
stages or levels rising one above the other, and brought forward on
the inside, so that the ninth course completed the covering of the
tomb. It was built in this way to save centreing, each niche when
completed being self-supporting. There is a second tomb at Bagdad, of
later date--the tomb of Ezekiel,--constructed in the same way, except
that in each stage the niches are built not one over the other but
astride between the two, and this is the way in which in subsequent
developments it always appears to have been built. Its application to
the pendentives of the portals of the mosque at Tabriz and Sultaniya
was the next development; and when some two centuries later it is
found in Europe, in the palaces of the Ziza at Palermo, dating from
about the beginning of the 11th century, it has lost its brick
constructive origin, and, being cut in slabs of stone, has become
simply a decorative feature. Its earliest example in Egypt is in the
tomb of ash-Shafi'i at Cairo, built by Saladin about 1240. Here and in
all subsequent examples throughout Egypt and Syria it is always carved
in stone. In the Alhambra another material was employed, the elaborate
vaults being built with a series of small moulds in stucco. In the
ceilings of the mosques at Cairo it was frequently carved in wood, and
consequently lost all trace of its origin.

From Coste's _Architecture Arabe en Caire_]

Two other decorative features, but having a constructive origin, are
(1) the alternating of courses of stone of different colour, probably
derived from Byzantine work, where bands of brick were employed; and
(2) the elaborate forms given to the voussoirs of the arches of the
Mecca niche.

Having now described the principles which ruled the plans of the
mosques and formed the _motifs_ of their architectural design, it
remains to take the principal examples in the various countries where
the style was developed.

Although the tendency of modern research points to Persia as the
country in which the first development of the art took place, and we
have already referred to two tombs at Bagdad, in which the earliest
examples of a stalactite vault are found, so far as remains are
concerned nothing can be traced earlier than the work of Ghazan Khan
(1294), whose mosque at Tabriz, half in ruins, is the earliest
example.

It is to Egypt therefore we turn first. There still exist--and
sometimes in good preservation--mosques and other buildings in Cairo
of every period showing the development of the Mahommedan style, from
the 9th to the 17th century. Owing to the magnificent material at
their command--for unfortunately more of it was taken from the ancient
Egyptian monuments than from the quarries--a much purer style was
evolved than in Persia; and owing to the absence of rain those
ephemeral structures built in brick and covered with stucco, which in
other countries would long have passed away, retained the crispness of
their flowing ornament, which is still as sharp and well defined as
when executed. We have already referred to two of the earlier
mosques, those of 'Amr in Old Cairo and of Tulun. The next in date,
and built also in brick, is the mosque El Hakim (c. 1003). The mosque
of El Azhar ("the Splendid") was founded about 970, but entirely
rebuilt in 1270 and enlarged in 1470. It is the university, and its
Liwan or prayer chamber is the largest in Cairo, there being 380
columns carrying its roof.

The mosque of al-Zahir (founded 1264) is now occupied as barracks. In
one of its entrance porches the arches are decorated with the
well-known zigzag or chevron ornament, and a second porch with cushion
voussoirs, features found elsewhere only in Sicily, so that the mosque
was probably built by masons brought from thence. Then follows a
series of mosques: Kalaun (1287); al-Nasir (1299-1303); Merdani
(1338); all based on the same plan as those described with a large
courtyard surrounded by porticoes. The mosque of al-Nasir has a portal
with clustered piers and pointed and moulded orders. This is said to
have been brought over as a trophy from Acre, but it is more probable
that Syrian masons were imported to carry on the style introduced by
the Crusaders.

The mosque of Sultan Hasan (1357-1360) marks an important change in
the scheme of its plan, which served afterwards as a future model
(fig. 57). It consists of a central court, 117 ft. by 105 ft. open to
the sky, and instead of the covered porticoes on each side there are
immense recesses covered over with pointed vaults. The prayer chamber
is 90 ft. deep, 90 ft. high to the apex of the vault and 69 ft. wide,
a greater span than any Gothic cathedral, and only exceeded in
dimensions by the great hall of the palace at Ctesiphon built by the
Sassanian dynasty. The mosque covers a large area, and would seem to
have been occupied by four religious sects, whose rooms, situated on
the outer side, are lighted by windows in eight or ten storeys, giving
the appearance of a factory. Its entrance portal, 60 ft. to 70 ft.
high, is the finest in Egypt, and is only exceeded in dimensions by
those of the Persian and Indian mosques. The vestibule is covered by a
dome with stalactite pendentives, and is perhaps the most complete and
perfect example in Cairo. Beyond the prayer chamber is the tomb of the
founder, which is covered by a dome. This, according to Poole, was not
originally a feature in Saracenic mosques. A dome, he says, has
nothing to do with prayer and therefore nothing with a mosque. It is
simply the roof of a tomb, and only exists when there is at least a
tomb to be covered. The greater number of the mosques in and outside
Cairo are mausoleums, which accounts for the large number of domes
found there.

Of the tombs of the caliphs, outside Cairo, the most important is the
tomb of ash-Shafi'i, reputed to have been built by Saladin but now
quite changed by restoration. The tomb of Barkuk, in which the
courtyard plan of Sultan Hasan is retained, has porticoes round it,
which are of much more solid construction than those in earlier
examples, and carry small domes. The two great domes on the east side
and the minarets on the west are among the finest in Cairo. The
tomb-mosque of Kait Bey (c. 1470), though comparatively small, is the
finest in design and most elegant of its type in Egypt. Here the
central court is covered by a cupola lantern (fig. 58), and the
ceiling over the prayer chamber and other recesses is framed in timber
and elaborately painted and gilded. The tomb is at the south-east
corner, and is covered with a dome in stone, beautifully carved with
conventional designs. In some of the mosques by the side of the portal
is a fountain enclosed with bronze grilles, and above it a small room
sometimes used as a school with open arcades on two sides. This
feature in the mosque of Kait Bey, with the portal on its right, the
lofty minaret beyond, and the great dome at the farther end, makes it
the most picturesque in aspect of any Cairene mosque. (For plan see
MOSQUE, fig. 3.)

FIG 78.--HEIDELBERG CASTLE, FRIEDRICHSBAU.

_Photo L.L. Paris._

FIG 79.--HEIDELBERG CASTLE, OTTO HEINRICHSBAU.

_Photo L.L. Paris._

FIG. 80.--HEIDELBERG CASTLE, OTTO-HEINRICHSBAU.

_Photo L.L. Paris._]

FIG. 81.--PORCH, PETERBORO' CATHEDRAL.

_Photo, J. Valentine, Ltd._

FIG. 82.--ELY CATHEDRAL.

_Photo, G.W. Wilson & Co._

FIG. 83.--THE LOUVRE--PAVILLON HENRI II.

(_Portion of Lescot's work on left._)

_Photo, Neurdein._

FIG. 84.--GRAND STAIRWAY, CHATEAU OF BLOIS.

_Photo, Neurdein._]