A Text-Book of the History of Architecture Part 23

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 181.--COLONNADE OF LOUVRE.]

+OTHER BUILDINGS.+ To Louis XIV. is also due the vast but uninteresting +Hotel des Invalides+ or veteran's asylum, at Paris, by J. H. Mansart.

To the chapel of this inst.i.tution was added, in 1680-1706, the celebrated +Dome+ of the Invalides, a masterpiece by the same architect.

In plan it somewhat resembles Bramante's scheme for St. Peter's--a Greek cross with domical chapels in the four angles and a dome over the centre. The exterior (Fig. 182), with the lofty gilded dome on a high drum adorned with engaged columns, is somewhat high for its breadth, but is a harmonious and impressive design; and the interior, if somewhat cold, is elegant and well proportioned. The chief innovation in the design was the wide separation of the interior stone dome from the lofty exterior decorative cupola and lantern of wood, this separation being designed to meet the conflicting demands of internal and external effect. To the same architect is due the formal monotony of the +Place Vendome+, all the houses surrounding it being treated with a uniform architecture of colossal pilasters, at once monumental and inappropriate. One of the most pleasing designs of the time is the +Chateau de Maisons+ (1658), by _F. Mansart_, uncle of J. H. Mansart. In this the proportions of the central and terminal pavilions, the ma.s.s and lines of the steep roof _a la Mansarde_, the simple and effective use of the orders, and the refinement of all the details impart a grace of aspect rare in contemporary works. The same qualities appear also in the +Val-de-Grace+, by F. Mansart and Lemercier, a domical church of excellent proportions begun under Louis XIII. The want of s.p.a.ce forbids mention of other buildings of this period.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 182.--DOME OF THE INVALIDES.]

+THE DECLINE.+ Under Louis XV. the pedantry of the cla.s.sic period gave place to a protracted struggle between license and the severest cla.s.sical correctness. The exterior designs of this time were often even more uninteresting and bare than under Louis XIV.; while, on the other hand, interior decoration tended to the extreme of extravagance and disregard of constructive propriety. Contorted lines and crowded scrolls, sh.e.l.ls, and palm-leaves adorned the mantelpieces, cornices, and ceilings, to the almost complete suppression of straight lines.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 183.--FAcADE OF ST. SULPICE, PARIS.]

While these tendencies prevailed in many directions, a counter-current of severe cla.s.sicism manifested itself in the designs of a number of important public buildings, in which it was sought to copy the grandeur of the old Roman colonnades and arcades. The important church of +St.

Sulpice+ at Paris (Fig. 183) is an excellent example of this. Its interior, dating from the preceding century, is well designed, but in no wise a remarkable composition, following Italian models. The facade, added in 1755 by _Servandoni_, is, on the other hand, one of the most striking architectural objects in the city. It is a correct and well proportioned cla.s.sic composition in two stories--an Ionic arcade over a Doric colonnade, surmounted by two lateral turrets. Other monuments of this cla.s.sic revival will be noticed in Chapter XXV.

+PUBLIC SQUARES.+ Much attention was given to the embellishment of open s.p.a.ces in the cities, for which the cla.s.sic style was admirably suited.

The most important work of this kind was that on the north side of the Place de la Concorde, Paris. This splendid square, perhaps, on the whole, the finest in Europe (though many of its best features belong to a later date), was at this time adorned with the two monumental colonnades by _Gabriel_. These colonnades, which form the decorative fronts for blocks of houses, deserve praise for the beauty of their proportions, as well as for the excellent treatment of the arcade on which they rest, and of the pavilions at the ends.

+IN GENERAL.+ French Renaissance architecture is marked by good proportions and harmonious and appropriate detail. Its most interesting phase was unquestionably that of Francis I., so far, at least, as concerns exterior design. It steadily progressed, however, in its mastery of planning; and in its use of projecting pavilions crowned by dominant ma.s.ses of roof, it succeeded in preserving, even in severely cla.s.sic designs, a picturesqueness and variety otherwise impossible.

Roofs, dormers, chimneys, and staircases it treated with especial success; and in these matters, as well as in monumental dispositions of plan, the French have largely retained their pre-eminence to our own day.

+MONUMENTS.+ (Mainly supplementary to text. Ch. = chateau; P. = palace; C. = cathedral; Chu. = church; H. = hotel; T.H. = town hall.)

TRANSITION: Blois, E. wing, 1499; Ch. Meillant; Ch. Chaumont; T.H.

Amboise, 1502-05.

FRANCIS I.: Ch. Nantouillet, 1517-25; Ch. Blois, W. wing (afterward demolished) and N. wing, 1520-30; H. Lallemant, Bourges, 1520; Ch. Villers-Cotterets, 1520-59; P. of Archbishop, Sens, 1521-35; P. Fontainebleau (Cour Ovale, Cour d'Adieux, Gallery Francis I., 1527-34; Peristyle, Chapel St. Saturnin, 1540-47, by _Gilles le Breton_; Cour du Cheval Blanc, 1527-31, by _P. Chambiges_); H. Bernuy, Toulouse, 1528-39; P. Granvelle, Besancon, 1532-40; T.H. Niort, T.H. Loches, 1532-43: H. de Ligeris (Carnavalet), Paris, 1544, by _P. Lescot_; churches of Gisors, nave and facade, 1530; La Dalbade, Toulouse, portal, 1530; St.

Symphorien Tours, 1531; Chu. Tillieres, 1534-46.

ADVANCED RENAISSANCE: Fontaine des Innocents, Paris, 1547-50, by _P. Lescot_ and _J. Goujon_; tomb Francis I., at St. Denis, 1555, by _Ph. de l'Orme_; H. Catelan, Toulouse, 1555; tomb Henry II., at St. Denis, 1560; portal S. Michel, Dijon, 1564; Ch. Sully, 1567; T.H. Arras, 1573; P. Fontainebleau (Cour du Cheval Blanc remodelled, 1564-66, by _P. Girard_; Cour de la Fontaine, same date); T.H. Besancon, 1582; Ch. Charleval, 1585, by, _J. B. du Cerceau_.

STYLE OF HENRY IV.: P. Fontainebleau (Galerie des Cerfs, Chapel of the Trinity, Baptistery, etc.); P. Tuileries (Pav. de Flore, by _du Cerceau_, 1590-1610; long gallery continued); Hotel Vogue, at Dijon, 1607; Place Dauphine, Paris, 1608; P. de Justice, Paris, Great Hall, by _S. de Brosse_, 1618; H. Sully, Paris, 1624-39; P. Royal, Paris, by _J. Lemercier_, for Cardinal Richelieu, 1627-39; P. Louvre doubled in size, by the same; P. Tuileries (N.

wing, and Pav. Marsan, long gallery completed); H. Lambert, Paris; T.H. Reims, 1627; Ch. Blois, W. wing for Gaston d'Orleans, by _F.

Mansart_, 1635; facade St. etienne du Mont, Paris, 1610; of St.

Gervais, Paris, 1616-21, by _S. de Brosse_.

STYLE OF LOUIS XIV.: T.H. Lyons, 1646; P. Louvre, E. colonnade and court completed, 1660-70; Tuileries altered by Le Vau, 1664; observatory at Paris, 1667-72; arch of St. Denis, Paris, 1672, by _Blondel_; Arch of St. Martin, 1674, by _Bullet_; Banque de France, H. de Luyne, H. Soubise, all in Paris; Ch. Chantilly; Ch.

de Tanlay; P. St. Cloud; Place des Victoires, 1685; Chu. St.

Sulpice, Paris, by _Le Vau_ (facade, 1755); Chu. St. Roch, Paris, 1653, by _Lemercier_ and _de Cotte_; Notre Dame des Victoires, Paris, 1656, by _Le Muet_ and _Bruant_.

THE DECLINE: P. Bourbon, 1722; T.H. Rouen; Halle aux Bles (recently demolished), 1748; ecole Militaire, 1752-58, by _Gabriel_; P. Louvre, court completed, 1754, by the same; Madeleine begun, 1764; H. des Monnaies (Mint), by _Antoine_; ecole de Medecine, 1774, by _Gondouin_; P. Royal, Great Court, 1784, by _Louis_; Theatre Francais, 1784 (all the above at Paris); Grand Theatre, Bordeaux, 1785-1800, by _Louis_; Prefecture at Bordeaux, by the same; Ch. de Compiegne, 1770, by _Gabriel_; P. Versailles, theatre by the same; H. Montmorency, Soubise, de Varennes, and the Pet.i.t Luxembourg, all at Paris, by _de Cotte_; public squares at Nancy, Bordeaux, Valenciennes, Rennes, Reims.

CHAPTER XXIII.

RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN GREAT BRITAIN AND THE NETHERLANDS.

BOOKS RECOMMENDED: As before, Fergusson, Pal.u.s.tre. Also, Belcher and Macartney, _Later Renaissance Architecture in England_.

Billings, _Baronial and Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Scotland_.

Blomfield, _A Short History of Renaissance Architecture in England_. Britton, _Architectural Antiquities of Great Britain_.

Ewerbeck, _Die Renaissance in Belgien und Holland_. Galland, _Geschichte der Hollandischen Baukunst im Zeitalter der Renaissance_. Gotch and Brown, _Architecture of the Renaissance in England_. Loftie, _Inigo Jones and Wren_. Nash, _Mansions of England_. Papworth, _Renaissance and Italian Styles of Architecture in Great Britain_. Richardson, _Architectural Remains of the Reigns of Elizabeth and James I._ Schayes, _Histoire de l'architecture en Belgique_.

+THE TRANSITION.+ The architectural activity of the sixteenth century in England was chiefly devoted to the erection of vast country mansions for the n.o.bility and wealthy _bourgeoisie_. In these seignorial residences a degenerate form of the Gothic, known as the Tudor style, was employed during the reigns of Henry VII. and Henry VIII., and they still retained much of the feudal aspect of the Middle Ages. This style, with its broad, square windows and ample halls, was well suited to domestic architecture, as well as to collegiate buildings, of which a considerable number were erected at this time. Among the more important palaces and manor-houses of this period are the earlier parts of Hampton Court, Haddon and Hengreave Halls, and the now ruined castles of Raglan and Wolterton.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 184.--BURGHLEY HOUSE.]

+ELIZABETHAN STYLE.+ Under Elizabeth (1558-1603) the progress of cla.s.sic culture and the employment of Dutch and Italian artists led to a gradual introduction of Renaissance forms, which, as in France, were at first mingled with others of Gothic origin. Among the foreign artists in England were the versatile Holbein, Trevigi and Torregiano from Italy, and Theodore Have, Bernard Jansen, and Gerard Chrismas from Holland. The pointed arch disappeared, and the orders began to be used as subordinate features in the decoration of doors, windows, chimneys, and mantels.

Open-work bal.u.s.trades replaced externally the heavy Tudor battlements, and a peculiar style of carving in flat relief-patterns, resembling _applique_ designs cut out with the jigsaw and attached by nails or rivets, was applied with little judgment to all possible features.

Ceilings were commonly finished in plaster, with elaborate interlacing patterns in low relief; and this, with the increasing use of interior woodwork, gave to the mansions of this time a more homelike but less monumental aspect internally. English architects, like Smithson and Thorpe, now began to win the patronage at first monopolized by foreigners. In +Wollaton Hall+ (1580), by Smithson, the orders were used for the main composition with mullioned windows, much after the fas.h.i.+on of +Longleat House+, completed a year earlier by his master, John of Padua. During the following period, however (1590-1610), there was a reaction toward the Tudor practice, and the orders were again relegated to subordinate uses. Of their more monumental employment, the +Gate of Honor+ of Caius College, Cambridge, is one of the earliest examples.

Hardwicke and Charlton Halls, and Burghley, Hatfield, and Holland Houses (Fig. 184), are noteworthy monuments of the style.

+JACOBEAN STYLE.+ During the reign of James I. (1603-25), details of cla.s.sic origin came into more general use, but caricatured almost beyond recognition. The orders, though much employed, were treated without correctness or grace, and the ornament was unmeaning and heavy. It is not worth while to dwell further upon this style, which produced no important public buildings, and soon gave way to a more rigid cla.s.sicism.

+CLa.s.sIC PERIOD.+ If the cla.s.sic style was late in its appearance in England, its final sway was complete and long-lasting. It was _Inigo Jones_ (1572-1652) who first introduced the correct and monumental style of the Italian masters of cla.s.sic design. For Palladio, indeed, he seems to have entertained a sort of veneration, and the villa which he designed at Chiswick was a reduced copy of Palladio's Villa Capra, near Vicenza. This and other works of his show a failure to appreciate the unsuitability of Italian conceptions to the climate and tastes of Great Britain; his efforts to popularize Palladian architecture, without the resources which Palladio controlled in the way of decorative sculpture and painting, were consequently not always happy in their results. His greatest work was the design for a new +Palace at Whitehall+, London. Of this colossal scheme, which, if completed, would have ranked as the grandest palace of the time, only the +Banqueting Hall+ (now used as a museum) was ever built (Fig. 185). It is an effective composition in two stories, rusticated throughout and adorned with columns and pilasters, and contains a fine vaulted hall in three aisles. The plan of the palace, which was to have measured 1,152 720 feet, was excellent, largely conceived and carefully studied in its details, but it was wholly beyond the resources of the kingdom. The garden-front of +Somerset House+ (1632; demolished) had the same qualities of simplicity and dignity, recalling the works of Sammichele. Wilton House, Coles.h.i.+ll, the Villa at Chiswick, and St. Paul's, Covent Garden, are the best known of his works, showing him to have been a designer of ability, but hardly of the consummate genius which his admirers attribute to him.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 185.--BANQUETING HALL, WHITEHALL.]

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 186.--PLAN OF ST. PAUL'S, LONDON.]

+ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL.+ The greatest of Jones's successors was _Sir Christopher Wren_ (1632-1723), princ.i.p.ally known as the architect of +St. Paul's Cathedral+, London, built to replace the earlier Gothic cathedral destroyed in the great fire of 1666. It was begun in 1675, and its designer had the rare good fortune to witness its completion in 1710. The plan, as finally adopted, retained the general proportions of an English Gothic church, measuring 480 feet in length, with transepts 250 feet long, and a grand rotunda 108 feet in diameter at the crossing (Fig. 186). The style was strictly Italian, treated with sobriety and dignity, if somewhat lacking in variety and inspiration. Externally two stories of the Corinthian order appear, the upper story being merely a screen to hide the clearstory and its b.u.t.tresses. This is an architectural deception, not atoned for by any special beauty of detail.

The dominant feature of the design is the dome over the central area. It consists of an inner sh.e.l.l, reaching a height of 216 feet, above which rises the exterior dome of wood, surmounted by a stone lantern, the summit of which is 360 feet from the pavement (Fig. 187). This exterior dome, springing from a high drum surrounded by a magnificent peristyle, gives to the otherwise commonplace exterior of the cathedral a signal majesty of effect. Next to the dome the most successful part of the design is the west front, with its two-storied porch and flanking bell-turrets. Internally the excessive relative length, especially that of the choir, detracts from the effect of the dome, and the poverty of detail gives the whole a somewhat bare aspect. It is intended to relieve this ultimately by a systematic use of mosaic decoration, especially in the dome. The central area itself, in spite of the awkward treatment of the four smaller arches of the eight which support the dome, is a n.o.ble design, occupying the whole width of the three aisles, like the Octagon at Ely, and producing a striking effect of amplitude and grandeur. The dome above it is constructively interesting from the employment of a cone of brick masonry to support the stone lantern which rises above the exterior wooden sh.e.l.l. The lower part of the cone forms the drum of the inner dome, its contraction upward being intended to produce a perspective illusion of increased height.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 187.--EXTERIOR OF ST. PAUL'S CATHEDRAL.]

St. Paul's ranks among the five or six greatest domical buildings of Europe, and is the most imposing modern edifice in England.

+WREN'S OTHER WORKS.+ Wren was conspicuously successful in the designing of parish churches in London. +St. Stephen's+, Walbrook, is the most admired of these, with a dome resting on eight columns. Wren may be called the inventor of the English Renaissance type of steeple, in which a conical or pyramidal spire is harmoniously added to a belfry on a square tower with cla.s.sic details. The steeple of +Bow Church+, Cheapside, is the most successful example of the type. In secular architecture Wren's most important works were the plan for rebuilding London after the Great Fire; the new courtyard of Hampton Court, a quiet and dignified composition in brick and stone; the pavilions and colonnade of +Greenwich Hospital+; the Sheldonian Theatre at Oxford, and the Trinity College Library at Cambridge. Without profound originality, these works testify to the sound good taste and intelligence of their designer.

[Ill.u.s.tration: FIG. 188.--PLAN OF BLENHEIM.]

+THE 18TH CENTURY.+ The Anglo-Italian style as used by Jones and Wren continued in use through the eighteenth century, during the first half of which a number of important country-seats and some churches were erected. _Van Brugh_ (1666-1726), _Hawksmoor_ (1666-1736), and _Gibbs_ (1683-1751) were then the leading architects. Van Brugh was especially skilful in his dispositions of plan and ma.s.s, and produced in the designs of Blenheim and Castle Howard effects of grandeur and variety of perspective hardly equalled by any of his contemporaries in France or Italy. +Blenheim+, with its monumental plan and the sweeping curves of its front (Fig. 188), has an unusually palatial aspect, though the striving for picturesqueness is carried too far. Castle Howard is simpler, depending largely for effect on a somewhat inappropriate dome.

To Hawksmoor, his pupil, are due +St. Mary's, Woolnoth+ (1715), at London, in which by a bold rustication of the whole exterior and by windows set in large recessed arches he was enabled to dispense wholly with the orders; St. George's, Bloomsbury; the new quadrangle of All Souls at Oxford, and some minor works. The two most noted designs of James Gibbs are +St. Martin's-in-the-Fields+, at London (1726), and the +Radcliffe Library+, at Oxford (1747). In the former the use of a Corinthian portico--a practically uncalled-for but decorative appendage--and of a steeple mounted on the roof, with no visible lines of support from the ground, are open to criticism. But the excellence of the proportions, and the dignity and appropriateness of the composition, both internally and externally, go far to redeem these defects (Fig.

189). The Radcliffe Library is a circular domical hall surrounded by a lower circuit of alcoves and rooms, the whole treated with straightforward simplicity and excellent proportions. Colin Campbell, Flitcroft, Kent and Wood, contemporaries of Gibbs, may be dismissed with pa.s.sing mention.