THE Valley of Mexico, in which the first group of buildings we have to

describe is situated, is a small tract in the centre of the table-land

of Anahuac. Though not larger than Yorkshire, and one-third of it

permanently under water, it was, at the time we first became acquainted

with it, divided into three or four small States, which, notwithstanding

continual wars among themselves, had managed to acquire a considerable

degree of material prosperity. After making every allowance for the

exaggeration of the Spanish and native historians, the remains of the

Aztec capitals attest an amount of population and a degree of

organisation which it is impossible to overlook or deny, and it seems

that it was at their last moment that this development was greatest;

for, immediately before the Spanish Conquest, all the States of the

valley, tired of their ruinous wars, had joined their forces together,

and, thus combined, proved more than a match for any of the surrounding

States. They spread their arms and influence to the Mexican Gulf,

penetrated to the shores of the Pacific, and on one occasion are even

said to have crossed the Isthmus of Tehuantepec, and reached the

confines of Guatemala. These last expeditions seem to have been

undertaken merely to obtain prisoners for their horrid rites of human

sacrifice, of which they were becoming passionately fond; and they made

no settlement in these countries sufficient to influence either their

arts or institutions in any way. Shortly after this, the conquest of the

Spaniards under Cortes put an end to the kingdom and power of the Aztecs

for ever.

The principal monuments of the valley are the Teocallis—literally Houses

of God—the Temples of the people. These are pyramids in terraces with

flat tops, and always surmounted by a chamber or cell which is in fact

the temple itself. They seem to be of all ages, for if one may trust the

tradition, that of Cholulu is as old as the early Toltecs, whereas the

great teocalli of the city of Mexico was only finished five years before

the discovery of America by Columbus, and the Spaniards met with many

persons who had assisted in its erection. It has, however, with all the

native buildings of the city, been swept away by the ruthless bigotry of

the conquerors. Independent of its own interest, this is the more to be

regretted, as the possession of a single monument of authentic date

would form a starting-point for our investigations and serve as a check

on all our theories.

Of these teocallis, the largest, probably also the oldest, is that of

Cholulu. Its dimensions, in so far as they can be ascertained in its

present ruinous state, are 1440 ft. square and 177 ft. in height,

divided in four storeys, the fifth being formed by the cell or temple,

which has now been replaced by a chapel dedicated to the Virgin Mary.

The whole is composed of badly-burnt bricks and mud, and is now so

overgrown with trees that it is difficult to make out its form, but in

Humboldt’s time it apparently was freer from obstruction and more easily

traced.

There are two pyramids at Teotihuacan, the largest of which is

apparently a square of 645 ft., with a height of 171, and there are

others at Tezcuco of about the same dimensions, and, like them, divided

into five or seven storeys, but the most interesting of those yet

brought to light is that of Xochicalco. It is situated on the top of

what appears to be a natural elevation, but which has been fashioned

into terraces by art. The pyramid itself is in five storeys, the stone

facing of the three upper of which has been removed to repair a

sugar-mill in quite recent times, but the two lower still retain their

sculptures and architectural ornaments. Mr. Tylor gives the date of 945

to this building,[495] and there does not seem to be any reason for

doubting its general correctness. If it is so, the possession of

photographs of its bas-reliefs and cornices would go far to clear up

half the difficulties which beset the question.[496] One monument in the

middle of the series with sculptural and architectural details, and an

authentic date, is nearly all that is required for the purpose.

[Illustration: 1015. Pyramid of Oajaca, Tehuantepec. (From the

‘Smithsonian Contributions to Knowledge.’)]

Besides these great many-storeyed pyramids there are numerous examples

in various parts of the country, of one storey only; several of these

have been described, but unfortunately not drawn. Their general

arrangement may, however, be judged of from the annexed example from

Oajaca. Like all others in Mexico, it is only a device to raise a temple

to such a height as should give it dignity and enable the ceremonies

performed on its upper platform to be seen by all the people.

It is indispensably necessary to bear this distinction in mind, in

speaking of these monuments, as careless writers, connecting the word

Pyramid with Egypt, have been too apt to confound together two classes

of monuments entirely distinct and dissimilar. The Egyptian pyramid is

always a tomb. The principal object of its erection is in the sepulchral

chamber in its centre. It always terminates upwards in a point. In no

instance are there external steps leading to a cell or chamber on the

apex. In fact, they were always tombs; never temples. The Assyrian

pyramids, on the contrary, have much more affinity with the buildings of

which we are now speaking. They were always in terraces, the upper

platform was always crowned by a chamber or cell, and there were

external steps leading to this, which was the principal object of the

erection. In investigating the history of Eastern art this form of

temple has been traced from Mesopotamia to the shores of the Eastern

Ocean. If we still, however, hesitate to pronounce that there was any

connection between the builders of the pyramids of Suku and Oajaca, or

the temples of Xochicalco and Boro Buddor, we must at least allow that

the likeness is startling and difficult to account for on the theory of

mere accidental coincidence.

One thing, at all events, seems clear. If we are at any time to trace a

connection between the architecture of the New and the Old World it is

in the direction above indicated that light is to be looked for. At all

events it seems as if it could not now be long before we ascertain

whether any connection did exist between the arts of the two continents,

or whether we may regard that of America as wholly indigenous.

[Illustration: 1016. Plan of Temple at Mitla. Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.]

Almost, however, as if to warn us to beware of jumping too rapidly to

conclusions of this class, we meet in Mexico occasionally with such a

monument as that at Mitla, which is so entirely original as to defy the

stoutest advocate to find an associate for it. As will be seen from the

annexed plan, it consists of a portico, measuring 160 ft. across, its

roof supported by a row of six pillars down the centre, and having

behind it a square building, measuring about 65 ft. each way, in the

centre of which is a court with four apartments opening into it, the

entrances of which are so arranged as to secure the utmost amount of

privacy. Originally there appear to have been four such buildings,

arranged round a courtyard, but only one is now perfect. If, however,

the plan is original, the style of ornamentation is still more so. The

walls slope outwards, which is not the case in any other known building.

The panels are filled with frets and forms such as are only found in

Mexico, and are entirely unlike anything found elsewhere; and the whole

building is such, that if it stood alone, or all Mexican buildings were

like it, we should at once be obliged to admit that the style was

entirely original, and formed without any connection with the older

world.

Its use is said to be sepulchral, and there are underground chambers

which would countenance that belief, according to our views. In hot

climates, however, subterranean apartments are appropriate rather to the

living, and are, when met with, generally the best in the house; so

that, without some more evidence, it would appear rather to be a palace,

which the arrangement of its internal chambers and its whole appearance

would more certainly indicate. Its age is not known, but in the Aztec

paintings executed immediately before, and in some instances

subsequently to, the conquest, the same forms and the same style of

decoration constantly appear. This is not conclusive, for the same

architectural forms may in this country have prevailed throughout, for

anything we know; but judging by the rules of European criticism, the

building does not date from long before the time of the conquest.

[Illustration: 1017. View of the Palace at Mitla. (From ‘Smithsonian

Contributions to Knowledge,’ vol. ix.)]

Whenever a stable government is established in that unhappy country, and

the artist and photographer are enabled to pursue their occupations in

security and at leisure, it is to be hoped that materials will become

available for completing this chapter of our history. At present, it

must remain nearly a blank, because so few representations of Mexican

monuments exist on which reliance can be placed.

YUCATAN.

It is extremely difficult to determine whether it is owing to their

original paucity, or to their destruction by the Spaniards, that the

monuments in the province of Mexico are now so few and far between. If

we may judge from the glowing descriptions of the conquerors, and the

analogy of the remains in Yucatan, we may almost certainly ascribe their

disappearance to the bigotry or the avarice of the Europeans. Be this as

it may, it is certain that the moment we pass the southern boundary of

Mexico and enter the peninsula generally known as Yucatan, which for our

present purpose must be considered as including Costa Rica, we find a

province as rich in architectural remains as any of the same extent in

the Old World, not even excepting Cambodia, which is the one it most

nearly resembles. In this region Messrs. Stephens and Catherwood visited

and described between fifty and sixty old cities; and, if we may trust

native reports, there are others in the centre of the land even more

important than these, but which have not been visited by any European in

modern times. Of the cities described by these travellers, Uxmal,

Palenque, Kabah, Chichen Itza, and others, are really magnificent. The

first-named almost rivals Ongcor in splendour and extent, though it

falls far short of it in the elegance or beauty of detail of its

buildings.

As before hinted, there seems no reason for dissenting from the

conclusion Messrs. Stephens and Catherwood arrived at regarding their

age. It is deliberately expressed by the last-named author in his folio

work (page 8) in the following terms:—“I do not think we should be safe

in ascribing to any of the monuments which retain their forms a greater

age than from 800 to 1000 years; and those which are perfect enough to

be delineated I think it is likely are not more than from 400 to 600

years old.” In other words, they belong to the great building epoch of

the world—the 13th century, or a little before or after that time.[497]

It seems more than probable, therefore, that the great buildings at

Uxmal are contemporary with the temples of Nakhon Wat and Hullabeed, and

the cathedrals of Rheims and Toledo. Whether or not there was any

communication direct or indirect between these buildings, which are

geographically so remotely distant, is another question, to which no

satisfactory answer can be given in the present state of our knowledge,

and if any is attempted it must be a negative one.[498]

[Illustration: 1018. Elevation of Teocalli at Palenque. Scale 50 ft. to

1 in.]

[Illustration: 1019. Plan of Temple. Scale 50 ft. to 1 in.]

As in Mexico, the principal monument of Yucatan is the Teocalli. In the

latter province, however, they seem to differ somewhat in design from

those above described. They are not generally in terraces, but rise, at

an angle of about 45°, to the level of the platform on which the temple

stands; and a magnificent unbroken flight of steps leads from the base

of the building to its summit. Almost all these retain more or less of

the remains of architectural magnificence that once adorned their

summits. The annexed Woodcut, No. 1018, representing the elevation of a

temple at Palenque (the plan of which is shown below), supported by a

pyramid, will give a good general idea of their form. The pyramid is

about 280 ft. square, and 60 ft. in height: on the top of it stands the

temple, 76 ft. wide in front and 25 ft. deep, ornamented in stucco with

bassi-relievi of better execution than is usually found in these parts,

and with large hieroglyphical tablets, whose decipherment, were it

possible, would probably reveal to us much of the history of these

buildings.

The roof is formed by approaching courses of stone meeting at the

summit, and following the same outline externally, with curious

projections on the outside, like dormer windows, but meant apparently

either for ornament or as pedestals for small idols, or for some similar

purpose.

The other temples found in Yucatan differ but little from this one,

except in size, and, architecturally speaking, are less interesting than

the palaces—the splendour of the temple consisting in the size of its

pyramid, to which the superstructure is only the crowning member; in the

palace, on the other hand, the pyramid is entirely subordinate to the

building it supports, forming merely an appropriate and convenient

pedestal, just sufficient to give it a proper degree of architectural

effect.

In speaking of the palaces it would be most important, and add very much

to the interest of the description, if some classification could be made

as to their relative age. The absence of all traces of history makes

this extremely difficult, and the only mode that suggests itself is to

assume that those buildings which show the greatest similarity to wooden

construction in their details are the oldest, and that those in which

this peculiarity cannot be traced are the more modern.

This at least is certainly the case in all other countries of the world

where timber fit for building purposes can be procured; there men

inevitably use the lighter and more easily worked vegetable material

long before they venture on the more durable but far more expensive

mineral substance, which ultimately supersedes it to so great an extent.

Even in Egypt, in the age of the pyramid builders, the ornamental

architecture is copied in all its details from wooden constructions. In

Greece, when the art reached its second stage, the base is essentially

stone, and the upper part only copied in stone from the earlier wooden

forms; and so it was apparently in Mexico; the lower part of the

buildings is essentially massive stone-work, the upper part is copied

from forms and carvings that must originally have been executed in wood,

and are now repeated in stone.

The following Woodcut, No. 1020, of Chunjuju, for instance, represents

in its simplest form what is repeated in almost all these buildings—a

stone basement with square doorways, but without windows, surmounted by

a superstructure evidently a direct copy of woodwork, and forming part

of the construction of the roof.

In most cases in Yucatan the superstructure is elaborately carved with

masks, scrolls, and carvings similar to those seen on the prows of the

war-boats, or in the Moraïs or burying-places of the Polynesian

islanders.

[Illustration: 1020. Elevation of Building at Chunjuju. (From a Drawing

by F. Catherwood.)]

Sometimes pillars are used, and the wooden construction is carried even

lower down, though mixed in that case with parts of essentially lithic

form. Barring the monstrosity of the carvings, there is often, as in the

palace at Zayi (Woodcut No. 1021 ), a degree of elegance in the design

by no means to be despised, more especially when, as in this instance,

the building rises in a pyramidal form in three terraces, the one within

and above the other, the lowest, as shown in the plan (Woodcut No.

1022), being 260 ft. in length, by 110 ft. in width. This, though far

from being the largest of these palaces, is one of the most remarkable,

as its terraces, instead of being mere flights of steps, all present

architectural façades, rising one above the other. The upper and central

tier may possibly have been a seven-celled temple, and the lower

apartments appropriated to the priests, but it is more probable that

they were all palaces, the residences of temporal chiefs, inasmuch as at

Uxmal a pyramidal temple is attached to the building called the Casa del

Gubernador, which is extremely similar to this, though on a still larger

and more ornate scale. There are other instances of the palace and

temple standing together.

[Illustration: 1021. Elevation of part of Palace at Zayi. (From a

Drawing by F. Catherwood.)]

Sometimes, instead of the buildings standing within and above each

other, as in the last example, they are arranged around a courtyard, as

in that called the Casa de las Monjas at Uxmal (Woodcut No. 1023 ), one

of the most remarkable buildings in Central America, for its size, as

well as for the elaborateness of its decorations. It is raised on three

low terraces, reaching a total height of 20 ft. The block to the south,

260 ft. long, is pierced by a triangular-headed gateway, 10 ft. 8 in.

wide, leading to a courtyard, measuring upwards of 200 ft. each way, and

surrounded on all sides by buildings, as shown in the plan; which,

though only one storey in height, from their size and the elaborateness

of their decorations, form one of the most remarkable groups of

buildings in the world.

[Illustration: 1022. Plan of Palace at Zayi. Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.]

[Illustration: 1023. Casa de las Monjas, Uxmal. Scale 100 ft. to 1 in.]

In the same city is the other building, just referred to, called the

Casa del Gubernador, somewhat similar to the principal of the three

edifices composing the Casa de las Monjas, but larger and even more

elaborate in its decorations. It stands alone, however, with only a

temple attached unsymmetrically to one angle of it.

With regard to construction, as above remarked, the style may be

generally characterized as one remove from the original wooden

construction of early times. No wooden buildings, or even wooden roofs,

now remain, nor could any have been expected to resist the effects of

the climate; but many of the lintels of the doorways were formed by

wooden beams, and some of these still remain, though most of them have

perished, bringing down with them large portions of the walls which were

supported by them. In other instances, and generally speaking in those

that seem most modern, the upper parts of the doorways, as well as the

roofs of the chambers, are formed by bringing the courses nearer

together till they meet in the centre, thus forming a horizontal arch,

as it is called, precisely as the Etruscans and all the earlier tribes

of Pelasgic race did in Europe at the dawn of civilisation, and as is

done in India to this day. This form is well shown in the annexed

woodcut, representing a chamber in the Casa de las Monjas at Uxmal, 13

ft. wide. The upper part of the doorway on the right hand has fallen in,

from its wooden lintel having decayed.

[Illustration: 1024. Interior of a Chamber, Uxmal. (From a Drawing by F.

Catherwood.)]

A still more remarkable instance of this mode of construction is shown

in the Woodcut No. 1025, representing a room in a temple at Chichen Itza

in Yucatan. The room is 19 ft. 8 in. by 12 ft. 9 in.; in the centre of

it stand two pillars of stone, supporting beams of sapote-wood, which

also forms the lintels of the door, and over these is the stone vaulting

of the usual construction: the whole apparently still perfect and

entire, though time-worn, and bearing the marks of as great age as any

of the other buildings of the place.

When the roof was constructed entirely of wood, it probably partook very

much of the same form, the horizontal beam being supported by two struts

meeting at the centre, and framed up at the sides, which would at once

account for the appearances shown in the Woodcuts Nos. 1020, 1021. It is

also probable that both light and air were introduced above the walls,

between the interstices of the wood-work; which is further confirmed by

the strange erection on the top of the Casa at Palenque (Woodcut No.

1018 ), where the openings look very like the copy of a ventilator of

some sort.

[Illustration: 1025. Apartment at Chichen Itza. (From a Drawing by F.

Catherwood.)]

It is, of course, impossible to ascribe any very remote antiquity to

buildings containing so much wood in their construction, and erected in

a climate so fatal to the durability of any class of buildings whatever.

In addition to this, it must be borne in mind that the bas-reliefs are

generally in stucco, which, however good, is still a very perishable

material, and also that the painting on these and on the walls is still

bright and fresh. In such a climate as that of Egypt no argument could

be drawn from these circumstances; but in a country subject to tropical

rains and the heat and dryness of a tropical summer the marvel is that

they should have lasted four or five centuries, and still more that they

should have resisted so long the very destructive powers of vegetation.

Taking all these circumstances together, the epoch of their erection

does not seem a matter of doubt, and all that remains for the

elucidation of their history is that they should be arranged in a

sequence during the six or eight centuries which may have intervened

between the erection of the oldest and the most modern of these

mysterious monuments.

[Illustration: 1026. Diagram of Mexican construction.]

CHAPTER III.

PERU.

CONTENTS.

Historical Notice—Titicaca—Tombs—Walls of Cuzco, &c.

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

CHRONOLOGY.

DATES.

Manco Capac A.D. 1021

Mayta Capac, 4th Inca, conquers Aymara 1126

Conquest by Pizarro 1534

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

PERU is situated geographically so near to Mexico, and the inhabitants

of both countries had reached so nearly to the same grade of

civilisation at the time when the Spaniards first visited them and

destroyed their native institutions, that we might naturally expect a

very considerable similarity in their modes of building and styles of

decoration. Nothing, however, can be further from the fact; indeed it

would be difficult to conceive two peoples, however remotely situated

from one another, whose styles of art differ so essentially as these

two.

The Mexican buildings, as we have just seen, are characterised by the

most inordinate exuberance of carving, derived probably, with many of

the forms of their architecture, from wooden originals. Peru, on the

other hand, is one of the very few countries known where timber appears

to have been used in primitive times so sparingly that its traces are

hardly discernible in subsequent constructions; and either from

inability to devise, or from want of taste for, such a mode of

decoration, the sculptured forms are few and insignificant.

The material which the Peruvians seem to have used earliest was mud, and

in that rainless climate many walls of this substance, erected certainly

before the Spanish conquest, still remain in a state of very tolerable

preservation. The next improvement on this seems to have been a sort of

rubble masonry or concrete: the last, a Cyclopean masonry of great

beauty and solidity. None of these forms, nor any of their derivatives,

are found in Mexico; the climate would not permit of the use of the

first—hardly of the second; and in all their buildings, even the

earliest, the Mexicans seem to have known how to use stones carefully

squared and set with horizontal beds.

Another distinction which Peruvian art has in common with many of those

derived from purely stone construction, is the sloping sides of the

openings—a form invented on purpose to diminish the necessary size of

the lintel. There are two discharging arches so constructed at Uxmal,

but, so far as is known, none anywhere else; and no single opening of

that class in the whole architectural province of Mexico. The roofs and

upper parts of the larger openings, on the contrary, almost universally

slope in that country. In Peru the roofs are always flat, or domical,

and the sides of the openings always straight-lined.

These remarks ought perhaps, in strictness, to be applied to the

architecture of the Incas alone—the only one with which we have hitherto

been made acquainted. Recently, however, it has dawned upon us, that

before the time of Manco Capac the regions of Peru about the Lake

Titicaca were inhabited by a race of Aymaras, who have left traces of

their art in this region. Some illustrations of the remains of Tia

Huanacu, at the southern end of Lake Titicaca, have reached this

country, and from them we gather that the style is essentially different

from that of the Incas. The most characteristic distinction being that

in the Aymara style all the jambs of the doors are perpendicular, and

all the angles right angles. In the Inca style, on the contrary, the

jambs are almost all universally sloping, and rectangular forms are by

no means common.

[Illustration: 1027. Ruined Gateway at Tia Huanacu. (From a

Photograph.)]

At Tia Huanacu there are two doorways, each cut out of a single block of

hard volcanic stone. That shown in Woodcut No. 1027 measures 10 ft. in

height and 13 ft. 3 in. across the top; or rather did before it was

broken in two, apparently by an earthquake shock. In the centre of it is

a mask cut with very considerable skill, and on each side a number of

panels containing incised emblematical figures whose purport and meaning

have not yet been explained. The other doorway (Woodcut No. 1028 ) is

erect and entire, but perfectly plain. Its only ornaments are square

sinkings cut with the admirable precision and clearness characteristic

of the style.[499]

There is also at Tia Huanacu a great mound, apparently about 1000 ft.

long by 400 in width, but the stone revêtment that gave it form has been

removed in modern times, so that its shape is undistinguishable. It was

apparently surrounded by a range of monolithic pillars or obelisks, like

a Ceylonese dagoba, and had a wall of Cyclopean masonry outside these.

There is also a square marked out by similar pillars, each of a single

stone, 18 to 20 ft. in height, but whether originally connected or not

cannot now be ascertained. The wonder of the place, however, is a

monument of very uncertain destination, called the “Seats of the

Judges,” consisting of great slabs of stone—there are either three or

four, each 36 ft. sq. and 5 ft. thick, at one end of which the seats are

carved. Without detailed plans and drawings it is difficult to form any

reliable opinion regarding these remains, but it does seem that the

people who executed them had a wonderful power of quarrying and moving

masses, and an aspiration after eternity very unlike anything else found

in this continent, and the details of their ornamentation neither

resemble those of Mexico nor the succeeding style of the Incas.[500]

[Illustration: 1028. Gateway at Tia Huanacu. (From a Photograph.)]

In his travels in Peru, Mr. Markham describes several towers as existing

at Sillustani (Woodcut No. 1029), which he ascribes to the same people.

These are certainly sepulchral, and are still filled with bones, which

were apparently thrown in by an opening at the top, and rested in a

chamber in the centre of the building.

Mr. Markham informs us that there are several other monuments of this

class in the same district, about which it would be extremely

interesting to know more. As there seems little doubt that they are

older than the time of the Incas they must modify to a considerable

extent any opinion we may form with regard to the origin of their art,

though at the same time they add another to the unsolved problems

connected with American architecture.

[Illustration: 1029. Tombs at Sillustani. (From a Drawing by Clements

Markham, Esq.)]

Besides the strongly-marked distinction that exists between the

architecture of Mexico and Peru, we have the negative evidence of their

history and traditions, which make no mention of any intercourse between

the Peruvians and any people to the northward. This, however, is not of

much weight, as there are no accounts at all which go farther back than

three or four centuries before the Spanish conquest, and our knowledge

of who the Aymaras were is still vague in the extreme.

At about that period it is fabled that a godlike man, Manco Capac,

appeared, with a divine consort, on an island in the Lake of Titicaca,

journeying from whence they taught the rude and uncivilised inhabitants

of the country to till the ground, to build houses and towns, and to

live together in communities; and made for them such laws and

regulations as were requisite for these purposes.

Like the Indian Bacchus, Manco Capac was after his death reverenced as a

god, and his descendants, the Incas, were considered as of divine

origin, and worshipped as children of the Sun, which was the great

object of Peruvian adoration. At the time of the Spanish conquest the

twelfth descendant of Manco Capac was on the throne, but, his father

having married as one of his wives a woman of the Indian race, the

prestige of the purity of Inca blood was tarnished, and the country was

torn by civil wars, which greatly facilitated the progress of the

Spaniards in their conquests under the unscrupulous Pizzaro.

[Illustration: 1030. Ruins of House of Manco Capac, in Cuzco. (From a

Sketch by J. B. Pentland.)]

Both from its style and the traditions attached to it, the oldest

building of the Incas seems to be that called the house of Manco Capac,

on an island in the Lake of Titicaca. The part shown in the woodcut (No.

1030) is curvilinear in form, standing on a low terrace, and surmounted

by upper chambers, hardly deserving the name of towers. All the doorways

have sloping jambs, and the masonry is of rude, irregular polygonal

blocks of no great size. Inside the wall are a number of small square

chambers, lighted only from the doorway.

A more advanced specimen of building, though inferior in masonry, is the

two-storeyed edifice called the House of the Nuns, or of the Virgins of

the Sun, in the same place (Woodcut No. 1031). It is nearly square in

plan, though with low projecting wings on one side, and is divided into

twelve small square rooms on the ground-floor, and as many similar rooms

above them. Several of these chambers were surrounded by others, and

those that had no doors externally had no openings like windows (except

one with two slits in the upper storey); and they must have been as dark

as dungeons, unless the upper ones were lighted from the roof, which is

by no means improbable. The most striking architectural features they

possess are the doorways, which exactly resemble the Etruscan, both in

shape and mode of decoration. We are able in this case to rely upon the

accuracy of the representation, so that there can be no doubt of the

close similarity.

Another building on the island of Coata, in the sacred lake of Titicaca,

is raised on five low terraces, and surrounds three sides of a

courtyard, its principal decoration being a range of doorways, some of

them false ones, constructed with upright jambs, but contracted at the

top by projecting courses of masonry, like inverted stairs—in this

instance, however, only imitative, as the building is of rubble.

[Illustration: 1031. House of the Virgins of the Sun. (From a Sketch by

J. B. Pentland.)]

The masonry of the principal tomb represented in the Woodcut No. 1032

may be taken as a fair specimen of the middle style of masonry; less

rude than that of the house of Manco Capac, but less perfect than that

of many subsequent examples. It is square in plan—a rare form for a tomb

in any part of the world—and flat-roofed. The sepulchral chamber

occupies the base, and is covered by a floor, above which is the only

opening. The other tomb in the background is likewise square, but

differs from the first in being of better masonry, and having been

originally covered, apparently, with a dome-shaped roof either of clay

or stucco. Some of these tombs are circular, though the square form

seems more common, in those at least which have been noticed by

Europeans.

[Illustration: 1032. Peruvian Tombs. (From a Drawing by J. B.

Pentland.)]

A specimen of the perfected masonry of the Peruvians is represented in

the Woodcut No. 1033. It is a portion of the wall of a Caravanserai, or

_Tambos_, erected by the last Incas on the great road they made from

their oldest capital, Cuzco, to Sinca. The road was itself perhaps the

most extraordinary work of their race, being built of large blocks of

hard stone, fitted together with the greatest nicety, and so well

constructed as to remain entire to the present day in remote parts where

uninjured by the hand of man.

The masonry here, as will be observed, is in regular courses, and

beautifully executed, the joints being perfectly fitted, and so close as

hardly to be visible, except that the stones are slightly convex on

their faces, something after the manner of our rustications.

[Illustration: 1033. Elevation of Wall of Tambos. (From Humboldt’s

‘Atlas Pittoresque.’)]

Intermediate between the two extremes just mentioned are the walls of

Cuzco, the ancient capital of the kingdom, forming altogether the most

remarkable specimen now existing of the masonry of the ancient

Peruvians. They are composed of immense blocks of limestone, of

polygonal form, but beautifully fitted together; some of the stones are

8 and 10 ft. in length, by at least half as much in width and depth, and

weigh from fifteen to twenty tons; these are piled one over the other in

three successive terraces, and, as may be seen from the plan, are

arranged with a degree of skill nowhere else to be met with in any work

of fortification anterior to the invention of gunpowder. To use a modern

term, it is a fortification _en tenaille_; the re-entering angles are

generally right angles, so contrived that every part is seen, and as

perfectly flanked as in the best European fortifications of the present

day.

[Illustration: 1034. Sketch Plans of Walls of Cuzco. No scale.]

[Illustration: 1035. View of Walls of Cuzco. (From a Sketch by J. B.

Pentland.)]

It is not a little singular that this perfection should have been

reached by a rude people in Southern America while it escaped the Greeks

and Romans, as well as the Mediæval engineers. The true method of its

attainment was never discovered in Europe until it was forced on the

attention of military men by the discovery of gunpowder. Here it is used

by a people who never had, so far as we know, an external war, but who,

nevertheless, have designed the most perfectly planned fortress we know.

Between these various specimens are many more, some less perfect than

the walls of Cuzco, showing great irregularity in the form, and a

greater admixture of large and small stones, than are there found;

others, in which all the blocks are nearly of the same size, and the

angles approach nearly to a right angle. Examples occur of every

intermediate gradation between the house of Manco Capac (Woodcut No.

1030) and the Tambos (Woodcut No. 1033), precisely corresponding with

the gradual progress of art in Latium, or any European country where the

Cyclopean or Pelasgic style of building has been found. So much is this

the case, that a series of examples collected by Mr. Pentland from the

Peruvian remains might be engraved for a description of Italy, and

Dodwell’s illustrations of those of Italy would serve equally to

illustrate the buildings of South America.

From what has been said above, it seems by no means improbable that at

some future time we may be able to trace a connection between the styles

of architecture existing in Central America and those on the eastern

shores of the Old World; but, for the present at least, that of Peru

must be considered as one of the isolated styles of the world. At the

same time it must be confessed that no style offers more tempting baits

to those who are inclined to speculate on such a subject. The sloping

jambs, the window cornices, the polygonal masonry, and other forms, so

closely resemble what is found in the old Pelasgic cities of Greece and

Italy, that it is difficult to resist the conclusion that there may be

some relation between them. Either, it may be argued, men in certain

circumstances do the same things in the same manner, as instinctively as

bees or beavers, or by some means or other the arts of the Old World

have been transferred to the New. In the present instance, at all

events, the latter view can hardly be sustained. The distance of 2000

years in time that elapsed between the erection of the European and

American examples is too great to be easily bridged over, and the

distance in space is a still more insuperable objection. Even, however,

if it were attempted to explain these away, the introduction of the

Aymara style is in itself sufficient to settle the question. If that

style preceded that of the Incas, as there is every reason to believe it

did, it cuts across any such speculations. Its jambs are perpendicular,

its angles rigidly rectangular, its surfaces smooth, and it is

altogether as unlike the style that succeeded it as can well be

conceived. We seem, therefore, forced to the conclusion that the sloping

jambs of Inca architecture are only a natural expedient for shortening

the length of the lintel, and their polygonal masonry probably arose

from the surfaces of cleavage or fracture, into which certain kinds of

stones naturally split.

Although, therefore, we are unable, with our present knowledge, to trace

the external relation of the Peruvians to the other races of the

American continent, there can be no doubt that when her architectural

remains are properly investigated, we shall understand her history, and

be able to assign to her civilization its proper rank, as compared with

that of other nations. Eventually, also, we need not despair of being

able to determine whether the gentle subjects of the Incas belonged to

the Polynesian, or to which other of the great families of mankind.

When, indeed, we look back on the progress that has been achieved in the

last few years, it seems difficult to assign a limit to the extent to

which architecture may be employed in investigations of this sort. It

was not, of course, even possible to rise to the conception of such a

scheme for tracing the affinities of mankind, till the greater part of

the world had been explored, and a sufficient amount of knowledge

attained to render it certain that no such exceptions existed as would

invalidate the general conclusions arrived at. Now, however, that this

has been done, and that we are enabled to survey and to group the whole,

it may safely be asserted that the great stone book on which men of all

countries and all ages have engraved their thoughts, and to which they

have committed their highest aspirations, is, of all those of its class

now open to us, the most attractive, and for some purposes the most

instructive. No one who has followed the inquiry can well doubt that in

a few years more, architectural ethnology will take its proper rank as

one of the most important adjuncts to all inquiries into the affinities

and development of the various families of mankind.

INDEX TO VOLS. I. AND II.

-------

[The volumes are indicated by Roman, the pages by Arabic, numerals.]

Aarhuus, church at, ii, 320.

The Frue Kirke, 321.

Abbeville, ii, 160.

Abbeys, Cistercian, i, 14.

Cluny, ii, 95. 99.

Plan, 98.

Abbaye aux Hommes and Abbaye aux Dames, Caen, 111-116.

St. Denis, 122.

Corvey, 221.

Their sites in England, 388.

Kilconnel, 445.

Jerpoint, 457.

Abd-el-Melik, mosques erected or restored by, ii, 517-522.

Abd-el-Rahman, mosque founded by, ii, 543-547.

Abencerrages, hall of the, ii, 554.

Aberbrothock, ii, 438.

Aberdeen Cathedral, nave and spires, ii, 437.

Material employed, _ibid._

Abernethy, Scotland, architectural element at, ii, 419.

Abo, Finland, church at, ii, 315.

Abou Abdallah, court in the Alhambra built by, ii, 552.

Abouseer, Pyramid temple of, i, 107.

Abraham’s burial-place, i, 294. 363.

Absalom, so-called tomb of, i, 369.

Abû Gosh (Kirjath-Jearim), noteworthy church at, ii, 36.

Abydus, remains of temples at, i, 128.

Plans, _ibid._

Historical value of the tablet found there, 129.

Fortress of, 137.

Arch in the temple, 128. 214.

Acropolis, restored view of the, i, 240.

Plan, 251.

Early temple, 252.

Adrian I., Pope, first church-tower builder, i, 578.

Ægina, age of temple at, i, 252.

Dimensions, _ibid. note_.

Restored, 252.

Aerschot, Belgium, church at, ii, 194.

Æsthetic element in art, i, 4-10.

Africa, basilican churches in, i, 508-511.

Aghadoe, near Killarney, doorway at, ii, 448.

S. Agnese, basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515.

Aisles, 515. 522.

Section and plan, 522.

S. Agostino, basilican church, Rome, i, 515.

Its style, 517.

Agrigentum, Doric temples at, i, 254.

Telamones in the great temple, 269.

Plan, 271.

Peculiarities of form and construction, _ibid._

Elevation and section, 273.

How lighted, 274.

Agrippa, baths said to have been built by, i, 343.

Ahmed, Sultan, mosque founded by, ii, 562.

Aigues Mortes, fortified town of, ii, 186.

Aillas, façade of church at, ii, 78.

Ainay, St. Martin d’, Lyons, west front of church, ii, 95.

Aisles in basilican churches, Rome, i, 515.

Their alleged indispensability, ii, 83.

Example of five aisles, 151.

Seven aisles, 195.

Aitchison, Prof., Iron girders in Baths of Caracalla, i, 346 _note_.

Aix, France, baptistery at, ii, 59.

Cloister, 61.

Aix-la-Chapelle, circular church at, its founder, &c., ii, 247.

Plan and arrangements, 248.

Choir, _ibid._

Charlemagne’s palace, 256.

Aizaini, temple at, i, 228.

Albano, tomb of Aruns at, i, 299.

S. Alban’s, ii, 411.

Alby Cathedral, peculiarities of its construction, ii, 69. 181.

_See_ ii, 367. 486.

Alcala, Paranimfo at, ii, 497 _note_.

Alcantara, Trajan’s bridge at, i, 352. 387.

Alcazar, Seville, ii, 551.

Alcobaça, church at, ii, 509.

Alet, apse at, ii, 54.

Interior, _ibid._

_See_ 467.

Alexander Severus, Column of Victory erected by, i, 353.

Alexandria, Diocletian’s column at, i, 353.

Algeria, architecture of, ii, 541.

Al-Hadhr, palace and edifices at, i, 390, 392-395.

Alhambra, the, ii, 545. 551-554.

Date, founders, &c., 551.

Plan, 552.

Materials of the building, Court of Lions, &c., 553, 554.

Alma-Tadema, velarium of amphitheatre, i, 340 _note_.

Alost, belfry of, ii, 200.

Alsace, ii, 44.

Churches: Rosheim, ii, 239.

Ottmarsheim, 250.

Thann, 276.

_See_ Strasburg.

Altenberg, near Cologne, merits of church of, ii, 268.

Cloisters, 261.

Altenfurt, circular chapel at, ii, 254.

Alyattes, tomb or tumulus of, i, 230, 231. 294. 296.

Amalfi, cloisters at, i, 605.

Amati, façade of Milan Cathedral finished by, i, 629.

Amenemhat III., pyramid of, i, 141.

Inscriptions in labyrinth, i, 112.

Amenhotep III., tomb of, i, 133.

America, ancient, architecture of, ii, 563.

Amiens Cathedral, ii, 53, 131.

Its plan, 135.

Proportional defects, 140.

Flying buttresses, 173.

Stalls, 181.

Compared with Cologne, 270, 271.

With English examples, 373, 380, 381, 384, 385.

Amphitheatre: Etruscan, at Sutrium, i, 293. 337 and _note_.

Flavian, or Colosseum, Rome, 337-340.

Capua, Nîmes, 340.

Verona, Pola, 341.

Otricoli, the ‘Castrense,’ Arles, 342.

Amrith, peculiar monument and tomb at, i, 239.

Amru, mosque of, ii, 30.

Date and original dimensions, 525.

Ground-plan and arches, 526, 527.

Minaret, 534.

Amsterdam, churches at, ii, 207.

Ancona, Trajan’s arch at, i, 347.

Ancyra, church of St. Clement at, i, 455.

Andernach, church at, ii, 238.

The Weigh-tower, 296.

S. Andrew’s, Scotland, cathedral of, ii, 437.

S. Angeli, Perugia, circular church of, i, 545, 546.

S. Angelo, castle of, Rome, i, 356.

St. Angelo, Mont, baptistery of, i, 601.

Angers, cathedral of, ii, 81.

Church of St. Trinité, 82.

St. Sergius, 84.

Arches recently discovered, castle, &c., 88.

Angilbertus, silver altar of, i, 567.

Angoulême, domical cathedral of, ii, 68.

Plan and section, 68.

Façade, 79.

Ani, capital of Armenia, cathedral of, i, 473.

Side elevation, 474.

Tombs, 475.

Capital, 477.

Anjou, architectural province of, its boundaries, &c., ii, 41, 43.

Age of its greatest splendour, 81.

Examples of its church architecture, 81-87.

Conventual buildings, castles, &c., 87-88.

Announa, Algeria, basilican church at, i, 509.

Antelami’s baptistery, Parma, ii, 12.

Anthemius of Thralles, great architectural work of, i, 440.

Antinoë, Hadrian’s arch at, i, 348.

Antioch, Constantine’s church at, i, 432.

Antoninus and Faustina, temple of, i, 311, 317.

Antrim, tower-doorway in, ii, 451 _note_, 452.

Antwerp Cathedral, ii, 138. 188.

Proportional defects, 195.

Plan, 196.

Church of St. Jacques, 197.

Boucherie, 204.

Exchange, 205.

Apocalyptic churches, the seven, ii, 446.

SS. Apollinare Nuovo and Apollinare-in-Classe, Ravenna, basilicas of,

i, 528-530.

Apollo, temples of: Branchidæ, i, 258.

Bassæ, 254, 265, 270.

Apollo Didymæus, Ionic temple to, i, 256.

Dimensions, 258.

Apollo Epicurius, Doric temple of, i, 254.

Apostles, churches dedicated to the: Constantinople, i, 451, 531; ii,

557.

Cologne, 191.

Appian Way, i, 385.

Apse, early example of, i, 316.

Its use in Roman basilicas, 329. 332. 507.

In early Christian churches, 509, 510. 512. 523.

Ravenna, 528-531. 536.

Polygonal apses, i, 528. 532. 537 and _note_.

Treble apse, 538.

Torcello, 539.

Byzantine examples: Qalb Louzeh, 425.

Thessalonica, 458.

Athens, 460.

Mistra, 463.

Italian examples: Pavia, 565.

St. Ambrogio, 566.

Verona, 570.

San Pellino, 592, 593 and _note_.

Lydda, ii, 37.

Singular example at St. Quinide, 53.

Alet, 54.

Triapsal church, Planes, 59.

Cruas, 60.

Romanesque form, 73.

The apse proper as distinguished from the chevet, _ibid._

Querqueville, 110.

St. Stephen’s, Caen, 111.

Bayeux, 118.

Gernrode, 220.

Trèves, 224.

Mayence, 230.

Cologne, 233-234.

Bonn, 235.

Scandinavian example, 315.

St. Bartolomeo, Toledo, 497.

Use made of the apse, 388.

_See_ Chevet.

Apulia, churches in, i, 582. 592.

Aqueduct: Etruscan, at Tusculum, i, 301.

Rome, at Nîmes, Segovia, and Tarragona, 385, 386.

Aquileja, basilican church at, ii, 220 _note_.

Aquitania, architectural boundaries of, ii, 41, 42.

Style peculiar to the province, 64.

Examples of same, 64-80.

Chevet churches, 72-76.

Façades, 78.

Arabs, architectural habits of the, ii, 514.

Considerations in regard to their immigration into other lands,

513-515.

Arbroath, ii, 438.

Arc de l’Etoile, Paris, i, 30.

Arcades of the Romans, i, 313.

At Spalato, 314.

St. John Lateran, 599.

German example, ii, 257.

Holyrood, 436.

Saracenic, 528.

Arch, objection of the Hindus to the, i, 22. 217.

To what extent known to the Egyptians, 214-218.

Examples at Nimroud and Khorsabad, 215.

Oldest in Europe, 216.

Delos, 245.

Etruscan examples, 300, 301.

Advances of the Romans, 306.

Ctesiphon, 399.

Thessalonica, 421.

Screen at Angers, ii, 88.

Horseshoe arch at Göllingen, 238.

Oxford, 366.

Jedburgh, 421.

Kelso, 422.

Holyrood, 436.

Clonmacnoise, 452.

Mosque of Amru, 525.

_See_ Pointed Arches. Triumphal Arches.

Archæology an essential adjunct in Ethnological studies, i, 53. 84, 85.

Instance of its value, 241.

Architecture: points of view from which it may be studied; value of the

historic method, i, 3.

Principles distinguishing it from painting and sculpture, 4.

Their office in connection with it, 5.

Earlier and later systems: result of the latter, 11, 12.

Definition of the art and elucidations of same, 12, 13.

Respective provinces of engineer and architect, 15, 16.

Technical principles: Mass, 16.

Stability, 17.

Durability, 18.

Materials, 19.

Construction, 22.

Forms, 25.

Proportion, 26.

Carved ornament, 31.

Decorative colour, 35.

Sculpture and painting, 37.

Uniformity, 39.

Imitation of Nature, 40.

Association, 43.

New style, 44.

Prospects, 47.

Essential fact in connection with architectural history, 55.

Chief divisions therein, 87, 88, 89.

Various styles: Egyptian, i, 91.

Assyrian, 151.

Greece, 240.

Etruscan and Roman, 289.

Parthian and Sassanian, 389.

Byzantine, 419.

Russian, 484.

Italy, 500.

France, ii, 39.

Belgium and Holland, 187.

Germany, 209.

Scandinavia, 313.

England, 335.

Spain and Portugal, 460.

Saracenic, 512.

Ancient American, 583.

Ardmore, bas-relief at, ii, 448.

Round tower, 454.

Arezzo, church of Sta. Maria at, i, 588.

d’Argent, Mark, church erected by, ii, 122. 157. 273.

Aristotile Fioravanti of Bologna, Russian church ascribed to, i, 492.

Arles, amphitheatre at, i, 342.

Church of St. Trophime, ii, 51, 52.

Tower, 60.

Cloisters, 61.

_See_ 29. 402.

Armenia, i, 466.

Examples of its architecture, 466-478.

_See_ Ani.

Arnolfo di Lapo, cathedral built by, 617-622.

Arpino, Etruscan gateway at, i, 301.

Arranmore, Galway, ii, 446 _note_.

Arsinoë, Column of Victory at, i, 353.

Artemisia, tomb erected by, i, 282.

Aruns, tomb at Albano of, i, 299, 300.

Aryans, first users of iron, i, 56.

Their origin, migrations, &c., 75, 76.

Purity and exaltedness of their religion, 76, 77.

Form of government, prevalence of caste, &c., 78, 79.

Morals and Literature: result of the perfect structure of their

language, 79, 80.

Why the Fine Arts do not flourish among them, 81.

Their proficiency in the useful arts, 82.

Their true mission, 83.

In Russia, 484.

In Spain, ii, 462.

_See_ i, 65. 71. 73, 74. 251. ii, 337.

Asia Minor, advantageous position of, epoch of its history, &c., i,

229.

Oldest remains, 230.

Tumuli and rock-cut monuments, 230-232.

Lycia and its tombs, 233-239.

Existence of an Ionic order, 256.

Corinthian example, 257.

Theatres, 280.

Turkish conquest, ii, 515.

Asoka, Buddhist king, result of his alliance with Megas, i, 285 _note_.

_See_ ii, 586.

Assisi, church at, i, 611, 612.

Assos, gateway at, i, 246.

Assyria, result of recent discoveries in, i, 255.

Assyrians, borrowings of the Greeks from the, i, 33. 35. 154.

Examples of their architecture how preserved, 68.

Occasion of their rise, 152.

M. Botta’s exploration, 154.

Chronological epochs, 155.

Chaldean period, 157-167.

Palatial architecture: sources of information, 168.

Babylonian and Ninevite palaces. 169.

Buildings at Khorsabad, 171-181.

Peculiarity of construction common to their palaces, 172.

Interior of a Yezidi house, 182.

Houses of the humbler classes, 183.

Sculptured representations of buildings, 187-189.

Temples and tombs, 191.

Value of their wall-sculptures, 193.

Rank to be assigned to their architecture, _ibid._

Purposes for which only they used stone, 194.

Users of the pointed arch, ii, 45.

_See_ Chaldean. Khorsabad. Koyunjik.

Asti, baptistery at: Plan i, 561.

Description, 562.

Church and Porch, 610.

View of the Porch, 611.

Tower, ii, 6.

Asturias, churches in the, ii, 464.

Athens, influence on art of the admixture of races at, i, 242.

Temples, 252, 253. 324.

The Propylæa, 254.

Corinthian examples, 257.

Hadrian’s arch, 348.

Byzantine churches: Panagia Lycodemo, i, 460, 461. 463.

Cathedral, 461.

Athos, Mount, convents at, i, 459, 460.

Atreus, treasury or tomb of, i, 243.

Fragment of column, 244.

Atrium, the, in basilican churches, i, 513.

Novara, 562.

San Ambrogio, Milan, 566.

Augsburg Cathedral, ii, 286.

Augustan age, sole remains of the i, 315.

S. Augustine, Canterbury, original church of, ii, 344.

Augustus, arches erected by, i, 347.

His tomb, 355.

Autun, double-arched Roman gates at, i, 349.

Aisle and nave of cathedral, ii, 100.

Its spire, 149.

Auvergne, architectural province of, ii, 41. 43.

Its peculiar features, physical and architectural, 89.

Central towers and vaults, 90.

Chevets, 91, 92.

Fortified church, 93.

Auxerre Cathedral, chevet and lady chapel of, ii, 147.

Avallon, ii, 95.

Avignon, cathedral at, ii, 50.

Porch, 51.

St. Paul-Trois-Châteaux, 55.

Palace of the popes, 186.

Avila, church of San Vicente, ii, 473.

Western porch, 474.

Axum, obelisks at, i, 150.

Azhar, mosque of, ii, 30.

Date and character, 530.

Aztecs and Toltecs, early inhabitants of Mexico, ii, 583-585.

Inference from their architectural remains, 589.

_See_ Mexico.

Baalbec, magnitude of the stones used at, i, 19. 326.

Frieze there, 311.

Remains of the great temple, 325.

Plan, elevation, &c., of the smaller temple, 325.

Babouda, Syria, chapel at, i, 426.

Babylon, palaces of, materials of their construction, &c., i, 169, 194.

Bacharach, St. Werner’s chapel at, ii, 288.

Bagdad, ii, 548.

Materials of its buildings, 567.

Absence of remains: its ancient splendour, 567.

Tomb of Zobeidé, 568.

Bahram Gaur, fourteenth Sassanian King, i, 393.

S. Balbina, basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515.

Baldwin of Constantinople, building founded by, ii, 200.

Ballyromney Court, Cork, Irish mansion, ii, 458.

Bamberg, Church of St. Jacob at, ii, 240.

Cathedral, 286.

Baptisteries, i, 512.

of Constantine and his daughter, 544.

Nocera dei Pagani, 546, 547.

St. John, Ravenna, 547.

Florence, 551.

Novara, 552.

Asti, 561.

Mont St. Angelo, 601.

Parma, ii, 1.

Aix; Riez, 459.

Bonn, Ratisbon, and Cobern, 252-253.

Meissen, 289.

Baquoza, Syria, Byzantine church at, 422, 423.

Barbarossa’s palace, Gelnhausen, ii, 256.

Barbary, ii, 515.

Examples of its architecture, 538-541.

Barcelona, church of San Pablo, ii, 464.

Plan and detail, 466.

Cathedral, plan and dimensions, 485.

Churches of SS. Maria del Mar and del Pi, 486.

Bari Cathedral, i, 592.

Plan, 591.

East end, 592.

Defects in the towers, 605.

Dome, 600.

Church of San Nicolo, 594.

view of, 594.

Barletta, i, 595.

S. Bartolomeo in Isola, basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515.

Basilicas, importance attached by the Romans to, i, 327.

Trajan’s, its plan, dimensions, arrangement, &c., 328, 329.

Difference between it and that of Maxentius, _ibid._

Plan, particulars, &c., of the latter, 330, 331.

Construction of the roofs, 332.

Provincial Basilicas: Trèves, Pompeii, Otricoli, 332, 333.

Origin and peculiar applicability for Christian uses of these

buildings, 334.

Examples in Bethlehem, Jerusalem, Thessalonica, Syria, and Asia

Minor, i, 419-431.

Christian basilicas; Preliminary observations, 504-508.

African examples, 508-511.

Modifications introduced by Christian usages, 512.

Choirs and crypts: the atrium and the narthex, 513, 514.

Chronological list of basilicas in Rome, 515.

Peculiarities of the more important ones, 517-530.

Mosaic pavements, 527.

Ravenna, 527.

St. Mark’s, Venice, 530.

Dalmatia and Istria, 536.

Torcello, 538.

Causes of Byzantine, Lombardic, and Gothic varieties, 540.

Distinction between the basilica and the church, 542-543.

German examples, ii, 214 _et seq._

Use made of the apse, 388.

Absence of basilicas in Ireland, 446.

Basle Cathedral, doorway of, ii, 244.

Its one defect, 245.

Bassæ, Ionic column at, i, 265.

Basse Œuvre, Beauvais, plan and section, ii, 105.

Exterior and interior, 106.

Probable date, 107.

_See_ ii, 344.

Batalha, church of, ii, 507, 508.

Its circular tomb-house, 508.

Baths of the Romans, i, 342-346.

Of the Moors in Spain, ii, 555.

Battlements, Jerpoint abbey, ii, 457.

Bavarian church architecture, ii, 287, 288.

Bayazid, mosque of, ii, 558.

Bayeux Cathedral, ii, 118.

Nave and spandrils, 118.

Spires, 176.

Bays in cathedrals—Italy: Verona, i, 612.

Lucca, 613.

France: Angoulême, ii, 68.

Fontevrault, 84.

Caen, 115.

Their object and arrangement, 167.

Exeter and Westminster, 371.

Kirkwall, 423.

Spain: Leon and Burgos, 484.

Bazas Cathedral: plan, ii, 150.

Description, 151.

Beaune, Roman column at Cussi, near, i, 353.

Beauty in art, i, 5.

Beauvais Cathedral, choir of, i, 18.

The Basse Œuvre, ii, 105.

Wooden-roofed churches, 107.

Date of the cathedral, 142.

Casualties due to constructive faults, _ibid._

Its magnificence, 143.

Becket, Thomas à, his asylum, ii, 155.

Becket’s Norwegian counterpart crown, Canterbury, ii, 317 _note_,

344.

Bedochwinta, Armenia, church at, i, 471.

proof of its comparative modernness, 471.

Beejapore, i, 444.

Beisan, khans at, ii, 525.

Belem, date of chapel at, ii, 433.

Gothic remains, 507.

Church of the Convent, 507.

Façade, 509, 510.

Belfries and campaniles. Bell-towers of Moscow, i, 497.

Italian campaniles: Verona, ii, 7.

Mantua, 7.

Florence, 7.

Belgium, their occasion and uses, ii, 199.

Examples, 200.

Swedish example, 316.

Belgium, immigration of Germans into, and its results, ii, 187.

Its cathedrals, 188.

Pre-eminence of its town-halls and burgher-residences, 189.

Examples of its churches, 189-198.

Cause of their preservation, 198.

Belfries, 199.

Municipal halls, 200-205.

Private dwelling-houses, 205.

Bellefontaine, church of, ii, 122 _note_.

Bells, when first used, i, 577.

Russian bells, 497.

Belus, base of the temple of, i, 163 _note_.

Benedictine monastic system, plan illustrative of the, ii, 215.

Beneventum, Trajan’s arch at, i, 347.

Beni-Hasan, tombs of, i, 115, 294, 363.

Pillars, 154.

Arches, 214.

Bergamo, church of San-Tomaso near, i, 576.

Sta. Maria Maggiore, ii, 8.

North porch of same, 9.

Berkook, Sultan, mosque and tomb of, ii, 533.

Berne Cathedral, ii, 276.

Berosus, state of the text of, i, 151.

Besançon, Porta Nigra at, i, 349.

Cathedral, ii, 102, 149.

Bethlehem, churches at, i, 419.

Church of the Nativity, 419.

Bicchieri, Cardinal, church erected by, i, 610.

Billings, Mr. R. W., character of his Architectural Work on Scotland,

ii, 420 _note_.

Birs Nimroud, the, i, 159.

Buildings of which it was the type, 157, 159.

Diagrams and description, 160.

Dedication, 161.

Bittonto, west front of cathedral at, i, 593.

Blackfriars Bridge, i, 48.

Black Prince, tomb of the, ii, 408.

Blouet, M., restored plan of Roman baths by, i, 344.

Blundell, Mr. Weld, Researches at Persepolis, i, 205 _note_.

Bocherville, Norman church at, ii, 111.

Bodleian Library, ii, 339.

Boffiy, Guillermo, cathedral designed by, ii, 488.

Bohemia, ii, 211.

Bohemund’s tomb at Canosa, i, 601.

Bois le Duc, church at, ii, 207, 208 _note_.

Boisserée’s ‘Nieder Rhein,’ ii, 212 _note_, 260.

On Cologne cathedral, 273.

Bologna, ii, 151.

Circular church of San Stefano, i, 545.

Asinelli and Garisenda towers, 579, ii, 2.

Cathedral or church of San Petronio, i, 614, 622, 623.

Plan, 623.

Enormous size originally determined on, 622.

Boni, Signor, Cà d’Oro Palace, Venice, ii, 18.

Bonn, church at, ii, 234.

East end, 235.

Baptistery, 252.

Bonnueill, Étienne, Swedish cathedral by, ii, 314.

Bordeaux cathedral, ii, 71.

Its chevet and spires, 149.

Boris, Czar of Russia, tower erected by, i, 497.

His tower in the Kremlin, 497.

Bornholm, circular churches in, ii, 327 _note_, 329.

Oester Larsker, 329.

Borsippa, temple of the Seven Spheres at, i, 161.

Inscriptions, 163.

Bosra, plan of cathedral, i, 432, 433.

Boston, Lincolnshire, church of, ii, 401.

Bothwell Church, near Glasgow, ii, 435.

Botta, M., his explorations at Khorsabad, i, 154.

Bourges, church of Neuvy St. Sepulchre at, ii, 76.

Cathedral: plan and dimensions, 151.

Proportions of the aisles, _ibid._

Western façade, 152.

Proportion of solids to area, 179.

Fault avoided, ii, 270.

References by way of comparison, 478, 479, i, 626.

House of Jacques Cœur, ii, 184.

Braga, Portugal, church at, ii, 511.

Brandenburg, Marien Kirche at, ii, 308.

Brechin, Scotland, architectural peculiarity at, ii, 419, 452.

Brescia, Duomo Vecchio at: Plan, i, 575.

Elevation and Section, 575, 576.

St. Francesco, 633.

Ornamental brickwork, ii, 13, 14.

Brick architecture: Italian examples, ii, 10-15.

Belgium, 205.

Remarks, 302, 303.

Examples from North Germany, 304-309.

Bridges over the Thames, progress in, i, 48.

Roman bridges, 385.

Brigwithe, English architect, church at Vercelli by, i, 610.

Brindisi, churches of, i, 595, 599.

Bristol chapter-house, ii, 389, 392.

Norman gateway at, 403.

Corporation buildings, 413.

Brittany, architectural boundary of, ii, 41, 43.

Brolettos, or Italian town-halls, ii, 11.

Como, 12.

Brescia, 13.

Bronze doors: Novogorod, i, 488.

Milan, 567.

Trani, 599.

Troja, 599.

Canosa, 601.

Brou en Bresse, sepulchral church of, ii, 159, 494.

Brück-am-Mur, Gothic house at, ii, 299.

Bruges, ii, 188.

Chapel of St. Sang, 192.

Its spire, 193.

Belfry, 200.

Town-hall, 202.

Burgesses’ lodge, 204.

Brunelleschi, designs by, i, 618, 622.

Brunswick town-hall and fountain, ii, 300, 301.

View, 300.

Brussels, Notre Dame de la Chapelle at, ii, 194.

St. Gudule, _ibid._

The belfry and its fate, 200.

Town-hall, 202.

View of same, 203.

Buddha, Buddhism. Source of the effect produced by the Topes, i, 16.

Buddhist architecture whence derived, 157.

Buddhism the religion of a Turanian people, 165.

Scandinavian Buddhism, i, 481.

Building, primary application and gradual development of the art of, i,

4.

Bürgelin, abbey of, ii, 238.

Burgos, ii, 433. 463, 469, 508.

Plan of the cathedral, 481.

View, 482.

Description, 483.

Nave, 483.

Monastery of the Huelgas, 498. 502, 503.

Burgund, Norway, wooden church at, ii, 332.

Burgundy, architectural province of, ii, 41-43.

Ethnographic considerations, 94.

Seat of monastic establishments, 94. 105.

Examples of the architecture of the province, 94-103.

Culminating epoch, 105.

_See_ 30.

Bussorah, ii, 567.

Butler, A. J., on Coptic churches, i, 507, 511; ii, 527.

Buttresses, earliest proper use of, i, 360.

Internal buttresses, ii, 69.

External: Chartres, 139.

Rheims, 139.

Theory, 171.

Explanatory diagram and further examples, 172, 173.

Combination of buttresses and pinnacles, 173.

Byzantine style, region dominated by the, i, 411, 412.

True application of the term, 415.

Definitions and divisions, 416, 417.

Basilicas, 419-423.

Stone-roofed churches, 428-431.

Circular or Domical buildings, 432-447.

Domestic examples, 447-452, 464, 465.

Neo-Byzantine, 453-464.

Armenian, 466-480.

Rock-cut churches, 481-483.

Mediæval Russian, 484-499.

_See_ 501, 502, 521, 523, 528-541, 548-551, 554.

St. Mark’s, Venice, 530-535.

Byzantine-Romanesque style, 582.

Examples: Rectangular, 583, 600.

Southern Italy, 600-602.

Circular, _ibid._

Towers, 603.

Civil architecture, 605.

_See_ also ii, 15.

Cæcilia Metella, tomb of, i, 355. 542.

Caen, churches of:

Abbaye aux Hommes, or St. Stephen’s: occasion of its erection, ii,

111.

Original and altered plan, sections, vaultings, &c., 111-116.

Its apse superseded by a chevet, 118.

Spires, 175.

Abbaye aux Dames, 111.

Advance in its construction upon that of St. Stephen’s, 116.

Church of St. Nicolas, 117.

Its apse, _ibid._

St. Pierre, spire and façade, 175, 176.

Cæsars, Palace of the, i, 375.

Its probable character as an architectural work, 376.

Cairo, Mosques of: Amru, ii, 30. 525, 526.

Azhar, 30, 530.

Hasan, 531-532.

Berkook, 533.

Kaloun, 531.

Kaitbey, 534, 535.

El Muayyad, 534.

Tooloon, 527-530.

Calatayud, Dominican church at, ii, 498.

Cambridge, King’s College chapel, i, 472; ii, 70, 338, 367, 397.

View, 396.

Proportions, 397.

Round church, 398.

St. John’s College, 394 _note_.

Colleges, 414.

Campaniles, _see_ Belfries.

Campione, Marco da, Italian architect, i, 626.

Campus Martius, tomb of Augustus in the, i, 355.

Canina, restoration of Trajan’s basilica, i, 327 _note_.

Canosa, tomb of Bohemund at, i, 601.

Canterbury, French asylum for the archbishops of, ii, 155.

Becket’s Crown, 317 _note_, 344.

Churches of St. Augustine and Cuthbert, _ibid._

St. Anselm’s chapel, 375. 377.

Cathedral, 131.

Plan, 347.

Most foreign of our English examples, 353.

Angel Tower, 384.

Chapter-house, 384. 389.

Anomalies in style, 387.

Site, 388.

Infirmary chapel, 393.

Decorative arch on staircase, 402, 403.

Prior de Estria’s screen, 406.

Tomb of the Black Prince, 408.

Area, measurements, &c., 417.

Capitals and columns: Isis-headed or Typhonian, i, 35. 127. 143.

Examples: Beni-Hasan, 114, 115.

Thebes, 121.

Medeenet-Habû, 125.

Denderah, 143.

Persepolis, 207.

Susa, 209.

Mycenæ, 244.

Ancient Corinthian, 258.

Doric, 260.

Ionic and Corinthian examples, 264-268.

Roman examples, 308-310. 312. 525.

Ani and Gelathi, 476.

Provençal, ii, 54. 62, 63.

Gothic: theory and diagram, 162.

Capitals from Rheims, 178.

Gelnhausen, 251.

Canterbury, 402.

Lincoln, 404.

Dome of the Rock, 521-522.

_See_ Obelisks, Columns.

Columns of Victory.

Capua, amphitheatre at, i, 340.

Caracalla, restored plan of the baths of, i, 344.

Arrangement, dimensions, &c., 345, 346.

Caravanserais: Persia, ii, 579.

Peru, 606.

Carcassonne, church of St. Nazaire at, compared with Diana’s temple at

Nîmes, ii, 49, 50.

Town walls, 186.

Carlisle, eastern window at, ii, 355. 378.

Carlovingian period, paucity of examples of the, i, 559.

Carpenter, R. H., churches with bisected naves, ii, 324 _note_.

Mosque of Cordoba, 546.

Carpentras, arched gate at, i, 349.

Carthage and the Carthaginians, ii, 22, 462.

Carved ornament, principle and object of, i, 31.

Caryatides at Medeenet-Habû, i, 125.

As made use of in Greek architecture, 268.

Caserta Vecchia, cathedral church of, view, i, 598.

Tower, 592.

Dome, 594.

Cashel, Cormac’s chapel at, ii, 447.

Dimensions, 447.

View, 448.

Roof, 449.

Date, &c., 454.

Monastery of the Holy Cross, 444.

Cathedral, _ibid._

Seven churches, 446.

Cassiodorus, elucidation of a passage in, i, 570.

Caste, nature and influence of, i, 78.

Its value, 79.

Castel d’Asso, Etruscan tombs at, i, 294.

Peculiarities of shape, &c., 295.

Castel del Monte, plan, and sectional elevation, i, 606.

Particulars, _ibid._

Castille, castles in, ii, 505.

Castles: St. Angelo, Rome, i, 356.

Italian, 606.

French, ii, 186.

Marienburg, 310.

English, 413-414.

Scottish, 442.

Spanish, 505.

S. Castor, Coblentz, ii, 238.

“Castrense,” the, i, 342.

Catalonia, architecture of, ii, 466.

Cathedrals, English and foreign compared, ii, 385.

_See_ England. France.

Catherwood, F., ancient tomb figured by, i, 372.

Value of his Central-American drawings, ii, 584.

Cattaneo (Prof. Raphael),

dates of St. Stefano Rotondo, i, 545 _note_;

of St. Mark’s, Venice, i, 531, 534;

of cathedral, Torcello, 536 _note_, 538;

of Palazzo delle Torre, Turin, 556;

of Duomo, Brescia, 575, and _note_;

of Tower of St. Satiro, Milan, 578 _note_.

St. Lorenzo, Rome, 523.

St. Praxede, 525 _note_.

Caumont, M. de, map published by, ii, 41 _note_.

Cavallon, arched gate at, i, 349.

Caves: Crimean, i, 482.

Caythorpe church, Lincolnshire, reference, ii, 324 _note_.

Cecilia Metella, tomb of, i, 355, 542.

Cefalu, cathedral at, ii, 24, 29.

Dimensions, cloisters, &c., 29.

Celtic races, their presumed origin, and migratory character, i, 70,

71.

Their religion: dominance of their priests, 71.

Form of government best suited to them, _ibid._

Their ruling passion, 72.

Literature, 72.

Pre-eminent in art, 73, 74.

Direction of their scientific pursuits, 74.

Megalithic or Celtic period in England, ii, 338.

Celto-Saxon period, _ibid._

Irish style, 445.

Celto-Irish system, Celtic likes and dislikes in a church direction,

444, 445.

Form and examples of their churches, 447-450.

Close of the Celtic epoch in Ireland, 459.

Certosa, near Pavia, i, 610. 629-631.

Its date, 629.

Feature in Monreale cathedral surpassing it, ii, 26.

Cervetri, Etruscan tomb at, i, 297, 298.

Chaitya caves, i, 426.

Chaldean dynasties, period of the, i, 151, 152.

State of the remains of their buildings, 153.

Written characters; arrow-headed inscriptions, 155.

Temples at Wurka and Mugheyr, 158.

Birs Nimroud, 160, 161.

Mujelibé, 163.

Tomb of Cyrus, 163, 196-198.

S. Chamas, arches and bridge at, i, 351. ii, 51.

Chambon, sepulchral chapel at, ii, 93.

Champollion, i, 92.

Chapels. Babouda, i, 426.

Friuli, 559.

Definition of, ii, 393 _note_.

English examples, 393-397.

Roslyn, 432.

Irish, 448.

Spanish, 498.

Chapter-houses, rarity of, in France and Germany, ii, 292.

Peculiarly an English feature, 388.

Earlier and later forms, 389-393.

Engraved examples, 389, 390, 391, 392.

Chaqqa, Byzantine building at, i, 437.

Singular window, 448.

Charing Cross, Mr. Barry’s restoration of, ii, 413 _note_.

Charité sur Loire, collegiate church of, ii, 153.

Choir, 153.

Charlemagne, model of the tomb of, i, 550.

Epoch marked by his accession; state of things at his death, ii, 120.

German architecture under him, 209-211.

His church at Aix-la-Chapelle, 247.

Palaces, 256.

Charles II. of Anjou, cathedral erected by, i, 583.

Charles V., architectural encroachment on the Alhambra by, ii, 552.

Charroux, church of, ii, 74, 75.

Chartres Cathedral, i, 24. ii, 132.

Date of erection, 132.

Area, 133.

Plan, &c., 134.

North-west view, 137.

Spires, transepts, and buttresses, 138. 173, 175, 195.

External sculpture, 141.

Transitional windows, 164, 165.

Circular windows, 165, 166.

Proportion of solids to area, 179.

Enclosure of choir, 181.

_See_ 385. 402. 626.

Chedanne, M., Discoveries in Pantheon, i, 320 _note_.

Chemillé, spire at, ii, 87.

Chemnitz, doorway of church at, ii, 294.

Its extravagant ornamentation, 295.

Cheops, _see_ Khufu.

Chepstow Castle, ii, 413.

Cherson, i, 485.

Wooden cathedral, 426.

Chevet churches in Aquitania, ii, 72.

Distinction between the apse and the chevet, 73.

Notre Dame du Port, Clermont, 89, 96.

St. Menoux, 102.

Bayeux, 118.

Auxerre, 147.

St. Quentin, 147.

Pontigny, 154, 171.

Souvigny, 170.

Chiaravalle, dome at, i, 620, 622, 631.

Chichen Itza, Yucatan, temple at, ii, 598.

Interior, 599.

Chichester Cathedral, ii, 380.

Chillambaram, India, porch of hall at, i, 430.

China, stationary perfection of works in, i, 62.

Ancient counterpart of its people, 96.

Choirs, introduction of, i, 512.

A French practice, ii, 69.

English examples, 361, 365, 366, 369.

Spanish examples, 480, 484.

Chosroes, arch of, at Takt-i-Bostan, i, 408.

St. Crisogonus, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515.

Christian architecture, discrimination of, its eras, styles, &c. i,

410-414.

Oriental tradition relative to Christian architects, ii, 527.

Christianity, adaptability of the Roman Basilicas to the usages of, i,

504-506.

Results of its introduction into England, ii, 337.

How carried into Ireland, 447.

Irish round towers, Christian edifices, 450.

Adaptation of Moorish art to its purposes, 498.

When introduced into Russia, i, 486.

Result of its corruption in the East, ii, 513.

Christodulos, Christian architect employed by Mahomet, ii, 557.

Chunjuju, Yucatan, building at, ii, 596.

Church, double, _see_ Double churches.

Churches, circular, _see_ Circular churches.

Cimborio, or dome, in Spanish churches, ii, 474.

Examples, 478, 490.

Circular and polygonal churches, first germ of, i, 542.

Byzantine examples, 432.

Romanesque types in Italy, 542-555, 602.

Provençal examples, ii, 59.

In Aquitania, 74.

In Germany, 247-254.

Heiligenstadt, 292.

Round churches in Scandinavia, 327-332.

In England, 398.

Circular windows, France, their number and dissimilarity in tracery,

&c., ii, 165-167.

English examples, 376, 378.

Cistercian abbeys, i, 14. ii, 154.

Citeaux, ii, 95.

Civic and Municipal buildings: Italy, ii, 10.

Venice, 15.

Belgian town-halls, ii, 199-204.

Germany, 295.

London, 413.

Spain, 502.

Clairvaux, ii, 95.

Clarke (Mr. J. T.): Temple of Assos, i, 254 _note_.

Proto-Ionic capital, 255 _note_.

Classic architecture, cause of the revival of, i, 43, 47.

S. Clemente, as a type of the Roman basilican church, i, 513-514.

Its date, 515.

Colonnade, 525.

Cleopatra in Egyptian paintings, i, 139.

Clerestories, in Greek and Egyptian temples, i, 272.

First publication of the Author’s views on the subject, _ibid. note_.

Munich and Metz, ii, 287.

Clermont, church of Notre Dame du Port at, ii, 89.

Elevation and plan of its chevet, 91, 92.

Climate: regions in which it has and has not changed, i, 56.

Cloaca Maxima, Rome, arch of the, i, 216, 300.

Cloisters, English and southern, St. John Lateran, i, 599.

Provençal examples, ii, 61, 62.

Puy-en-Velay, 96.

Zurich, 260.

Gloucester, 363.

Kilconnel Abbey, 445.

The Huelgas, 498.

Tarazona, 503.

Clonmacnoise, tower and arch at, ii, 451, 452.

Clovis, division of France on the death of, ii, 120.

Cluny, Abbey of, ii, 95.

Its magnitude, and magnificence, 99.

Narthex, 99.

Influence exercised by the establishment, 103.

Arcaded house, 183.

Cluny, Hôtel de, ii, 184.

Cnidus, lion tomb at, i, 284.

Coata, Titicaca, Peru, terraced building at, ii, 605.

Cobern, hexagonal chapel at, ii, 253.

Coblentz, church of St. Castor at, ii, 238.

Coburg, chapel at, ii, 241 _note_, 243.

Cockerell, C. R., work on Grecian temples by, i, 262 _note_.

Cocos, Castille, castle of, ii, 505.

Cocumella, the, at Vulci, i, 298, 300.

Cœur, Jacques, house of, ii, 184.

Coimbra, churches at, ii, 509.

Cologne Cathedral: dimensions, comparative observations, &c., i, 24.

ii, 131, 157, 159, 195, 196, 275, 278.

View, 272.

Buttresses, 173.

Features in which it is pre-eminent, 268.

Date, plan, &c., 269.

Disproportion of length to height, 270.

External proportions, 271.

Mechanical merits, 273.

Window tracery, 271.

Most pleasing characteristics of the cathedral, 275.

Original cathedral, 232, 269.

_See_ 478, 479. i, 618, 622, 626, 629.

Cologne, triapsal and other churches at, The Apostles’, ii, 199,

233-235.

Sta. Maria in Capitolio, 232.

St. Martin, 233, 234.

St. Gereon, 237.

Details, 264.

Section and plan, 265.

St. Cunibert, 237, 264.

St. George, 238.

Sion, 238, 262.

An English St. Gereon, 398.

Cloisters, 260.

Dwelling-houses and windows, 261-262.

Guildhall, or Gürzenich, 295.

Colosseum, or Flavian amphitheatre, Rome, i, 306.

Interest attaching to it, 337.

Effect of reduplication of parts, plan, sections, &c., 338.

Area, amount of sitting space, 339.

Colour as an architectural element, i, 35.

_See_ Painting.

Columbaria, Rome, arrangement and object of the, i, 356.

Columna Rostrata, ugliness of, i, 352.

Columns of Victory, remarks on, and examples of, i, 352, 353.

Buddhist sthambas, i, 578.

Columns: Sedinga, i, 127.

Thessalonica and Constantinople, 421, 422.

Como, cathedral at, i, 632.

Broletto, ii, 12.

Composite arcades, i, 313.

Composite order, i, 312.

Its merits and defects, 313.

Compostella, cathedral of, ii, 468.

Comte, Auguste, truth overlooked by, i, 83.

Concord, Temple of, at Rome, i, 309. 314. 317.

Condor, Major C. R., ii, 520.

Conques, chevet church at, ii, 73. 76.

Conquests, how effected, and general result of, ii, 513.

Conrad, emperor, churches erected by, ii, 226. 229.

Constantine: His mother’s tomb, i, 357.

His daughter’s, 358. 544.

Basilican churches erected by him, 517. 521. 523.

His tomb, or baptistery, 544.

His church at Antioch, i, 432. _See_ i, 504. 506. 508. 515.

His baths at Rome, i, 344.

Constantinople, cisterns, i, 44.

Palace of the Hebdomon, i, 464.

_Churches:_ The Apostles’: occasion of its destruction, 531 _note_.

Sta. Irene, 453. 455. 470. ii. 558.

St. John, 421, 422. 438.

Double church of “Kutchuk Agia,” or lesser Sta. Sophia, including

the Basilica of SS. Peter and Paul and the domical church of SS.

Sergius and Bacchus, i, 438, 439.

Church of Moné tés Choras, 456.

The Pantokrator, the Fethîyeh Djamisi, and the Theotokos, 457.

Sta. Sophia, 440,

Its grandeur; boast of its founder, &c., 440.

Fate of the original church, _ibid._

Dimensions, plan, sections, &c., 441-446.

Compared with the Renaissance cathedrals, 446.

Considered as an outgrowth of Roman classical edifices, 452.

Last creation of Byzantine art, 453.

Mode of lighting its dome, 454.

Dimensions of the dome, ii, 561.

Number of minarets, 563. [_See_ i, 455. ii, 557-558.]

Results of the occupation of the city by the Turks, ii, 556-558.

_Mosques:_ appropriation of Christian churches, ii, 557.

Mosques of Eyub and Bayazid, 558.

Suleimanie Mosque, 559-562.

Its minarets, 563.

Sultan Ahmed’s Mosque, 562-563.

Prince’s Mosque, 563.

Validé mosques, 564.

Mosque, or “Lantern” of Osman, _ibid._

Civil and domestic architecture: “palaces” and fires, _ibid._

Construction in architecture, rationale of, i, 22. Gothic cathedrals,

ii, 179.

Contarini (S^r. Marino), Palace of, ii, 14.

Conventual buildings, Germany, ii, 259-261.

Corbel, beautiful example of, ii, 178.

Cordova, or Cordoba, mosque at, ii, 543-548.

Plan, 544.

The Sanctuary, 545, 546.

Screen of chapel, 547, _see_ 549.

Corinth, i, 251. Age of Doric temple at, 252.

Corinthian order, its origin; period of introduction into Greece, i,

257. 268.

Noteworthy examples, 257, 258. 266, 267.

Keynote of Roman architecture, 308.

Roman elaborations of it, 309-311.

Base from the church of St. Praxede, 312.

Corvey, abbey of, ii, 221.

S. Costanza, Rome, tomb or baptistery of, i, 358.

Plan, 544.

Coucy, castle-keep of, ii, 185.

Viollet le Duc’s section, _ibid. note_.

Coutances Cathedral, ii, 147.

View, 146.

Spires and lantern, 147.

Coventry, ii, 401.

Crassus, tomb of C. Metella, wife of, i, 355.

Crecy, battle of, its influence on French art, ii, 122.

Cremona, the Torracio at, i, 605. ii, 3. 4.

Occasion of its erection, 3.

Palace of the Jurisconsults, 11.

S. Croix, Mont Majour, triapsal church of, ii, 59.

Crosses: Waltham, ii, 412.

Kells, 459.

Cruas, circular church at, ii, 60. 76.

Cruciform tomb of Galla Placidia, i, 435. 553.

Crusaders, introduction of the Gothic style into Palestine by, ii, 32.

Principal building erected there by them, 33.

Others of their churches there, 36.

Crypts, purposes to which dedicated, i, 512.

Examples: Göllingen, ii, 239.

Glasgow, 426.

Otranto, i, 596.

Crystal Palace, Sydenham, a step in the right direction, i, 48.

Assyrian façade erected by the Author, 189 _note_.

Reproduction of the Court of Lions, Alhambra, ii, 553 _note_.

Ctesiphon, i, 389.

The Tâk Kesra, 398.

Its great arch, 399.

Cubbet-es-Sakhra (Dome of Rock), ii, 520. 523.

Cubbet es-Silsileh (Dome of Chain), ii, 521.

Cufic inscriptions at Diarbekr, i, 393 and _note_.

Cunault, spire and tower at, ii, 87.

S. Cunibert, Cologne, ii, 237, 264.

Cussi, near Beaune, Roman pillar of Victory at, i, 353.

Cuthbert, Archbishop, baptistery erected by, ii, 344.

Cuzco, Peru, Manco Capac’s house at, ii, 604.

Walls, 605-608.

Cybele, temple at Sardis of, i, 258.

Cyclopean works, chief element of, i, 19.

Irish examples, ii, 456.

Peru, 600.

Cypselidæ, race of, i, 251.

Cyrene, rock-cut tombs at, i, 285-287. 294.

Remains of colour, 285.

Probable date, 287. 370 _note_.

Recent explorations, 370.

Cyrus, so-called tomb of, i, 158. 160.

View, Plan and Section, 196-198.

Dahshur, Pyramid of, i, 102.

Dalmeny, ii, 420.

Damascus, antecedents and present state of the great mosque at, ii,

522-524.

Plan, 523.

Dana, on the Euphrates, i, 469.

Daniel, so-called tomb of, ii, 569.

Dankwarderode (Brunswick), Palace of, ii, 256.

Dantzic, cathedral and churches of, ii, 306.

Darius, palace of, i, 202, 203.

Tomb, 204.

Dartein, F. de, vault of St. Michele, Pavia, i, 564.

David, alleged sarcophagus of, i, 368 _note_.

David I. of Scotland, and the round-arched style, ii, 419.

A fosterer of monastic establishments, 421.

Bishopric and building founded by him, 425. 437.

Decorated style, _see_ Edwardian period.

Delft, churches at, ii, 207.

Delhi, i, 494.

Delos, Pelasgic masonry at, i, 245.

Column of temple, 260.

Denderah, i, 127.

Façade and Isis-headed columns of the temple, 142, 143.

S. Denis, abbey of, ii, 122. 154. 237. 266. 338. 371.

Denmark, church architecture in, ii, 318-321.

Round churches, 327-332.

Dêr-el-Bahree, Temple of, i, 131.

Arch at, 216.

Devenish, Ireland, round tower at, ii, 453. 454.

De Vogüé, Comte. _See_ Vogüé.

Diana, temple at Ephesus of, i, 256.

Dimensions, 258.

Remains of, 277.

Plan, arrangements, &c., _ibid._

Temple at Nîmes, 317, 318.

Diarbekr, i, 392.

The great mosque, 392-394.

Dieppe, church of St. Jacques at, ii, 160.

Diest, Belgium, boucherie at, ii, 204.

Dieulafoy (M.), Pasargadæ, i, 196;

Susa, 210-211;

Frieze of Archers, 210.

Dighour, Armenia, Byzantine church at; View, i, 467.

Plan, &c., 468.

Dijon, church of St. Benigne at, ii, 75. 95, 96. 508.

Notre Dame, 147.

Cathedral, 148.

Dinant, Notre Dame de, ii, 194.

Diocletian’s Palace at Spalato: Arcades, i, 314.

Idea suggested by its splendour and magnitude, 376.

Plan and dimensions, 377.

The Golden Gateway, 379.

General arrangement, 378.

Temples in the palace, 322, 323, 360. 378.

His baths at Rome, 344.

Diogenes, Tomb of, at Hass, i, 451.

Djemla, basilican church at, i, 509.

Dochiariu, Catholicon at, i, 459.

Plan, 459.

Dodona, or Dramyssus, theatre at, i, 280.

Doganlu, rock-cut monuments at, i, 232, 233.

Doge’s palace, Venice, ii, 16, 17.

Domes and domical buildings: Pelasgian, i, 244.

The Pantheon, 321.

Minerva Medica, 359-361.

Diagram of pendentives, 434.

Byzantine, 433-447.

Neo-Byzantine, 454-463.

Greek Byzantine, 459.

Mode of lighting domes, 454.

Armenian, 468.

Florence, 618.

Chiaravalle, 621.

Aquitaine, ii, 64-80.

Anjou, 83, 84.

St. Gereon, Cologne, 264.

Only true Gothic dome, 351.

Best modern specimen, 393 _note_.

Batalha, 507.

_See_ Circular churches.

Domestic Architecture; Egypt, i, 136.

Greece, 287.

Roman, 375.

Italian, ii, 10.

France, 182.

Belgium, 205.

Germany, 261. 298, 299.

England, 413.

Ireland, 457.

Turkish, 564.

Domitian, baths of, i, 343.

S. Donato. On the Murano, apse of, i, 571.

Zara, 603.

Donoughmore, Ireland, doorway in tower of, ii, 453.

Doors and doorways; Egyptian, i, 106.

Pelasgic, 245.

Firouzabad, 397.

Moscow, 493.

Naples, 598.

Palermo, ii. 25.

France: Maguelonne, 57.

Beauvais, 143.

Basle, 244.

Chemnitz, 294.

Gothland, 325, 326.

Lichfield, 405.

Rochester, 407.

Elgin, 430.

Linlithgow, 439.

Edinburgh, 440.

Pluscardine, 441.

Kildare, 455.

Early Irish, 458.

Lérida, 473.

Valencia, 501.

_See_ Bronze doors. Gates. Porches.

Dorians, character of the, i, 242.

Their “treasuries,” 243.

Doric temple, earliest known example of, i, 252.

Examples in Greece, _ibid._

In Sicily, 254.

Rationale of the application of the order, 259.

Columns, 260.

Material used, 262.

Sculpture and colours, 263.

Compared with the Ionic order, 264-266.

Roman examples, 308.

Columns of Victory, 353.

Dorpfield (Dr). Plan of Palace of Tiryns, i, 248.

Age of Temple of Theseus, 253.

On hypæthral temples, 272 _note_.

Greek Theatres, 281 _note_.

Dort, church at, ii, 207.

Dosseret (Impost block): Its Byzantine origin, i, 421. 523 _note_.

Examples, 439. 449. 523. 530. 532, 538. 549. 550.

Double churches, ii, 241-243. 256. 328.

Dramyssus, or Dodona, Greek theatre at, i, 280.

Plan, 280.

Drüggelte, circular church at, ii, 251.

Plan and model, 251.

Druidical trilithon, i, 26.

Dublin, English churches in, ii, 443.

Cathedral, 444.

Dugga, near Tunis, ancient tomb at, i, 371.

View, 372.

Dunblane, ii, 438.

Dunfermline, porch at, ii, 437. 439.

Dunkeld, window at, ii, 438.

Durability, i, 18.

Durham Cathedral: Plan, ii, 348.

Vault, 348. 356.

Towers, 385.

Site, 388.

Chapter-house, 390.

_See_ 417. 438.

Dutch architecture, ii, 206-208.

Dyer Abou Taneh, church, i, 510.

Earl’s Barton, Saxon church at, ii, 341.

Window, 342.