site of a temple which tradition says was founded by Abraham, appears
to have been the earliest Mahometan mosque. Mahomet had already
erected a building at Medina, but this seems to have been
not so much a house of prayer as a dwelling-place for his family. The
Kaabah has less importance as an architectural production than as the
centre of the wheel of Mahometanism, the faithful being directed to turn
their faces toward it when praying, and to regard it as the ultimate goal
of their wanderings.
The original structure was built by foreign workmen, and had no great
pretensions, but subsequently it was surrounded by a colonnaded court,
and by later additions was very considerably enlarged. Although the Koran
decrees that all good Mussulmen should make a pilgrimage to Mecca, it
does not uphold the Kaabah as a model to be followed in the erection of
other mosques nor give any specific directions of the manner in which
they should be built. It was therefore natural when the peace, following
their rapid conquests, permitted the Mahometans to turn their thoughts to
the erection of religious edifices, suitable for the observances of their
worship, that they should borrow inspiration from the surrounding nations.
The style they eventually evolved was drawn from Byzantine, Sassanian,
Greek, and Roman sources, and became native by adaptation.
In Turkey, Asia Minor, and Persia we find Mahometan mosques closely
resembling Christian and Byzantine churches, many domed edifices being
copied from St. Sophia and differing only in point of decoration,
while the atrium or courtyard preceding the entrance to
Christian buildings furnished the type for the wide colonnaded courts,
with porticos roofed with a succession of hemispherical or bulbous domes,
which became so common in Arabian buildings.
The mosques of Omar, at Jerusalem, on the site of the temple of Solomon,
of Wallid, at Damascus, Al-Azhar, Athar-en-Neby, Ibn Touloun, and Hassan,
in Cairo, are notable edifices, in which the columns are either taken
or copied from Greek and Roman temples, and in which the pointed arches
seem to have been suggested by the hyperbolic arches of certain ancient
Sassanian structures, such as the palace of Coroes, the Takt Kesra in the
ruins of Ctesiphon, on the Tigris, and the buildings of Firouzabad and
Sarbistan, which were mentioned in connection with Persian art.
One of the earliest examples of the use of the pointed arch is in the
Nilometer, erected on the Rodah, or Isle of Gardens, at Cairo, by Wallid,
in the eighth century.
This is a matter worthy of note, as showing conclusively that the Gothic
arch was no invention of the thirteenth century, in Europe, but merely
the adoption of a form used five centuries before in Egypt, and probably
universally known, if indeed it had ever been lost sight of, since the
days of the prosperity of Babylon.
Of the early mosques the most important are those of Omar and
Abd-el-Malek at Jerusalem and of Wallid at Damascus. The
mosque of Omar was but a simple vaulted chamber, oriented in order to
enable the faithful to turn in the direction of Mecca while praying.
That of Abd-el-Malek, called the Aksah, adjoins it and is an extensive
structure. It is chiefly remarkable for its general resemblance to the
basilica in its division into aisles. The columns forming these carry
pointed arches, built over connecting beams. It is not improbable that
this design was inspired by the order of the church of the Dome of the
Rock, adjoining it, built by Constantine, where the columns support
circular arches, over a continuous entablature.
Wallid, Caliph of Damascus, erected a mosque on the site of the old
church of St. John the Baptist, and employed labour and material in its
construction furnished by Justinian, Emperor of Byzance.
The mosques of Cairo resemble each other in a great degree. They have
usually a first court, giving access to apartments for the accommodation
of strangers, with baths, and stables for their camels, connected with
a second and larger quadrangular court, having a fountain in the centre
and porticos on three sides. The fourth side, facing the entrance, has a
series of aisles roofed in and forming the sanctuary, with recesses in
the rear wall, where the prayers are offered. Reading-desks, provided
with copies of the Koran, and hanging lamps form the chief furniture.
The minarets, one or more of which are usually erected at
the angles of the building, are special features. These tall, graceful
towers, from whose summits a crier calls the people to prayers five times
daily, serve a purpose similar to that of the belfries and campaniles
of Europe. The diameter of most of them is small in proportion to the
height, giving them a slender and beautiful aspect, very distinct from
another class of towers, of which the Giralda at Seville is the best
known, which were conceived in the same spirit of massiveness in which
the campanile in the square before St. Mark’s in Venice was built. They
are ascended by spiral staircases placed either within or without, and
have projecting balconies at various stages.
The building materials employed by the Arabs were chiefly stone of
different colours, combined in bands and patterns, and brick covered
with stucco. Enamelled tiles and multicoloured marbles were used both
externally and internally, while within, carved wood, gilding, painting,
and plaster were lavishly employed.
Of the forms of decoration, the chief were elaborate gold inscriptions in
Arabic characters, floral and geometric designs in interlaced patterns
of the most intricate combinations, coloured with all the profusion
suggested by the Oriental love of brilliancy and with the exquisite
harmony which we see in Persian and Indian fabrics.
A favourite form of decoration was that formed by a multiplication of
minute pendentives, called the honeycomb ornament, the whole surface,
as well as the dome above, being covered with an agglomeration of
minute niches, the effect of which is frequently compared to that of
stalactites. This form of ornament was much used, particularly in the
mosques and palaces of Spain.
In Cairo domestic architecture has a distinctive character of its own.
The houses have reception-rooms on the ground floor, furnished with the
divans, carpets, and lamps usual in Oriental manner of life, while the
upper floors, occupied by the women, have projecting balconies of lattice
wood-work, which permit them to see without being seen, and form an
agreeable and picturesque feature on the exterior.
The richness and the progress of Arabic art at a period when architecture
had sunk to the lowest ebb throughout Europe, is due in great measure
to the establishment of the learned academies of Damascus, Bagdad, and
other principal cities, and to the revival of Classic learning by the
translation of the works of Greek authors.
In Spain, where the Moorish and Christian populations were thrown in
constant contact with one another, the difference of religious opinion
maintained a wide gulf between them, and while the Christians struggled
with the difficulties of the Romanesque revival, their opponents attained
a brilliant era in art, as a result of their superior industry and
civilization.
One of the oldest Arabian buildings in Spain is the great
mosque at Cordova. Here, as in the East, we find Corinthian and Composite
columns, taken from Roman buildings on the soil, forming integral parts
of the new structure, but the Classical principles of building are in no
sense adhered to. The entablature is replaced by cinque-foiled arches
with voussoirs of alternate stone and brick; a second order of columns is
superposed directly upon the capitals of the first, carrying horseshoe
arches, and between the two arcades an intermediary series of trefoiled
arches is placed, springing from the keystone of the lower arches and
divided at the centre by the upper ones.
The general plan of the building consists of the usual series of aisles,
of which there are nineteen, with divisional walls. The sanctuary has a
vault with intersecting ribs, surmounted by a small dome and enriched
by profuse ornament, and is the object of much just admiration for its
beauty.
The chapel of Villa Viciosa, a later structure, has a series of arcades
similar to those before the sanctuary, differing only in the arrangement
of the intermediary arches, which are carried up to the level of the
upper arches from a horizontal course, and are cinque-foiled instead of
trefoiled, both on the extrados and intrados.
The mosque was begun by Abd-el-Rhaman, in the eighth century, and
successively added to during the four centuries following. It
covers a very large superficial area, upwards of one hundred and
sixty thousand square feet, and surpasses, in this respect,
most European buildings. Its chief defects are the want of height, which
does not exceed thirty feet, and the monotony of the aisles, which are
nearly all precisely alike.
At Toledo there are several Moorish buildings of merit, the principal
one of which is the mosque called, at present, the church of “Cristo de
la Luz.” It is similar to the sanctuary of Cordova in general aspect,
but is a marvel of intricate and minute workmanship. The whole area
which it occupies does not exceed four hundred superficial feet, but the
proportions are so nicely balanced that it appears much larger. There
are four columns carrying horseshoe arches, above which comes a second
arcade, and each division is roofed in by a vault of intersecting ribs.
These vaults are formed of wood, overlaid with plaster, and have no
pretension to scientific construction. Indeed, in none of the Arabian
buildings in Spain do we find anything of the kind attempted, the
decorative features being always the most prominent.
In the tower of Seville a species of vault was formed by thickening
the walls gradually as they rose from the ground until they met; this,
however, was nothing more than extensive corbelling, and, consequently,
very inferior to Roman and Byzantine methods.
The Alcázar, at Seville, and the Palace of the Alhambra, at Granada, are
the richest examples of Moorish architecture, and show in
their design and ornament the most fertile expression of the brilliant
imagination with which this warm-blooded people imbued all its creations.
The Court of the Lions in the latter, a rectangular enclosure, surrounded
by arcades, with projecting domed pavilions at the upper and lower ends,
is generally held to be the finest production of the later period of the
style.
The same materials are used here as in the other buildings—plaster shaped
in the most exquisite forms and coloured brilliantly, tiles ornamented
with patterns and devices of the most elaborate character, and wooden
ceilings carved and richly painted. All these are handled with such
correct taste that their brilliancy never degenerates into gaudiness.
A splendid fountain in the centre of the court, the lower bowl of which
is supported upon the backs of lions, explains the name given to this
celebrated structure.
The mosque of Cordova is superior, in respect to materials, to the other
remaining Moorish buildings in Spain, in which plaster is used to excess.
It is vain, however, to look in any of them for any distinct or novel
constructional departure. The lintel and arch in Greece and Rome, the
dome carried on pendentives in Byzance, were features giving character to
each style, but the art of the Mahometan architects differed only in form
and colour from its predecessors. The horseshoe arch with one and two
centres, that is both round and pointed, was used by them
almost exclusively, but it cannot rank as a constructional invention, for
the real arch starts only at the level of the centres, and the remaining
lower portion is a mere corbelling to obtain a form pleasing to the eye.
Any new method of construction always affected the surrounding parts, and
often altered the whole design of a building. It is obvious, therefore,
that a mere change in the appearance of an arch such as this, which
affects nothing connected with it, cannot be said to have created any new
era in the progress of building.
We hear the question frequently asked why a modern and new style is not
developed in our times, and the answer architects make is illustrated
by just this case, that is, that no new style can be evolved without a
new constructive principle. As yet none such has been forthcoming, the
only novel method of construction lately introduced being the employment
of iron girders and posts, which, from an artistic point of view, can
scarcely be considered an improvement upon the use of what are called the
natural building materials.
IX.
THE ROMANESQUE STYLE.
Some late historians have departed from the previously generally accepted
nomenclature of architectural styles, in designating under the general
term of Christian architecture all buildings erected between the tenth
and sixteenth centuries in Western Europe.
As, however, Christian building in Europe began with the conversion of
Constantine, this chronology is hardly satisfactory, and as the customary
division of Gothic from the styles preceding it, is on many grounds a
convenient one, it is preferable to adopt the conventional names, and to
distinguish under the title of “Romanesque” the outgrowth of the debased
form of Roman architecture which, influenced by Byzantine and Arabic art,
formed a distinct method of building throughout the West for nearly two
centuries after the year 1000 A.D., giving it the alternative name of
“Norman” in Normandy and England.
Previous to this date the long continuance of war and barbaric incursions
seem to have prevented the erection of any stable edifices; fire and the
poverty of the material with which they were constructed
having caused the destruction of the few of which an account has been
preserved.
Many churches subsequently built, however, were erected upon the sites of
these older ones and have fragments of the older buildings incorporated
in them. Of such are the churches of St. Germain des Prés, in Paris, and
Notre Dame du Port, at Clermont.
Under Charlemagne, a revival of art was attempted, the chief building
constructed by him being a reproduction of St. Vitale, of Ravenna,
in which he employed sculpture and ornament torn from the original
structure, and fragments from the edifices of ancient Rome; but this
effort soon died away, and the period intervening between the eighth and
tenth centuries was totally lacking in any architectural production of
merit.
As the Roman principles of architecture had been taken Eastward and
gradually transformed into a new style at Byzance, so also in the
West they had been the forerunners of another method of building, but
proportionately different in accordance with the character, customs, and
race of the Western populations.
The basilica formed, as it had in the East, the model upon which all
church architecture was designed, the nave, transept, aisles, and
apse being all retained in this new class of buildings, but many of
the building methods were new, and the details of their
decoration differed considerably from the precise proportions and Classic
graces of the buildings of Rome. The result exhibits a curious contrast
between the barbaric ornament and the scientific construction, which
advanced throughout the style in the genuine efforts which were made to
progress in the art of building.
Starting thus at the decadence of Classic art, with a Classical building
as the original type for their churches, the Romanesque architects
took up each of the parts combining in its formation, and sought to
improve or elaborate each, in pursuance of certain ends, arising from
local necessities. There is virtually no point where Romanesque ends
and Gothic commences, to give due reason for the conventional divisions
of historians, for the one style melts into the other in the continual
progress in the study of the principles of construction which was
steadily effected throughout both styles.
They differ chiefly in that, during the two centuries prior to the
thirteenth century, the pointed arch was rarely used, and that the
influence of the Classic decadence is more apparent in the buildings
of the earlier period. After this, the pointed arch became universal,
and the whole style becoming entirely distinct from its derivation, the
ornament and detail, quite unlike anything which had come before, it may
be said that a new style had been created.
This new style, which has been called Gothic, continued
to be developed until the fifteenth century, when its principles became
exaggerated, and it died out at the extreme point to which they could be
pushed.
It has been customary to call the buildings of the eleventh and twelfth
centuries, built in the transition of Roman to Gothic art, Romanesque;
but the pointed arch was used in both styles, though, as stated above,
less frequently in the earlier one; and it should not, therefore, be
taken as the distinguishing characteristic of Gothic architecture.
The chief points wherein the Romanesque churches, which were the only
buildings of importance constructed at that period, differed from the
basilicas were in the methods of vaulting and their consequent effects
upon the whole structure, the elaboration of the apse, and the system
of connected supports employed. The main characteristics of the style
were the same in all Western countries, and these being known, it is not
difficult to distinguish the slight differences arising from local causes.
In the old basilicas the aisles, whether of one or two stories, were
lighted by windows in the lateral walls, while the nave borrowed light
from them, and also received it directly from a clerestory rising above
the roof of the galleries. As we have seen, these buildings were usually
covered by wooden roofs, tunnel-vaults or a series of intersecting
vaults thrown across the square formed by two of the columns of the
nave, equidistant from each other and from corresponding
pilasters in the side walls, being only occasionally used in the aisles.
The Western architects of the tenth century continued to build their
churches in this manner, and we have a splendid example of a timber
roof of this kind, as late even as the twelfth century, in Peterborough
Cathedral; but at an early period they sought to replace these perishable
roofs by stone vaults. They found the construction of the semi-dome of
the apse and the vaulting of the side aisles, either by a continuous
tunnel-vault, by a series of semicircular vaults perpendicular to
the lateral walls, or by intersecting vaults upon a square plan,
comparatively easy; but the vaulting of the nave was a much more
difficult matter.
The circular tunnel-vault would have been the simplest known method of
accomplishing this, but the pressure of a circular vault placed over the
nave would have tended to push outward the walls upon which it rested,
and this pressure being continuous, it was obviously of no avail to place
buttresses at any separate point, and to place a great number, side by
side, all along the vault, or, in other words, to greatly thicken the
supporting wall, was to take up too much valuable ground space.
In St. Front and kindred structures we have seen the problem solved in
one way by the introduction of Byzantine domes; but these churches were
confined to a province of Southern France, and had but little influence
in other districts. In St. Etienne de Nevers, St. Sernin de Toulouse,
and in Notre Dame du Port at Clermont in Auvergne, and others, this
difficulty is partially overcome by the building of a half vault over
the upper galleries connecting the tunnel-vault of the nave with the
outer main walls, and taking the strain continuously, the thickness
of the outer wall not being considered of consequence. This system
permitted the placing of roofing-tiles directly upon the extrados
of the vaults, and the entire suppression of wooden rafters, which
was advantageous in diminishing the risk of fire, although the pitch
was scarcely sufficient to prevent leakage. The great disadvantage,
however, was that the nave had only borrowed light, and in large
churches it was inconveniently dark.
Another method adopted was that of suppressing the upper gallery, and
bringing the arches of the aisles up to the level of the springing of
the main vault, so that the summits of the side vaults and the walls
erected between them, which were at right angles to the nave, served to
counteract the strain of the upper vault. We have examples of this in
the cathedral of Limoges and at Fontenay, but it is open to the same
objection, that of darkening the nave.
Still another system consisted in binding the vault over the nave by ribs
or arches thrown across to opposite piers, which were strengthened by
buttresses. These buttresses, however, were built upon the top of the
arches, thrown across the aisles, and did more harm than good.
[Illustration: ELEVATION.
ROMANESQUE CONSTRUCTION]
[Illustration: SECTION.]
There is an example of unusual construction at Tournus, in Burgundy,
where the difficulty is effectually surmounted by the building of a
number of arches at right angles to the axis of the nave, between each
set of piers; but the effect is far from satisfactory.
Finally at Vezelay, in France, the tunnel-vault was abandoned and
diagonal intersecting vaults were thrown across the nave, framed in
between semicircular arch ribs carried upon piers spaced at equal
intervals, the weight being thus wholly transferred to the four points at
the angles of each compartment. It was found, however, that these piers
needed strengthening, as the strain upon them was excessive, and it was
thus that external buttresses were resorted to, which were connected with
the piers by arches, called flying buttresses, bridging the side aisles
and conveying the pressure to the outer wall. A weight was placed over
each buttress, generally taking the form of a pinnacle, which stiffened
it and counteracted the pressure of the arch.
An illustration of this mode of construction has been attempted in the
accompanying drawing, which does not represent any special building, but
in which the chief characteristics of the style at this juncture have
been introduced.
The distance across the nave being usually greater than that between
the columns dividing it from the aisles, the rectangular
compartments of the vault were consequently no longer square, but oblong,
so that while the arches crossing the nave at right angles were still
semicircular those between the pillars were pointed.
The transition from this, in the thirteenth century, to the definite
adoption of the pointed vault was consequently but a step.
We see, thus, that a continual progress was made in vaulting throughout
the style, and the principle of concentrating weight upon isolated points
was evolved in order to vault the nave and at the same time give direct
light to it. In effecting this result, however, the original aim had
been lost sight of—namely, that of avoiding the use of wooden roofs;
for when the Romanesque architects abandoned tunnel-vaulting they had
to surmount their more complicated intersecting vaults by wooden roofs,
the perishable nature of which caused the ruin of many of the finest
buildings. Nor was the external appearance of these roofs any improvement
upon those of St. Etienne and St. Sernin, for it is a question whether
any more monumental roof has been conceived than that which is formed by
the natural outside surface of stone vaults.
In the old basilicas, columns taken from or modelled upon those of the
temples and palaces of Rome had sufficed to support the light brick wall,
carried upon an architrave or arches, which enclosed the nave. When the
Western architects resumed the building of churches, after an interval
of war and trouble which had proved fatal to architectural progress,
brick was little used and the formation of light masonry and good mortar
were lost arts. The slender Classic column was consequently insufficient
to carry the load of a heavy stone wall and had, necessarily, to be
replaced by a more solid pier.