2. Dressing Room.
3. Clerk of the Parliament.
4. Clerk Assistant's Dressing Room.
5. Clerk Assistant.
6. Clerk, House of Lords.
7. Messengers.
8. Waiting Room.
9. Lord Chancellor's Secretaries.
10. Lord Chancellor.
11. Lord Chancellor's Dressing Room.
12 Permanent Secretary.
13. Sergeant-at-Arms.
14. Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod.
15. Private Bill Office.
16. Chairman's Dressing
17. Chairman of Committees.
18. Clerk to Private Bill and Taxing Office.
19. Chairman of Committees Counsel.
20. Royal Staircase.
21. Clerk to Public Bills.
22. Minutes.
23. Peers' Staircase.
24. Inner Office.
25. Printed Papers Office.
26. Private Bills and Taxing Office.
27. Earl Marshal.
28. Strangers' and Reporters' Stairs.
29. Peers' Standing Order Committee Room.
30. The Thrones.
31. Bar of the House.
32. Leader of the Opposition in the House of Lords.
33. Premier.
34. Telegraph.
35. Solicitor-General.
36. Attorney-General.
37. Lord Advocate.
38. Resident Superintendent.
39. Archbishops.
40. Principal Stairs.
41. Residence of the Yeoman Usher of the Black Rod.
42. Sitting Room.
43. Residence of the Clerk of Parliament.
44. Members' Entrance.
45. Dining Room of the Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms.
46. Turret Room.
47. Private Stairs of the Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms.
48. Journal Office Stores.
49. Police.
50. Ministers.
51. Opposition Ministers.
52. Members' Entrance Stairs.
53. Members' Conference Room.
54. Members' Private Secretaries
55. Members' Small Conference Room.
56. Votes and Proceedings.
57. Accountant and Chief Public Bill Office.
58. Old Treasury Stairs.
59. Post Master.
60. Strangers' Stairs.
61. Cistern Tower.
62. Irish Whips.
63 Government Whips.
64. Opposition Whips.
65. Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms.
66. Clerk to Deputy Sergeant-at-Arms.
67. Speaker's Counsel.
68. Speaker's Counsel's Clerk.
69. Vote Office.
70. Bar Lobby.
71. Speaker's Lobby.
72. Ministers.
73. Clerk Assistant.
74. Train Bearers.
75. Speaker's Retiring Room.
76. Old Prison Rooms Lobby.
77. Sergeant-at-Arms' Smoking Room.
78. Clock Weight Shaft.
79. Air Shaft.
80. Smoking Room Lobby.
81. Butler.
82. Speaker's Secretary.
83. Audience Room.
84. _Times_ Reporters.
85. Strangers' Gallery.
86. Waste Paper.
87. Mess.]
[Illustration: FIG. 92.--Plan of the Parliament House, Budapest.
(Steindl.)]
The Gothic Revival, England.
We may now turn to consider the Gothic Revival movement itself, of which
Pugin was one of the most important pioneers. New ideas, however, as to
the importance of Gothic architecture had been in the air before he came
on the scene, and quite early in the century John Britten's
_Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain_ and _Cathedral
Antiquities_, with their beautiful steel engravings by Le Keux, had done
much to call attention to the neglected beauty of English medieval
churches; and Thomas Rickman's remarkable and (for its day) masterly
analysis of the variations of style in Gothic architecture, which first
appeared in 1817, and went through edition after edition in succeeding
years, gave the first intelligent direction to the study of the subject.
Pugin supplied to the movement not analysis, but passion. He had the
merit of having perceived, when quite a youth, that one thing wanted was
better craftsmanship, and that craftsmanship in the medieval period was
something very different from what it was in the early Victorian period;
he set up an atelier of craftsmen, and was the real pioneer of what may
be called the Arts and Crafts movement in England. An enthusiast by
nature, he flung his whole soul into the task of reviving, as he
believed, the glory of English medieval architecture; nothing else in
architecture was worth thinking of; Classic and Renaissance were only
worth sarcasm. The result in his works was a curious inconsistency.
Pugin was not in the true sense a great architect; his mind was not
practical enough to grasp an architectural problem as a whole, plan and
building combined; in fact, he was no master of plan, and does not seem
to have troubled himself much about it. But he had a remarkable
perception of interior effect; whenever you go into one of his churches
you recognize the desire to realize the greatest effect of height, the
most soaring effect of lines, possible within the actual vertical
measurements. But in his passion for this soaring expression he seems to
have entirely lost sight of the essential quality of solidity and
genuineness of material in the medieval architecture which he was trying
to emulate or to outvie. So long as he could get his effect of height,
his poetic interior, he was content to have thin walls and plaster
vaults and ornaments; or, in other words, he spent upon height what
should first have been spent upon solid and monumental building. The
result has been gently but effectively satirized by Browning in "Bishop
Blougram's Apology":--
"It's different preaching in Basilicas
To doing duty in some masterpiece
Like this of brother Pugin's, bless his heart.
I doubt if they're half-baked, those chalk rosettes,
Ciphers and stucco-twiddlings everywhere;
It's just like breathing in a limekiln, eh?"
It is too true; and there is something pathetic in Pugin's career, in
this passionate and sincere pursuit after a revival of the medieval
spirit in life and in architecture--a pursuit which towards the close of
his life he himself evidently more than half suspected to have been a
fallacy.
The full tide of the Gothic revival is connected more especially with
the name of Sir Gilbert Scott. He was hardly a pure enthusiast like
Pugin; he was a shrewd man of the world, the commencement of whose
professional career coincided with the rising tide of ecclesiological
reform, and he had the ability to make the best of the opportunity. He
appears to have had, even as a child, an inborn interest in church
architecture and in Gothic detail (witness the description, in his
_Memoirs_, of his astonishment and interest, at the age of eleven, at
the first sight of capitals of the Early English type), and he acquired
by unremitting study a knowledge of English Gothic architecture in its
every detail which few architects have ever equalled. His numerous
churches were, intentionally and confessedly, as close reproductions as
possible of medieval architecture, generally that of the Early Decorated
period; and if it were desirable that modern church architecture should
consist in the reproduction of medieval churches, the task could not
have been carried out with more learning and exactitude than it was by
him. It was this minute and accurate knowledge of medieval church
architecture which made him such a power when the idea of restoring
English cathedrals became popular. He had an acquired instinct in
tracing out the existence of details which had been overlaid by modern
repairs or plasterwork; in going over a cathedral to decide on a scheme
of restoration he seemed to know it as an anatomist knows the
suggestions of a fossil skeleton; and in the course of his restorations
he unearthed many points in the architectural history of the buildings
which but for him would never have been elucidated. We now recognize
that much of this "restoration" was a mistake, which destroyed the real
interest of the cathedrals; and it is unhappily a mistake which cannot
be undone. But the violent reproaches which have been heaped upon
Scott's memory on this account are rather unjust. It is forgotten that
he was doing what at the time every one considered to be the right
thing; cathedral bodies vied with each other in restoration, and were
enthusiastic in the cause; there were few if any dissenting voices; and
in regard to the interiors of the cathedrals which were in modern use as
places of worship, much that he did really required to be done to put
them into decent condition. His churches have ceased to be interesting
now, as is usually the case with copied architecture; but when they were
built they were exactly what every one wanted and was asking for. And he
produced at all events one original work which is a great deal better
than it is now the fashion to think--the Albert Memorial. It is injured
by the statue, for which the commission went to the wrong sculptor; but
Scott's idea of producing, as he phrased it, "a shrine on a great
scale," was really a fine one, and finely carried out. The most
important objection to it is one which popular criticism does not
recognize, viz. that the vault is tied by concealed iron ties, and would
hardly be safe without them. But apart from that it is a fine
conception, and Scott was right in regarding it as his best work.
G.E. Street, who was a pupil of Scott, was a greater enthusiast for
medieval architecture (which, with him, as with Pugin, included medieval
religion) than even Scott, and an architect of greater force and
individuality. He was especially devoted to the early Transitional type
of Gothic, and in all his buildings there is apparent the feeling for
the solidity and monumental character, and the reticence in the use of
ornament, which is characteristic of the Transitional period. His
churches are noteworthy for their monumental character; and he had a
remarkable faculty for giving an appearance of scale and dignity to the
interiors of comparatively small churches. Hence his modern-medieval
churches retain their interest more than Scott's, but in respect of
secular architecture his taste was hopelessly medievalized, and his
great building, the law courts in London, can only be regarded as a
costly failure; it is not even beautiful except in regard to some good
detail; it is badly planned; and the one fine interior feature, the
great vaulted hall, is rendered useless by not being on the same floor
with the courts, so that instead of being a _salle des pas perdus_ it is
a desert. Street's career is a warning how real architectural talent and
vigour may be stultified by a sentimental adherence to a past phase of
architecture. No modern architect had more fully penetrated the spirit
of Gothic architecture, and his nave of Bristol cathedral is as good as
genuine medieval work, and might pass for such when time-worn; but that
is rather archaeology than architecture.
The competition for the law courts was one of the great architectural
events of the middle of the century, and made or raised the reputation
even of some of the unsuccessful competitors. Edward Barry (the son of
Sir Charles) gained the first place for "plan," which the advisers of
the government had foolishly separated from "design" (as if the plan of
a building could be considered apart from the architectural
conception!), giving first marks for plan, and second for design. E.
Barry therefore had really gained the competition, "design," which was
awarded to Street, counting second; but Street managed to push him out,
and it is a nemesis on him for this by no means loyal proceeding that
the building he contrived to get entirely into his own hands has served
to injure rather than benefit his reputation. William Burges
(1827-1881), an ardent devotee of French early Gothic, produced a design
in that style, which, though quite unsuitable practically, is a greater
evidence of architectural power than is furnished by any of his executed
buildings. J.P. Seddon (1828-1906), an old adherent of Rossetti and the
pre-Raphaelite brotherhood, an architect of genius who never got his
opportunity, produced a design which was wildly picturesque in
appearance but in reality more practical than might be thought at first
sight, and his proposal for a great Record tower for housing official
records was a really fine and original idea.
Among the ecclesiastical buildings of the Gothic revival those of
William Butterfield (1814-1900), much less numerous than those of Scott
and Street, have a special interest as the work of a revival architect
who was something more than a mere archaeologist. All Saints, Margaret
Street (1859), is the production of an architectural artist using
medieval materials to carry out a conception of his own, and hence, like
Babbacombe church and others by the same hand, it has an interest for
the present day which Scott's churches have not. His Keble College
chapel rather failed from an exaggeration of the use of polychromatic
materials, which in some of his other churches he had used with
moderation and with good effect. J.L. Pearson was another distinguished
architect of the later period of the Gothic revival who was able to put
something of his own into modern Gothic churches. No one was more
learned in medieval architecture than he was; and as of Street's nave of
Bristol, so we may say of Pearson's nave of Truro, that it is as good as
medieval Gothic; indeed Truro nave is finer in character than some of
the ancient cathedral naves, and represents pure Gothic at its best. But
in the exteriors of his churches, as at Truro and in the churches of
Kilburn and Red Lion Square, Pearson evolved a Gothic of his own which
is Pearsonesque and not merely archaeological. James Brooks (1825-1901)
also deserves an honoured place in the chronicle of the Gothic revival
for being the first to show how large town churches might be erected in
brick (fig. 93), in which largeness of scale and a certain grandeur of
effect could be obtained without extravagant cost, and in which it was
practically demonstrated that architecture in the true Gothic spirit
could be produced without depending on ornament.
[Illustration: FIG. 93.--Exterior of modern English Church. (James
Brooks.)]
Alfred Waterhouse began his remarkable career as an adherent of the
Gothic revival, and merits separate mention inasmuch as he was the only
one of the Gothic revivalists who from the first set himself to adapt
Gothic to secular uses and to make out of it a modern Gothic manner of
his own. His first success was made with the Manchester law courts, a
design more purely Gothic than his later works, and an admirably planned
building (the only good point in the national law courts plan, the
access to the public galleries, is taken from it); his special style was
more developed in the Manchester town hall, a building typical both of
the defects and merits of his secular Gothic style. This style of his
received the compliment, for a good many years, of an immense amount of
imitation; in fact, during that earlier period of his work it may be
said to have influenced every secular building that was erected in the
medieval style all over England. His Gothic detail was, however, not
very refined, and he has been subject to the same kind of retrospective
injustice which has fallen on Scott, critics in both instances
forgetting that what they do not like _now_ was what every one liked
_then_, and could not have enough of. Waterhouse was a master of plan,
and a man of immense business and administrative ability, without which
he could not have carried out the number of great building schemes
which fell into his hands, and he had much more of the qualities of a
great architect than are to be found in the works of some of his
latter-day critics. His later works, one or two of which will be
referred to, do not come under the head of the Gothic revival.
France.
In France, the Gothic revival, which so strongly affected the whole
school of English architecture for thirty or forty years, took little
hold. Its most remarkable monument is the church of Ste Clotilde at
Paris, built about the middle of the century from the designs of Ballu.
In size it equals a second-class cathedral, and is a fine monument,
though it does not show that complete knowledge of medieval Gothic which
we find in the churches of Scott, Street, Pearson and G.F. Bodley. But
as with the Classic, so with the Gothic revival--the leading French
architects of the period had too much personal architectural feeling to
be carried along in the wake of a "movement." Two very important Paris
churches, built just after the middle of the century, illustrate well
this independence of spirit. The one is the domed church of St Augustin
in the Boulevard Malesherbes (Plate XII., fig. 122), designed by Victor
Baltard (1805-1874). It may be called a Classic church treated in a
quasi-Byzantine manner. A remarkable point about it is that, standing
between the divergence of two streets at an acute angle, the outer walls
of the nave follow the line of the two streets, the church thus
expanding towards the centre; internally the colonnades are parallel,
the chapels outside of them increasing in depth from the entrance of the
nave towards the centre--a very clever device for reconciling exterior
and interior effect. The other church referred to, built about the same
time, is La Trinite (Plate XII., fig. 123) by Theodore Ballu
(1817-1885)--a church which is Renaissance in detail and yet distinctly
Gothic in its general effect and in the multiplicity of its detail,
somewhat recalling in this sense Barry's Halifax tower before referred
to. The sense in which there has really been a general movement in
church architecture in France has been in the direction of a kind of
modernized Byzantine, of which one of the earliest and best examples is
the church of St Pierre de Montrouge, by Joseph Auguste E. Vaudremer
(Plate XII., fig. 124). A later and more important example is the
cathedral of Marseilles, by Leon Vaudoyer (1803-1872) and Henry
Esperandieu (1829-1874), a mingling of Romanesque and Byzantine, and in
many respects a fine building (Plate XIII., fig. 126). This modern
feeling in favour of a Byzantine type of church architecture culminated
in the great church of the Sacre Coeur on Montmartre, at Paris, begun in
the early 'eighties from the designs of Paul Abadie (1812-1884). This
grand building stands on a most effective site, and is of a monumental
solidity seldom met with in modern architecture; it is more pure and
consistent in style than many of the smaller churches of the same school
of architecture. These latter are not for the most part very attractive;
they represent in general a kind of Frenchified Byzantine detail which
exhibits neither Byzantine spirit nor French grace and finish; and on
the whole it may be said that church architecture is the field in which
the French architects of the 19th century were least successful.
As regards secular buildings, on the other hand, the Paris of the middle
portion of the 19th century can show some of the most unquestionable
architectural successes of the period. The modern portions of the Palais
de Justice by Louis Joseph Duc (1802-1879)--not Viollet-le-Duc, as is
often mistakenly asserted in guide-books--and of the Ecole des
Beaux-Arts, by Jacques Felix Duban (1797-1870), are among the best
examples of the application of classic forms of architecture to modern
buildings; and the Bibliotheque Ste Genevieve (Plate XIII., fig. 128),
by Henri Labrouste (1801-1875), was in its day (about 1850) a new
creation in applied classic architecture; a building in which the
exterior design was entirely subservient to and expressive of the
requirements of a library, a large portion of the wall being left
unpierced for the storage of books, windows being only inserted where
they did not interfere with this object; and the manner in which these
walls are treated so as to produce a decorative architectural effect
without having recourse to sham colonnades and sham window openings, was
entirely new at the time in modern work. It is instructive to compare
this design with that of the Bank of England, as examples of the right
and the wrong way of treating buildings in which much blank wall space
was required. The new buildings of the Louvre (Plate XIV., fig. 129),
built under Napoleon III. from the designs of Louis Tullius Joachim
Visconti (1791-1853), are not to be passed over, though they have too
much of the showy and flaunting character which belonged to both the
society and the art of the Second Empire; a fault which also destroys
some of the value of the Grand Opera house, a remarkable work by a
remarkable architect (Jean Louis Charles Garnier), and typical, more
than any other structure, of the epoch in which it was built. Some of
its effect it owes to the admirable painting and sculpture with which it
is decorated, but the grand staircase is a fine architectural conception
(see GARNIER).
Recent English architecture.
"Queen Anne."
In England and in the United States, the last quarter of the 19th
century was a period of unusual interest and activity in architectural
development. While other nations have been content to carry on their
architecture, for the most part, on the old scholastic lines which had
been prevalent since the Renaissance, in the two countries named there
has been manifest a spirit of unrest, of critical inquiry into the basis
and objects of architecture; an aspiration to make new and original
creations in or applications of the art, without example in any other
period in the modern history of architecture. In England, the
"note"--heard with increasing shrillness of _crescendo_ towards the very
last year of the century--was the cry for originality, for throwing off
the trammels of the past, for rendering architecture more truly a direct
expression of the conditions of practical requirement and of structure.
This was no doubt to some extent the effect of a reaction. During the
greater part of the century architectural strength, as has been already
shown, had been spent in revivals of past styles. Churches indeed, up to
the close of the century, continued to be built, for the most part, in
revived Gothic; but this was owing to special clerical influence, which
saw in Gothic a style specially consecrated to church architecture, and
would be satisfied, as a rule, with nothing else. Efforts have been made
by architects to modify the medieval church plan into something more
practically suited to modern congregational worship, by a system of
reducing the side aisles to mere narrow passages for access to the
seats, thus retaining the architectural effect of the arcade, while
keeping it out of the way of the seated congregation; and there have
been occasional reversions to the ancient Christian basilica type of
plan, or sometimes, as in the church in Davies Street, London, attempts
to treat a church in a manner entirely independent of architectural
precedent; but in the main, Gothic has continued to rule for churches.
Apart from this special class of building, however, revived Gothic began
to droop during the 'seventies. All had been copied that could be
copied, and the result, to the architectural mind, was not satisfaction
but satiety. Gothic began to be regarded as "played out." The immediate
result, however, was not an organized attempt to think for ourselves,
and make our own style, but a recourse to another class of precedent,
represented in the type of early 18th-century building which became
known as "Queen Anne," and which, like Gothic before it, was now to be
recommended as "essentially English," as in fact it is. It can hardly,
however, be called an architectural style; it would have no right to
figure in any work illustrating the great architectural styles of the
world. It was, in fact, the last dying phase of the English Renaissance;
the architecture of the classic order reduced to a threadbare condition,
treated very simply and in plain materials, in many cases shorn of its
columnar features, and reflecting faithfully enough the prim
rationalistic taste in literature and art of the England of the 18th
century. Though not to be dignified as a _style_, it was, however, a
recognizable and consistent _manner_ in building; it made extensive use
of brick, a material inexpensive and at the same time very well suited
to the English climate and atmosphere; and it was generally carried out
in very solid proportions, and with very good workmanship. To a
generation tired of imitating a great style at second hand, this
unpretending and simple model was a welcome relief, and led to the
erection of a considerable number of modern buildings, dwelling-houses
especially, the obvious aim of which was to look as like 18th-century
buildings as possible. A typical example is the large London house by
Norman Shaw, at the corner of Queen's Gate and Imperial Institute Road
The Chelsea town hall (fig. 94), by J.M. Brydon (1840-1901), is a good
example of a public building in the revived Queen Anne style.
[Illustration: PLATE XI.
FIG. 120.--NATURAL HISTORY MUSEUM, SOUTH KENSINGTON. (WATERHOUSE.)
_Photo, Valentine & Sons, Dundee._
FIG. 121.--LAW COURTS, BRUSSELS. (POELAERT.)
_Photo, M. Gerbeault._]
[Illustration: PLATE XII.
FIG. 122.--CHURCH OF ST AUGUSTIN, PARIS.(BALTARD.)
_Photo, Neurdein._
FIG. 123.--CHURCH OF LA TRINITE, PARIS. (BALLU.)
_Photo, Neurdein._
FIG. 124.--CHURCH OF ST PIERRE DE MONTROUGE, PARIS. (VAUDREMER.)
_Photo, A. Levy._
FIG. 125.--CHURCH OF ST VINCENT DE PAUL, PARIS. (HITTORFF.)
_Photo, Neurdein._]
[Illustration: FIG. 94.--Chelsea Town Hall. (J.M. Brydon.) ]
"Free classic."
A change of front from copying a great style like the medieval to
copying what is at best a bastard one, if a style at all, might not seem
to promise very much for the emancipation of modern architecture; yet
there turned out to be one element of progress in it, resting on the
fact that the comparatively simple detail of the 18th-century buildings
formed a kind of vernacular of building workmanship, which could be
comprehended and carried out by good artisans as a recognized tradition.
Now to reduce architecture to good sound building and good workmanship
seemed to promise at any rate a better basis to work upon than the mere
imitation of classic or medieval detail; it might conceivably furnish a
new starting-point. This was the element of life in the Queen Anne
revival, and it had, as we shall see, an influence beyond the circle of
the special revivers of the style. But almost concurrently with, or
following hard upon, the "Queen Anne" movement arose the idea of a
modern architecture, founded on a free and unfettered treatment of the
materials of our earlier Renaissance architecture, as illustrated in
buildings of the Stuart period. This new ideal was styled "free
classic," and it gave the prevailing tone to English architecture for
the last fifteen years of the century, though it had its commencement in
certain characteristic buildings a good many years earlier than that. In
1873, for instance, there arose a comparatively small front in
Leadenhall Street, under the name of "New Zealand Chambers" (fig. 95),
designed by Norman Shaw, which excited more attention, and had more
influence on contemporary architecture than many a building of far
greater size and importance. This represented the playful and
picturesque possibilities of "free classic." Its more restrained and
refined achievements were early exemplified in G.F. Bodley's design for
the front of the London School Board offices on the Thames
Embankment,[6] a comparatively small building which also exercised a
considerable influence. There were no details here, however, but what
could be found in Stuart (or, as it is more often called, Jacobean)
architecture, but the building, and the prominence of its architect's
name, helped to draw attention to the possibilities of the style, and it
has been discovered that free classic is susceptible of a great deal of
original treatment based on Renaissance elements. As an example we may
cite a street front built some twenty years later by another
academician-architect, viz. the offices of the Chartered Accountants in
the City, by J. Belcher. More dignified and more monumental than New
Zealand Chambers, more original than the School Board offices, this
front contains some details and a general treatment which may be said to
be absolutely new; it affords another example of a piece of street
architecture which attracted a great deal of attention, and has had an
effect quite disproportionate to its size and importance as a building;
and it gives a general measure of the progress of the "free classic"
idea. During the last decade of the century "free classic" was almost
the recognized style in English architecture, and has been illustrated
in many town halls and other large and important buildings, among which
the Imperial Institute is a prominent example (fig. 96).
[Illustration: FIG 95.--New Zealand Chambers. (R. Norman Shaw, R.A.)]
The allied arts.
Concurrently with this tendency towards a free classic style there has
arisen another movement which has had a considerable influence on
English architecture, viz. an increased perception of the importance of
decorative arts--sculpture, painting, mosaic, etc.--in alliance with
architecture, and of the architect and the decorative artist working
together and in harmony. This is no more than what has long been
understood and acted on in France, but it has been a new light to modern
English architecture, in which, until a comparatively recent period,
decorative painting was hardly thought of, and decorative sculpture,
where it was introduced, was too often, or indeed generally, the mere
work of some trading firm of masons But of late years sculpture has
taken a far more prominent place in connexion with architecture; it has
become a habit with the best architects to rely largely on the
introduction of appropriate and symbolic sculpture to add to the
interest of their buildings, and to associate with them eminent
sculptors, who, instead of regarding their work only in the light of
isolated statues or groups for the exhibition room and the art gallery,
are willing to give their best efforts to produce high-class sculpture
for the decoration of an architectural design which forms the framework
to it.
[Illustration: FIG. 96.--Staircase, Imperial Institute. (Collcutt.)]
The craftmanship ideal.
Notice should be taken, however, of another movement in English
architecture during the closing years of the 19th century. Reference has
already been made to one idea which prompted the culture of the "Queen
Anne" type of architecture: that it presented a simple vernacular of
construction and detail, in which solid workmanship a more prominent
element than elaboration of what is known as architectural style. To a
small group of clever and enthusiastic architects of the younger
generation it appeared that this idea of reducing architecture to the
common-sense of construction might be carried still further; that as all
the revivals of styles since the Renaissance had failed to give
permanent satisfaction and had tended to reduce architecture to a
learned imitation of the work of former epochs, the real chance for
giving life to architecture as a modern art was to throw aside all the
conventionally accepted insignia of architectural style--columns,
pilasters, cornices, buttresses, etc.--and to begin over again with mere
workmanship--wall-building and carpentry--and trust that in process of
time a new decorative detail would be evolved, indebted to no precedent.
The building artisans, in fact, were collectively to take the place of
the architect and the form of the building to be evolved by a natural
process of growth. This was a favourite idea also with William Morris,
who insisted that medieval art--the only art which he recognized as of
any value (Greek, Roman and Renaissance being alike contemptible in his
eyes)--was essentially an art of the people, and that in fact it was the
modern architects who stood in the way of our having a genuine
architecture of the 19th century. Considering how much of merely formal,
conventional and soulless architecture has been produced in our time
under the guidance of the professional architect, it is impossible to
deny that there is an element of truth in this reasoning; at all events,
that there have been a good many modern architects who have done more
harm than good to architecture. But when we come to follow out this
reasoning to its logical results, it is obvious that there are serious
flaws in it. Morris's idea that medieval architecture alone was worthy
the name, we may, of course, dismiss at once; it was the prejudice of a
man of genius whose sympathies, both in matters social and artistic,
were narrow. Nor can we regard the medieval cathedrals as artisan's
architecture. The name of "architect" may have been unknown, but that
the personage was present in some guise, the very individuality and
variety of our English cathedrals attest. Peterborough front was no mere
mason's conception. And when we come to consider modern conditions of
building, it is perfectly obvious that with the complicated practical
requirements of modern building, in regard to planning, heating,
ventilation, etc., the planning of the whole in a complete set of
drawings, before the building is begun, is an absolute necessity. We are
no longer in medieval times; modern conditions require the modern
architect. The real cause of failure, as far as modern architecture is a
failure, lies partly in the fact that it is practised too much as a
profession or business, too little as an art; partly in the deadening
effect of public indifference to art in Britain. If the public really
desired great and impressive works of architecture they would have them;
but neither the British public nor its mouthpiece the government, care
anything about it. Their highest ambition is to get convenient and
economical buildings. And as to the theory of the new school, that we
should throw overboard all precedent in architectural detail, that is
intellectually impossible. We are not made so that we can invent
everything _de novo_, or escape the effect on our minds of what has
preceded us; the attempt can only lead to baldness or eccentricity.
Every great style of architecture of the past has, in fact, been evolved
from the detail of preceding styles; and some of the ablest and most
earnest architects of the present day are, indeed, urging the
desirability of clinging to traditional forms in regard to detail, as a
means of maintaining the continuity of the art. This does not by any
means imply the absence of original architecture; there is scope for
endless origination in the plan and the general design of a building.
The Houses of Parliament is a prominent example. The detail is a
reproduction of Tudor detail, but the plan and the general conception
are absolutely original, and resemble those of no other pre-existing
building in the world.
United States.
It is necessary to take account of all these movements of opinion and
principle in English architecture to appreciate properly its position
and prospects at the time with which we are here dealing. Turning now
from England to the United States, which, as already observed, is the
only other important country in which there has been a general new
movement in architecture, we find, singular to say, that the course of
development has in America been almost the reverse of what has taken
place in England. The rapidity of architectural development in America,
it may be observed, since about 1875, has been something astonishing;
there is no parallel to it anywhere else. Before then the currently
accepted architecture of the American Republic was little more than a
bad repetition of the English Gothic and Classic types of revived
architecture. At the present day no nation, except perhaps France, takes
so keen an interest in architecture and produces so many noteworthy
buildings; and it may be observed that in the United States the public
and the official authorities seem really to have some enthusiasm on the
subject, and to desire fine buildings. But the stirring of the dry bones
began in America where it ended in England. The first symptoms of an
original spirit operating in American architecture showed themselves in
domestic architecture, in town and country houses, the latter
especially; and the form which the movement took was a desire to escape
conventional architectural detail and to return to the simplest form of
mere _building_; rock-faced masonry, sometimes of materials picked up on
the site; chimneys which were plain shafts of masonry or brickwork;
woodwork simply hewn and squared, but the whole arranged with a view to
picturesque effect (figs. 97 and 98). This form of American house became
an incident in the course of modern architecture; it even had a
recognizable influence on English architects. About the same time an
impetus of a more special nature was given to American architecture by a
man of genius, H.H. Richardson, who, falling back on Romanesque and
Byzantine types of architecture as a somewhat unworked field, evolved
from them a type of architectural treatment so distinctly his own
(though its _origines_ were of course quite traceable) that he came very
near the credit of having personally invented a style; at all events he
invented a manner, which was so largely admired and imitated that for
some ten or fifteen years American architecture showed a distinct
tendency to become "Richardsonesque" (see also Plate XVI., fig. 137). As
with all architectural fashions, however, people got tired of this, and
the influence of another very able American architect, Richard M. Hunt,
coupled perhaps with the proverbial philo-Gallic tendencies of the
modern American, led to the American architects, during the last decade
of the 19th century, throwing themselves almost entirely into the arms,
as it were, of France; seeking their education as far as possible in
Paris, and adopting the theory and practice of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts
so completely that it is often impossible to distinguish their designs,
and even their methods of drawing, from those of French architects
brought up in the strictest regime of the "Ecole." By this French
movement the Americans have, on the one hand, shared the advantages and
the influence of what is undoubtedly the most complete school of
architectural training in the world; but, on the other hand, they have
foregone the opportunity which might have been afforded them of
developing a school or style of their own, influenced by the
circumstances of their own requirements, climate and materials. Figs.
133 and 134, Plate XV., show examples of recent American architecture of
the European classic type. Thus, in the two countries which in this
period have shown the most activity and restlessness in their
architectural aspirations, and given the most original thought to the
subject, England has constantly tended towards throwing off the yoke of
precedent and escaping from the limits of a scholastic style; while
America, commencing her era of architectural emancipation with an
attempt at first principles and simple but picturesque building, has
ended by a pretty general adoption of the highly-developed scholastic
system of another country. The contrast is certainly a curious one. Only
one original contribution to the art has been made by America in recent
days --one arising directly out of practical conditions, viz. the "high
buildings" in cities; a form of architecture which may be said to have
originated in the fact that New York is built on a peninsula, and
extension of the city is only possible vertically and not horizontally.
The tower-like buildings (see Plate XV., fig. 131, and STEEL
CONSTRUCTION, Plate II., figs. 3 and 4), served internally by lifts, to
which this condition of things has given rise, form a really new
contribution to architecture, and have been handled by some of the
American architects in a very effective manner; though, unfortunately,
the rage for rapid building in the cities of the United States has led
to the adoption of the false architectural system of running up such
structures in the form of a steel framing, cased with a mere skin of
masonry or terra-cotta, for appearance' sake, which in reality depends
for its stability on the steel framing. It must be admitted, however, to
be a new contribution to architecture, and renders New York, as seen
from the harbour, a "towered city" in a sense not realized by the poet.
[Illustration: FIG. 97.--American Type of Country-House Architecture.]
[Illustration: FIG. 98.--American Seaside Villa. (Bruce Price.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 99.--Crane Public Library, Quincy, Mass. (H.H.
Richardson.)]
English progress.
Some sketch of the state of recent architectural thought or endeavour in
England seemed essential to the subject, since it is there that what may
be called the philosophy of architecture has been most debated, and that
thought has had the most obvious and most direct effect on architectural
style and movement. That this has been the case has no doubt been
largely due to the influence of Ruskin, who, though his architectural
judgment was on many points faulty and absurd in the extreme, had at any
rate the effect of setting people thinking--not without result. In other
countries architecture continued to pursue, up to the close of the
century, the scholastic ideal impressed upon it by the Renaissance,
without exciting doubt or controversy unless in a very occasional and
partial manner, and without any changes save those minor ones arising
from changing habits of execution and use of material. In Germany there
appears to be a certain tendency to a greater freedom in the use of the
materials of classic architecture, a certain relaxation of the bonds of
scholasticism; but it has hardly assumed such proportions as to be
ranked as a new movement in architecture.
English churches.
The last years of the 19th century witnessed the progress to an advanced
stage of the most remarkable piece of English church architecture of the
period, the Roman Catholic cathedral at Westminster, by J.H. Bentley
(1839-1902), a building which is not a Gothic revival, but goes back to
earlier (Byzantine) precedents; not, however, without a considerable
element of novelty and originality in the design, especially in some of
the exterior detail. The interior was intended for decoration in applied
marble and mosaic, yet even as a shell of brickwork, with its solid
domes and the immense masses of the piers, it is one of the most
impressive and monumental interiors of modern date.
[Illustration: FIG. 100.--Interior, St Clare's, Liverpool. (Leonard
Stokes.)]
In ordinary church architecture, though there is still a good deal of
mere imitation medieval work carried out, England has not been without
examples of a new and original application of Gothic materials. The
interior of the church of St Clare, Liverpool, by Mr Leonard Stokes
(fig. 100), is a good example of the modified treatment of the
three-aisled medieval plan already referred to, the side aisles being
reduced to passages; and also of the tendency in recent years to
simplify the treatment of Gothic, in contrast to the florid and
over-carved churches of the Gothic revival. The churches of James
Brooks, as already noted, have shown many examples of a solid plain
treatment of Gothic, yet with a great deal of character; and J.D.
Sedding (1838-1891) built some showing great originality, among which
the interior of his church of the Holy Redeemer, Clerkenwell, affords
also an interesting example of the modern free treatment of forms
derived from classic architecture.
The event of most importance in English church architecture at the
beginning of the 20th century was the commencement of a modern cathedral
at Liverpool. In the early 'eighties the proposal for a cathedral had
led to an important competition between three sets of invited
architects, Sir William Emerson, Messrs Bodley and Garner and James
Brooks. Nothing, however, resulted, except the production of three very
fine sets of drawings. Subsequently the subject was taken up again with
more energy, and a sketch competition invited for a cathedral on a new
site (the one originally intended being no longer available); from among
the sketch competitors five were invited to join in a final competition,
viz. Messrs Austin and Paley, C.A. Nicholson, Gilbert Scott (grandson of
Sir Gilbert Scott), Malcolm Stark and W.J. Tapper. Mr Scott's design was
selected (May 1903) and the building of it commenced not long after. It
is a design in revived Gothic, of the orthodox type as to detail, though
containing some points of decided originality in the general treatment.
The condition proposed in the first instance by the committee, that the
designs sent in must be in the Gothic style, gave rise to a strong
protest, in the architectural journals and elsewhere, on the ground that
the revival of ancient styles was a mistaken and exploded fallacy; and
in deference to this expression of opinion the committee officially
withdrew the limitation as to style. That, in view of their obvious
bias, they would confine their selection to designs in the Gothic style,
was, however, a foregone conclusion. It is much to be regretted that the
opportunity was not taken to evolve a modern and Protestant type of
cathedral, with a central area and a dome as its principal feature.
English public buildings.
In the architecture of public buildings one of the earliest incidents in
this latest period was the completion of the Albert Hall, which, though
the work of an engineer, and commonplace in detail, is in the main a
fine and novel architectural conception, and a practical success
(considering its abnormal size) as a building for musical performances.
Had its constructor been bold enough to roof it with a solid masonry
dome, with an "eye" in the centre (as in the Pantheon) instead of a huge
dish-cover of glass and iron, there would have been little to find fault
with in its general conception. It was also the first modern English
building of importance to be decorated externally with symbolical figure
composition, in the shape of the large frieze in coarse mosaic of
terra-cotta, which is carried round the upper portion of the exterior,
and which, if not very interesting in detail, at all events fulfils very
well its purpose as a piece of decorative effect. The subject of the
government offices in London forms in itself an important chapter in
recent architectural history. The home and foreign office block was
finished in 1874; a sumptuous, but weak and ill-planned building
designed by Scott, _invita Minerva_, in a style alien to his own
predilections. In 1884 took place the great competition for the war and
admiralty offices conjointly, won by a commonplace but admirably drawn
design, presenting some good points in planning. The building was to
stand between Whitehall and St James's Park, with a front both ways. The
competition came to nothing, and the successful architects were
eventually employed to build the new admiralty as it now stands, a mean
and commonplace building with no street frontage, in which economy was
the main consideration, and totally discreditable to the greatest naval
power in the world. In 1898-1899 it was at last resolved to a war office
and other government offices much needed, and an irregular site opposite
the Horse Guards was selected for the war office and one in Great George
Street for the others. In this case there was no competition, but the
government selected two architects after inquiry as to their works
("classic" architecture being a _sine qua non_); W. Young (d. 1900) for
the war office, and J.M. Brydon for the Great George Street block. The
war office site is inadequate and totally unsymmetrical, the boundary of
the building being settled by the boundary of the street curb, and the
inner courtyards are of very mean proportions compared with the great
courtyard of the home and foreign office. Both architects produced
grandiose designs, but in regard to the war office at least the
government threw away a great opportunity.
[Illustration: PLATE XIII.
FIG. 126.--CATHEDRAL, MARSEILLES. (VAUDOYER AND ESPERANDIEU.)
_Photo, Neurdein._
FIG. 127.--MAIRIE, Xth ARRONDISSEMENT, PARIS. (ROUYER.)
_Photo, Neurdein._
FIG. 128.--BIBLIOTHEQUE STE GENEVIEVE, PARIS. (LABROUSTE.)
_Photo, A. Levy._]
[Illustration: PLATE XIV.
FIG. 129.--PAVILLON RICHELIEU, THE LOUVRE, PARIS. (VISCONTI.)
_Photo, L.L. Paris._
FIG. 130.--PETIT PALAIS, PARIS. (GIRAULT.)
_Photo, Neurdin._]
There can only be further enumerated a few of the more important
buildings erected in England during the later years of the 19th
century, and mention made of the general course which architecture has
taken in regard to special classes of buildings. The Natural History
Museum (Plate XI., fig. 120), completed in 1881 by Alfred Waterhouse,
may stand as a type of the taste for the employment of terra-cotta, with
all its dangerous facilities in ornamental detail, of which that
architect specially set the example. Detail is certainly overdone here,
but the building is strikingly original; a point not to be overlooked in
these days of architectural copying. The Imperial Institute, the result
of a competition among six selected architects, represents also a type
of architecture which its architect, T.E. Collcutt, maybe said to have
matured for himself, and which has been extensively imitated; a refined
variety of free classic, always quiet and delicate in detail, though
perhaps rather wanting in architectonic force. The next great
architectural competition was that for the completion of the South
Kensington Museum, the bare brick exterior of which, waiting for
architectural completion, had long been a national disgrace. The
competition produced some fine and striking designs, some of them
perhaps more so than the selected one by Sir Aston Webb, whose fine
plan, however, justified the selection. Another competition which
excited general interest was that in 1894, for the rebuilding on a
country site of Christ's Hospital schools, also gained by Aston Webb (in
collaboration with Ingress Bell), by a design which, in its arrangement
of schoolhouses in detached blocks (fig. 101), but in a symmetrical
grouping, opened up a new idea in public-school planning, and struck a
blow at the picturesque but insanitary quadrangle system. Among notable
public buildings of the period ought to be mentioned Norman Shaw's New
Scotland Yard, built in a style neither classic nor Gothic, but
partaking of the elements of both (Plate X., fig. 119). A competition in
1908 for the design of the new county hall for the London County
Council, to be "English Renaissance" in style, was won by a young
architect, till then unknown, Mr Ralph Knott.
[Illustration: FIG. 101.--Plan of a Master's House, New Christ's
Hospital. (Webb and Bell.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 102.--Sheffield Town Hall. (Mountford.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 103.--Oxford Town Hall. (Hare.)]
In recent years there has been a great movement for building town halls;
towns rather vying with each other in this way. Of late nearly all of
these have been carried out in some variety of free classic. Among the
more important in point of scale is that of Sheffield, by E.W. Mountford
(1856-1908) (fig. 102); among smaller ones, those of Oxford, by H.T.
Hare (fig. 103); and Colchester, by John Belcher, are particularly good
examples of recent architecture of this class, the former distinguished
also by an exceptionally good plan. The merit of excellent planning also
belongs to Aston Webb and Ingress Bell's Birmingham law courts, one of
the modern terra-cotta buildings of somewhat too florid detail, though
picturesque as a whole. Among public halls the M'Ewan Hall at Edinburgh,
completed in 1898 from the designs of Sir Rowand Anderson, deserves
mention as one of the most original and most carefully designed of
recent buildings in Great Britain.
The various new buildings erected in connexion with the university of
Oxford, those by T.G. Jackson (b. 1835) especially, form an important
incident in modern English architecture. Mr Jackson succeeded to a
remarkable degree in designing new buildings which are in harmony with
the old architecture of the university city; sometimes perhaps a little
too imitative of it, but at any rate he has the credit of having added
rather extensively to Oxford without spoiling it; while his school
buildings in different parts of the country have a refinement and
domesticity of feeling which is the true note of school architecture.
Among buildings of an educational class, the move in technical education
has led to the erection of a good many large polytechnic and similar
institutions, which in many cases have been well treated
architecturally; the Northampton Institute at Clerkenwell (fig. 104), by
Mountford, being perhaps one of the boldest and most effective of recent
public buildings. In the building of hospitals and asylums much has been
done, and great progress made in the direction of hygienic and practical
planning and construction, but the tendency has been (perhaps rightly)
towards making this practical efficiency the main consideration and
reducing architectural treatment to the simplest character. St Thomas's
hospital at Lambeth exemplifies the treatment of hospital architecture
at the commencement of the last quarter of the 19th century; the
separate pavilion system had been already adopted on practical grounds,
but the building is treated in a sumptuous architectural style, as if
representing so many detached mansions--a treatment which would now be
deprecated as an expenditure foreign to the main purpose of the
building. One recent hospital, however, that at Birmingham, by W.
Henman, combining architectural effect with the latest hygienic
improvements, was the first large hospital in Great Britain in which the
system of mechanical ventilation was completely and consistently carried
out.
[Illustration: FIG. 104.--Northampton Institute, Clerkenwell.
(Mountford.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 105.--Cragside. (R. Norman Shaw.)]
In theatre building there has been an immense improvement in regard to
planning, ventilation and fireproof construction, but little to note in
an architectural sense, since theatres in England are never designed by
eminent architects, the financial and practical aspects being alone
considered.
[Illustration: FIG. 106.--London City & Midland Bank, Ludgate Hill
Branch. (Collcutt.)]
English domestic and street architecture.
In domestic architecture the tendency has been to quit picturesque
irregularity for a more formal and more dignified treatment. Such a
house as Norman Shaw's "Cragside," built in the earlier part of our
period (fig. 105), however its picturesque treatment may still be
admired, would hardly be built now on a large scale; its architect
himself has of late years shown a preference for a symmetrical and
regular treatment of house architecture sometimes to the extent of
making the mansion look too like a barrack. In street architecture,
however, the tendency has been towards a more characteristic and more
picturesque treatment; nor is there any class of building in which the
improvement in English architecture has been more marked and more
unquestionable. Many of the new residential streets in the west end of
London present a really picturesque _ensemble_, and many shops and other
commercial street buildings have been erected with admirable fronts from
the designs of some of the best architects of the day. Norman Shaw's
building at the corner of St James's Street and Pall Mall was one of the
first, and is still one of the best examples of modern street
architecture, though surpassed by the same architect's more recent
building opposite, at the south-west angle of St James's Street--one of
the finest and most monumental examples of street architecture in
London. Among other examples may be cited T.E. Collcutt's London City &
Midland Bank in Ludgate Hill (fig. 106) and R. Blomfield's narrow
house-front in Buckingham Gate (fig. 107). The introduction of sculpture
in street fronts is also beginning to receive attention; and a simple
house-front recently erected in Margaret Street, London, from the design
of Beresford Pite (fig. 108), is an excellent example of the use of
sculpture in connexion with ordinary street architecture. It is
significant of the increased attention accorded to street architecture,
that the most important architectural event in England at the very close
of the 19th century, was the outlay of L2000 by the London County
Council, in fees to eight architects for designs for the front of the
proposed new streets of Kingsway and Aldwych. The idea was to treat
these streets as comprehensive architectural designs with a certain
unity of effect. Unfortunately this idea was abandoned for merely
commercial reasons, it being feared that there would be a difficulty in
letting the sites if tenants were required to conform their frontages to
a general design. In the case of Aldwych, which is a crescent street,
this decision was fatal. A crescent loses all its effect unless treated
as a complete and symmetrical architectural design.
[Illustration: FIG. 107.--House in Buckingham Gate, London. (R.
Blomfield.)]
The competition for the Queen Victoria Memorial, consisting of a
processional road from Whitehall to Buckingham Palace, culminating in a
sculptural trophy in front of the palace, attracted a great deal of
attention in 1901. Of the five invited competitors--Sir Aston Webb (b.
1849), T.G. Jackson, Ernest George (b. 1839), Sir Thomas Drew (b. 1838),
and Sir Rowand Anderson (b. 1834) the two latter representing Ireland
and Scotland respectively,--Sir Aston Webb's design was selected, and
unquestionably showed the best and most effective manner of laying out
the road, as well as a very pleasing architectural treatment of the
semicircular forecourt in front of the palace, with pavilions and
fountain-basins symmetrically spaced; but some of this was subsequently
sacrificed on grounds of economy. The building, a triumphal arch flanked
by pavilions, forming the entry to the processional road from Whitehall,
is a dignified design.
[Illustration: FIG. 108.--House in Margaret Street, London. (Beresford
Pite.)]
Recent French architecture.
In France, still the leading artistic nation of the world, the art of
architecture has been in a most flourishing and most active state in the
most recent period. It is true that there is not the same variety as in
modern English architecture, nor have there been the same discussions
and experiments in regard to the true aim and course of architecture
which have excited so much interest in England; because the French
architects, unlike the English, know exactly what they want. They have a
"school" of architecture; they adhere to the scholastic or academic
theory of architecture as an art founded on the study of classic models;
and on this basis their architects receive the most thorough training of
any in the world. This predominance of the academic theory deprives
their architecture, no doubt, of a good deal of the element of variety
and picturesqueness; a French architect _pur sang_, in fact, never
attempts the picturesque, unless in a country residence, and then the
results are such that one wishes the attempt had not been made. But, on
the other hand, modern French architecture at its best has a dignity and
style about it which no other nation at present reaches, and which goes
far to atone for a certain degree of sameness and repetition in its
motives; and living under a government which recognizes the importance
of national architecture, and is willing to spend public money liberally
on it (with the full approbation of its public), the French architects
have opportunities which English ones but seldom enjoy--the predominant
aim with a British government being to see how little they can spend on
a public building. The two great Paris exhibitions of 1889 and 1900 may
be regarded as important events in connexion with architecture, for even
the temporary buildings erected for them showed an amount of
architectural interest and originality which could be met with nowhere
else, and which in each case left its mark behind it, though with a
difference; for while in the 1889 exhibition the main object was to
treat temporary structures--iron and concrete and terra-cotta--in an
undisguised but artistic manner, in those of the 1900 exhibition the
effort was to create an architectural _coup d'oeil_ of apparently
monumental structures of which the actual construction was disguised. In
spite of some eccentricities the amount of invention and originality
shown in these temporary buildings was most remarkable; but fortunately
the exhibition left something more permanent behind it in the shape of
the two art-palaces and the new bridge over the Seine. The two palaces
are triumphs of modern classic architecture; the larger one (by MM.
Thomas, Louvet and Deglane) is to some extent spoiled by the apparently
unavoidable glass roof, the smaller one, by M. Girault, escapes this
drawback, and, still more refined than its greater opposite, is one of
the most beautiful buildings of modern times; the central portion is
shown in Plate XIV., fig. 130. The architectural pylons, with their
accompanying sculpture, which flank the entries to the bridge, are
worthy of the best period of French Renaissance. Thus much, at least,
has the 1900 exhibition done for architecture.
[Illustration: FIG. 109.--Plan of Hotel de Ville, Paris.]
A, Salle des Fetes.
B, Salle a manger.
C, Salons de Reception.
D, Council Chamber.
E, Grand Staircase.
F, Salle des Cariatides.
G, General Secretary.
H, Prefect.
K, Committee Rooms.
L, Public Works.
M, Corridor.
N, President of Council.
O, Library.
P, Refreshment Room.]
At the beginning of the last quarter of the 19th century stands one of
the most important of modern French buildings, the Paris hotel de ville,
commenced shortly after the war, from the designs of MM. Ballu and
Deperthes, planned on an immense scale, and on the stateliest and most
monumental lines: the plan is given in fig. 109. The central block is,
externally, a restoration of the old hotel de ville, the remainder
carried out in an analogous but somewhat more modern style. The interior
has been the scene of sumptuous pictorial decoration, in which all the
first artists of the day were employed--unfortunately in too scattered a
manner and on no predominant or consistent scheme. One of the most
characteristic architectural efforts of the French has consisted in the
erection of the various smaller hotels-de-ville or mairies, in the city
and suburban districts of the capital; as at Pantin, Lilas, Suresnes and
in various arrondissements within the city proper (Plate XIII., fig.
127). Nothing shows the quality of modern French architecture better, or
perhaps more favourably, than this series of district town halls; all
have a distinctly municipal character and a certain family resemblance
of style amid their diversity of details; all are refined specimens of
pre-eminently civilized architecture. Among the greater architectural
efforts of France is the immense block of the new Sorbonne, by M. Nenot,
a building sufficient in itself for an architectural reputation. Among
smaller French buildings of peculiar merit may be mentioned the Musee
Galliera, in the Trocadero quarter of Paris, designed by M. Ginain--a
work of pure art in architecture such as we should nowadays look for in
vain out of France; the Ecole de Medecine, by the same refined architect
(fig. 110); and the chapel in rue Jean Goujon (Guilbert), erected as a
memorial to the victims of the bazaar fire, again a notable instance of
a work of pure thought in architecture--a new conception out of old
materials. The new Opera Comique (Bernier) should also be mentioned, the
rather disappointing result of a competition which excited great
interest at the time. Street architecture has been carried out of late
in Paris in a sumptuous style, with great stone fronts and a profusion
of carved ornament, such as we know nothing of in England; and though
there is a rather monotonous repetition of the same style and character
throughout the new or newly built streets, it is impossible to deny the
effect of palatial dignity they impart to the city. In the matter of
country houses the French architect is less fortunate; when he attempts
what he regards as the rural picturesque, his good taste seems entirely
to desert him, and the _maison de campagne_ is generally a mere riot of
gimcrack bargeboards and finials. In Paris, the taste for the
contortions of what is called _art nouveau_ has led to the erection,
here and there, of ugly and eccentric fronts with preposterous
ornamental details; but the invasion of this element is only partial and
will probably not prove other than a passing phase.
[Illustration: FIG. 110.--Ecole de Medecine, Paris. (Ginain.)]
Germany.
The great military success of Germany in 1870, and the founding of the
German empire, gave, as is usual in such crises, a decided impetus to
public architecture, of which the central and most important visible
sign is the German Houses of Parliament (Plate IX., fig. 117), by Paul
Wallot (b. 1841), whose design was selected in a competition. There is
something essentially German in the quality of this national building;
classic architecture minus its refinement. The detail is coarse; the
finish of the end pavilions of the principal front absolutely
unmeaning--mere architectural rodomontade; the central cupola of glass
and iron, on a square plan, probably the ugliest central feature on any
great building in Europe; and yet there is undeniable power about the
whole thing; it is the characteristic product of a conquering nation not
reticent in its triumph. The new cathedral at Berlin, by Julius
Raschdorff (b. 1823), is the other most important German work of the
period (fig. 111); a building very striking and unusual in plan, but
absolutely commonplace in its architectural detail; school classic of
the most ordinary type, without even any of those elements of
originality which are to be found in the Houses of Parliament. A curious
feature in the plan (fig. 112) is that the building, alone of any
cathedral we can recall, has its principal general entrance at the side,
the end entrance being reserved for a special imperial cortege on
special occasions, the cathedral also serving the second purpose of an
imperial mausoleum. Theatre building has been carried on very largely in
Germany, and among its productions the Lessing theatre at Berlin (fig.
113) (Hermann von der Hude and Julius Hennicke, d. 1892) is a favourable
example of German classic at its best, besides being, like most modern
German theatres, very well planned (fig. 114). Hamburg has had its new
municipal buildings (Grotjan), a florid Renaissance building with a
central tower, showing in its general effect and grouping a good deal of
Gothic feeling Mention may also be made of the Imperial law courts
(Reichsgerichtsgebaude) at Leipzig, designed by Ludwig Hoffmann (b.
1852) and finished in 1895, a building with no more charm about it,
externally, than the Berlin Parliament Houses, but with some good
interior effects. The new post offices in Germany have been an important
undertaking, and are, at all events, buildings of more mark than those
in England. There has also been a great deal of new development in
street architecture, which shows an immense variety, and a constantly
evident determination to do something striking, but we find in it
neither the dignity of Parisian street architecture nor the refinement
of modern London work; there is an element of the bombastic about it.
[Illustration: FIG. 111.--Cathedral at Berlin. (Raschdorff.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 112.--Plan of Cathedral at Berlin.]
[Illustration: FIG. 113.--Lessing Theatre, Berlin. (Von der Hude and
Hennicke.)]
[Illustration: FIG. 114.--Plan of Lessing Theatre, Berlin.]
Other countries.
No modern building on the European continent is more remarkable than the
Brussels law courts (Plate XI., fig. 121) from the designs of Joseph
Poelaert (1816-1879), an original genius in architecture, who had the
good fortune to be appreciated and given a free hand by his government.
The design is based on classic architecture, but with a treatment so
completely individual as to remove it almost entirely from the category
of imitative or revival architecture; somewhat fantastic it may be, but
as an original architectural creation it stands almost alone among
modern public buildings. In Vienna the scholastic classic style has been
retained with much more purity and refinement than in the German
capital, and the Parliament Houses (Plate IX., fig. 116), by Theophil
Hansen (1813-1891), if they show no originality of detail, have the
merit of original and very effective grouping. Budapest, on the other
hand, which has almost sprung into existence since 1875 as the rival of
the Austrian capital, has erected a great Parliament building of florid
character (Plate IX., fig. 115), in a style in which the Gothic element
is prevalent, though the central feature is a dome. The plan (see fig.
92) is obviously based on that of the Westminster building, the exterior
design, however, has the merit of clearly indicating the position of the
two Chambers as part of the architectural design, the want of which is
the one serious defect of Barry's noble structure. In Italy modern
architecture is at a very low ebb; the one great work of this period was
the building of the facade to the Duomo at Florence, from the design of
de Fabris, who did not live to see its completion. As the completion in
modern times of a building of world-wide fame, it is a work of
considerable interest, and, on the whole, not unworthy of its position;
that it should harmonize quite satisfactorily with the ancient structure
was hardly to be expected. It was probably the completion of this facade
which led the city of Milan to start a great architectural competition,
in the early 'eighties, for the erection of a new facade to its
celebrated cathedral, not because the facade had never been completed,
but because it had been spoiled and patched with bad 18th-century work.
The ambition was a legitimate one, and the competition, open to all the
world, excited the greatest interest; but the young Italian architect,
Brentano, to whom the first premium was awarded, died shortly
afterwards, and other causes, partly financial, led to the postponement
of the scheme, though it is understood that there is still an intention
of carrying out Brentano's design under the direction of the official
architectural department of the city.
Conclusion.
In summing up the present position of modern architecture, it may be
said that architecture is now a more cosmopolitan art than it has been
at any previous period. The separate development of a national style has
become in the present day almost an impossibility. Increased means of
communication have brought all civilized nations into close touch with
each other's tastes and ideas, with the natural consequence that the
treatment of a special class of building in any one country will not
differ very materially from its treatment in another; though there are
nuances of local taste in detail, in manner of execution, in the
materials used. And the civilized countries have almost with one consent
returned, in the main, to the adoption of a school of architecture based
on classic types. The taste for medievalism is dying out even in Great
Britain, which has been its chief stronghold.
What course the future of modern architecture will take it is not easy
to prophesy. What is quite certain is that it is now an individual art,
each important building being the production, not of an unconsciously
pursued national style, but of a personal designer. As far as there is a
ruling consensus in architectural taste, this will tend to become, like
dress and manners, more and more cosmopolitan; and it seems probable
that it will be based more or less on the types left us by Classic and
Renaissance architecture. There are, however, two influences which may
have a definite effect on the architecture of the near future. One of
these is the possible greater _rapprochement_ between architecture and
engineering, of which there are already some signs to be seen;
architects will learn more of the kind of structural problems which are
now almost the exclusive province of the engineer, and there will be a
demand that engineering works shall be treated, as they well may be,
with some of the refinement and expression of architecture. The other
influence lies in the closer connexion, which is already taking place,
between architecture and the allied arts, so that an important building
will be regarded and treated as a field for the application of
decorative sculpture and painting of the highest class, and as being
incomplete without these. It is in this closer union of architecture
with the other arts that there lies the best hope for the architecture
of the future.
[Illustration: PLATE XV.
FIG. 131.--"FLAT-IRON" BUILDING, NEW YORK.
(For method of construction, see STEEL CONSTRUCTION, and Plate II.,
Fig. 4, of that article.)
_Copyright 1903 by Detroit Photographic Co._
FIG. 132.--A NEWPORT, R.I., "COTTAGE": "THE BREAKERS."
_Copyright 1899 by Detroit Photographic Co._
FIG. 133.--THE METROPOLITAN CLUB, NEW YORK.
FIG. 134.--THE UNIVERSITY CLUB, NEW YORK.
_Copyright 1905 by Detroit Publishing Co._]
[Illustration: PLATE XVI.
FIG. 135.--PUBLIC LIBRARY, BOSTON. (McKIM, MEAD & WHITE.)
_Photo, Detroit Publishing Co._]
FIG. 136.--PUBLIC LIBRARY, NEW YORK. (CARRERE & HASTINGS.)
_Photo, Geo. P. Hall & Son._]
FIG. 137.--TRINITY CHURCH, BOSTON. (H.H. RICHARDSON.)
_Photo, Elmer Chickering._
FIG. 138.--STATE CAPITOL, HARTFORD, CONNECTICUT.
_Copyright 1906 by Detroit Publishing Co._]
AUTHORITIES.--The literature of architecture as a modern art is
limited, the most important publications of recent times being mainly
devoted to the study and illustration of ancient architecture. The
following, however, may be named:--James Fergusson, _History of Modern
Architecture_ (2nd ed., London, 1873); T.G. Jackson, _Modern Gothic
Architecture_ (London, 1873); J.T. Micklethwaite, _Modern Parish
Churches_ (London, 1874); E.R. Robson, _School Architecture_ (London,
1874); J.J. Stevenson, _House Architecture_ (London, 1880); E.E.
Viollet-le-Duc, _How to Build a House_ (London, 1874); _Lectures on
Architecture_ (London, 1881); H.C. Burdett, _Hospitals and Asylums of
the World_ (London, 1892-1893); Professor Oswald Kuhn, _Krankenhauser_
(Stuttgart, 1897); E.O. Sachs, _Modern Opera-Houses and Theatres_
(London, 1897-1899); E. Wyndham Tarn, _The Mechanics of Architecture_
(London, 1893); R. Norman Shaw, R.A., T.G. Jackson, R.A., and others,
_Architecture, a Profession or an Art_ (London, 1892); W.H. White,
_The Architect and his Artists_ (London, 1892); _Architecture and
Public Buildings in Paris and London_ (London, 1884); H.H. Statham,
_Architecture for General Readers_ (London, 1895); _Modern
Architecture_ (London, 1898); Herrmann Muthesius, _Die englische
Baukunst der Gegenwart_ (Berlin and Leipzig, 1900); Der Architekten
Verein zu Berlin, _Berlin und Seine Bauten_ (Berlin, 1896). The real
literature of modern architecture, however, is to be found mainly in
the articles and illustrations in the best periodical architectural
publications of various countries. Among these Italy has none worth
mention, and France, with all her architectural enthusiasm, has had no
first-class architectural periodical since the extinction, about 1890,
of the _Revue generale de l'architecture_, conducted for more than
fifty years by the late Cesar Daly, and in its day the first
periodical of its class in the world. Among the best periodical
publications are: _The Architectural Record_ (quarterly), (New York);
_The Architectural Review_ (monthly), (Boston); the _Allgemeine
Bauzeitung_ (quarterly), (Vienna); the _Berlin Architekturwelt_
(monthly), (Berlin); _The Builder_ (weekly), (London); _La
Construction moderne_ (weekly), (Paris). (H. H. S.)
FOOTNOTES:
[1] For the various chronological systems proposed see EGYPT:
_Chronology_.
[2] Except, possibly, the earliest of those at Sparta (q.v.).--ED.
[3] Article "Architecture," _Ency. Brit._, 9th ed.
[4] Wilkins made two designs for the whole building; one leaving the
quadrangle entirely open on the fourth side, towards the street the
other showing a low open colonnaded screen connecting the ends of the
two wings. He never for a moment contemplated closing in the
quadrangle by buildings on the fourth side.
[5] A remarkable instance of this is shown by the railway viaduct at
Passy, a large and monumental piece of work in itself, which is built
along the centre of the roadway of Napoleon's bridge. It was' at
first proposed to have a steel railway viaduct parallel with the old
bridge, but it was found that the latter, both in respect of solidity
and spacious dimensions, would fully bear the erection of the railway
viaduct along its centre.
[6] The western half of the present front; the design was duplicated
afterwards, on the extension of the building, but Bodley originated
it.
ARCHITRAVE (from Lat. _arcus_, an arch, and _trabs, trabem_, a beam), an
architectural term for the chief beam which carries the superstructure
and rests immediately on the columns. In the ordinary entablature it is
the lowest of the three divisions, the other two being the frieze and
the cornice (see ORDER). The term is also applied to the moulded frame
of a doorway.
ARCHIVE (Lat. _archivum_, a transliteration of Gr. [Greek: archeion], an
official building), a term (generally used in the plural "archives"),
properly denoting the building in which are kept the records, charters
and other papers belonging to any state, community or family, but now
generally applied to the documents themselves (see RECORD).
ARCHIVOLT (from Lat. _arcus_, an arch, and _volta_, a vault), an
architectural term applied to the mouldings of an architrave, when
carried round an arched opening.
ARCHON ([Greek: archon], ruler), the title of the highest magistrate in
many ancient Greek states. It is only in Athens that we have any
detailed knowledge of the office, and even in this one case the evidence
presents problems of the first importance which are incapable of
decisive solution. There is no doubt that the archons represented the
ancient kings, whose absolutism, under conditions which we can only
infer, yielded in process of time to the power of the noble families,
supported no doubt by the fighting force of the state. As to the process
by which this change was effected there are two accounts. Traditionally,
the monarchy after the death of Codrus (?1068 B.C.) gave place to the
life archon whose tenure of office was limited afterwards to ten years
and then to one year. Aristotle's _Constitution of Athens_ (q.v.) speaks
of five stages: (1) the institution of the polemarch who took over the
military duties of the king; (2) the institution of _the_ archon to
relieve the king of his civil duties; (3) the tenure of office was
reduced to ten years (?752 B.C.); (4) the office was taken from the
"royal" clan and thrown open to all Eupatridae (?712 B.C.); (5) office
was made annual, and to the existing three offices were added the six
thesmothetae whose duty it was to record judicial decisions. The value
of this latter account is, of course, debatable, but it is at least
compatible with the general trend of development from hereditary
absolutism, civil, military and religious, in the person of the "king,"
to a constitutional oligarchy. The change was clearly effected by the
devolution of the military and civil powers of the king to the polemarch
and the archon, while the archon basileus (or king) retained control of
state religion. It is equally clear that owing to the predominating
importance of civil affairs, _the_ archon became the chief state
official and gave his name to the year (hence archon eponymus). It
should be noticed that the analogy which has often been suggested
between the early history of the archonship at Athens, and such cases as
the mayors of the palace in French history, or the tycoon (shogun) and
mikado in Japanese history, is misleading. In these cases it is the old
royal house that retains the royal title and the semblance of power,
while the real authority passes into new hands. In Athens, the new civil
office is vested in the old royal family, while the old title along with
its religious functions is transferred. The early history of the
thesmothetae is not clear, but this much is certain that there is no
adequate reason for supposing, as many historians do, that in early
times, they, with the three chief archons, constituted a collective or
collegiate magistracy. It is true Thucydides (i. 126) states that, in
the time of the Cylonian conspiracy (?632 B.C.), "the nine archons were
(i.e. collectively) the principal officials," but at the same time the
responsibility for the action then taken attached to the Alcmaeonidae
alone, because one of their number, Megacles, was at that time _the_
archon (i.e. responsibility was personal, not collective). Again, the
_Constitution of Athens_ says that down to Solon's time the archons had
no official residence, but that afterwards they used the Thesmotheteion.
It is a reasonable inference from this statement that the thesmothetae
had previously sat together apart from the superior archons and that it
was only after Solon that collegiate responsibility began.
_Evolution of the Office._--The history of the democratization of the
archonship is beset with equal difficulty. In the early days, the
importance of the office (confined as it was to the highest class) must
have been immense; there was no audit, no written law, no executive
council. The popular assembly was ill-organized and probably summoned by
the archons themselves. The only control came from the Areopagus which
elected them and would generally be favourably disposed, and from the
fact that the military and civil powers were not vested in the same
hands. Although the institution of the popular courts by Solon had
within it the germ of democratic supremacy, it is clear that the
immediate result was small; thus, in the next decade _anarchia_ was
continuous and Damasias held the archonship for more than two years in
defiance of the new constitution; the prolonged dissension in this
matter shows that the office of archon still retained its supreme
importance. Gradually, however, the archonship lost its power,
especially in judicial matters, until it retained merely the right of
holding the preliminary investigation and the formal direction of the
popular courts. Its administrative powers, save those wielded by the
polemarch (see below and cf. STRATEGUS), dwindled away into matters of
routine. We know that Peisistratus ruled by controlling the archonship,
which was always held by members of his family, and the archonship of
Isagoras was clearly an important party victory; we know further the
names of three important men who held the office between Cleisthenes'
reform and the Persian War (Hipparchus, Themistocles (q.v.), Aristides)
from which we infer that the office was still the prize of party
competition. On the other hand, after 487 B.C. the list of archons
contains no name of importance. Presumably this is due to the growing
importance of the Strategus and to the institution of sortition (see
below), which, whether as cause or effect, is presumably by the 5th
century indicative of diminished importance. There can, on these
assumptions, be no doubt that, from the early years of the 5th century
B.C., the archonship was of practically no importance. Furthermore we
find that (probably after the Persian War) the office is thrown open to
the second class, and finally in 457 B.C. we meet an archon,
Mnesitheides, of the third, or Zeugite, class. Plutarch (_Aristides_,
22) says that after the great struggle of the Persian War Aristides
threw open the office to all the citizens. But in fact the members of
the fourth class were not formally admitted even in the 4th century
(though by a fiction they were allowed to pose for the time as
Zeugites). Furthermore it is not till 457 that even a Zeugite archon is
known, according to the _Constitution of Athens_ (_c_. 26), which dates
the change as five years after the death of Ephialtes and does not
connect it with Aristides.
_Sortition._--The next question constitutes perhaps the most important
problem in Greek political development. At what date was election by
lot, or sortition, introduced for the archonship? From the _Constitution
of Athens_ (_c_. 22) we gather that from the fall of the Tyranny to 487
B.C. the archons were [Greek: airetoi], not [Greek: klaerotoi] (i.e.
chosen by vote, not by lot), and that in 487, limited sortition was
introduced, whereby fifty candidates were elected by each tribe, and
from these the archons and their "secretary" were chosen by lot. But
against this must be set the statement by the same authority that this
double method was part of the Solonian reform. The solution of the
dilemma is a matter of inference. Three indications favour the former
view: (1) the "anarchia" which occurred so often between Solon and
Peisistratus shows that the office was at that time a question of party
(i.e. elective); (2) the statement that Solon invented sortition for the
office is put as the basis of a comparison ([Greek: othen, saemeion])
and, therefore, may fairly be regarded as a hypothesis; (3) there is no
indication that the change made in 487 B.C. was a return to an obsolete
method, and on the same argument it is odd that Solon's alleged system
should not have been revived at the end of the Tyranny. On the other
hand Herodotus (vi. 109) states that, in 490, before the battle of
Marathon, the polemarch was chosen by lot. If this be true, it follows
that the office of polemarch must have lost its military importance,
which was not the case, inasmuch as the polemarch at Marathon gave the
casting vote in favour of immediate battle. Whether, therefore, Solon or
Aristides was the first to introduce sortition, it is perfectly clear
that the lot was not used between the Tyranny and 487 B.C. and that
after 487 the lot was always used (see J.E. Sandys, _Constitution of
Athens_ c. 8 note 1, c. 22 S 5, note); in fact, at a date not known the
mixed system of Aristides gave place to double sortition, in which the
first nomination also was by lot. To enter here into the theory of the
lot is impossible. It should, however, be observed that in the somewhat
material atmosphere of constitutional Athens the religious significance
of the lot had vanished; no important office in the 5th and 4th
centuries was entrusted to its decision. The real effect of sortition
was to equalize the chances of rich and poor without civil strife. Now
it is perfectly clear that it could not have been this object which
impelled Solon to introduce sortition; for in his time the archonship
was not open to the lower classes, and, therefore, election was more
democratic than sortition, whereas later the case was reversed. It
should further be mentioned that, before the discovery of the
Aristotelian _Constitution_ in 1891, Grote, C.F. Hermann, Busolt and
others had maintained that the lot was not used in Athens before the
time of Cleisthenes; and in spite of the treatise, it must be admitted
that there is no satisfactory evidence, historical or inferential, that
their theory was unsound.
_Qualifications and Functions._--It remains to give a brief analysis of
the qualifications and functions of the archons after the year 487 B.C.
After election (in the time of Aristotle in the month Anthesterion; in
the 3rd century in Munychion) a short time had to elapse before entering
on office to allow of the _dokimasia_ (examination of fitness). In this
the whole life of the nominee was investigated, and each had to prove
that he was physically without flaw. Failure to pass the scrutiny
involved a certain loss of civic rights (e.g. that of addressing the
people). The successful candidate had to take an oath to the people
(that he would not take bribes, &c.) and to go through certain
preliminary rites. Any citizen could bring an impeachment (_eisangelia_)
against the archons. Any delinquency involved a trial before the
Heliaea. Finally an examination took place at the end of the year of
office, when each archon had to answer for his actions with person and
possessions; till then he could not leave the country, be adopted into
another family, dispose of his property, nor receive any "crown of
honour." A similar investigation took place with regard to the assessors
(_paredri_) whom the three senior archons chose to assist them. The
archons at the end of their year of office (some say on entering upon
office) became members of the Areopagus, which was, therefore, a body
composed of ex-archons of tried probity and wisdom. The archons as a
body retained some duties such as the appointment of jurymen, the
sortition of the _athlothetae_, &c. (but see Gilbert's _Antiquities_,
Eng. trans., p. 251, n. 1). On entering upon office the archon (_archon
eponymus_) made proclamation by his herald that he would not interfere
with private property. His official residence was the Prytaneum where he
presided over all questions of family, e.g. the protection of parents
against children and _vice versa_, protection of widows, wardship of
heiresses and orphans, divorce; in religious matters he superintended
the Dionysia, the Thargelia, the processions in honour of Zeus the
Saviour and Asclepius. The archon basileus superintended the holy
places, the mysteries, the Lampadephoria (Torch race), &c., questions of
national religion and certain cases of bloodguiltiness. His official
residence was the Stoa Basileios, and his wife, as officially
representing the wife of Dionysus, was called Basilinna. The polemarch,
who was at any rate titular commander down to about 487 B.C. (see above;
and Herod, vi. 109, [Greek: hendekatos psaephidophoros]), became in the
5th century a sort of consul who watched over the rights of resident
aliens (_metoeci_) in their family and legal affairs. He offered
sacrifices to Artemis Agrotera and Enyalios, superintended _epitaphia_
and arranged for the annual honours paid to the tyrannicides. His
official residence was the Epilyceum (formerly called the
Polemarcheion).
BIBLIOGRAPHY.-G. Gilbert, _Constitutional Antiquities_ (Eng. trans.,
1895); Eduard Meyer's _Geschichte des Alterthums_, ii. sect. 228;
A.H.J. Greenidge, _Handbook of Greek Constitutional Hist._ (1895);
J.W. Headlam, _Election by Lot in Athens_ (Camb., 1891); and
authorities quoted under GREECE: _History, ancient_, and ATHENS:
_History_. (J. M. M.)
ARCHPRIEST (Lat. _archipresbyter_, Gr. [Greek: archipresbyteros]), in
the Christian Church, originally the title of the chief of the priests
in a diocese. The office appears as early as the 4th century as that of
the priest who presided over the presbyters of the diocese and assisted
the bishop in matters of public worship, much as the archdeacon helped
him in administrative affairs. Where, as in Germany, the dioceses were
of vast extent, these were divided into several archpresbyterates. Out
of these developed the rural deaneries, the office of archpriest being
ultimately merged in that of rural dean, with which it became
synonymous. It thus became strictly subordinate to the jurisdiction of
the archdeacon. In Rome itself, as the office of archdeacon grew into
that of cardinal-camerlengo, so that of archpriest of St Peter's
developed into that of the cardinal-vicar. In England from 1598 until
the appointment of a vicar-apostolic in 1623 the Roman Catholic clergy
were placed by the pope under an "archpriest" as superior of the English
mission. In the Lutheran Church in Germany the title archpriest
(_Erzpriester_) was in some cases long retained as the equivalent of
that of superintendent, sometimes also still called dean (_Dechant_),
his functions being much the same as those of the rural dean.
ARCHYTAS (c. 428-347 B.C.), of Tarentum, Greek philosopher and scientist
of the Pythagorean school, famous as the intimate friend of Plato, was
the son of Mnesagoras or Histiaeus. Equally distinguished in natural
science, philosophy and the administration of civic affairs, he takes a
high place among the versatile savants of the ancient Greek world. He
was a man of high character and benevolent disposition, a fine
flute-player, and a generous master to his slaves, for whose children he
invented the rattle. He took a prominent part in state affairs, and,
contrary to precedent, was seven times elected commander of the army.
Under his leadership, Tarentum fought with unvarying success against the
Messapii, Lucania and even Syracuse. After a life of high intellectual
achievement and uninterrupted public service, he was drowned (according
to a tradition suggested by Horace, _Odes_, i. 28) on a voyage across
the Adriatic, and was buried, as we are told, at Matinum in Apulia. He
is described as the eighth leader of the Pythagorean school, and was a
pupil (not the teacher, as some have maintained) of Philolaus. In
mathematics, he was the first to draw up a methodical treatment of
mechanics with the aid of geometry; he first distinguished harmonic
progression from arithmetical and geometrical progressions. As a
geometer he is classed by Eudemus, the greatest ancient authority, among
those who "have enriched the science with original theorems, and given
it a really sound arrangement." He evolved an ingenious solution of the
duplication of the cube, which shows considerable knowledge of the
generation of cylinders and cones. The theory of proportion, and the
study of acoustics and music were considerably advanced by his
investigations. He was said to be the inventor of a kind of
flying-machine, a wooden pigeon balanced by a weight suspended from a
pulley, and set in motion by compressed air escaping from a valve.[1]
Fragments of his ethical and metaphysical writings are quoted by
Stobaeus, Simplicius and others. To portions of these Aristotle has been
supposed to have been indebted for his doctrine of the categories and
some of his chief ethical theories. It is, however, certain that these
fragments are mainly forgeries, attributable to the eclecticism of the
1st or 2nd century A.D., of which the chief characteristic was a desire
to father later doctrines on the old masters. Such fragments as seem to
be authentic are of small philosophical value. It is important to notice
that Archytas must have been famous as a philosopher, inasmuch as
Aristotle wrote a special treatise (not extant) _On the Philosophy of
Archytas_. Some positive idea of his speculations may be derived from
two of his observations: the one in which he notices that the parts of
animals and plants are in general rounded in form, and the other dealing
with the sense of hearing, which, in virtue of its limited receptivity,
he compares with vessels, which when filled can hold no more. Two
important principles are illustrated by these thoughts, (1) that there
is no absolute distinction between the organic and the inorganic, and
(2) that the argument from final causes is no explanation of phenomena.
Archytas may be quoted as an example of Plato's perfect ruler, the
philosopher-king, who combines practical sagacity with high character
and philosophic insight.
See G. Hartenstein, _De Arch. Tar. frag._ (Leipzig, 1833); O.F.
Gruppe, _Uber d. Frag. d. Arch._ (1840); F. Beckmann, _De Pythag.
reliq._ (Berlin, 1844, 1850); Egger, _De Arch. Tar. vit., op. phil._;
Ed. Zeller, _Phil. d. Griech._; Theodor Gomperz, _Greek Thinkers_, ii.
259 (Eng. trans. G.G. Berry, Lond., 1905); G.J. Allman, _Greek
Geometry from Thales to Euclid_ (1889); Florian Cajori, _History of
Mathematics_ (New York, 1894); M. Cantor, _Gesch. d. gr. Math._ (1894
foll.). The mathematical fragments are collected by Fr. Blass,
_Melanges Graux_ (Paris, 1884). For Pythagorean mathematics see
further PYTHAGORAS.
FOOTNOTE:
[1] If this be the proper translation of Aulus Gellius, _Noctes
Atticae_, x. 12., 9, " ... simulacrum columbae e ligno ... factum; ita
erat scilicet libramentis suspensum et aura spiritus inclusa atque
occulta concitum." (See AERONAUTICS.)
ARCIS-SUR-AUBE, a town of eastern France, capital of an arrondissement
in the department of Aube, on the left bank of the Aube, 23 m. N. of
Troyes on the Eastern railway to Chalons-sur-Marne. Pop. (1906) 2803.
Fires in 1719, 1727 and 1814 destroyed the ancient buildings, and it is
now a town built in modern style with wide and regular streets. A
chateau of the 18th century occupies the site of an older one in which
Diana of Poitiers, mistress of Henry II., resided. The only other
building of interest is the church, which dates from the 15th century.
In front of it there is a statue of Danton, a native of the town.
Arcis-sur-Aube has a tribunal of first instance. Its industries include
important hosiery manufactures, and it carries on trade in grain and
coal. The town communicates with Paris by means of the Aube, which
becomes navigable at this point.
A battle was fought here on the 20th and 21st of March 1814 between
Napoleon and the Austro-Russian army under Schwarzenberg (see NAPOLEONIC
CAMPAIGNS).
ARCOLA, a village of northern Italy, 16 m. E.S.E. of Verona, on the
Alpone stream, near its confluence with the Adige below Verona. The
village gives its name to the three days' battle of Arcola (15th, 16th
and 17th of November 1796), in which the French, under General Napoleon
Bonaparte, defeated the Austrians commanded by Allvintzy (see FRENCH
REVOLUTIONARY WARS).
ARCOS DE LA FRONTERA, a town of southern Spain, in the province of
Cadiz; on the right bank of the river Guadalete, which flows past Santa
Maria into the Bay of Cadiz. Pop. (1900) 13,926. The town occupies a
ridge of sandstone, washed on three sides by the river, and commanding
fine views of the lofty peak of San Cristobal, on the east, and the
fertile Guadalete valley, celebrated in ancient Spanish ballads for its
horses. At the highest point of the ridge is a Gothic church with a fine
gateway, and a modern tower overlooking the town. The fame of its ten
bells dates from the wars between Spaniards and Moors in which "Arcos of
the Frontier" received its name. After its capture by Alphonso the Wise
of Castile (1252-1284), the town was a Christian stronghold on the
borders of Moorish territory. Another church contains several Moorish
banners, taken in 1483 at the battle of Zahara, a neighbouring village.
The ruined citadel, the theatre, and the palace of the dukes of Arcos
are the only other noteworthy buildings. Roman remains have been found
in the vicinity, and the ridge of Arcos is honeycombed with rock-hewn
chambers, said to be ancient cave-dwellings.
See _Galeria de Arcobricenses illustres_ (Arcos, 1892), and _Riqueza y
cultura de Arcos de la Frontera_ (Arcos, 1898); both by M. Mancheno y
Olivares.
ARCOSOLIUM (from Lat. _arcus_, arch, and _solium_, a sarcophagus), an
architectural term applied to an arched recess used as a burial place in
a catacomb (q.v.).
ARCOT, the name of a city and two districts of British India in the
presidency of Madras. Arcot city is the principal town in the district
of North Arcot. It occupies a very prominent place in the history of the
British conquest of India, but it has now lost its manufactures and
trade and preserves only a few mosques and tombs as traces of its former
grandeur. It is a station on the line of railway from Madras to Beypur,
but has ceased to be a military cantonment. The most famous episode in
its history is the capture and defence of Arcot by Clive. In the middle
of the 18th century, during the war between the rival claimants to the
throne of the Carnatic, Mahommed Ali and Chanda Sahib, the English
supported the claims of the former and the French those of the latter.
In order to divert the attention of Chanda Sahib and his French
auxiliaries from the siege of Trichinopoly, Clive suggested an attack
upon Arcot and offered to command the expedition. His offer was
accepted; but the only force which could be spared to him was 200
Europeans and 300 native troops to attack a fort garrisoned by 1100 men.
The place, however, was abandoned without a struggle and Clive took
possession of the fortress. The expedition produced the desired effect;
Chanda Sahib was obliged to detach a large force of 10,000 men to
recapture the city, and the pressure on the English garrison at
Trichinopoly was removed. Arcot was afterwards captured by the French;
but in 1760 was retaken by Colonel Coote after the battle of Wandiwash.
It was also taken by Hyder Ali when that invader ravaged the Carnatic in
1780, and held by him for some time. The town of Arcot, together with
the whole of the territory of the Carnatic, passed into the hands of the
British in 1801, upon the formal resignation of the government by the
nawab, Azim-ud-daula, who received a liberal pension.
The district of North Arcot is bounded on the N. by the districts of
Cuddapah and Nellore; on the E. by the district of Chingleput; on the S.
by the districts of South Arcot and Salem; and on the W. by the Mysore
territory. The area of North Arcot is 7386 sq. m., and the population in
1901 was 2,207,712, showing an increase of 4% in the decade. The aspect
of the country, in the eastern and southern parts, is flat and
uninteresting; but the western parts, where it runs along the foot of
the Eastern Ghats, as well as all the country northwards from Trivellam
to Tripali and the Karkambadi Pass, are mountainous, with an agreeable
diversity of scenery. The elevated platform in the west of the district
is comparatively cool, being 2000 ft. above the level of the sea, with a
mean maximum of the thermometer in the hottest weather of 88 deg. The
hills are composed principally of granite and syenite, and have little
vegetation. Patches of stunted jungle here and there diversify their
rugged and barren aspect; but they abound in minerals, especially copper
and iron ores. The narrow valleys between the hills are very fertile,
having a rich soil and an abundant water-supply even in the driest
seasons. The principal river in the district is the Palar, which rises
in Mysore, and flows through North Arcot from west to east past the
towns of Vellore and Arcot, into the neighbouring district of
Chingleput, eventually falling into the sea at Sadras. Although a
considerable stream in the rainy season, and often impassable, the bed
is dry or nearly so during the rest of the year. Other smaller rivers of
the district are the Paini, which passes near Chittore and falls into
the Palar, the Sonamukhi and the Chayaur. These streams are all dry
during the hot season, but in the rains they flow freely and replenish
the numerous tanks and irrigation channels. The administrative
headquarters are at Chittore, but the largest towns are Vellore (the
military station), Tirupati (a great religious centre), and Wallajapet
and Kalahasti (the two chief places of trade).
The district of South Arcot is bounded on the N. by the districts of
North Arcot and Chingleput; on the E. by the French territory of
Pondicherry and the Bay of Bengal; on the S. by the British districts of
Tanjore and Trichinopoly; and on the W. by the British district of
Salem. It contains an area of 5217 sq. m.; and its population in 1901
was 2,349,894, showing an increase of 9% in the decade. The aspect of
the district resembles that of other parts of the Coromandel coast. It
is low and sandy near the sea, and for the most part level till near the
western border, where ranges of hills form the boundary between this and
the neighbouring district of Salem. These ranges are in some parts about
5000 ft. high, with solitary hills scattered about the district. In the
western tracts, dense patches of jungle furnish covert to tigers,
leopards, bears and monkeys. The principal river is the Coleroon which
forms the southern boundary of the district, separating it from
Trichinopoly. This river is abundantly supplied with water during the
greater part of the year, and two irrigating channels distribute its
waters through the district. The other rivers are the Vellar, Pennar,
and Gadalum, all of which are used for irrigation purposes. Numerous
small irrigation channels lead off from them, by means of which a
considerable area of waste land has been brought under cultivation.
Under the East India Company, a commercial resident was stationed at
Cuddalore, and the Company's weavers were encouraged by many privileges.
The manufacture and export of native cloth have now been almost entirely
superseded by the introduction of European piece goods. The chief
seaport of the district of South Arcot is Cuddalore, close to the site
of Fort St David. The principal crops in both districts are rice,
millet, other food grains, oil-seeds and indigo.
ARCTIC (Gr. [Greek: harktos], the Bear, the northern constellation of
Ursa Major), the epithet applied to the region round the North Pole,
covering the area (both ocean and lands) where the characteristic polar
conditions of climate, &c., obtain. The Arctic Circle is drawn at 66
deg. 30' N. (see POLAR REGIONS).
ARCTINUS, of Miletus, one of the earliest poets of Greece and
contributors to the epic cycle. He flourished probably about 744 B.C.
(Ol. 7). His poems are lost, but an idea of them can be gained from the
_Chrestomathy_ written by Proclus the Neo-Platonist of the 5th century
or by a grammarian of the same name in the time of the Antonines. The
_Aethiopis_ [Greek: Aithiopis], in five books, was so called from the
Aethiopian Memnon, who became the ally of the Trojans after the death of
Hector. As the opening shows, it took up the narrative from the close of
the _Iliad_. It begins with the famous deeds and death of the Amazon
Penthesileia, and concludes with the death and burial of Achilles and
the dispute between Ajax and Odysseus for his arms. The title thus only
applied to part of the poem. The _Sack of Troy_ ([Greek: Iliou Perois])
gives the stories of the wooden horse, Sinon, and Laocoon, the capture
of the city, and the departure of the Greeks under the wrath of Athene
at the outrage of Ajax on Cassandra. The _Little Iliad_ ([Greek: Igias
mikra]) of Lesches formed the transition between the _Aethiopis_ and the
_Sack of Troy_.
Kinkel, _Epicorum Graecorum Fragmenta_ (1877); Welcker, _Der epische
Cyclus_; Muller, _History of the Literature of Ancient Greece_; Lang,
_Homer and the Epic_ (1893); Monro, _Journal of Hellenic Studies_
(1883); T.W. Allen in _Classical Quarterly_, April 1908, pp. 82 foll.
ARCTURUS, the brightest star in the northern hemisphere, situated in the
constellation Bootes (q.v.) in an almost direct line with the tail
([zeta] and [eta]) of the constellation Ursa Major (Great Bear); hence
its derivation from the Gr. [Greek: arktos], bear, and [Greek: ouros],
guard. Arcturus has been supposed to be referred to in various passages
of the Hebrew Bible; the Vulgate reads Arcturus for stars mentioned in
Job ix. 9, xxxvii. 9, xxxviii. 31, as well as Amos v. 8. Other versions,
as also modern authorities, have preferred, e.g., Orion, the Pleiades,
the Scorpion, the Great Bear (of. _Amos_ in the "International Critical
Comment" series, and G. Schiaparelli, _Astronomy in the O.T._, Eng.
trans., Oxford, 1905, ch. iv.). According to one of the Greek legends
about Arcas, son of Lycaon, king of Arcadia, he was killed by his father
and his flesh was served up in a banquet to Zeus, who was indignant at
the crime and restored him to life. Subsequently Arcas, when hunting,
chanced to pursue his mother Callisto, who had been transformed into a
bear, as far as the temple of Lycaean Zeus; to prevent the crime of
matricide Zeus transported them both to the heavens (Ovid, _Metam_. ii.
410), where Callisto became the constellation Ursa Major, and Areas the
star Arcturus (see LYCAON and CALLISTO).
ARCUEIL, a town of northern France, in the department of Seine, on the
Bievre, 2-1/2 m. N.E. of Sceaux on the railway from Paris to Limours.
Pop. (1906) 8660. The town has an interesting church dating from the
13th to the 15th century. It takes its name from a Roman aqueduct, the
_Arcus Juliani_ (Arculi), some traces of which still remain. In
1613-1624 a bridge-aqueduct over 1300 ft. long was constructed to convey
water from the spring of Rungis some 4 m. south of Arcueil, across the
Bievre to the Luxembourg palace in Paris. In 1868-1872 another
aqueduct, still longer, was superimposed above that of the 17th century,
forming part of the system conveying water from the river Vanne to
Paris. The two together reach a height of about 135 ft. Bleaching, and
the manufacture of bottle capsules, patent leather and other articles
are carried on at Arcueil; and there are important stone quarries.