RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE AND ORNAMENT.
Many things tended to bring about the art of the Renaissance. The great
impulse given to learning by the study of the writings of the Greek and
Roman poets, lawyers, and philosophers, and the keen study of the rich
legacy of art and architecture left by Greece and Rome, may be reckoned
among the chief causes which led to the development during the fifteenth
and sixteenth centuries of the Re-Birth or Renaissance both of
literature and art.
Dante, and his successors Petrarch and Boccaccio, were called
“Humanists,” for the reason that they studied and advocated the
knowledge that was needful to man in his progress and in relation to his
life in this world, and did not confine themselves wholly to theology,
which was the case with those who devoted themselves to learning in the
Middle Ages. This led to a wider spread of knowledge among the people,
which was greatly stimulated by the invention of printing. The rulers of
the people also encouraged learning and promoted the arts to an extent
unknown before. In Florence, especially, under the powerful and
beneficent rule of the Medici family, art and literature received every
attention, and made rapid progress in every department of cultured
knowledge and skilful handicraft.
Great artists like Niccola Pisano, Brunellesco, Donatello, Giotto,
Alberti, and others of the early period, whose individuality and great
personality did more than anything else to bring about the epoch and the
art of the Renaissance, studied with evident purpose the existing
remains of the art of Ancient Rome. In this they only followed the
movement of the day in every branch of art and learning: all classes in
every walk of life were then directing their footsteps to Rome in the
pursuit of knowledge. About the year 1414 the discovery was made in the
Monastery of St. Gall of the celebrated codex of Vitruvius, a work
wherein the learned writer had set forth the principles of Roman
architecture of the Augustan era. This work was reprinted later at Rome,
and was very much used by architects as a guide for the better
understanding of the Roman temples and other buildings. As the Gothic
style in France, Germany, and in England was approaching its climax, the
art of the Renaissance in Italy was developing, and the period of
decadence in the former was contemporaneous with the finest period of
the latter—towards the end of the fifteenth century. The transition, or
early beginnings of the Renaissance, has been called the Trecento (1300)
style, which in its ornamental features is characterised by a free use
of conventional foliage, mixed with Saracenic or with Byzantine
ornament, interlacings, and scroll work; in sculpture and painting by a
closer study of nature and of antique remains, with an endeavour to
shake off the former stiff Byzantine traditions; and in architecture by
the use of the round arch and a revival of some other features of the
classic orders. Niccola Pisano, Arnolfo di Lapo, Orcagna, and Giotto
were some of its exponents.
The next division is known as the Quattrocento (1400), which is more
properly the early form of the Renaissance. To this period belong the
real founders of the style: Filippo Brunellesco (1377-1446), Lorenzo
Ghiberti (1381-1455), and Donatello (1386-1468); the former more
particularly in architecture, and the latter two in sculpture. The
ornament of the Quattrocento period—the fifteenth century—is
distinguished by its prominence of elaborate natural forms in festoons,
scroll work, and other compositions; all the ornament was decoratively
arranged more or less geometrically, but the details and actual working
out were closely copied from nature. The bronze gates of the Baptistery
of San Giovanni (1425-52) are the finest examples of the Quattrocento
style, both as regards ornament and figure work. The modelled work in
high relief of fruit, flowers, and foliage on these gates, and similar
work on great medallions and altar-pieces of Luca della Robbia
(1355-1430) is characteristic of this style. These natural forms, mixed
with tracery ornamentation, acanthus foliage, treated in symmetrical
arrangements, and occasionally cartouche or strap-work, were used in the
Italian ornament of this period. The panel forms were usually Byzantine,
but the rest of the ornament had no symbolic meaning. Besides Luca della
Robbia, the name of Jacopo dell’ Quercia (1374-1438), the Sienese
sculptor, may be mentioned as one who executed some of the finest work
in figure and ornament in the above style.
The Cinquecento style (1500) was the culminatory effort of the
Renaissance. It is the art of Italy in the sixteenth century, and is
entirely devoid of symbolism in its ornament. Although the difference is
great in the matter of style between the classic ornament of the Greeks
and that of the Italian Cinquecento, yet in their aim and expression
they are identical, for in both there is the same striving to reach the
highest possible æsthetic ideal, the same delight in the production of
beautiful lines and forms for their own sakes, and a similar expression
of appropriate fitness—the outcome of a correct conformity to
architectural principles—pervades the ornament of both styles.
Returning to the art of the early Renaissance, we have to mention two
great names, already referred to—Giotto in painting, and Niccola Pisano
in sculpture, who may be justly called the harbingers of the new era of
Italian art. The latter was the first to go to the antique for his
inspiration and style in sculpture. It appears—according to Vasari—that
in Pisa there had been accumulated a great collection of antique
sculpture—the spoils of war—and among them a sarcophagus, on which the
"Hunt of Meleager and the Calydonian boar "was wrought with great skill,
which was placed for ornament on the façade of the Cathedral: this and
other antique remains in the city were studied to great advantage by
Niccola, to the great improvement of his style. One fine work of his,
executed in the spirit of the antique, was the pulpit for the Church of
San Giovanni in Pisa, on which are great numbers of figures,
representing the Universal Judgment. For the Cathedral of Siena he also
executed a similar work with subjects from various passages in the life
of Christ. On this pulpit he had the assistance of Arnolfo and Lapo, his
pupils, and probably also that of his son Giovanni. These works proved
the great turning-point in sculpture, from the archaic productions of
the Middle Ages to an era of better things, although in execution they
left much to be desired. Giotto was not only the great painter who first
invested his works with poetry, feeling, and expression, but was also a
skilful architect, as his fine Campanile, or bell-tower, in his native
city of Florence bears witness. Dante and Petrarch were his friends, the
former especially so; the portrait of Dante by Giotto still exists in
the Chapel of the Podesta at Florence.
Brunellesco, as we learn from Vasari, was one of the most interesting of
men, and one of the most capable artists of his time, a man of acute
genius and ready resource. In the early Renaissance period architecture
was studied by nearly all sculptors and painters, and many, as we have
seen, were apprenticed in their youth as goldsmiths. Brunellesco was no
exception to this rule, for we find that he was a clever goldsmith and
worker in niello.
The greatest work of his life was the building of the cupola or dome of
the Cathedral of Florence—he was the only architect of his day that was
found able to do it. The Cathedral was the work of the Florentine
architect, Arnolfo di Lapo, the foundations of which were laid in the
year 1298. Brunellesco also built the sacristy and dome on the Church of
San Lorenzo, which was decorated with sculpture by Donatello, and was
the architect of the Pitti Palace, besides many other works. He gained
his knowledge of the construction of domes in Rome, more particularly
from that of the Pantheon, having drawn from and made models of the
domes of all that was worth copying of the ancient remains at Rome, in
company with his friend Donatello, the sculptor.
The latter, with Brunellesco, Ghiberti, and a few other sculptors,
competed with their designs for the work of making the celebrated bronze
doors of the Baptistery of San Giovanni at Florence, when Ghiberti’s
design was adjudged the best, and of which Michelangelo at a later
period said, when speaking of the gates, that they were “fit to be the
gates of Paradise.” Brunellesco’s design was good, was more restrained
in character, and was more consistent with correct architectural
principles than Ghiberti’s; but the latter’s design was so fresh and so
vigorous, that in spite of its being too picturesque for sculpture it
won universal admiration.
The next great name in architecture is that of Leon Battista Alberti
(1404-1472), who naturally follows Brunellesco. His most complete work
is the Rucellai Palace at Florence; he built and restored many churches,
tombs, and palaces; was a great mathematician, and very learned in
Latin, in which language he wrote poems, plays, and treatises on
painting and architecture.
[Illustration: Fig. 408.—Portion of the Strozzi Palace.]
The Rucellai Palace is a very fine work of the Renaissance. It has the
three orders of architecture in its pilasters, with their entablatures.
The lower story has a small square window placed high from the ground
between every two pilasters, and has two square-headed doorways. Between
each pair of pilasters in the upper stories are round-headed windows,
which have each a double light divided by a small column. The style of
building is called “rusticated,” like so many of the Italian palaces
(Fig. 408). This is a roughened form of stonework, and was copied from
Roman buildings, which, together with the heavy cornices and symmetrical
repetition of windows, gave these palaces a heavy and imposing look.
Another palace of the Rucellai type is the Cancelleria at Rome, which
was built by Bramante (1444-1514), a native of Castel-Durante, in
Urbino, who also built St. Peter’s at Rome, and who was the greatest
architect of the Renaissance, of whom Michelangelo testified “that
Bramante was equal to any architect who has appeared from the time of
the ancients to our own, can by no means be denied.” Michelangelo
himself was the architect of the dome of St. Peter’s, and his sublime
works in sculpture and fresco adorn the interior.
The Cancelleria Palace is a masterpiece of elegance and good proportion.
It has two imposing doorways, and the plainness of its lower story
contrasts agreeably with the upper two, which have rows of round-headed
windows enclosed in flat or square-headed architraves, and are placed at
agreeable distances above the entablatures of the lower stories. The two
upper stories are divided alternately into wide and narrow divisions by
pilasters, the windows being placed in the wide divisions. This building
is a marked improvement in point of beauty on the Pitti and Rucellai
palaces.
[Illustration:
Fig. 409.—Upper Story
of the Farnese Palace,
Rome. Designed
partly by M. Angelo.
]
The Farnese Palace is another typical building of the Renaissance. The
design of it is attributed to Antonio Picconi, who took the surname of
San Gallo (148?-1546). It is built in three stories, without pilasters,
with a widely projecting cornice, and has rather a monotonous look with
its numerous windows of equal size. Michelangelo is said to have
designed some of the windows and the cornice (Fig. 409), though some say
that the architect Vignola was the designer of the cornice, The central
doorway is “rusticated” and arched, and the angles of the building are
of dressed stones.
The celebrated building known as the Certosa (Charter-house) of Pavia
was begun by Borgognone in the year 1473, is an example of the most
ornate phase of the Renaissance, and offers a widely-marked contrast to
the almost bald simplicity of the palace just described (Fig. 410). As a
whole, the façade of this building cannot be called a model of good
architectural composition, but it is easier to criticise its faults in
this respect than to suggest improvements. It contains, however, many
striking elements of beauty, and is full of useful suggestions to the
architect and decorative artist.
The plan and shell of Renaissance buildings were usually of the
Romanesque or Gothic types; the dome, columns, and ornament generally
were all borrowed from the Roman remains.
The column, round arch, and horizontal lintel or architrave feature were
extensively used in the palaces and other buildings of Venice (Fig.
411), though the Renaissance style had a difficult task to make headway
in Venice against the strong Byzantine and Gothic traditions that had
hitherto prevailed.
[Illustration: Fig. 410.—Portion of the Certosa of Pavia.]
The general type of the Venetian palaces is a solid panelled wall and
pier arrangement or rusticated lower story, which supports a central
loggia, or arcaded second story, that has circular-headed windows and
heavy cornices and balconies. The whole façade is richly decorated with
engaged columns and pilasters.
The Cornaro, now the Mocenigo Palace, the Grimani on the Grand Canal,
now the Post Office, and the Spinelli Palace, are said to have
originally been built from the designs of the great military architect,
San Michele, of Verona (1484-1588), to whom the Signori of Venice owed
so much as the designer of their fortifications.
Jacopo Sansovino, who built the Library of San Marco at Venice (Fig.
411); Palladio (1518-1580), the well-known writer on architecture;
Scamozzi, and the Lombardi family, may be mentioned as other celebrated
architects and ornamentists, who executed many works in Venice and in
Verona, Florence, Padua, Vicenza, Rome and Milan, etc., during the
sixteenth century. It was the tendency of the Renaissance period to
build palaces and castles, and in the later times municipal and private
dwellings, as learning and the arts were getting into the hands of the
laymen, in contrast to the days of the Middle Ages, when the clergy and
monks were the architects and master-builders: in those days hardly
anything but churches had architectural pretensions; but the case was
different in the Renaissance times, when the architects were not bound
by the strict canonical laws of _style_; hence we find a greater variety
and wider range of ideas expressed in the art of the period, due in a
great measure to the individuality of the artists, which has given to
the art of the Renaissance a different character in every country,
district, or city to which it had spread.
[Illustration: Fig. 411.—Library of San Marco, Venice. By Sansovino.]
The greatest Venetian architect of the seventeenth century, Longhena,
flourished (1602-82) when the Renaissance had entered into its Baroque
phase or period of decadence. He built many churches and palaces in
Venice and in some other cities of Italy, but his greatest work is the
celebrated Church of the Salutation—"Santa Maria della Salute"—in
Venice, a picturesque building that has been painted and photographed
more frequently than any other church in the world. With its domes and
bell-towers, and its great buttresses decorated with figures that
support the drum of the dome, it presents a striking object of
picturesque beauty. This church and the Pesaro and Rezzonico palaces are
exceedingly rich and ornate, but are overloaded with figures and
decorative details—the Pesaro Palace especially—which is very
characteristic of the florid work of the seventeenth century. Their
magnificence of style reflects the palmy days of Venetian grandeur, and
contrasts strongly with the simpler and better architecture of the early
Renaissance period.
The influence of the Italian Renaissance spread to France in the days of
Louis XII., and Francis I., the monarch who did so much for French art.
Afterwards, in the reign of Henry II. and Catherine de’ Medici, who
greatly favoured Italian art and artists, we find the Renaissance taking
a deep root in France. Fra Giocondo was summoned to France from Italy by
Louis XII., who reigned 1495 to 1515, and caused to be built the Château
de Blois, and the Château de Gaillon in Normandy (1502-10) In these two
buildings the native French Gothic received a grafting of the Italian
forms. This was the case in France for a long time, as in that country
the Gothic style was then in the full zenith of its Flamboyant period.
The Castle of Chambord is one of the finest examples, and a portion of
the Château de Blois, by Viart, the architect of Francis I.
The early French Renaissance is quite different from the Italian, partly
from the reasons we have stated, but it has a liveliness and exuberance
that is full of inventive resource. The buildings are noted for their
pointed roofs, and for their multitude of picturesque towers and
pinnacles, and also rich carvings of a refined class of ornament.
The French Flamboyant Gothic and the Italian Decorative forms are
happily blended in this style, to which the name of “François Premier”
(I^{er}) has been given. This style was chiefly brought about by the
employment of the Italian sculptors and architects, Serlio, Vignola,
Primaticcio, Il Rosso, Cellini, and others who had been invited by
Francis I. to build and decorate his châteaux and palaces. Primaticcio
was also entrusted with the task of collecting a series of antique casts
and copies of antiques from Rome for the gardens of the palace at
Fontainebleau. This, no doubt, had the effect of helping to form the
taste for classic art among French artists. Owing to all the above
circumstances, French art began to show more of the influence of the
Italian style. The Roman orders were henceforth invariably used, but
still the new style was modified in a great measure to suit the French
taste. What is known as the Henri Deux (Henry II.) style is another
French development of the Cinquecento, in which there is a preponderance
of strap-work, with figures, masks, grotesques, cartouches of all kinds,
and much of the conventional Saracenic ornament. The monogram of Henry
II. and the arms of Catherine de’ Medici often appear in this ornament,
as seen in the decorations of the Château d’Anet (1548) and on the Oiron
or Henri Deux pottery.
Pierre Lescot (1510-1578) designed the western façade of the Louvre, in
Paris, and Jean Buillant designed the oldest parts; these two architects
and another, Philibert Delorme, brought the Renaissance to such a head
in France that it became immediately the national style.
The great names in architectural sculpture of the early French
Renaissance were Jean Goujon and Paul Ponce, who carved the principal
figures of the façades of the Louvre. Towards the early part of the
seventeenth century the architecture began to assume a more florid
character, under the hands of Lepautre and Du Cerceau. It became richer,
but less pure in style, an example of which is the Apollo Gallery of the
Louvre, designed by Lepautre. By the time of the latter half of the
seventeenth century the desire for show and the expression of
magnificence, especially brought about by the “Grand Monarque,” Louis
XIV., assisted by the efforts of his architects, Mansard, Perrault,
Lemercier, and Blondel, who ministered to the whims of the powerful
King, speedily laid the foundations for the loose and unrestrained
Baroque or Rococo style which subsequently followed. The name of “Louis
Quatorze” has been given to the style developed in the reign of this
king. “Louis Quinze” and “Louis Seize” are names of subsequent French
styles, which will be considered under the head of Renaissance Ornament.
The tame and spiritless palace of Versailles was designed by François
Mansard, who invented the Mansard roofs which have been used together
with this style for nearly all the palatial buildings of Europe. The
purity of the Italian Renaissance was forgotten or ignored by the
nations of Europe, and the stiff and pompous buildings of Louis XIV.
were accepted as the patterns that all civilization was eager to copy.
Even old churches and mediæval castles were transformed in some portions
of their interiors into Louis XIV. imitations. In Windsor Castle the
great ballroom has been vilely treated with the meaningless
incrustations of this period, by the way of decorations, endeavouring,
however, to make amends for its tasteless poverty of invention by the
arrogant display of its rich covering of gold leaf.
In the late seventeenth and during the eighteenth centuries, the Rococo
or Baroque phase of the Renaissance was in vogue in Italy and France,
and indeed everywhere in Europe. The main characteristic of the Baroque
style is the undue prominence given to the ornament and decoration,
which arose from a gradual forgetfulness of the Roman and Greek
principles of construction, and a want of order in the arrangement of
the principal forms in the architecture. By degrees these forms took a
secondary position: columns supported nothing or only a few mouldings,
cornices and pediments were broken, brackets and consoles were inverted,
mouldings ended in scrolls, hanging curtains were represented on stone
carving, also wreaths of roses; pediments and gables had weak outlines
of carved forms, shells and rock-work (_rococo_) ending in weedy
scrolls, which doubtless was a Chinese inspiration, grafted on the
prevailing style; in fact, the utmost license and riot in decoration
seemed to be allowed, as it aimlessly sprawled over architecture,
furniture, and interiors, until art had almost evaporated from the
decorative productions of the age.
In spite of this, however, something must be said in favour of the
Rococo: at the least it was homogeneous in its way; some of the figure
work that forms part of the ornament is very fine, the finish and
perfection also of the carved, painted, and gilt surfaces, from a
technical point of view, leave usually nothing to be desired. The curved
and broken character of the ornament is excellent for showing the play
of light and shade on the gilded surface, and the effect of some
interiors is very rich and brilliant; but when decoration takes the
place of construction, however well executed it may be, it becomes more
of an incrustation than a requirement.
[Illustration:
Fig. 412.—Portion of the
Façade of St. Paul and
St. Louis at Paris.
]
Lorenzo Bernini (1589-1680) and Francesco Borromini (1599-1667) were
Italian architects who chiefly brought about the Rococo in Italy. They
treated the classical forms with extraordinary freedom. The column
especially was degraded in its use. It sometimes supported only a few
mouldings, and at other times was carried through two or three stories,
when its proper function is to represent one story. One kind of
architectural style a little later than this period was called the
“Jesuit Style” (Fig. 412), in which churches of the Jesuit Order were
built. On the vaulted ceilings of these churches a florid type of
painting of sacred subjects was used as decoration.
In Spain the Renaissance, mixed with some Saracenic features, produced
some very good work; the typical example of Spanish Renaissance is the
Escurial, the great palace of the Spanish kings.
In Germany the Italian Renaissance made but a tardy advance, and was
never thoroughly at home in that country. German Renaissance is far less
refined than that of other countries which were influenced by the
Italian style. It is chiefly in painting, furniture, book illustration,
and in goldsmiths’ work that it appears at its best, and not in
architecture. This was owing to the art of Germany being at that time in
the hands of the burghers when the advent of the Renaissance took place,
and also that the mass of the people were more concerned in the study of
ethics and philosophy than the arts. Another reason may be added, that
the nation was unsettled, and occupied with the great religious upheaval
of the Reformation. All these things proved to be sufficient to retard
the advancement of the Renaissance in Germany for more than a hundred
years. One of the best examples of the Renaissance we can point to in
Germany is the Castle of Heidelberg, built by the Elector Otto Heinrich
(1556-1559). The two façades of this castle, which are now in ruins,
have engaged columns and pilasters; the windows have rather heavy-headed
features, and are richly carved; statues are placed in the niches
between the windows. The portico of the Town Hall at Cologne is another
example, and the Cloth Hall at Brunswick is a very interesting specimen
of German Renaissance. It is deficient in proportion, however, by the
extreme horizontality of its eight series of low stories in the
principal façade, but is otherwise very picturesque.
The German Renaissance towards the later periods was characterised by
its elaborate carving of ornament, figures, and animals in wood and
stone; armorial bearings, escutcheons, shields, and cartouches or
ornamental labels were very common in German work, and in most other
forms of Renaissance ornament in Europe, except in the purest form of
the Italian Cinquecento, when highly decorative vase forms and labels
took the place of the shield and cartouche work of the Quattrocento
period.
The Renaissance in England made its earliest appearance in the reign of
Henry VIII. John of Padua was an Italian architect employed by that
king. Hampton Court Palace in its earlier portions, built by Cardinal
Wolsey in 1515, is Gothic, but it has been considerably added to since,
and partly rebuilt in the time of William III. in a kind of Renaissance.
In the reigns of Queen Elizabeth and James I., the Elizabethan or
English Renaissance and the Jacobean respectively were predominant. The
latter style was developed by Dutch architects working in England on the
Elizabethan models, and is distinguished by shield work and carvings in
high relief, in opposition to the lower relief cartouche and strap-work
of the Elizabethan style.
The Elizabethan Renaissance is more like German work than the French,
but, of course, has its native peculiarities, developed from its mixture
with the Tudor Gothic of the time. This mixture is seen in many of the
old halls and mansions built about this time in England. Wollaton Hall
is a fine example of the Elizabethan (Fig. 413), and Holland House,
Kensington, is another fine mansion of the same style (Fig. 414).
These castellated buildings of the Elizabethan style, in red brick and
stone dressings, are in singular and pleasant harmony with the grand
parks and richly wooded English landscape with which they are usually
surrounded.
Inigo Jones, in the early part of the seventeenth century, and Sir
Christopher Wren, his successor, were the greatest names in architecture
of the English Renaissance period. The former was a close follower of
the Italian architect Palladio, and designed, usually, his buildings
after the Roman models. The palace at Whitehall, the church and piazza
in Covent Garden, and Crewe Hall in Cheshire were built from his
designs.
[Illustration: Fig. 413.—Elizabethan, North Entrance, Wollaton House.]
The Cathedral of St. Paul’s is too well known to need description. It
may be mentioned as the most important example of the late Renaissance
in England. It was thirty-five years in building (1675-1710), and
although some details and the ornament generally incline to the Baroque,
the building as a whole is one of the finest and most impressive works
ever produced in any country. Wren built a great many churches in London
during the time that was occupied in the building of St. Paul’s, St.
Stephen’s, Walbrook, being one of his finest. Chelsea Hospital, the
Royal Exchange, together with some City Halls and twenty-five churches,
were built from his designs or under his directions.
The architecture of the present day in France leans mostly to
Renaissance traditions.
[Illustration: Fig. 414.—The Ancient Parlour, Holland House.]
In Germany, Greek and Roman styles find favour, but Gothic and
Renaissance, and sometimes Romanesque style of buildings are now
erected.
In England about one hundred years ago there was a Greek revival, due in
a great measure to the publication of Stuart and Revett’s works in
connection with their close study of Grecian architectural remains. St.
Pancras Church, in London, is one of the outcomes of this revival. Sir
William Chambers was the architect of the beautiful riverside
building—Somerset House, on the Thames Embankment (1725-1796); he also
designed a great deal of furniture and the State carriage. He published
important works on architecture and furniture, which had considerable
influence on the design of the latter in England. In the first half of
this century a Gothic revival took place, which was greatly brought
about and assisted by the writings and architectural work of A. W.
Pugin. The Houses of Parliament, built by Barry, are the finest examples
of the Gothic revival in England. They are built in the Perpendicular or
Tudor style. Sir Gilbert Scott was a late exponent of the modern Gothic
style (1811-78), and was the architect of the Albert Memorial in
Kensington Gardens, St. Pancras Railway Station and Hotel, London,
besides building and restoring many churches in the Gothic style.
The architecture of the present day in England tends to the Renaissance,
with a slight mixture of Gothic and much that is original in the
ornamental details, but Gothic is still a favourite style for churches.
ORNAMENT OF THE RENAISSANCE.
The ornament of the Renaissance period was founded on the Roman. Before
describing the former it will be necessary to say a few words concerning
its prototype, the Roman. More than anything else the great use of the
acanthus foliage characterizes the ornamental art of the Romans. The
treatment of the acanthus in Roman architecture has already been noticed
in the first part of this work. A fine boldness and freedom was
everywhere apparent in the Roman treatment of this foliage (Figs. 28 and
29).
Large scrolls of acanthus (see Fig. 319) in which birds, reptiles, and
insects are arranged to fill the unoccupied spaces are used in
pilasters, friezes, and panels.
Chimeras as whole or half figures with foliage endings, griffins, and
large vases well decorated, were used as symmetrical arrangements in
friezes.
The well-known acanthus scroll frieze from Trajan’s Forum is a very
typical example of the soft-leaved acanthus. The rosette of the scroll,
as in nearly all classic ornament, is made up from acanthus-leaves
arranged in a radiating manner, like a flower (Fig. 415).
[Illustration: Fig. 415.—Rosette from Scroll, Forum of Trajan.]
Some of the ornament on the antique Roman bronze and silver work is
particularly beautiful and delicate, as may be seen on the silver wine
crater found at Hildesheim in Hanover, which is one object of a
collection found at that place in the year 1869. These and the treasures
found at Pompeii and Herculaneum, together with the wall paintings at
the same places, give us a good idea of Roman art in domestic decoration
and the minor arts and crafts.
[Illustration: Fig. 416.—Nest of Scroll, Roman Panel, Florence.]
The Pompeian objects, chiefly in bronze (Fig. 417) and the wall
paintings (Figs. 418-20) are as much Greek as Roman in style, as they
are chiefly the work of Greek artists executed for the Romans.
[Illustration: Fig. 417.—Objects of Art handiwork, from Pompeii.]
[Illustration: Fig. 418.—The Goddess Demeter enthroned. Wall painting
from Pompeii. (B.)]
The Baths of Titus and Diocletian and the palace of the Cæsars on the
Palatine Hill, Rome, were decorated with grotesques similar to those of
Pompeii, and were studied to great advantage by Raphael and his pupils
and assistants when decorating the Loggia of the Vatican. Thin tendrils,
festoons of fruit, animals, masks, all kinds of grotesque forms and
birds flying and playing in and out of light scrolls, architectural
constructions of a light and fantastic character, and panels of
landscapes formed the subjects that were painted on the walls, which
were often divided into friezes, panels, and dados. These decorations
were executed in tempera colours of bright reds, greens, yellows, blues,
and black. The antique grotesques, so called from being found on the
walls of underground chambers, or “grottos,” together with the figure
subjects taken from Greek gems, furnished Raphael and his celebrated
pupils Giovanni da Udine (1487-1561) and Perino del Vaga (1500-47) with
fanciful ideas for the decoration of the Loggia of the Vatican, and the
Villa Madama, at Rome. These _grottesches_ were painted in a kind of
fresco or tempera on a white ground with a fairly bright variety of
colouring. Some portions of the decorations were executed in stucco
relief made of a composition of lime and marble dust, and were sometimes
gilded. Giovanni da Udine, or Ricamatore, as he is also called, was
especially celebrated at this stucco-work, and in the drawing of animals
and birds. He, and another celebrated artist, Primaticco, assisted
Raphael’s great pupil Giulio Romano (1492-1546) in a similar kind of
decoration at the ducal palace of Mantua. The latter artist executed the
principal figure work at Mantua, and also at the Villa Madama.
[Illustration: Fig. 419—Pan. Wall Painting at Herculaneum. (B.)]
There is no lack of good examples of Italian ornament, especially in
carved marble and wood, in the churches and palaces of Italy and France.
The Museum at South Kensington is rich in casts and in real examples of
Italian ornament, has excellent copies of the Raphael pilasters and
other examples of painted decorations. In addition to this the maiolica
plates and vases furnish good examples of painted decoration of the
Renaissance period.
It is only necessary here to illustrate and describe a few examples of
the style, as they appear in architectural decoration, for under the
heads of the various historic industrial arts many examples of
Renaissance ornament will come under our notice in a succeeding volume.
[Illustration: Fig. 420.—Mural Painting. Pompeii.]
[Illustration: Fig. 421.—Pilaster by Donatello.]
[Illustration: Fig. 422.—Ornament from Baptistery Gates, Florence.]
Belonging to the ornament of the fifteenth century, or as it is called
the “Quattrocento” (1400), we have a beautiful little pilaster (Fig.
421), designed by Donatello (1386-1438). The portion of the ornament of
the architecture from Ghiberti’s bronze gates of the Baptistery of
Florence (Fig. 422) shows the use of natural forms ornamentally
arranged, which was one of the characteristics of the Quattrocento
style; and the tabernacle (Fig. 423) shows the transition between the
use of the natural forms and the more severe conventional ornament of
the Cinquecento period. Luca della Robbia (1400-81) was one of the
ablest masters of the Quattrocento, and Riccio, called Briosco, was also
an artist of this period who was engaged on the decorative work of the
ducal palace at Venice.
The Cinquecento (1500) is the name given to the style of the sixteenth
century. So many brilliant names belong to this period that it becomes a
difficulty to give in our space an adequate selection of this work. It
was towards the end of the fifteenth century that many of the ancient
monuments had been excavated; and the Italian artists from Michelangelo
and his great contemporaries down to the artists of lesser powers,
followed the strong inclination of the times in their deep study of the
antique, and sought more and more to invest their creations with the
spirit of ancient art. The lingering traditions of Byzantine forms that
were in some degree a part of the Quattrocento style were now entirely
excluded from the purer art of the Cinquecento, and anything that had a
precedent for existence in the antique was copied or imitated in a
modified manner, and improved upon in point of delicacy in the
treatment.
[Illustration: Fig. 423.—Tabernacle. End of Fifteenth Century. Italian.
(P.)]
Though the arabesques of Raphael and his pupils in the Loggia of the
Vatican (1515) have been severely criticised as being full of coarse
absurdities and designed with questionable taste, still, taking them as
a whole, they were a decided improvement on the grosser absurdities of
the Pompeian school of grotesque decoration, and they are certainly
distinguished by good drawing and clever execution. Doubtless the later
achievements in painted decoration at the Villa Madama and the ducal
palace of Mantua had less incongruities of design and were more refined
than the Vatican pilasters, but they lack the freshness, the boldness,
and virility of the latter. It is not always a good argument, for
instance, to say—which has often been said of the decoration in
question—that a thick stem should be used to support heavy masses, for
it can be said with equal truth that a thick stem may be painted to look
like a weak vegetable flabby stalk—like that of a cabbage—and so have
really a weaker appearance than one painted to represent the fibrous
stem of a woody tree; and besides, if a thin stem supporting a heavy
mass is vigorously drawn, it will look strong enough, and be useful also
in giving the necessary amount of contrast that is wanted in decoration.
Such a thing may be quite admissible in painted ornament that would be
out of place in sculptured work or in architectural forms.
[Illustration: Fig. 424.—Cinquecento Floral Ornament. Acanthus, Oak,
Convolvulus, &c.]
[Illustration: Fig. 425.—Venetian Panel. Sixteenth Century.]
The Cinquecento artists were better craftsmen than the Romans. The
design and delicacy of finish on some of the sculptured ornament of the
sixteenth century have never been excelled in any period of the world’s
art history. It is strange that many of our would-be teachers in design
of the present day are not in sympathy with it; perhaps however, it is
not to be wondered at, for they may have tried, and found how difficult
it really is to get within measurable distance of its excellence. It is
cheap and plausible to say that a style is dead with the people who
created it; but this is not what the artists of the sixteenth century
said, and we know what they produced out of a dead style. By all means
let us have originality, if it is good art, but let us have the good art
first.
In the Cinquecento ornament we find that a greater variety of plants,
animals, and designed objects, such as vases, candelabra, and armour,
were made use of than is generally found in antique ornament. The
acanthus, vine, oak, and poppy foliage have all been simplified to a
general type of acanthoid leafage (Fig. 425). Such animals as the lion,
goat, and the dolphin fish form occur frequently, sometimes almost
naturally, but more often with foliated endings (Figs. 425 and 426).
Some compositions are made up entirely with well-chosen vase and
candelabra forms (Fig. 427).
[Illustration: Fig. 426.—Cinquecento; from the Martinengo Tomb,
Brescia.]
[Illustration: Fig. 427.—Candelabra and Vase Panel.]
In the Cinquecento, the Greek guilloche pattern with rosettes is used,
and an Italian rendering of the anthemion, and also of the Greek
honeysuckle band pattern (Fig. 428).
The Lombardi family of Venice were celebrated as sculptors in ornament.
Pietro the elder (1481) was the architect of Dante’s tomb in San
Francesco at Ravenna, but his greatest work was the Church of Santa
Maria de’ Miracoli at Venice, in which he was assisted by his sons
Tullio and Antonio in the sculptured decorations. Tullio was the most
gifted as a sculptor, and his ornament is the best of the Cinquecento
period at Venice (Fig. 429).
Martino Lombardo was the architect of the Scuda di San Marco at Venice,
in the decorations of which he was aided by Tullio. Some of the best
specimens of the ornament of this period are to be found on the
Martinengo tomb, in the Church of the Corpo di Cristo (1530). The
ornament bears a strong resemblance to the Lombardi, but the sculptor is
not known (Fig. 426).
[Illustration: Fig. 428.—From a Marble Fountain in the Louvre. (1508.)]
The ceilings from Serlio’s book of architecture, and from San Spirito,
by Sansovino, are good examples of the Renaissance panelling and
decorative filling (Figs. 431 and 432).
[Illustration: Fig. 429.—Panel from Santa Maria de’ Miracoli, Brescia.
By Tullio Lombardo. (1500.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 430.—Panel from the Facade of Santa Maria de’
Miracoli, Brescia. (1530.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 431.—Renaissance Ceiling. (From Serlio’s
_Architecture_.)]
One of the purest examples of the Cinquecento in France is the ornament
found on the pilasters of the monument erected to Louis XII. at St.
Denis, Paris (Fig. 433). The sculptors are said to have been Jean Just
and François Gentil. The figure work on this monument was executed by
Trebatti, a Florentine sculptor. Another phase of the Renaissance in
France is the Henry Deux style. It is illustrated in the carved
door-panels from the Château d’Anet (Figs. 434 and 435) (1548), where
the tracery, interlaced work, and shields are combined to form the
features of this ornament. The initial letter H of the king and the
crescent arms of Diana of Poitiers are seen very often on the shields.
[Illustration: Fig. 432.—Ceiling Decoration, from San Spirito, Florence.
By Sansovino.]
Jean Goujon and Jean Cousin were employed on the decoration of this
castle.
[Illustration: Fig. 433.—Pilasters, from the Monument to Louis XII., St.
Denis, Paris.]
An extremely rich example of French carved wood is the panel from the
Château Gaillon, in Normandy (1515) (Fig. 436).
[Illustration: Fig. 434.—Carved Panel, Henry II. style, from the Château
d’Anet.]
[Illustration: Fig. 435.—Carved Panel, Henry II. style, from the Château
d’Anet.]
[Illustration: Fig. 436.—Carved Wood; Château Gaillon. (1505.)]
The above examples, and the chimney-piece panel by Germain Pilon (1560)
(Fig. 437), another sculptor employed by Catherine de’ Medici, are a few
of the best specimens of the Cinquecento period in France.
Elizabethan ornament, or that of the Renaissance in England, is
characterized by a preponderance of strap-work, and has animals, masks,
rosettes, half-lion or half-human terminals, debased class of mouldings,
and very little foliage. The example given—the panelling from the Old
Guard Chamber, Westminster (1600), exhibits a strong influence of
Saracenic tracery that was prevalent in much of the later furniture and
textiles of the Renaissance (Fig. 438).
[Illustration: Fig. 437.—Panel from Chimneypiece; Louvre. By Germain
Pilon.]
[Illustration: Fig. 438.—Elizabethan Panelling, from the Old Guard
Chamber, Westminster.]
Shield-work was not so prominent in the pure Elizabethan as in the
Jacobean (James I.) style; the carved stone escutcheon-like work from
Crewe Hall, Cheshire, attributed to Inigo Jones (Fig. 439), shows the
beginning of the Jacobean shield-work. This style is best seen in the
carved-wood furniture of the period, and both it and the Elizabethan are
generally speaking offshoots of the Flemish and German phases of the
Renaissance. Elizabethan ornament is of great variety, the panelling and
other arrangements are sometimes composed purely of strap-work of a
rectangular flat perforated appearance, sometimes seen in the doorways
and chimney fronts, as at Hardwick Hall, Haddon Hall, Speke and Crewe
Halls. Another kind is of a more curved variety, with figures and
animals, as seen in the illustration from an old house at Exeter now in
Kensington Museum (Fig. 440); another kind is carved in rectangular or
curved and notched frames of cartouche work with the smaller spaces and
little panels carved in imitation of jewels with oval or lozenge-shaped
facets. Columns of Ionic or Corinthian orders, and classic mouldings,
dentils, and the egg and tongue were frequently used. The ceilings were
often panelled and moulded, inclining in this respect more to the Gothic
than classic. A bizarre kind of Renaissance architectural feature was
prevalent in Holland and in some parts of Germany, which seems to have
been the model for much of the “bolt and lock” style of some Elizabethan
gateways. The architect Dietterlin, of Strassburg (1550-1599), was an
extraordinary exponent of this twisted and bolted form of fantastic
architecture, which had become only too fashionable at this period. The
illustration (Fig. 441) shows an example of what might be called a mild
specimen of the style of Dietterlin. The popularity of the Dietterlin
craze was owing to the circulation of several volumes he had published
of his impossible designs, some of which designs were evidently adapted
by the Elizabethan architects, but in a much more reticent spirit.
[Illustration: Fig. 439.—Doorway, Crewe Hall. Inigo Jones.]
[Illustration: Fig. 440.—Elizabethan Carved Ornament, from an old house
at Exeter. (1590.)]
[Illustration: Fig. 441.—Example of Dietterlin’s Architecture; German,
Sixteenth Century.]
----------------------------------------------------------------
LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED,
DUKE STREET, STAMFORD STREET, S.E., AND GREAT WINDMILL STREET, W.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
ART PUBLICATIONS.
----------
=BROOME=—=Brush-work for Schools.= By FLORENCE BROOME. With forty-eight
Designs in Colour. Small 4to. New Edition. 5_s._ net.
=BULLMORE=—=Memory Drawing of Plant Form and Design.= By W. R. BULLMORE.
In Two Parts, each consisting of six Artistically Printed Plates in
Portfolio. Price 1_s._ net each Part; postage 2_d._
=BULLMORE=—=Copies in Silhouette for Brush-Drawing.= By W. R. BULLMORE.
Part I. Natural Forms. Part II. Simple Patterns. Books, 6_d._ each
net; postage extra.
=BULLMORE=—=Senior Brush-Drawing Cards.= By W. R. BULLMORE. Part I.
Natural Forms. Part II. Simple Patterns. Each consisting of twelve
Cards. 1_s._ 3_d._ net each; postage 2_d._
This work contains the same examples as the author’s “Copies in
Silhouette,” Parts I and II, but printed on stout cards instead of
in book form.
=DAWSON=—=Elementary Design.= By CHARLES FREDERICK DAWSON. With numerous
Illustrations. Second Edition. Demy 8vo. 2_s._ net.
=DOUGLAS=—=A System of Brush-drawing.= By R. SMEATON DOUGLAS and ADA
HILL WALKER. Oblong 4to. 3_s._ net.
=FURNISS=—=How to draw in Pen and Ink.= By HARRY FURNISS. With numerous
Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 3_s._ 6_d._ net.
=HARBUTT=—=Harbutt’s Plastic Method=, and the use of Plasticine in the
Arts of Writing, Drawing, and Modelling in Educational Work. By
WILLIAM HARBUTT. With fifty-six Illustrations. Crown 4to. 4_s._
=HARBUTT=—=Plastic Methods for Plastic Minds=: A Teacher’s Handbook of
easy Lessons in Modelling in Plasticine for Infants and Young
Children. By Mrs. HARBUTT. With thirty-four Illustrations. A New and
Revised Edition. Small 4to. 1_s._ net.
=HARPER=—=A Practical Handbook of Drawing=, for modern methods of
Reproduction, with many Illustrations showing comparative results.
By CHARLES G. HARPER. New Edition, Revised and added to. Demy 8vo.
7_s._ 6_d._
=HATTON=—=The Craftsman’s Plant-Book=: or Figures of Plants selected
from the Old Herbals. With numerous Illustrations in colour and
black and white. Arranged with Notes and additional Drawings, and an
Essay on the Use of Plants in Decorative Design. By RICHARD G.
HATTON, Hon A.R.C.A. (Lond.). Demy 8vo.
[_In the press._
=HATTON=—=Perspective for Art Students, Artists and Draughtsmen.= By R.
G. HATTON. With 208 Illustrations. Large Crown 8vo. 5_s._
=HATTON=—=Design.= An Exposition of the Principles and Practice of
Decoration. By R. G. HATTON. With 177 Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 5_s._
net.
=HATTON=—=Figure-Drawing.= A new work for Artists and Students. By
RICHARD G. HATTON. With nearly 400 Diagrams. Demy 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._
net.
=HATTON=—=Figure Composition.= A companion to “Figure-Drawing.” By
RICHARD G. HATTON. With numerous Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 7_s._
6_d._ net.
=JACKSON=—=Wood-Carving as an Aid to the Study of Elementary Art.= By F.
G. JACKSON. With numerous Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 3_s._ net.
=JACKSON=—=Metal Work=: Chasing and Repoussé for Home Art Workers. By
FRANK G. JACKSON. With numerous Illustrations and Diagrams. Demy
8vo. 3_s._ net.
=JACKSON=—=Decorative Design.= An Elementary Text-book of Principles and
Practice. By FRANK G. JACKSON. Fully Illustrated. Third Edition.
Large. Crown 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._
=JACKSON=—=The Theory and Practice of Design.= An Advanced Textbook on
Decorative Art. By FRANK G. JACKSON. With 700 Illustrations. Large
Crown 8vo. 9_s._
=JACKSON=—=The A B C of Drawing and Design=. By FRANK G. JACKSON. Crown
4to. In two parts, with numerous Illustrations. 2_s._ 6_d._ each
net.
These Illustrations, with additional exercises, have also been
prepared on stout cards.
To correspond with Part I. { Set I. 30 cards, 2_s._ net.
{ " II. 30 ” 2_s._ "
{ " III. 30 ” 2_s._ "
To correspond with Part II. { " IV. 24 ” 2_s._ "
{ " V. 12 ” 1_s._ "
=LANTERI=—=Modelling.= A Guide for Teachers and Students. By E.
LANTERI, Professor of Sculpture at the Royal College of Art, South
Kensington.
VOLUME I.—With a Portrait Drawing of the Author by Professor A.
Legros and forty-two full-page Plates and other Illustrations and
Diagrams. E. ONSLOW FORD, R.A., contributes a Preface. Crown 4to.
162 pages. 15_s._ net.
VOLUME II.—With numerous Illustrations and a Preface by Sir W. B.
RICHMOND, R.A. Crown 4to. 15_s._ net.
=LINDSAY=—=Geometrical Drawing.= By C. T. LINDSAY. With numerous
Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 6_s._ net.
=LUNN=—=Pottery.= A Practical Handbook for Art Teachers and Students.
By R. LUNN, Teacher at the Royal College of Art, South Kensington.
Demy 8vo. 5_s._ net.
=MANN=—=The Art of Shading.= A Complete and Graduated Guide to the
Principles and Practice of Drawing in Light and Shade. By WILLIAM
MANN. With forty Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 3_s._ net.
=MIDGLEY and LILLEY=—=Studies in Plant Form and Design.= By W. MIDGLEY
and A. E. V. LILLEY. With numerous Illustrations. Tenth Thousand.
Revised and Enlarged. Demy 8vo. 6_s._
=MIDGLEY=—=The Life and Leaf Set of Drawing and Design Cards.= By W.
MIDGLEY, A.R.C.A. London. 4to. 2_s._ net.
=MUYBRIDGE=—=The Human Figure in Motion.= An Electro-Photographic
Investigation of Consecutive Phases of Muscular Actions. By
EADWARD MUYBRIDGE. Illustrated with numerous full-page
Photo-Mezzotint Engravings reproduced from the Original Negatives.
Oblong. 20_s._ net.
=MUYBRIDGE=—=Animals in Motion.= An Electro-Photographic Investigation
of Consecutive Phases of Progressive Movements. By EADWARD
MUYBRIDGE. Ninety-five full-page Photo-Mezzotint Engravings,
reproduced from the Original Negatives, and more than 1,600
Half-tone Figures of Horses, Dogs, Elephants, Lions, and other
Animals, while engaged in walking, galloping, leaping, or some
other act of motion, and of Birds while flying. Oblong. 20_s._
net.
=POYNTER=—=Ten Lectures on Art.= By E. J. POYNTER, R.A. Fourth
Edition. Large Crown 8vo. 9_s._
=RHEAD=—=Studies in Plant Form and Natural Objects.= By GEORGE
WOLLISCROFT RHEAD, R.E. Set 1.—PLANT FORMS. Set 2.—NATURAL
OBJECTS. Per Set, 6_s._ net. Each contains Six Outline and Six
Tinted subjects.
=RHEAD=—=Memory Drawing of Plant Form, and Blackboard Drawing.= Twelve
Cards of Plant Form to meet the above Syllabuses, drawn from
Nature by G. W. RHEAD. R.E. Price 2_s._ 6_d._ net. Size, 10 in. ×
7 in.
=SEEMAN (O.)=—=The Mythology of Greece and Rome=, with Special
Reference to its Use in Art. Edited by G. H. BIANCHI. Sixty-four
Illustrations. New Edition. Crown 8vo. 5_s._
=STATHAM=—=Modern Architecture.= A Book for Architects and the Public.
By H. H. STATHAM. With numerous Illustrations of Contemporary
Buildings. Large Crown 8vo. 10_s._ 6_d._
=STATHAM=—=Architecture for General Readers.= A Short Treatise on the
Principles and Motives of Architectural Design. By H. H. STATHAM.
With 250 Illustrations drawn by the Author. Third Edition,
Revised. Large Crown 8vo. 12_s._
=TAYLOR=—=Elementary Art Teaching.= An Educational and Technical Guide
for Teachers and Learners. By E. R. TAYLOR. With over 600 Diagrams
and Illustrations. Second Edition. Large Crown 8vo. 6_s._
=TEBBS=—=The New Lace Embroidery (Punto Tagliato).= By LOUISA A.
TEBBS. With thirty-four Illustrations. New Edition. 4to. 5_s._
net.
=TEBBS=—=The Art of Bobbin Lace.= A Practical Text-book of
Workmanship, Illustrated with original designs in Italian, point
de Flandre, Bruges Guipure, Duchesse, Honiton, “Raised” Honiton,
Appliqué, and Bruxelles. Also how to clean and repair valuable
lace, etc. By LOUISA A. TEBBS. 4to. 5_s._ net.
=VINYCOMB=—=Fictitious and Symbolic Creatures in Art.= With Special
References to their Use in British Heraldry. By JOHN VINYCOMB.
With numerous Illustrations. Demy 8vo. 10_s._ 6_d._ net.
=WARD and AITCHISON=—=The Principles of Ornament.= By J. WARD. Ed. by
GEORGE AITCHISON, A.R.A. Fully Illustrated. Large Crown 8vo. 7_s._
6_d._
=WARD=—=Colour Harmony and Contrast.= For the use of Art Students,
Designers, and Decorators. By JAMES WARD. With sixteen Coloured
Illustrations and several Half-tone Pictures. 10_s._ 6_d._ net.
=WARD=—=Floral Studies for Decorative Design.= By JAMES WARD. In
Portfolio. 20_s._ net.
=WARD=—=Progressive Design for Students.= By JAMES WARD. With
forty-two full-page Plates, comprising upwards of 1,700 Drawings.
8vo. 5_s._ net.
=WARD=—=Historic Ornament.= A Treatise on Decorative Art and
Architectural Ornament. By JAMES WARD.
VOLUME I.—Prehistoric Art; Ancient Art and Architecture; Eastern,
Early Christian, Byzantine, Saracenic, Romanesque, Gothic, and
Renaissance Architecture and Ornament. With 436 Illustrations. Second
Edition. Demy 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._
VOLUME II.—Pottery, Enamels, Ivories, Metal Work, Furniture, Textile
Fabrics, Mosaics, Glass, and Book Decoration. With 317 Illustrations.
Demy 8vo. 7_s._ 6_d._
=WARD=—=Fresco Painting: its Art and Technique.= With special reference
to the Buono and Spirit Fresco Methods. By JAMES WARD. With four
Plates in Colour and thirty-one Half-tone Illustrations of Italian
and other Fresco Paintings. Royal 8vo. 10_s._ 6_d._ net.
=WORNUM=—=The Analysis of Ornament—The Characteristics of Styles.= By R.
N. WORNUM. New Edition. Fully Illustrated. Royal 8vo. 8_s._
------------------------------------
PLANTS AND ANIMALS AS
FOUNDATIONS FOR DESIGNS IN FORM
AND COLOUR.
=VERNEUIL=—=The Animal in Decoration.= By M. P. VERNEUIL. Introduction
by EUGENE GRASSET.
This magnificent work consists of Ten Parts, each containing six
Coloured Plates, treating of the use of certain animal forms in
decorative design. Sixty Plates. In Ten Parts, each containing six
Plates, 8_s._ net per part.
=GRASSET=—=Plants and Their Application to Ornament.= Edited by EUGENE
GRASSET. First Series.
This magnificent work contains seventy-two Coloured Plates. In Twelve
Parts, 8_s._ net per part.
=GRASSET=—=Plants and Their Application to Ornament.= Edited by EUGENE
GRASSET. Second Series.
This magnificent work contains seventy-two Coloured Plates. In Twelve
Parts, 8_s._ net per part.
LONDON: CHAPMAN & HALL, LTD.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
Transcriber’s Note
Some inconsistencies in formatting conventions have been corrected,
without further mention. Occasionally, diacritical marks are used
(or not used) inconsistently as well, and been been made regular to
facilitate searches.
A quoted passage on p. 326, begins with “It was built probably...”,
and apparently continues into the following paragraph (without the
conventional opening quotation mark) and ends with “... total height
is 33 feet 6 inches.” It is unclear how much of this passage is a
direct quotation, since it includes a reference to an illustration
in the current text. In any case, it is given here as printed.
Any errors deemed most likely to be the printer’s have been
corrected, and are noted here. The references are to the page and
line in the original. The following issues should be noted, along
with the resolutions.
xiv.2 [2]75. Dionysus and the Lion Added.
xv.15 1[0/6]7. Fragment of Border of Fig. 166 Replaced.
xvi.35 Lake Dwellings, Objects fro[m] Added.
xvii.18 Mosque of K[aī/āi]t Bey, Cairo Corrected.
xvii.33 Ornament on an Arch of the Wekāla K[a/ā]it Bey Replaced.
xviii.46 Pulpit of the Sultan K[aī/āi]t Bey Corrected.
135.4 there is [none] end _Sic_ King
James
version
79.12 appearance of the whole building[.] Restored.
90.f121 Nymph[œ/æ]a nelumbo; Flower, Leaf, and Fruit. Corrected.
144.f192 drawn by Gautier. [(]P. & C.[)] Added.
163.18 their sculptured figures in the round[.] Restored.
170.23 but the hiero[lyg]gly]phics are not to be Transposed.
relied
223.22 his favourite animal attributes[.] Restored.
225.21 the mass of the Greek people[.] Added.
241.13 They show marks of injury by fire[.] Restored.
276.6 a[a/n]d the Indo-Aryan Corrected.
342.27 are also examples of early work ex[e]cuted in Inserted.
England
349.10 The Church of N[o/ô]tre-Dame Corrected.
353.18 in many interiors of German churches[.] Added.
356.15 battlemented cornices, and stepped gables[.] Added.
365.2 with fifteenth and sixteenth [ ] Venetian or _sic_:
Renaissance forms century?
376.5 San Michele, of Verona (1484-[1588]) _sic_ d.
1559.
379.16 What is known as the Henri Deux [(]Henry II.) Added.
style
383.24 built about this time in England[.] Added.
386.27 was founded on [t]he Roman Restored.
End of Project Gutenberg's Historic Ornament, Vol 1 (of 2), by James Ward