CHAPTER III

.

PERU.

CONTENTS.

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

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

CHRONOLOGY.

DATES. Manco Capac A.D. 1021 Mayta Capac, 4th Inca, conquers Aymara 1126 Conquest by Pizarro 1534

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

PERU is situated geographically so near to Mexico, and the inhabitants of both countries had reached so nearly to the same grade of civilisation at the time when the Spaniards first visited them and destroyed their native institutions, that we might naturally expect a very considerable similarity in their modes of building and styles of decoration. Nothing, however, can be further from the fact; indeed it would be difficult to conceive two peoples, however remotely situated from one another, whose styles of art differ so essentially as these two.

The Mexican buildings, as we have just seen, are characterised by the most inordinate exuberance of carving, derived probably, with many of the forms of their architecture, from wooden originals. Peru, on the other hand, is one of the very few countries known where timber appears to have been used in primitive times so sparingly that its traces are hardly discernible in subsequent constructions; and either from inability to devise, or from want of taste for, such a mode of decoration, the sculptured forms are few and insignificant.

The material which the Peruvians seem to have used earliest was mud, and in that rainless climate many walls of this substance, erected certainly before the Spanish conquest, still remain in a state of very tolerable preservation. The next improvement on this seems to have been a sort of rubble masonry or concrete: the last, a Cyclopean masonry of great beauty and solidity. None of these forms, nor any of their derivatives, are found in Mexico; the climate would not permit of the use of the first—hardly of the second; and in all their buildings, even the earliest, the Mexicans seem to have known how to use stones carefully squared and set with horizontal beds.

Another distinction which Peruvian art has in common with many of those derived from purely stone construction, is the sloping sides of the openings—a form invented on purpose to diminish the necessary size of the lintel. There are two discharging arches so constructed at Uxmal, but, so far as is known, none anywhere else; and no single opening of that class in the whole architectural province of Mexico. The roofs and upper parts of the larger openings, on the contrary, almost universally slope in that country. In Peru the roofs are always flat, or domical, and the sides of the openings always straight-lined.

These remarks ought perhaps, in strictness, to be applied to the architecture of the Incas alone—the only one with which we have hitherto been made acquainted. Recently, however, it has dawned upon us, that before the time of Manco Capac the regions of Peru about the Lake Titicaca were inhabited by a race of Aymaras, who have left traces of their art in this region. Some illustrations of the remains of Tia Huanacu, at the southern end of Lake Titicaca, have reached this country, and from them we gather that the style is essentially different from that of the Incas. The most characteristic distinction being that in the Aymara style all the jambs of the doors are perpendicular, and all the angles right angles. In the Inca style, on the contrary, the jambs are almost all universally sloping, and rectangular forms are by no means common.

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

At Tia Huanacu there are two doorways, each cut out of a single block of hard volcanic stone. That shown in Woodcut No. 1027 measures 10 ft. in height and 13 ft. 3 in. across the top; or rather did before it was broken in two, apparently by an earthquake shock. In the centre of it is a mask cut with very considerable skill, and on each side a number of panels containing incised emblematical figures whose purport and meaning have not yet been explained. The other doorway (Woodcut No. 1028 ) is erect and entire, but perfectly plain. Its only ornaments are square sinkings cut with the admirable precision and clearness characteristic of the style.[499]

There is also at Tia Huanacu a great mound, apparently about 1000 ft. long by 400 in width, but the stone revêtment that gave it form has been removed in modern times, so that its shape is undistinguishable. It was apparently surrounded by a range of monolithic pillars or obelisks, like a Ceylonese dagoba, and had a wall of Cyclopean masonry outside these. There is also a square marked out by similar pillars, each of a single stone, 18 to 20 ft. in height, but whether originally connected or not cannot now be ascertained. The wonder of the place, however, is a monument of very uncertain destination, called the “Seats of the Judges,” consisting of great slabs of stone—there are either three or four, each 36 ft. sq. and 5 ft. thick, at one end of which the seats are carved. Without detailed plans and drawings it is difficult to form any reliable opinion regarding these remains, but it does seem that the people who executed them had a wonderful power of quarrying and moving masses, and an aspiration after eternity very unlike anything else found in this continent, and the details of their ornamentation neither resemble those of Mexico nor the succeeding style of the Incas.[500]

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

In his travels in Peru, Mr. Markham describes several towers as existing at Sillustani (Woodcut No. 1029), which he ascribes to the same people. These are certainly sepulchral, and are still filled with bones, which were apparently thrown in by an opening at the top, and rested in a chamber in the centre of the building.

Mr. Markham informs us that there are several other monuments of this class in the same district, about which it would be extremely interesting to know more. As there seems little doubt that they are older than the time of the Incas they must modify to a considerable extent any opinion we may form with regard to the origin of their art, though at the same time they add another to the unsolved problems connected with American architecture.

[Illustration: 1029. Tombs at Sillustani. (From a Drawing by Clements Markham, Esq.)]

Besides the strongly-marked distinction that exists between the architecture of Mexico and Peru, we have the negative evidence of their history and traditions, which make no mention of any intercourse between the Peruvians and any people to the northward. This, however, is not of much weight, as there are no accounts at all which go farther back than three or four centuries before the Spanish conquest, and our knowledge of who the Aymaras were is still vague in the extreme.

At about that period it is fabled that a godlike man, Manco Capac, appeared, with a divine consort, on an island in the Lake of Titicaca, journeying from whence they taught the rude and uncivilised inhabitants of the country to till the ground, to build houses and towns, and to live together in communities; and made for them such laws and regulations as were requisite for these purposes.

Like the Indian Bacchus, Manco Capac was after his death reverenced as a god, and his descendants, the Incas, were considered as of divine origin, and worshipped as children of the Sun, which was the great object of Peruvian adoration. At the time of the Spanish conquest the twelfth descendant of Manco Capac was on the throne, but, his father having married as one of his wives a woman of the Indian race, the prestige of the purity of Inca blood was tarnished, and the country was torn by civil wars, which greatly facilitated the progress of the Spaniards in their conquests under the unscrupulous Pizzaro.

[Illustration: 1030. Ruins of House of Manco Capac, in Cuzco. (From a Sketch by J. B. Pentland.)]

Both from its style and the traditions attached to it, the oldest building of the Incas seems to be that called the house of Manco Capac, on an island in the Lake of Titicaca. The part shown in the woodcut (No. 1030) is curvilinear in form, standing on a low terrace, and surmounted by upper chambers, hardly deserving the name of towers. All the doorways have sloping jambs, and the masonry is of rude, irregular polygonal blocks of no great size. Inside the wall are a number of small square chambers, lighted only from the doorway.

A more advanced specimen of building, though inferior in masonry, is the two-storeyed edifice called the House of the Nuns, or of the Virgins of the Sun, in the same place (Woodcut No. 1031). It is nearly square in plan, though with low projecting wings on one side, and is divided into twelve small square rooms on the ground-floor, and as many similar rooms above them. Several of these chambers were surrounded by others, and those that had no doors externally had no openings like windows (except one with two slits in the upper storey); and they must have been as dark as dungeons, unless the upper ones were lighted from the roof, which is by no means improbable. The most striking architectural features they possess are the doorways, which exactly resemble the Etruscan, both in shape and mode of decoration. We are able in this case to rely upon the accuracy of the representation, so that there can be no doubt of the close similarity.

Another building on the island of Coata, in the sacred lake of Titicaca, is raised on five low terraces, and surrounds three sides of a courtyard, its principal decoration being a range of doorways, some of them false ones, constructed with upright jambs, but contracted at the top by projecting courses of masonry, like inverted stairs—in this instance, however, only imitative, as the building is of rubble.

[Illustration: 1031. House of the Virgins of the Sun. (From a Sketch by J. B. Pentland.)]

The masonry of the principal tomb represented in the Woodcut No. 1032 may be taken as a fair specimen of the middle style of masonry; less rude than that of the house of Manco Capac, but less perfect than that of many subsequent examples. It is square in plan—a rare form for a tomb in any part of the world—and flat-roofed. The sepulchral chamber occupies the base, and is covered by a floor, above which is the only opening. The other tomb in the background is likewise square, but differs from the first in being of better masonry, and having been originally covered, apparently, with a dome-shaped roof either of clay or stucco. Some of these tombs are circular, though the square form seems more common, in those at least which have been noticed by Europeans.

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

A specimen of the perfected masonry of the Peruvians is represented in the Woodcut No. 1033. It is a portion of the wall of a Caravanserai, or _Tambos_, erected by the last Incas on the great road they made from their oldest capital, Cuzco, to Sinca. The road was itself perhaps the most extraordinary work of their race, being built of large blocks of hard stone, fitted together with the greatest nicety, and so well constructed as to remain entire to the present day in remote parts where uninjured by the hand of man.

The masonry here, as will be observed, is in regular courses, and beautifully executed, the joints being perfectly fitted, and so close as hardly to be visible, except that the stones are slightly convex on their faces, something after the manner of our rustications.

[Illustration: 1033. Elevation of Wall of Tambos. (From Humboldt’s ‘Atlas Pittoresque.’)]

Intermediate between the two extremes just mentioned are the walls of Cuzco, the ancient capital of the kingdom, forming altogether the most remarkable specimen now existing of the masonry of the ancient Peruvians. They are composed of immense blocks of limestone, of polygonal form, but beautifully fitted together; some of the stones are 8 and 10 ft. in length, by at least half as much in width and depth, and weigh from fifteen to twenty tons; these are piled one over the other in three successive terraces, and, as may be seen from the plan, are arranged with a degree of skill nowhere else to be met with in any work of fortification anterior to the invention of gunpowder. To use a modern term, it is a fortification _en tenaille_; the re-entering angles are generally right angles, so contrived that every part is seen, and as perfectly flanked as in the best European fortifications of the present day.

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

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

It is not a little singular that this perfection should have been reached by a rude people in Southern America while it escaped the Greeks and Romans, as well as the Mediæval engineers. The true method of its attainment was never discovered in Europe until it was forced on the attention of military men by the discovery of gunpowder. Here it is used by a people who never had, so far as we know, an external war, but who, nevertheless, have designed the most perfectly planned fortress we know.

Between these various specimens are many more, some less perfect than the walls of Cuzco, showing great irregularity in the form, and a greater admixture of large and small stones, than are there found; others, in which all the blocks are nearly of the same size, and the angles approach nearly to a right angle. Examples occur of every intermediate gradation between the house of Manco Capac (Woodcut No. 1030) and the Tambos (Woodcut No. 1033), precisely corresponding with the gradual progress of art in Latium, or any European country where the Cyclopean or Pelasgic style of building has been found. So much is this the case, that a series of examples collected by Mr. Pentland from the Peruvian remains might be engraved for a description of Italy, and Dodwell’s illustrations of those of Italy would serve equally to illustrate the buildings of South America.

From what has been said above, it seems by no means improbable that at some future time we may be able to trace a connection between the styles of architecture existing in Central America and those on the eastern shores of the Old World; but, for the present at least, that of Peru must be considered as one of the isolated styles of the world. At the same time it must be confessed that no style offers more tempting baits to those who are inclined to speculate on such a subject. The sloping jambs, the window cornices, the polygonal masonry, and other forms, so closely resemble what is found in the old Pelasgic cities of Greece and Italy, that it is difficult to resist the conclusion that there may be some relation between them. Either, it may be argued, men in certain circumstances do the same things in the same manner, as instinctively as bees or beavers, or by some means or other the arts of the Old World have been transferred to the New. In the present instance, at all events, the latter view can hardly be sustained. The distance of 2000 years in time that elapsed between the erection of the European and American examples is too great to be easily bridged over, and the distance in space is a still more insuperable objection. Even, however, if it were attempted to explain these away, the introduction of the Aymara style is in itself sufficient to settle the question. If that style preceded that of the Incas, as there is every reason to believe it did, it cuts across any such speculations. Its jambs are perpendicular, its angles rigidly rectangular, its surfaces smooth, and it is altogether as unlike the style that succeeded it as can well be conceived. We seem, therefore, forced to the conclusion that the sloping jambs of Inca architecture are only a natural expedient for shortening the length of the lintel, and their polygonal masonry probably arose from the surfaces of cleavage or fracture, into which certain kinds of stones naturally split.

Although, therefore, we are unable, with our present knowledge, to trace the external relation of the Peruvians to the other races of the American continent, there can be no doubt that when her architectural remains are properly investigated, we shall understand her history, and be able to assign to her civilization its proper rank, as compared with that of other nations. Eventually, also, we need not despair of being able to determine whether the gentle subjects of the Incas belonged to the Polynesian, or to which other of the great families of mankind.

When, indeed, we look back on the progress that has been achieved in the last few years, it seems difficult to assign a limit to the extent to which architecture may be employed in investigations of this sort. It was not, of course, even possible to rise to the conception of such a scheme for tracing the affinities of mankind, till the greater part of the world had been explored, and a sufficient amount of knowledge attained to render it certain that no such exceptions existed as would invalidate the general conclusions arrived at. Now, however, that this has been done, and that we are enabled to survey and to group the whole, it may safely be asserted that the great stone book on which men of all countries and all ages have engraved their thoughts, and to which they have committed their highest aspirations, is, of all those of its class now open to us, the most attractive, and for some purposes the most instructive. No one who has followed the inquiry can well doubt that in a few years more, architectural ethnology will take its proper rank as one of the most important adjuncts to all inquiries into the affinities and development of the various families of mankind.

INDEX TO VOLS. I. AND II.

-------

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

Aarhuus, church at, ii, 320. The Frue Kirke, 321.

Abbeville, ii, 160.

Abbeys, Cistercian, i, 14. Cluny, ii, 95. 99. Plan, 98. Abbaye aux Hommes and Abbaye aux Dames, Caen, 111-116. St. Denis, 122. Corvey, 221. Their sites in England, 388. Kilconnel, 445. Jerpoint, 457.

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

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

Abencerrages, hall of the, ii, 554.

Aberbrothock, ii, 438.

Aberdeen Cathedral, nave and spires, ii, 437. Material employed, _ibid._

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

Abo, Finland, church at, ii, 315.

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

Abouseer, Pyramid temple of, i, 107.

Abraham’s burial-place, i, 294. 363.

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

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

Abydus, remains of temples at, i, 128. Plans, _ibid._ Historical value of the tablet found there, 129. Fortress of, 137. Arch in the temple, 128. 214.

Acropolis, restored view of the, i, 240. Plan, 251. Early temple, 252.

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

Ægina, age of temple at, i, 252. Dimensions, _ibid. note_. Restored, 252.

Aerschot, Belgium, church at, ii, 194.

Æsthetic element in art, i, 4-10.

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

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

S. Agnese, basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515. Aisles, 515. 522. Section and plan, 522.

S. Agostino, basilican church, Rome, i, 515. Its style, 517.

Agrigentum, Doric temples at, i, 254. Telamones in the great temple, 269. Plan, 271. Peculiarities of form and construction, _ibid._ Elevation and section, 273. How lighted, 274.

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

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

Aigues Mortes, fortified town of, ii, 186.

Aillas, façade of church at, ii, 78.

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

Aisles in basilican churches, Rome, i, 515. Their alleged indispensability, ii, 83. Example of five aisles, 151. Seven aisles, 195.

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

Aix, France, baptistery at, ii, 59. Cloister, 61.

Aix-la-Chapelle, circular church at, its founder, &c., ii, 247. Plan and arrangements, 248. Choir, _ibid._ Charlemagne’s palace, 256.

Aizaini, temple at, i, 228.

Albano, tomb of Aruns at, i, 299.

S. Alban’s, ii, 411.

Alby Cathedral, peculiarities of its construction, ii, 69. 181. _See_ ii, 367. 486.

Alcala, Paranimfo at, ii, 497 _note_.

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

Alcazar, Seville, ii, 551.

Alcobaça, church at, ii, 509.

Alet, apse at, ii, 54. Interior, _ibid._ _See_ 467.

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

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

Algeria, architecture of, ii, 541.

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

Alhambra, the, ii, 545. 551-554. Date, founders, &c., 551. Plan, 552. Materials of the building, Court of Lions, &c., 553, 554.

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

Alost, belfry of, ii, 200.

Alsace, ii, 44. Churches: Rosheim, ii, 239. Ottmarsheim, 250. Thann, 276. _See_ Strasburg.

Altenberg, near Cologne, merits of church of, ii, 268. Cloisters, 261.

Altenfurt, circular chapel at, ii, 254.

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

Amalfi, cloisters at, i, 605.

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

Amenemhat III., pyramid of, i, 141. Inscriptions in labyrinth, i, 112.

Amenhotep III., tomb of, i, 133.

America, ancient, architecture of, ii, 563.

Amiens Cathedral, ii, 53, 131. Its plan, 135. Proportional defects, 140. Flying buttresses, 173. Stalls, 181. Compared with Cologne, 270, 271. With English examples, 373, 380, 381, 384, 385.

Amphitheatre: Etruscan, at Sutrium, i, 293. 337 and _note_. Flavian, or Colosseum, Rome, 337-340. Capua, Nîmes, 340. Verona, Pola, 341. Otricoli, the ‘Castrense,’ Arles, 342.

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

Amru, mosque of, ii, 30. Date and original dimensions, 525. Ground-plan and arches, 526, 527. Minaret, 534.

Amsterdam, churches at, ii, 207.

Ancona, Trajan’s arch at, i, 347.

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

Andernach, church at, ii, 238. The Weigh-tower, 296.

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

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

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

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

Angers, cathedral of, ii, 81. Church of St. Trinité, 82. St. Sergius, 84. Arches recently discovered, castle, &c., 88.

Angilbertus, silver altar of, i, 567.

Angoulême, domical cathedral of, ii, 68. Plan and section, 68. Façade, 79.

Ani, capital of Armenia, cathedral of, i, 473. Side elevation, 474. Tombs, 475. Capital, 477.

Anjou, architectural province of, its boundaries, &c., ii, 41, 43. Age of its greatest splendour, 81. Examples of its church architecture, 81-87. Conventual buildings, castles, &c., 87-88.

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

Antelami’s baptistery, Parma, ii, 12.

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

Antinoë, Hadrian’s arch at, i, 348.

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

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

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

Antwerp Cathedral, ii, 138. 188. Proportional defects, 195. Plan, 196. Church of St. Jacques, 197. Boucherie, 204. Exchange, 205.

Apocalyptic churches, the seven, ii, 446.

SS. Apollinare Nuovo and Apollinare-in-Classe, Ravenna, basilicas of, i, 528-530.

Apollo, temples of: Branchidæ, i, 258. Bassæ, 254, 265, 270.

Apollo Didymæus, Ionic temple to, i, 256. Dimensions, 258.

Apollo Epicurius, Doric temple of, i, 254.

Apostles, churches dedicated to the: Constantinople, i, 451, 531; ii, 557. Cologne, 191.

Appian Way, i, 385.

Apse, early example of, i, 316. Its use in Roman basilicas, 329. 332. 507. In early Christian churches, 509, 510. 512. 523. Ravenna, 528-531. 536. Polygonal apses, i, 528. 532. 537 and _note_. Treble apse, 538. Torcello, 539. Byzantine examples: Qalb Louzeh, 425. Thessalonica, 458. Athens, 460. Mistra, 463. Italian examples: Pavia, 565. St. Ambrogio, 566. Verona, 570. San Pellino, 592, 593 and _note_. Lydda, ii, 37. Singular example at St. Quinide, 53. Alet, 54. Triapsal church, Planes, 59. Cruas, 60. Romanesque form, 73. The apse proper as distinguished from the chevet, _ibid._ Querqueville, 110. St. Stephen’s, Caen, 111. Bayeux, 118. Gernrode, 220. Trèves, 224. Mayence, 230. Cologne, 233-234. Bonn, 235. Scandinavian example, 315. St. Bartolomeo, Toledo, 497. Use made of the apse, 388. _See_ Chevet.

Apulia, churches in, i, 582. 592.

Aqueduct: Etruscan, at Tusculum, i, 301. Rome, at Nîmes, Segovia, and Tarragona, 385, 386.

Aquileja, basilican church at, ii, 220 _note_.

Aquitania, architectural boundaries of, ii, 41, 42. Style peculiar to the province, 64. Examples of same, 64-80. Chevet churches, 72-76. Façades, 78.

Arabs, architectural habits of the, ii, 514. Considerations in regard to their immigration into other lands, 513-515.

Arbroath, ii, 438.

Arc de l’Etoile, Paris, i, 30.

Arcades of the Romans, i, 313. At Spalato, 314. St. John Lateran, 599. German example, ii, 257. Holyrood, 436. Saracenic, 528.

Arch, objection of the Hindus to the, i, 22. 217. To what extent known to the Egyptians, 214-218. Examples at Nimroud and Khorsabad, 215. Oldest in Europe, 216. Delos, 245. Etruscan examples, 300, 301. Advances of the Romans, 306. Ctesiphon, 399. Thessalonica, 421. Screen at Angers, ii, 88. Horseshoe arch at Göllingen, 238. Oxford, 366. Jedburgh, 421. Kelso, 422. Holyrood, 436. Clonmacnoise, 452. Mosque of Amru, 525. _See_ Pointed Arches. Triumphal Arches.

Archæology an essential adjunct in Ethnological studies, i, 53. 84, 85. Instance of its value, 241.

Architecture: points of view from which it may be studied; value of the historic method, i, 3. Principles distinguishing it from painting and sculpture, 4. Their office in connection with it, 5. Earlier and later systems: result of the latter, 11, 12. Definition of the art and elucidations of same, 12, 13. Respective provinces of engineer and architect, 15, 16. Technical principles: Mass, 16. Stability, 17. Durability, 18. Materials, 19. Construction, 22. Forms, 25. Proportion, 26. Carved ornament, 31. Decorative colour, 35. Sculpture and painting, 37. Uniformity, 39. Imitation of Nature, 40. Association, 43. New style, 44. Prospects, 47. Essential fact in connection with architectural history, 55. Chief divisions therein, 87, 88, 89. Various styles: Egyptian, i, 91. Assyrian, 151. Greece, 240. Etruscan and Roman, 289. Parthian and Sassanian, 389. Byzantine, 419. Russian, 484. Italy, 500. France, ii, 39. Belgium and Holland, 187. Germany, 209. Scandinavia, 313. England, 335. Spain and Portugal, 460. Saracenic, 512. Ancient American, 583.

Ardmore, bas-relief at, ii, 448. Round tower, 454.

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

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

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

Arles, amphitheatre at, i, 342. Church of St. Trophime, ii, 51, 52. Tower, 60. Cloisters, 61. _See_ 29. 402.

Armenia, i, 466. Examples of its architecture, 466-478. _See_ Ani.

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

Arpino, Etruscan gateway at, i, 301.

Arranmore, Galway, ii, 446 _note_.

Arsinoë, Column of Victory at, i, 353.

Artemisia, tomb erected by, i, 282.

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

Aryans, first users of iron, i, 56. Their origin, migrations, &c., 75, 76. Purity and exaltedness of their religion, 76, 77. Form of government, prevalence of caste, &c., 78, 79. Morals and Literature: result of the perfect structure of their language, 79, 80. Why the Fine Arts do not flourish among them, 81. Their proficiency in the useful arts, 82. Their true mission, 83. In Russia, 484. In Spain, ii, 462. _See_ i, 65. 71. 73, 74. 251. ii, 337.

Asia Minor, advantageous position of, epoch of its history, &c., i, 229. Oldest remains, 230. Tumuli and rock-cut monuments, 230-232. Lycia and its tombs, 233-239. Existence of an Ionic order, 256. Corinthian example, 257. Theatres, 280. Turkish conquest, ii, 515.

Asoka, Buddhist king, result of his alliance with Megas, i, 285 _note_. _See_ ii, 586.

Assisi, church at, i, 611, 612.

Assos, gateway at, i, 246.

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

Assyrians, borrowings of the Greeks from the, i, 33. 35. 154. Examples of their architecture how preserved, 68. Occasion of their rise, 152. M. Botta’s exploration, 154. Chronological epochs, 155. Chaldean period, 157-167. Palatial architecture: sources of information, 168. Babylonian and Ninevite palaces. 169. Buildings at Khorsabad, 171-181. Peculiarity of construction common to their palaces, 172. Interior of a Yezidi house, 182. Houses of the humbler classes, 183. Sculptured representations of buildings, 187-189. Temples and tombs, 191. Value of their wall-sculptures, 193. Rank to be assigned to their architecture, _ibid._ Purposes for which only they used stone, 194. Users of the pointed arch, ii, 45. _See_ Chaldean. Khorsabad. Koyunjik.

Asti, baptistery at: Plan i, 561. Description, 562. Church and Porch, 610. View of the Porch, 611. Tower, ii, 6.

Asturias, churches in the, ii, 464.

Athens, influence on art of the admixture of races at, i, 242. Temples, 252, 253. 324. The Propylæa, 254. Corinthian examples, 257. Hadrian’s arch, 348. Byzantine churches: Panagia Lycodemo, i, 460, 461. 463. Cathedral, 461.

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

Atreus, treasury or tomb of, i, 243. Fragment of column, 244.

Atrium, the, in basilican churches, i, 513. Novara, 562. San Ambrogio, Milan, 566.

Augsburg Cathedral, ii, 286.

Augustan age, sole remains of the i, 315. S. Augustine, Canterbury, original church of, ii, 344.

Augustus, arches erected by, i, 347. His tomb, 355.

Autun, double-arched Roman gates at, i, 349. Aisle and nave of cathedral, ii, 100. Its spire, 149.

Auvergne, architectural province of, ii, 41. 43. Its peculiar features, physical and architectural, 89. Central towers and vaults, 90. Chevets, 91, 92. Fortified church, 93.

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

Avallon, ii, 95.

Avignon, cathedral at, ii, 50. Porch, 51. St. Paul-Trois-Châteaux, 55. Palace of the popes, 186.

Avila, church of San Vicente, ii, 473. Western porch, 474.

Axum, obelisks at, i, 150.

Azhar, mosque of, ii, 30. Date and character, 530.

Aztecs and Toltecs, early inhabitants of Mexico, ii, 583-585. Inference from their architectural remains, 589. _See_ Mexico.

Baalbec, magnitude of the stones used at, i, 19. 326. Frieze there, 311. Remains of the great temple, 325. Plan, elevation, &c., of the smaller temple, 325.

Babouda, Syria, chapel at, i, 426.

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

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

Bagdad, ii, 548. Materials of its buildings, 567. Absence of remains: its ancient splendour, 567. Tomb of Zobeidé, 568.

Bahram Gaur, fourteenth Sassanian King, i, 393.

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

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

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

Bamberg, Church of St. Jacob at, ii, 240. Cathedral, 286.

Baptisteries, i, 512. of Constantine and his daughter, 544. Nocera dei Pagani, 546, 547. St. John, Ravenna, 547. Florence, 551. Novara, 552. Asti, 561. Mont St. Angelo, 601. Parma, ii, 1. Aix; Riez, 459. Bonn, Ratisbon, and Cobern, 252-253. Meissen, 289.

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

Barbarossa’s palace, Gelnhausen, ii, 256.

Barbary, ii, 515. Examples of its architecture, 538-541.

Barcelona, church of San Pablo, ii, 464. Plan and detail, 466. Cathedral, plan and dimensions, 485. Churches of SS. Maria del Mar and del Pi, 486.

Bari Cathedral, i, 592. Plan, 591. East end, 592. Defects in the towers, 605. Dome, 600. Church of San Nicolo, 594. view of, 594.

Barletta, i, 595.

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

Basilicas, importance attached by the Romans to, i, 327. Trajan’s, its plan, dimensions, arrangement, &c., 328, 329. Difference between it and that of Maxentius, _ibid._ Plan, particulars, &c., of the latter, 330, 331. Construction of the roofs, 332. Provincial Basilicas: Trèves, Pompeii, Otricoli, 332, 333. Origin and peculiar applicability for Christian uses of these buildings, 334. Examples in Bethlehem, Jerusalem, Thessalonica, Syria, and Asia Minor, i, 419-431. Christian basilicas; Preliminary observations, 504-508. African examples, 508-511. Modifications introduced by Christian usages, 512. Choirs and crypts: the atrium and the narthex, 513, 514. Chronological list of basilicas in Rome, 515. Peculiarities of the more important ones, 517-530. Mosaic pavements, 527. Ravenna, 527. St. Mark’s, Venice, 530. Dalmatia and Istria, 536. Torcello, 538. Causes of Byzantine, Lombardic, and Gothic varieties, 540. Distinction between the basilica and the church, 542-543. German examples, ii, 214 _et seq._ Use made of the apse, 388. Absence of basilicas in Ireland, 446.

Basle Cathedral, doorway of, ii, 244. Its one defect, 245.

Bassæ, Ionic column at, i, 265.

Basse Œuvre, Beauvais, plan and section, ii, 105. Exterior and interior, 106. Probable date, 107. _See_ ii, 344.

Batalha, church of, ii, 507, 508. Its circular tomb-house, 508.

Baths of the Romans, i, 342-346. Of the Moors in Spain, ii, 555.

Battlements, Jerpoint abbey, ii, 457.

Bavarian church architecture, ii, 287, 288.

Bayazid, mosque of, ii, 558.

Bayeux Cathedral, ii, 118. Nave and spandrils, 118. Spires, 176.

Bays in cathedrals—Italy: Verona, i, 612. Lucca, 613. France: Angoulême, ii, 68. Fontevrault, 84. Caen, 115. Their object and arrangement, 167. Exeter and Westminster, 371. Kirkwall, 423. Spain: Leon and Burgos, 484.

Bazas Cathedral: plan, ii, 150. Description, 151.

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

Beauty in art, i, 5.

Beauvais Cathedral, choir of, i, 18. The Basse Œuvre, ii, 105. Wooden-roofed churches, 107. Date of the cathedral, 142. Casualties due to constructive faults, _ibid._ Its magnificence, 143.

Becket, Thomas à, his asylum, ii, 155. Becket’s Norwegian counterpart crown, Canterbury, ii, 317 _note_, 344.

Bedochwinta, Armenia, church at, i, 471. proof of its comparative modernness, 471.

Beejapore, i, 444.

Beisan, khans at, ii, 525.

Belem, date of chapel at, ii, 433. Gothic remains, 507. Church of the Convent, 507. Façade, 509, 510.

Belfries and campaniles. Bell-towers of Moscow, i, 497. Italian campaniles: Verona, ii, 7. Mantua, 7. Florence, 7. Belgium, their occasion and uses, ii, 199. Examples, 200. Swedish example, 316.

Belgium, immigration of Germans into, and its results, ii, 187. Its cathedrals, 188. Pre-eminence of its town-halls and burgher-residences, 189. Examples of its churches, 189-198. Cause of their preservation, 198. Belfries, 199. Municipal halls, 200-205. Private dwelling-houses, 205.

Bellefontaine, church of, ii, 122 _note_.

Bells, when first used, i, 577. Russian bells, 497.

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

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

Beneventum, Trajan’s arch at, i, 347.

Beni-Hasan, tombs of, i, 115, 294, 363. Pillars, 154. Arches, 214.

Bergamo, church of San-Tomaso near, i, 576. Sta. Maria Maggiore, ii, 8. North porch of same, 9.

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

Berne Cathedral, ii, 276.

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

Besançon, Porta Nigra at, i, 349. Cathedral, ii, 102, 149.

Bethlehem, churches at, i, 419. Church of the Nativity, 419.

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

Billings, Mr. R. W., character of his Architectural Work on Scotland, ii, 420 _note_.

Birs Nimroud, the, i, 159. Buildings of which it was the type, 157, 159. Diagrams and description, 160. Dedication, 161.

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

Blackfriars Bridge, i, 48.

Black Prince, tomb of the, ii, 408.

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

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

Bocherville, Norman church at, ii, 111.

Bodleian Library, ii, 339.

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

Bohemia, ii, 211.

Bohemund’s tomb at Canosa, i, 601.

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

Boisserée’s ‘Nieder Rhein,’ ii, 212 _note_, 260. On Cologne cathedral, 273.

Bologna, ii, 151. Circular church of San Stefano, i, 545. Asinelli and Garisenda towers, 579, ii, 2. Cathedral or church of San Petronio, i, 614, 622, 623. Plan, 623. Enormous size originally determined on, 622.

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

Bonn, church at, ii, 234. East end, 235. Baptistery, 252.

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

Bordeaux cathedral, ii, 71. Its chevet and spires, 149.

Boris, Czar of Russia, tower erected by, i, 497. His tower in the Kremlin, 497.

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

Borsippa, temple of the Seven Spheres at, i, 161. Inscriptions, 163.

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

Boston, Lincolnshire, church of, ii, 401.

Bothwell Church, near Glasgow, ii, 435.

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

Bourges, church of Neuvy St. Sepulchre at, ii, 76. Cathedral: plan and dimensions, 151. Proportions of the aisles, _ibid._ Western façade, 152. Proportion of solids to area, 179. Fault avoided, ii, 270. References by way of comparison, 478, 479, i, 626. House of Jacques Cœur, ii, 184.

Braga, Portugal, church at, ii, 511.

Brandenburg, Marien Kirche at, ii, 308.

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

Brescia, Duomo Vecchio at: Plan, i, 575. Elevation and Section, 575, 576. St. Francesco, 633. Ornamental brickwork, ii, 13, 14.

Brick architecture: Italian examples, ii, 10-15. Belgium, 205. Remarks, 302, 303. Examples from North Germany, 304-309.

Bridges over the Thames, progress in, i, 48. Roman bridges, 385.

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

Brindisi, churches of, i, 595, 599.

Bristol chapter-house, ii, 389, 392. Norman gateway at, 403. Corporation buildings, 413.

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

Brolettos, or Italian town-halls, ii, 11. Como, 12. Brescia, 13.

Bronze doors: Novogorod, i, 488. Milan, 567. Trani, 599. Troja, 599. Canosa, 601.

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

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

Bruges, ii, 188. Chapel of St. Sang, 192. Its spire, 193. Belfry, 200. Town-hall, 202. Burgesses’ lodge, 204.

Brunelleschi, designs by, i, 618, 622.

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

Brussels, Notre Dame de la Chapelle at, ii, 194. St. Gudule, _ibid._ The belfry and its fate, 200. Town-hall, 202. View of same, 203.

Buddha, Buddhism. Source of the effect produced by the Topes, i, 16. Buddhist architecture whence derived, 157. Buddhism the religion of a Turanian people, 165. Scandinavian Buddhism, i, 481.

Building, primary application and gradual development of the art of, i, 4.

Bürgelin, abbey of, ii, 238.

Burgos, ii, 433. 463, 469, 508. Plan of the cathedral, 481. View, 482. Description, 483. Nave, 483. Monastery of the Huelgas, 498. 502, 503.

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

Burgundy, architectural province of, ii, 41-43. Ethnographic considerations, 94. Seat of monastic establishments, 94. 105. Examples of the architecture of the province, 94-103. Culminating epoch, 105. _See_ 30.

Bussorah, ii, 567.

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

Buttresses, earliest proper use of, i, 360. Internal buttresses, ii, 69. External: Chartres, 139. Rheims, 139. Theory, 171. Explanatory diagram and further examples, 172, 173. Combination of buttresses and pinnacles, 173.

Byzantine style, region dominated by the, i, 411, 412. True application of the term, 415. Definitions and divisions, 416, 417. Basilicas, 419-423. Stone-roofed churches, 428-431. Circular or Domical buildings, 432-447. Domestic examples, 447-452, 464, 465. Neo-Byzantine, 453-464. Armenian, 466-480. Rock-cut churches, 481-483. Mediæval Russian, 484-499. _See_ 501, 502, 521, 523, 528-541, 548-551, 554. St. Mark’s, Venice, 530-535. Byzantine-Romanesque style, 582. Examples: Rectangular, 583, 600. Southern Italy, 600-602. Circular, _ibid._ Towers, 603. Civil architecture, 605. _See_ also ii, 15.

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

Caen, churches of: Abbaye aux Hommes, or St. Stephen’s: occasion of its erection, ii, 111. Original and altered plan, sections, vaultings, &c., 111-116. Its apse superseded by a chevet, 118. Spires, 175. Abbaye aux Dames, 111. Advance in its construction upon that of St. Stephen’s, 116. Church of St. Nicolas, 117. Its apse, _ibid._ St. Pierre, spire and façade, 175, 176.

Cæsars, Palace of the, i, 375. Its probable character as an architectural work, 376.

Cairo, Mosques of: Amru, ii, 30. 525, 526. Azhar, 30, 530. Hasan, 531-532. Berkook, 533. Kaloun, 531. Kaitbey, 534, 535. El Muayyad, 534. Tooloon, 527-530.

Calatayud, Dominican church at, ii, 498.

Cambridge, King’s College chapel, i, 472; ii, 70, 338, 367, 397. View, 396. Proportions, 397. Round church, 398. St. John’s College, 394 _note_. Colleges, 414.

Campaniles, _see_ Belfries.

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

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

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

Canosa, tomb of Bohemund at, i, 601.

Canterbury, French asylum for the archbishops of, ii, 155. Becket’s Crown, 317 _note_, 344. Churches of St. Augustine and Cuthbert, _ibid._ St. Anselm’s chapel, 375. 377. Cathedral, 131. Plan, 347. Most foreign of our English examples, 353. Angel Tower, 384. Chapter-house, 384. 389. Anomalies in style, 387. Site, 388. Infirmary chapel, 393. Decorative arch on staircase, 402, 403. Prior de Estria’s screen, 406. Tomb of the Black Prince, 408. Area, measurements, &c., 417.

Capitals and columns: Isis-headed or Typhonian, i, 35. 127. 143. Examples: Beni-Hasan, 114, 115. Thebes, 121. Medeenet-Habû, 125. Denderah, 143. Persepolis, 207. Susa, 209. Mycenæ, 244. Ancient Corinthian, 258. Doric, 260. Ionic and Corinthian examples, 264-268. Roman examples, 308-310. 312. 525. Ani and Gelathi, 476. Provençal, ii, 54. 62, 63. Gothic: theory and diagram, 162. Capitals from Rheims, 178. Gelnhausen, 251. Canterbury, 402. Lincoln, 404. Dome of the Rock, 521-522. _See_ Obelisks, Columns. Columns of Victory.

Capua, amphitheatre at, i, 340.

Caracalla, restored plan of the baths of, i, 344. Arrangement, dimensions, &c., 345, 346.

Caravanserais: Persia, ii, 579. Peru, 606.

Carcassonne, church of St. Nazaire at, compared with Diana’s temple at Nîmes, ii, 49, 50. Town walls, 186.

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

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

Carpenter, R. H., churches with bisected naves, ii, 324 _note_. Mosque of Cordoba, 546.

Carpentras, arched gate at, i, 349.

Carthage and the Carthaginians, ii, 22, 462.

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

Caryatides at Medeenet-Habû, i, 125. As made use of in Greek architecture, 268.

Caserta Vecchia, cathedral church of, view, i, 598. Tower, 592. Dome, 594.

Cashel, Cormac’s chapel at, ii, 447. Dimensions, 447. View, 448. Roof, 449. Date, &c., 454. Monastery of the Holy Cross, 444. Cathedral, _ibid._ Seven churches, 446.

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

Caste, nature and influence of, i, 78. Its value, 79.

Castel d’Asso, Etruscan tombs at, i, 294. Peculiarities of shape, &c., 295.

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

## Particulars, _ibid._

Castille, castles in, ii, 505.

Castles: St. Angelo, Rome, i, 356. Italian, 606. French, ii, 186. Marienburg, 310. English, 413-414. Scottish, 442. Spanish, 505.

S. Castor, Coblentz, ii, 238.

“Castrense,” the, i, 342.

Catalonia, architecture of, ii, 466.

Cathedrals, English and foreign compared, ii, 385. _See_ England. France.

Catherwood, F., ancient tomb figured by, i, 372. Value of his Central-American drawings, ii, 584.

Cattaneo (Prof. Raphael), dates of St. Stefano Rotondo, i, 545 _note_; of St. Mark’s, Venice, i, 531, 534; of cathedral, Torcello, 536 _note_, 538; of Palazzo delle Torre, Turin, 556; of Duomo, Brescia, 575, and _note_; of Tower of St. Satiro, Milan, 578 _note_. St. Lorenzo, Rome, 523. St. Praxede, 525 _note_.

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

Cavallon, arched gate at, i, 349.

Caves: Crimean, i, 482.

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

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

Cefalu, cathedral at, ii, 24, 29. Dimensions, cloisters, &c., 29.

Celtic races, their presumed origin, and migratory character, i, 70, 71. Their religion: dominance of their priests, 71. Form of government best suited to them, _ibid._ Their ruling passion, 72. Literature, 72. Pre-eminent in art, 73, 74. Direction of their scientific pursuits, 74. Megalithic or Celtic period in England, ii, 338. Celto-Saxon period, _ibid._ Irish style, 445. Celto-Irish system, Celtic likes and dislikes in a church direction, 444, 445. Form and examples of their churches, 447-450. Close of the Celtic epoch in Ireland, 459.

Certosa, near Pavia, i, 610. 629-631. Its date, 629. Feature in Monreale cathedral surpassing it, ii, 26.

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

Chaitya caves, i, 426.

Chaldean dynasties, period of the, i, 151, 152. State of the remains of their buildings, 153. Written characters; arrow-headed inscriptions, 155. Temples at Wurka and Mugheyr, 158. Birs Nimroud, 160, 161. Mujelibé, 163. Tomb of Cyrus, 163, 196-198.

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

Chambon, sepulchral chapel at, ii, 93.

Champollion, i, 92.

Chapels. Babouda, i, 426. Friuli, 559. Definition of, ii, 393 _note_. English examples, 393-397. Roslyn, 432. Irish, 448. Spanish, 498.

Chapter-houses, rarity of, in France and Germany, ii, 292. Peculiarly an English feature, 388. Earlier and later forms, 389-393. Engraved examples, 389, 390, 391, 392.

Chaqqa, Byzantine building at, i, 437. Singular window, 448.

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

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

Charlemagne, model of the tomb of, i, 550. Epoch marked by his accession; state of things at his death, ii, 120. German architecture under him, 209-211. His church at Aix-la-Chapelle, 247. Palaces, 256.

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

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

Charroux, church of, ii, 74, 75.

Chartres Cathedral, i, 24. ii, 132. Date of erection, 132. Area, 133. Plan, &c., 134. North-west view, 137. Spires, transepts, and buttresses, 138. 173, 175, 195. External sculpture, 141. Transitional windows, 164, 165. Circular windows, 165, 166. Proportion of solids to area, 179. Enclosure of choir, 181. _See_ 385. 402. 626.

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

Chemillé, spire at, ii, 87.

Chemnitz, doorway of church at, ii, 294. Its extravagant ornamentation, 295.

Cheops, _see_ Khufu.

Chepstow Castle, ii, 413.

Cherson, i, 485. Wooden cathedral, 426.

Chevet churches in Aquitania, ii, 72. Distinction between the apse and the chevet, 73. Notre Dame du Port, Clermont, 89, 96. St. Menoux, 102. Bayeux, 118. Auxerre, 147. St. Quentin, 147. Pontigny, 154, 171. Souvigny, 170.

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

Chichen Itza, Yucatan, temple at, ii, 598. Interior, 599.

Chichester Cathedral, ii, 380.

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

China, stationary perfection of works in, i, 62. Ancient counterpart of its people, 96.

Choirs, introduction of, i, 512. A French practice, ii, 69. English examples, 361, 365, 366, 369. Spanish examples, 480, 484.

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

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

Christian architecture, discrimination of, its eras, styles, &c. i, 410-414. Oriental tradition relative to Christian architects, ii, 527.

Christianity, adaptability of the Roman Basilicas to the usages of, i, 504-506. Results of its introduction into England, ii, 337. How carried into Ireland, 447. Irish round towers, Christian edifices, 450. Adaptation of Moorish art to its purposes, 498. When introduced into Russia, i, 486. Result of its corruption in the East, ii, 513.

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

Chunjuju, Yucatan, building at, ii, 596.

Church, double, _see_ Double churches.

Churches, circular, _see_ Circular churches.

Cimborio, or dome, in Spanish churches, ii, 474. Examples, 478, 490.

Circular and polygonal churches, first germ of, i, 542. Byzantine examples, 432. Romanesque types in Italy, 542-555, 602. Provençal examples, ii, 59. In Aquitania, 74. In Germany, 247-254. Heiligenstadt, 292. Round churches in Scandinavia, 327-332. In England, 398.

Circular windows, France, their number and dissimilarity in tracery, &c., ii, 165-167. English examples, 376, 378.

Cistercian abbeys, i, 14. ii, 154.

Citeaux, ii, 95.

Civic and Municipal buildings: Italy, ii, 10. Venice, 15. Belgian town-halls, ii, 199-204. Germany, 295. London, 413. Spain, 502.

Clairvaux, ii, 95.

Clarke (Mr. J. T.): Temple of Assos, i, 254 _note_. Proto-Ionic capital, 255 _note_.

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

S. Clemente, as a type of the Roman basilican church, i, 513-514. Its date, 515. Colonnade, 525.

Cleopatra in Egyptian paintings, i, 139.

Clerestories, in Greek and Egyptian temples, i, 272. First publication of the Author’s views on the subject, _ibid. note_. Munich and Metz, ii, 287.

Clermont, church of Notre Dame du Port at, ii, 89. Elevation and plan of its chevet, 91, 92.

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

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

Cloisters, English and southern, St. John Lateran, i, 599. Provençal examples, ii, 61, 62. Puy-en-Velay, 96. Zurich, 260. Gloucester, 363. Kilconnel Abbey, 445. The Huelgas, 498. Tarazona, 503.

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

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

Cluny, Abbey of, ii, 95. Its magnitude, and magnificence, 99. Narthex, 99. Influence exercised by the establishment, 103. Arcaded house, 183.

Cluny, Hôtel de, ii, 184.

Cnidus, lion tomb at, i, 284.

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

Cobern, hexagonal chapel at, ii, 253.

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

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

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

Cocos, Castille, castle of, ii, 505.

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

Cœur, Jacques, house of, ii, 184.

Coimbra, churches at, ii, 509.

Cologne Cathedral: dimensions, comparative observations, &c., i, 24. ii, 131, 157, 159, 195, 196, 275, 278. View, 272. Buttresses, 173. Features in which it is pre-eminent, 268. Date, plan, &c., 269. Disproportion of length to height, 270. External proportions, 271. Mechanical merits, 273. Window tracery, 271. Most pleasing characteristics of the cathedral, 275. Original cathedral, 232, 269. _See_ 478, 479. i, 618, 622, 626, 629.

Cologne, triapsal and other churches at, The Apostles’, ii, 199, 233-235. Sta. Maria in Capitolio, 232. St. Martin, 233, 234. St. Gereon, 237. Details, 264. Section and plan, 265. St. Cunibert, 237, 264. St. George, 238. Sion, 238, 262. An English St. Gereon, 398. Cloisters, 260. Dwelling-houses and windows, 261-262. Guildhall, or Gürzenich, 295.

Colosseum, or Flavian amphitheatre, Rome, i, 306. Interest attaching to it, 337. Effect of reduplication of parts, plan, sections, &c., 338. Area, amount of sitting space, 339.

Colour as an architectural element, i, 35. _See_ Painting.

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

Columna Rostrata, ugliness of, i, 352.

Columns of Victory, remarks on, and examples of, i, 352, 353. Buddhist sthambas, i, 578.

Columns: Sedinga, i, 127. Thessalonica and Constantinople, 421, 422.

Como, cathedral at, i, 632. Broletto, ii, 12.

Composite arcades, i, 313.

Composite order, i, 312. Its merits and defects, 313.

Compostella, cathedral of, ii, 468.

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

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

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

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

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

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

Constantine: His mother’s tomb, i, 357. His daughter’s, 358. 544. Basilican churches erected by him, 517. 521. 523. His tomb, or baptistery, 544. His church at Antioch, i, 432. _See_ i, 504. 506. 508. 515. His baths at Rome, i, 344.

Constantinople, cisterns, i, 44. Palace of the Hebdomon, i, 464. _Churches:_ The Apostles’: occasion of its destruction, 531 _note_. Sta. Irene, 453. 455. 470. ii. 558. St. John, 421, 422. 438. Double church of “Kutchuk Agia,” or lesser Sta. Sophia, including the Basilica of SS. Peter and Paul and the domical church of SS. Sergius and Bacchus, i, 438, 439. Church of Moné tés Choras, 456. The Pantokrator, the Fethîyeh Djamisi, and the Theotokos, 457. Sta. Sophia, 440, Its grandeur; boast of its founder, &c., 440. Fate of the original church, _ibid._ Dimensions, plan, sections, &c., 441-446. Compared with the Renaissance cathedrals, 446. Considered as an outgrowth of Roman classical edifices, 452. Last creation of Byzantine art, 453. Mode of lighting its dome, 454. Dimensions of the dome, ii, 561. Number of minarets, 563. [_See_ i, 455. ii, 557-558.] Results of the occupation of the city by the Turks, ii, 556-558. _Mosques:_ appropriation of Christian churches, ii, 557. Mosques of Eyub and Bayazid, 558. Suleimanie Mosque, 559-562. Its minarets, 563. Sultan Ahmed’s Mosque, 562-563. Prince’s Mosque, 563. Validé mosques, 564. Mosque, or “Lantern” of Osman, _ibid._ Civil and domestic architecture: “palaces” and fires, _ibid._

Construction in architecture, rationale of, i, 22. Gothic cathedrals, ii, 179.

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

Conventual buildings, Germany, ii, 259-261.

Corbel, beautiful example of, ii, 178.

Cordova, or Cordoba, mosque at, ii, 543-548. Plan, 544. The Sanctuary, 545, 546. Screen of chapel, 547, _see_ 549.

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

Corinthian order, its origin; period of introduction into Greece, i, 257. 268. Noteworthy examples, 257, 258. 266, 267. Keynote of Roman architecture, 308. Roman elaborations of it, 309-311. Base from the church of St. Praxede, 312.

Corvey, abbey of, ii, 221.

S. Costanza, Rome, tomb or baptistery of, i, 358. Plan, 544.

Coucy, castle-keep of, ii, 185. Viollet le Duc’s section, _ibid. note_.

Coutances Cathedral, ii, 147. View, 146. Spires and lantern, 147.

Coventry, ii, 401.

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

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

Cremona, the Torracio at, i, 605. ii, 3. 4. Occasion of its erection, 3. Palace of the Jurisconsults, 11.

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

Crosses: Waltham, ii, 412. Kells, 459.

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

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

Crusaders, introduction of the Gothic style into Palestine by, ii, 32. Principal building erected there by them, 33. Others of their churches there, 36.

Crypts, purposes to which dedicated, i, 512. Examples: Göllingen, ii, 239. Glasgow, 426. Otranto, i, 596.

Crystal Palace, Sydenham, a step in the right direction, i, 48. Assyrian façade erected by the Author, 189 _note_. Reproduction of the Court of Lions, Alhambra, ii, 553 _note_.

Ctesiphon, i, 389. The Tâk Kesra, 398. Its great arch, 399.

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

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

Cufic inscriptions at Diarbekr, i, 393 and _note_.

Cunault, spire and tower at, ii, 87.

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

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

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

Cuzco, Peru, Manco Capac’s house at, ii, 604. Walls, 605-608.

Cybele, temple at Sardis of, i, 258.

Cyclopean works, chief element of, i, 19. Irish examples, ii, 456. Peru, 600.

Cypselidæ, race of, i, 251.

Cyrene, rock-cut tombs at, i, 285-287. 294. Remains of colour, 285. Probable date, 287. 370 _note_. Recent explorations, 370.

Cyrus, so-called tomb of, i, 158. 160. View, Plan and Section, 196-198.

Dahshur, Pyramid of, i, 102.

Dalmeny, ii, 420.

Damascus, antecedents and present state of the great mosque at, ii, 522-524. Plan, 523.

Dana, on the Euphrates, i, 469.

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

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

Dantzic, cathedral and churches of, ii, 306.

Darius, palace of, i, 202, 203. Tomb, 204.

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

David, alleged sarcophagus of, i, 368 _note_.

David I. of Scotland, and the round-arched style, ii, 419. A fosterer of monastic establishments, 421. Bishopric and building founded by him, 425. 437.

Decorated style, _see_ Edwardian period.

Delft, churches at, ii, 207.

Delhi, i, 494.

Delos, Pelasgic masonry at, i, 245. Column of temple, 260.

Denderah, i, 127. Façade and Isis-headed columns of the temple, 142, 143.

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

Denmark, church architecture in, ii, 318-321. Round churches, 327-332.

Dêr-el-Bahree, Temple of, i, 131. Arch at, 216.

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

De Vogüé, Comte. _See_ Vogüé.

Diana, temple at Ephesus of, i, 256. Dimensions, 258. Remains of, 277. Plan, arrangements, &c., _ibid._ Temple at Nîmes, 317, 318.

Diarbekr, i, 392. The great mosque, 392-394.

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

Diest, Belgium, boucherie at, ii, 204.

Dieulafoy (M.), Pasargadæ, i, 196; Susa, 210-211; Frieze of Archers, 210.

Dighour, Armenia, Byzantine church at; View, i, 467. Plan, &c., 468.

Dijon, church of St. Benigne at, ii, 75. 95, 96. 508. Notre Dame, 147. Cathedral, 148.

Dinant, Notre Dame de, ii, 194.

Diocletian’s Palace at Spalato: Arcades, i, 314. Idea suggested by its splendour and magnitude, 376. Plan and dimensions, 377. The Golden Gateway, 379. General arrangement, 378. Temples in the palace, 322, 323, 360. 378. His baths at Rome, 344.

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

Djemla, basilican church at, i, 509.

Dochiariu, Catholicon at, i, 459. Plan, 459.

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

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

Doge’s palace, Venice, ii, 16, 17.

Domes and domical buildings: Pelasgian, i, 244. The Pantheon, 321. Minerva Medica, 359-361. Diagram of pendentives, 434. Byzantine, 433-447. Neo-Byzantine, 454-463. Greek Byzantine, 459. Mode of lighting domes, 454. Armenian, 468. Florence, 618. Chiaravalle, 621. Aquitaine, ii, 64-80. Anjou, 83, 84. St. Gereon, Cologne, 264. Only true Gothic dome, 351. Best modern specimen, 393 _note_. Batalha, 507. _See_ Circular churches.

Domestic Architecture; Egypt, i, 136. Greece, 287. Roman, 375. Italian, ii, 10. France, 182. Belgium, 205. Germany, 261. 298, 299. England, 413. Ireland, 457. Turkish, 564.

Domitian, baths of, i, 343.

S. Donato. On the Murano, apse of, i, 571. Zara, 603.

Donoughmore, Ireland, doorway in tower of, ii, 453.

Doors and doorways; Egyptian, i, 106. Pelasgic, 245. Firouzabad, 397. Moscow, 493. Naples, 598. Palermo, ii. 25. France: Maguelonne, 57. Beauvais, 143. Basle, 244. Chemnitz, 294. Gothland, 325, 326. Lichfield, 405. Rochester, 407. Elgin, 430. Linlithgow, 439. Edinburgh, 440. Pluscardine, 441. Kildare, 455. Early Irish, 458. Lérida, 473. Valencia, 501. _See_ Bronze doors. Gates. Porches.

Dorians, character of the, i, 242. Their “treasuries,” 243.

Doric temple, earliest known example of, i, 252. Examples in Greece, _ibid._ In Sicily, 254. Rationale of the application of the order, 259. Columns, 260. Material used, 262. Sculpture and colours, 263. Compared with the Ionic order, 264-266. Roman examples, 308. Columns of Victory, 353.

Dorpfield (Dr). Plan of Palace of Tiryns, i, 248. Age of Temple of Theseus, 253. On hypæthral temples, 272 _note_. Greek Theatres, 281 _note_.

Dort, church at, ii, 207.

Dosseret (Impost block): Its Byzantine origin, i, 421. 523 _note_. Examples, 439. 449. 523. 530. 532, 538. 549. 550.

Double churches, ii, 241-243. 256. 328.

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

Drüggelte, circular church at, ii, 251. Plan and model, 251.

Druidical trilithon, i, 26.

Dublin, English churches in, ii, 443. Cathedral, 444.

Dugga, near Tunis, ancient tomb at, i, 371. View, 372.

Dunblane, ii, 438.

Dunfermline, porch at, ii, 437. 439.

Dunkeld, window at, ii, 438.

Durability, i, 18.

Durham Cathedral: Plan, ii, 348. Vault, 348. 356. Towers, 385. Site, 388. Chapter-house, 390. _See_ 417. 438.

Dutch architecture, ii, 206-208.

Dyer Abou Taneh, church, i, 510.

Earl’s Barton, Saxon church at, ii, 341. Window, 342.

Early styles in England, epoch of, ii, 337.

East, advantage to inquirers of the immutability of manners and customs in the, i, 182.

Echternach, abbey church of, ii, 238.

Edfû, temple at, i, 140. Its arrangements, dimensions, &c., 140.

Edinburgh, church doorway at, ii, 440. Aisle in Trinity College church, _ibid._ 442. Holyrood and the castle, 440.

Edmund, Archbishop of Canterbury, ii, 155.

Edward I., monumental crosses erected by, ii, 412.

Edward II., shrine or tomb of, ii, 410.

Edward III., ii, 122. 128. His tomb, 408. 409.

Edward the Black Prince, tomb of, ii, 408.

Edwardian period of English architecture, ii, 338. Combination which led to its perfection, 338. Desire of the period, 375. Scottish example, 437.

Eger, double church at, ii, 241 _note_, 242.

Eginwald, Biographer of Charlemagne, ii, 213. 220.

Eglinton tournament, system carried out in the, i, 12.

Egypt, architecture of, i, 22. 29. 35. 62. Chronology of its dynasties, 90. Historical facts bearing on the subject, 92, 93. Paintings and sculpture, 94. 108. Its architecture our sole source of knowledge of its people, 95. Their proficiency as mathematicians and builders, 98. Architecturally historic value of the sculptured lists of kings, 129. Side of the Nile preferred for sepulture, 136. Domestic architecture of the great Theban period: existing examples, 136, 137. Periods of decline and revival of the arts; limited influence thereon of foreign domination, 139, 140. Gradual degradation of the people: their essential characteristic, 144. Alleged parent state, 147. First users of stone, 194. Architectural feature neglected by them, 201. Object of contention with Phrygia, 229. Principle despised by them, ii, 180. _See_ Obelisks. Pyramids. Rock-cut temples. Thebes.

Egyptian mosques, _see_ Cairo.

Eitelberger (Prof.) Parenzo, i, 537 _note_.

Eleanor, Queen of Edward I., monumental crosses to, ii, 412.

Elegance and sublimity, distinctive features of, i, 26.

Elephantine, Mammeisi at, i, 132.

Elgin Cathedral, windows of, ii, 419. Its date, 431. Views, plan, &c., 429-431.

El-Hakeem, ii, 33. Sanctuary rebuilt by him, 545.

Elis, temple of Jupiter at, i, 16.

Elizabeth of Germany, residence of, ii, 258. Church dedicated to her, 267.

Elizabethan period, architecture of the, ii, 339. State of the country, _ibid._

Elne, Provence, cloisters at, ii, 63. Capitals, 62.

S. Eloi, church of, at Espalion, ii, 79.

Eltham palace; roof, ii, 415. Hall, 416.

Ely Cathedral, ii, 349. Choir and presbytery, 349. 369. Effect of the new reredos, 349 _note_. Plan, 351. Octagon, 352. 382. 387. East end, 373. Site, 388. Lantern, 393. Chapel, 394. 396. Tomb of Bishop West, 408. Bishop Redman’s, 411. Dimensions, &c., 417.

Emanuel the Fortunate, tomb-house of, ii, 508. Convent founded by him, 509.

England, an architectural difficulty surmounted only in, ii, 68. Introduction of the Pointed style, 131. 371. Bold transepts why required, 270. Abiding love of the people for Gothic art, 335. Multiplicity of works on the national architecture; space allotted to it in this work, 336. Epochs of its history, 337. Saxon architecture, 341. Dominating feature in the plans of our cathedrals, 345. Vaults, 355. Pier arches, 367. Window tracery, 371. External proportions, 379. Diversity of style, 386. Situation, 387. Chapter-houses, 388. Chapels, 393. Parish churches, 397. Details, doorways, &c., 401. Tombs, 408. Crosses, 412. Civil and domestic architecture, 413. Comparative table of cathedrals, 417. English influence in Ireland, 443. 458. _Cathedrals_: _See_ Bristol. Canterbury. Carlisle. Chichester. Coventry. Durham. Ely. Exeter. Gloucester. Hereford. Lichfield. Lincoln. Norwich. Oxford. St. Paul’s. Peterborough. Salisbury. Wells. Westminster. Winchester. York.

Ephesus, i, 229. Temple, _see_ Diana.

Erechtheium, the, i, 39. Its perfectness as a sample of Greek art, 255. Column and cornice, 264. Caryatides, 268. Mode of lighting, 276. Its threefold aspect, 276. Plan, section, and view, 274-276.

Erfurt Cathedral, and church of St. Severus, ii, 290. View and peculiar features of the latter, _ibid._

Ermeland, or Eastern Prussia, brick buildings of, ii, 307.

Ermet, the ancient Hermonthis, i, 510.

Erzeroum, Hospital of Oulou Diami at, ii, 570. Interior, _ibid._

Esarhaddon, palace of, i, 184.

Esslingen, church at, ii, 276.

Estremadura, chapel at Humanejos in, ii, 498.

Etchmiasdin, legendary occasion of the four churches at, i, 472.

Ethiopians, probable parent-stock of the, i, 147. Most remarkable of their monuments, 148. Their mode of preserving their dead, 149. Arches, 217.

Ethnology and Ethnography, as applied to architecture, i, 52. Importance of Archæology as an adjunct, 53. Characteristics of various races and ages, 55-83. [_See_ Aryans. Celtic races. Semitic races. Turanian races.] Conclusion, 83-85. Ethnological considerations bearing on the architecture of France, ii, 39-44.

Eton, ii, 414.

Etruscans, mounds of the, i, 16. Parallels in Asia Minor, 230. Certainty of their existence, 289. Their probable origin; permanence of their influence on Roman art, 290, 291. Only example of their temples, 292. Their civil buildings, skill in engineering, &c., 293. Shapes and classification of their rock-cut tombs, 294, 295. Numerousness of their tumuli, 296. Prominent examples, 297, 300. Tomb of Aruns, 300. Their use of the arch, 300, 301. 306.

Euphrasius, Bishop, basilica built by, i, 536.

Evreux Cathedral, ii, 149. Circular window, 166.

Exeter Cathedral: Vault, ii, 358. Bay, 370. Choir, 371. Western entrance, 385. Bishop Marshall’s tomb, 405. Dimensions, &c., 417

Eyub, mosque of, ii, 558.

Ezekiel, tomb of, ii, 569. View, _ibid._

Ezra, in the Hauran, Byzantine church at, i, 438.

Façades: Paris, i, 30. Denderah, 142. Jerusalem, 368. 370. Tourmanin, 427. Sta. Sophia, 442. Novara, 563. Piacenza, 568. Verona, 571. Troja, 591. Siena, 615. Ferrara, 632. Venice, ii, 16. Belem, 510.

Falaise, castle of, ii, 185.

Falkland Castle, ii, 440.

Fanal de Cimetière, and the Irish round tower, ii, 450.

Fano, basilica built by Vitruvius at, i, 334.

Fellows, Sir Charles, his Lycian investigations, i, 233, 237.

Ferdinand and Isabella, sepulchral chapel of, ii, 494.

Ferrara, the Duomo at, i, 632. Façade, 632. Palazzo Pubblico, ii, 10.

Fez, towers of, ii, 550.

Fire temples of the Persians, i, 212.

Firouzabad, palace at, i, 397. Plan, doorway, _ibid._ External walls, 398. Internal arrangement, _ibid._ Date, 401 _note_.

Flamboyant style, its faults and beauties, ii, 165. 376. 379. Introduced into Scotland, 419.

Flaminian Way, i, 347.

Flanders, _see_ Belgium.

Flanders, French, ii, 44.

Flavian amphitheatre, Rome, _see_ Colosseum.

Florence, baptistery at, i, 552. San Miniato, 584-586. 596. Cathedral (St. Mary, or Sta. Maria dei Fiori), proportion of solids to area, ii, 179. Left unfinished, i, 619. Plan, 617. Dome and nave, 618. Flank, 619. SS. Croce and Maria Novella, 631. San Michele, 633. Giotto’s campanile, ii, 7. Palazzo Vecchio, 10. _See_ i, 500. 553. 579. 624. 629. 631. ii, 8.

Folö, Gothland, church at, ii, 326. Interior, 324.

Fontevrault, plan of church at, ii, 84. Chevet and bay, 84.

Fontifroide, church at, ii, 56. Section, 56. Cloisters, 61. _See_ 91. 435.

Form in Architecture, principles of, i, 25.

Fortified churches in France. _See_ Maguelonne. Royat.

Fortuna Virilis, temple of, i, 317.

Foscari palace, Venice, ii, 19.

Fougères, town walls of, ii, 186.

Fowler (Charles) on Maulbronn, ii, 236 _note_.

France, Roman arches in, i, 348-350. Roman column at Cussi, 353. Diversity and ultimate fusion of races, architectural provinces, &c., ii, 39-44. Architecture of the northern division, 104. Progress in Central France, 108. Great architectural epoch of the nation, 120-122. Gothic cathedrals, 130. Painted glass; External sculptures, 141-142. Collegiate churches, 153-159. Details: Pillars, 161. Windows, 163. Circular windows, 165. Bays, 167. Vaults, 169. Buttresses, 171. Pinnacles, 174. Spires, 175. Lanterns, Corbels, &c., 177. Construction, 179. Church furniture, 180. Domestic architecture; town-halls, 182. Houses, 183. Castellated buildings, &c., 184. Fortified town walls, 186. French forms in English edifices, 353. 371. Styles of the two countries compared, 355. 367. 379. 386. 401. French styles in Scotland, 419. In Spain, 462. 485. Examples of the styles of the various provinces, _see_ Anjou. Aquitania. Auvergne. Burgundy. Frankish Province. Normandy. _Cathedrals_: _See_ Alby. Amiens. Angers. Angoulême. Autun. Auxerre. Avignon. Bayeux. Bazas. Beauvais. Besançon. Bordeaux. Bourges. Chartres. Coutances. Dijon. Evreux. Laon. Limoges. Lisieux. Lyons. Nevers. Notre Dame, Paris. Noyon. Orleans. Poitiers. Rheims. Rouen. Sens. Soissons. Toul. Toulouse. Tours. Troyes. Vienne. _See_ also ii, 264. 266. 377. 386.

Frankish Province, France, birthplace of the true Gothic Pointed style, ii, 104. Frankish Architecture, 120.

Franks, Mr., suggestion by, i, 69 _note_.

Frauenburg, brick church at, ii, 307.

Frederick II., castle built by, i, 606.

Freemasonry, its origin, rationale, &c., ii, 125-129. Its influence on German architecture, 129. 280.

Freiburg in the Breisgau, cathedral of, ii, 138. 195. 273. View, 274. Details, 275.

Freiburg on the Unstrutt, double chapel at, ii, 241 _note_, 243.

Freshfield, Dr., triple apses, i, 447 _note_.

Freshford, Kilkenny, doorway at, ii, 448.

Friuli, vaulted chapel at, i, 559.

Fulda, original cathedral of, ii, 220. Circular church, 251.

Furnes, Belgium, belfry of, ii, 200.

Gaeta, tower at i, 601. 604.

Gaillard, castle of, ii, 185.

Gainsborough Abbey, ii, 374.

Galatina, i, 595.

S. Gall, ancient plan of monastery found at, and details of same, ii, 213-216. 235, 236.

Galla Placidia, alleged sarcophagus of, i, 552 _note_. Her tomb, its peculiar form, polychromatic decorations, &c., 434. 553. View of interior, 435.

Gallerus, oratory of, ii, 457.

Galway, ancient house in, ii, 458.

Gardiner, Bishop of Winchester, tomb of, ii, 408.

Gates and Gateways: Assyrian, i, 181. Pelasgic, 245-247. Arpino, 301. Ctesiphon, 399. Jerusalem, 449, 450. Moscow, 498. Bristol, ii, _see_ Doors. Golden Gateways.

“Gates” of the Bible, i, 202.

Gates of Justice, i, 350.

Gebweiler, cathedral of, ii, 240.

Geddington, cross at, ii, 412.

Gelathi, Armenia, capital at, i, 477.

Gelnhausen, palace at, ii, 256. Arcade, 256, 257. Its chief features, 257.

## Particulars and view of the church, 266.

S. Geneviève, Paris, i, 24.

Geology, importance of Palæontology in the study of, i, 53, 54.

S. George, Cologne, ii, 238.

S. George’s Hall, Liverpool, i, 346 _note_.

S. Gereon, Cologne, ii, 264-266; an English parallel to, 398. _See_ Cologne.

Gerizim, Mount, Justinian’s Church on, i, 432.

S. Germain des Prés, Paris, in its original state, ii, 121.

Germany, round-arched Gothic style of, i, 23. Character of its races, ii, 40. 209. Effect of Freemasonry, 128. 210. Claim as to the Pointed style, 211. Leading characteristics of the Round style, 211, 212. Basilicas, 213-240. Double churches, 241-243. Noteworthy peculiarities in German Gothic, 244. Circular and polygonal churches, 247-254. Domestic architecture, Romanesque style, 255-263. Ecclesiastic examples, Pointed style, 264-291. Foible of German masons, 275. Circular churches (Pointed style) church furniture, civil architecture, 292-306. Races and building materials of Baltic Provinces, 302. Examples of brick architecture, 302-309. A trick of its architects, 422. German artists brought to Moscow, i, 493. _See_ ii, 357. 380. 413. 461.

Gernrode, basilican church at, ii, 220-222.

Gerona, Spain, vault in the cathedral at, ii, 367. Plan, 488. Interior, 489. Arcade, 503.

Ghazan Khan, mosque founded by, ii, 571, 572.

Ghazni, ii, 454 _note_.

Ghengis Khan, ii, 571.

Ghent, ii, 188. Church of St Bavon, 198. Belfry, 200. Town-hall, 202. Cloth-hall and boatmen’s lodge, 204.

Ghibellines and Guelfs; influence of their quarrels on Italian architecture, i, 608.

Gibel Barkal, temples and pyramids at, i, 147-149.

S. Gilles, church of, ii, 52. 58. Prototype of St Mark’s, Venice, façade, i, 534.

S. Giorgio in Velabro, Roman basilican church, its date, i, 515.

Giotto, campanile designed by, ii, 7.

S. Giovanni a Porta Latina, Roman basilican church, its date, i, 515.

Giralda, Seville, dimensions of the, ii, 550. View, _ibid._

Gizeh, Pyramids at, _see_ Pyramids.

Gladiatorial exhibitions at Rome, i, 337.

Glasgow Cathedral, ii, 424-428.

Glass, painted, _see_ Painted glass.

Glendalough, seven churches at, ii, 446. St. Kevin’s Kitchen, 449. Its date, _ibid._ Window, 455.

Gloucester Cathedral, ii, 355. Choir, 361, 362. Cloister, 363. Nave, 369. Western entrance, 385. Anomalies of style, 387. Site, 388. Chapter-house, 390. Tomb of Edward II., 410.

Golden Gateways: Spalato, i, 379. Jerusalem, 449, 450.

Göllingen, horseshoe-arch, crypt at, ii, 238, 239.

Gonse (M. Louis) on L’art Gothique, ii, 122 _note_.

Gorlitz, Petri Kirche at, ii, 291.

Goslar, Imperial Palace, ii, 256. Church, 230. Chapel, 241 _note_.

Gothic architecture; source of its beauty, i, 14. Massiveness, 17. French and English peculiarities contrasted, 22, 23. Proportion: naves, aisles, towers, spires, 29-31. Carved ornaments, 34, 35. Painted glass and sculpture, 37. Symmetry, how far regarded, 39. Imitation of Nature, 42. Effect of fifteenth-century enthusiasm, 43. Conclusion arrived at by the clergy, 47. Compared with Egyptian architecture, 145. Element of superiority in Roman roofs, 331. Roman peculiarities employed and improved upon, _ibid._ Cause of its decadence, 388. An oasis of Gothic art, 410. Regions peopled by the Gothic tribes: True application of the term, 412. Stone vaults and wooden roofs, their accessories and their dangers, 540. 547. ii, 47. Gothic invasion of Italy, 558. Lombard and Round-arched style, 558-581. Pointed Italian, 607-634. ii, 1-22. [_See_ Italy.] Sicilian Pointed style, 22-31. The style in Palestine, 32-38. Inventors of the true pointed style, 104. Progress under the French kings, 120-122. [_See_ France.] Introduction of painted glass, 124. Abiding love for the style in England, 335. Edwardian period, 338. Culmination under the Tudors, 339. English examples, 345-417. [_See_ England.] Scottish examples, 418-442. [_See_ Scotland.] Ireland, 443-459. Period of its prevalence in Spain, 462. Spanish examples, 464-506. [_See_ Spain.] Portugal, 507-511. _See_ i, 501.

Gothem (Gothland) Church, ii, 326. Interior, 323.

Gothland, interest attaching to the architecture of, ii, 321. Occasion of the early prosperity of its capital, _ibid._ Its churches; early pointed examples, 322-327. Round churches, 327-332.

Gouda, painted glass at, ii, 207.

Grado, Duomo at, i, 537. St. Marie delle Grazie, 537, 538.

Granada, expulsion of the Moors from, ii, 497. 556. _See_ 547.

Granson, church at, ii, 219.

Great Leighs Church, Essex, spire of, ii, 398.

Greece, Byzantine churches in, i, 459-463.

Greeks, architecture of the, i, 11. Their non-employment of the arch, 22. Use of proportion, 29. Of ornament, 32. Borrowings from the Assyrians, 33. 35. 154. Uniformity and symmetry, 39. Immigration of the Aryans and Pelasgi, 75. Results of Pelasgic influences, 81 _note_. Their indebtedness to the Egyptians, 132. 257. Points in which they surpassed them, 145. Their theory as to Egyptian civilization, 147. Essential differences between them and the Romans, 241. 289, 290. Chronological memoranda, 240. Sources of their language, arts, religion, &c., 241. Short period comprehended in their great history, 242. Dimensions of their temples, 258. System of proportion employed, 261. Forms of their temples, i, 269-272. Suggested mode of lighting them, 272-276. Their municipal architecture, 279. Theatres, 280. Tombs, 281-284. Domestic architecture, 287. Period of art development in their nation, 289. Result of their repulse of their invaders, 290. Their style of decoration adopted at Pompeii, 382-385. Work of Greek architects in Russia, i, 481, 488, 491. _See_ Pelasgi. Greek Orders of Architecture, _see_ Corinthian. Doric. Ionic.

Greensted, Essex, wooden church at, ii, 342.

S. Gregory, legend of the appearance of the Saviour to, i, 472.

Guildhall, London, ii, 413.

Guimaraens, Portugal, ii, 511.

Gutschmid’s Chaldean researches, i, 151.

Hadrian, remains of temple built by, i, 318. 323. Triumphal arches, 348. His famous tomb, or ‘Mole,’ 356. 362. Columns thereof, 320.

Hagby, Sweden, round church at, ii, 331.

Hakeem, Caliph, Sanctuary built by, ii, 545.

Hal, Notre Dame de, ii, 194.

Halberstadt Cathedral, ii, 287. Liebfrauen Kirche, 236.

Halicarnassus, i, 229. Mausoleum at, 282-284.

Hall, Sir James, theory of, ii, 294.

Hamburg, ii, 309.

Hameln, church at, ii, 230.

Hammer-beam roofs, ii, 415.

Hampton Court, ii, 416.

Hannington Church, Northamptonshire, ii, 324 _note_.

Hanover, church tower at, ii, 307.

Haroun al-Rashid, absence of proofs of the magnificence of, ii, 567. Splendour of his court, _ibid._

Hasbeiya, remains at, ii, 525.

Hass, Central Syria, tomb at, i, 451.

Hassan, Sultan, mosque of, ii, 531-533.

Hastings, battle of, its architectural result, ii, 413.

Hatshepsu, obelisks erected by, i, 135.

Hauran, effect of the Mahomedan conquest on the buildings in the, i, 447.

Hawara Pyramid, i, 112.

Hebdomon (Constantinople), palace of, i, 464, 465. Elevation, 464.

Hebron, mosque at, ii, 37. Plan, 38.

Hechlingen, church at, ii, 239.

Heckington Church, canopy over sedilia, ii, 406.

Heeren’s notion of the ruins at Wady el-Ooatib, i, 149.

Height, disproportionate, its effect, ii, 59, 60.

Heiligenstadt, Anna chapel at, ii, 292.

Heisterbach, abbey church of, ii, 238. Cloisters, ii, 261.

Hejira, events of the first century of the, ii, 512.

S. Helena, Constantine’s mother, tomb of, i, 357. 542. 544. Sections and elevation, 358. Church built by her, ii, 222. 267. i, 419.

Heliopolis, beautiful obelisk at, i, 111. 135.

Henry III., choir rebuilt by, ii, 374.

Henry VII.’s chapel, French and German parallels to, ii, 160. 283. 353. 494. Aisle, 364.

Herculaneum, theatre at, i, 335.

Hereford Cathedral, lancet window in, ii, 372. 374.

Herod’s Temple at Jerusalem, i, 227, 228. Plan and view restored, 225, 226. Type of the Expiatory Stele erected by him, i, 239. His tomb, 368. _See_ 498.

Herodotus on the tumulus of Alyattes, i, 230.

Hersfeld Church, ii, 230.

Hierapolis, Byzantine churches at, i, 430, 431.

Hildesheim, St. Michael’s church at, plan and interior, ii, 225. Description, 226.

Hindus, proverbial objection to the arch by the, i, 22. 217.

Hitterdal, Norway, wooden church at; Plan, ii, 332. View, 333.

Hoäte Church, Gothland, doorway of, ii, 326.

Hogarth’s pictures, i, 4.

Hohenstaufens, architectural period of the, ii, 237. Remains of their palaces, castles, &c., 256. 413. i, 606.

Holland, race indigenous to, and architecture of, ii, 206-208.

Holyrood Chapel, its date, ii, 437. _See_ 440.

Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem, Church of the, ii, 33-36.

Homer’s architectural descriptions, i, 247. Religion of his poem, 249.

Honeyman, Mr. John, drawings by, ii, 435 _note_.

Honeysuckle ornament, i, 258. 264.

Hope, Mr. Beresford, point asserted by, ii, 156 _note_.

Horseshoe arches. Takt-i-gero, i, 406. Dana, 468. Dighour, 469. Göllingen, ii, 238. Kerouan, 540.

Horse tent, Nimroud, i, 190.

Hoskins, Mr., pyramids figured by, i, 148. His Ethiopian researches, 215.

Huelgas, ii, 498. Cloister of the, 502.

S. Hugh, of Lincoln, architectural debt due to, ii, 358.

Hugo, Victor, an axiom of, ii, 141.

Humanejos, chapel at, ii, 498.

Husein Shah, Madrissa of, ii, 577, 578.

Huy, Notre Dame de, ii, 194.

Ibn Tooloon, mosque of, ii, 527. View, 528. Window, 529. Minarets, 530.

Ibrim in Nubia, basilican church at, i, 510.

Igel, near Trèves, Roman monument at, i, 362.

Ilescas, tower at, ii, 499.

Ilissus, Ionic temple on the, i, 255. 274.

Illahun Pyramid, i, 113.

Imumzade, palace of, i, 407.

Ingelheim, Charlemagne’s palace at, ii, 256.

Inkerman, cave at, i, 482.

Inner Temple Hall, ii, 415.

Innisfallen, Celtic church or oratory at, ii, 447. View, _ibid._

Iona, ii, 419. 439. Window, 441.

Ionian colonies, i, 229.

Ionic order, origin of the, i, 154. 237, 238. Result of recent discoveries: oldest and finest examples, 255. Temples of Juno, Diana, Apollo, and at Pergamon, 256, 257. Compared with the Doric order, 264. Columns and cornices, 264, 265. Carving, colour, masonry, &c., 265. Use of the order by the Romans, 309.

Ipsamboul, rock-cut temple at, i, 130.

Ireland, scroll work at New Grange in, i, 245 _note_. Character of its early architecture: source of the anti-Saxon feeling, ii, 443. Examples of its architecture, 444-459.

Iron as a building material, i, 21.

Irrigation, proficiency of the Turanian races in, i, 63.

St. Isaac’s at St. Petersburg, redeeming feature in the design of, i, 20.

Isis-headed or Typhonian capitals, i, 35, 127. 143.

Ispahan, works of Shah Abbas at, ii, 575. The Maidan Shah and its accompanying buildings, 575. 577. Sultan Husein’s Madrissa, 578. Char Bagh, 579. View of palace, 580.

Issoire, chevet church at: Plan, ii, 89. Elevation and section, 90.

Italy, ethnographic history of art in, i, 289. Adaptation of circular buildings left by the Romans, 543. Introductory notice; Division and classification of styles, i, 500. Lombard and round-arched Gothic, 558. Examples, 559-581. Byzantine Romanesque and other phases of the Byzantine style, 582-605. Pointed Gothic: effect of the disputes of factions, 607. Sources of difference between Italian Gothic and that of other peoples, 608. Examples, 610-634. Circular buildings, ii, 1. Towers, 2. Porches, 8. Civic buildings, 10. Moulded bricks, 13. Windows, 14. 19. Palestine, why treated as (architecturally) a part of Italy, ii, 32. _See_ Amalfi. Asti. Bari. Bittonto. Bologna. Brindisi. Byzantine. Ferrara. Florence. Friuli. Lucca. Mantua. Milan. Naples. Novara. Orvieto. Padua. Palestine. Pavia. Piacenza. Pisa. Prato. Rome. Sicily. Siena. Toscanella. Venice. Vercelli. Verona. Vicenza.

Ivan III, and Ivan the Terrible, churches built by, i, 492.

Jackson (Mr. T. G.), Dalmatia and Istria, i, 536-538. Trau, Jak, 590. Ragusa, ii, 21.

Jaina, i, 371. Parallel to its style in Ireland, ii, 456.

Jak, Hungary, church at, i, 590.

S. James, sepulchre of, i, 368. 370.

Jedburgh Abbey, mixed style at, ii, 419. Pier-arch, 421. Their peculiarity, 422.

Jerpoint Abbey, tower and battlements of, ii, 457.

Jerusalem, chief feature of admiration in the Temple of, i, 19. Earliest Temple, or Tabernacle, 222, 223. Solomon’s Temple, 65. 68. 201. Source of its splendour, 223. Its dimensions and plan, 222, 223. Ornaments and accessories of metal, 224. Subsequent rebuildings: Herod’s Temple, 225. Author’s drawing of the same, 226. Its magnitude and magnificence, 227. Cognate temples, 228. Constantine’s Basilicas, 420. The Golden Gateway, 449. The Gate Huldah, 450. Bassi-relievi on the Arch of Titus, 348. Rock-built tombs: Herod’s, Zechariah’s, 368. Absalom’s, the Judges’, 369. Result of the Crusades, ii, 32. Churches of SS. Anne, Marie la Grande, Marie Latine, and the Madeleine, 36. Church of the Holy Sepulchre, ii, 33-36. “Dome of Rock,” or Mosque of Omar, 520-522. Mosque el-Aksah (Abd el-Melik’s), 517-519. Fountains, 525.

Jews, period of the Exode of the, i, 93. _See_ Jerusalem. Semitic races.

John, King of Portugal, church founded by, ii, 507.

S. John Lateran, Roman basilican church built, i, 515. Present state, 521. Original founder, _ibid._ Cloister, 599.

S. John, Ravenna, baptistery of, i, 547. Knights of St. John at Brindisi, 599.

Jones, Owen, reproduction of the Alhambra Court of Lions by, ii, 553 _note_.

Josephus, fragment of Manetho preserved by, i, 92, 93. [_See_ Manetho.] His idea of Solomon’s palace, 221.

Judah, alleged tombs of the kings of, i, 368 _note_.

Judea, architecture of, _see_ Jerusalem.

Judges, tomb of the, i, 369. Façade, 370.

Jumièges, Norman church at, ii, 111. 114.

Juno, temple at Samos of, i, 256. Dimensions, 258.

Jupiter, temples of, at Elis, i, 16. Olympia, 253. Agrigentum, 258. 271. 273.

Jupiter Ammon, alleged ruins of a temple of, i, 149.

Jupiter Capitolinus, Etruscan temple to, i, 292. 315.

Jupiter Olympius, Athens, temple of, i, 257. Dimensions, 257. 323. School to which it belongs, 267. Plan and view of its ruins, 324.

Jupiter Stator, temple of, i, 34. 310. 311. Its form and dimensions, 315, 316.

Jupiter Tonans, temple of, i, 316.

Justinian’s Church at Bethlehem, i, 419. His boast on the completion of the mosque of Sta. Sophia, 440. Church in Armenia ascribed to him, 469.

Kaabah at Mecca, i, 65; ii. 514. 516. 536, 537. Persian Kaabahs, i, 212.

Kahun, Town of, i, 113, 114. Plan of houses, 113.

Kaitbey, mosque and tomb of, ii, 534. View, 535.

Kalabscheh, rock-cut temple at, i, 131. Roman temple: Plan, 143. Section, 144.

Kalaoon, mosque of, ii, 531.

Kalat Sema’n, Syria, church and monastery at, i, 422, 423. Double church, section and plan, 433.

Kallundborg, Denmark, peculiarly formed church at, ii, 321. View, 320.

Kampen, church at, ii, 207.

Kangovar, temple at, i, 228. 324.

Karlsburg Cathedral, ii, 210.

Karnac, chief feature of the Hypostyle Hall at, i, 17. Its dimensions, 24. 122. Original founder of the Temple, 111. Its successive accretions, great magnitude, &c., 122-124. The South Temple, 127. Parallel to the Hypostyle Hall, 123. _See_ ii, 553.

Kells, Ireland, ii, 449. Ancient Cross, 459.

Kelso Abbey Church, ii, 422. Norman arches, 422.

Kenilworth Hall, ii, 416.

Kerouan, Great mosque of, ii, 538-540. Plan, 538. Entrance, 539.

Kertch, tumuli near, i, 481.

Khafra, Pyramid of, i, 97-99. Temple of, 107, 108.

Khasné, or treasury of Pharaoh: View i, 364. Section and description, 365.

Khiva, ii, 581. View of palace, 581.

Khorsabad, explorations at, i, 154. Temple exhumed by M. Place, 161. Elevation of Observatory, 162. Plan of, _ibid_. Situation of the city, 172. Plans of the Palace, 171. 176. Restorations by the Author, 176. 178. Peculiar ornamentation, 180. Discovery of the city gates, 181. Plan of gateway, 180. Elevation of, 181. Remains of propylæa, 173. Sculptured view of a pavilion, 187. Example of the arch, 215.

Khosru (Nushirven), daring building feat of, i, 398.

Khufu (or Cheops), the proved founder of the Great Pyramid, i, 102. Alleged repairer of the Sphinx, 108 _note_.

Kief, architects of churches at, i, 484. Churches: Dessiatinnaya, and SS. Basil and Irene, 486. Cathedral (Sta. Sophia), 486, 487. 493. Other churches, 488. Immense number thereof, 489.

Kieghart, Armenia, rock-cut church at, i, 483.

Kilconnel, Monastery, ii, 444. View of cloister, 445.

Kilcullen, early doorway at, ii, 455.

Kildare Cathedral, ii. 444. Doorway in tower, 452.

Killaloe, section of chapel at, ii, 448.

Kilree, Kilkenny, round tower at, ii, 453, 454.

King’s College Chapel, Cambridge. _See_ Cambridge.

Kinneh, County Cork, round tower at, ii, 454, 455.

Kirk, proper application of the term, i, 543. Whence derived, _ibid. note_.

Kirkwall Cathedral, ii, 423. Bays, 423. View, 424.

Kloster Neuberg, “Todtenleuchter” at, ii, 297.

Königsberg, ii, 309.

Kootub Mosque and Minar, ii, 551.

Kostroma, Eastern Russia, churches in, i, 490. Views of interiors, 491, 492.

Kour, rock excavations on the banks of the, i, 483.

Kouthais, Armenia, peculiarities of church at, i, 472, 473.

Koyunjik, palace of Sennacherib at, 183. Palace of Esarhaddon, or South-west palace, 184. Central palace; its plan, 185. Its sculptures and pavement, 186. Palace of Tiglath Pileser, 185. Original magnificence of these groups of palaces, 186. Cause of the preservation of their ruins, 187. Illustrative bas-reliefs from palace walls, 187-190.

Kremlin, the. _See_ Moscow.

Kubr Roumeïa, i, 372. Plan, 373.

Kurtea el Argyisch, i, 479. View of, 495. Its plan, _ibid._ Date, 496.

Kuttenberg, church of St. Barbara at, its peculiar features, ii, 284. Section, 285.

Laach, abbey church at, ii, 235. Plan and view, 236.

Labyrinth of Lampares, i, 111. Its probable dimensions and arrangements, 112.

Läderbro, Gothland, church and wapenhus at, ii, 331. 398.

Lambeth Palace, ii, 416.

Landsberg, double chapel at, plan and section, ii, 243.

Landshut, St. Martin’s church at, ii, 286.

Langres, double-arched Roman gate at, i, 349. ii, 100.

Langton, Archbishop of Canterbury, ii, 155.

Langue d’Oc and Langue d’Œil, ii, 42.

Lantern pillars of Germany and France, ii, 297.

Lanterns: St. Ouen, Rouen, ii, 177. Salamanca, 475.

Laon Cathedral, its spires and towers, ii, 145.

Lapo, Arnolpho da, church remodelled by, i, 616.

Lateran church, Rome. _See_ St. John Lateran.

Latin style, French example of the, ii, 105.

Layard, Sir Henry Austen, his Assyrian explorations, i, 163. 169, 170 _note_, 215. 297.

Le Duc, Viollet, his Dictionnaire d’Architecture, ii, 179 _note_. On the donjon at Coucy, 185 _note_. Restoration of Autun Gateway, i, 349 _note_.

Leighs. _See_ Great Leighs.

Leo the Isaurian, church built by, i, 453.

Leon, Spain, ii, 467. Panteon of San Isidoro, _ibid_. Interior, 470. Cathedral: Plan, 483. Bay of choir, 484.

Lérida. Door of porch, ii, 473.

Léry, Norman Church at, ii. 111.

Lethaby (W. R.): Restoration of Mujelibé, i, 163 _note_.

Leuchars, Norman window at, ii, 420.

Lewis (Prof. T. H.), ii, 518, 519. 521.

Lichfield Cathedral: Spires, ii, 196. Nave, 360. 369. 404. Clerestory windows, 358. Views, 382. West doorway, 404, 405. Dimensions, proportions, &c., 417.

Liège Cathedral, its date, &c., ii, 194. Churches: St. Bartholomew, 192. St. Jacques, _ibid_. Its plan, flamboyant porch, polychromatic decorations, 197. St. Martin, 198. Bishop’s palace, 205. _See_ 492.

Lierre, church of St. Gommaire at, ii, 197. Belfry, 200.

Lighting of temples, i, 124. 272. Of domes, 454.

Limburg, near Dürkheim, church at, ii, 226. 229.

Limburg on the Lahn, cathedral of, ii, 288.

Lincoln Cathedral, ii, 348, 349 _note_. Nave, 358. Roof-vaulting, 359. East end, 375. Transept-windows, 376. 378. General view, 383. Angel choir, 387. 402. Situation, 388. Chapter-house, 391. Choir-aisles doorway, 404. Dimensions, proportions, &c., 417.

Linköping, Sweden, church at, ii, 314.

Linlithgow, doorway at, ii, 439. Palace, 440.

Lino, Spain, churches of SS. Miguel and Cristina at, ii, 464. Unique in form, 465.

Lion tomb at Cnidus, i, 284.

Lisieux Cathedral, ii, 149.

Lismore Cathedral ii, 444.

Little Maplestead, Essex, round church at, ii, 35. 398.

Little Saxham, Sussex, round-towered church at, ii, 398.

Liverpool, St. George’s Hall at, i, 346 _note_.

Livia, house of, i, 375.

Lloyd, Mr. Watkiss, subject of a paper by, i, 262 _note_.

Loches, round arches upon pointed ones at, ii, 83. Castle, 88. 185. _See_ i, 600.

Loftus, Mr., explorations of. Susa, i, 209. Wurka, 392.

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

Lombardy, ii, 3, 4 _note_; i, 558. Disappearance of original Lombard buildings, 560. Examples of Lombard and round-arched Gothic, 559-581. _See_ Italy.

London Bridge, i, 48.

St. Lorenzo, Milan, _see_ Milan.

Lorenzo, basilican church, Rome, dates of, i, 515. Aisles, _ibid._ Gallery, 523. Interior view, 524.

Lorraine, architectural affinities of, ii, 44.

Lorsch, porch of convent at, elevation of, ii, 255.

Louis le Gros, Louis le Jeune, Saint Louis, and the architecture of France, ii, 121, 122.

Louis the Pious, i, 566.

Loupiac, façade of church at, ii, 78.

Louvain, town-hall at, i, 14. Its date and character, ii, 202. Church of St. Pierre, intended design, &c., 196. 290 _note_. Cloth-hall, 204.

Lubeck, brick-built Cathedral and churches of SS. Mary and Catherine at. Plans, view, &c., ii, 303-305. Town-hall, 311.

Lucca, i, 558. 580. 607. Bays of San Martino, 613. San Michele, 588. ii, 6. Lund, Sweden, cathedral at, ii, 315.

Lüneburg, brick architecture of, ii, 311.

Luther’s shelter, ii, 258.

Luxeuil, ii, 95.

Luxor, temple of, i, 125. Obelisk, 135.

Lycia and its tombs, i, 234. 237. _See_ i, 430.

Lycurgus, i, 242. Effect of his laws, 251.

Lydda, Gothic church at, ii, 37.

Lydia, i, 229.

Lyons, church of St. Martin d’Ainay at, ii, 95. Style of the cathedral, 149, 150.

Lysicrates, choragic monument of, its character as a work of art, i, 26. 257. 266. Dimensions and elevation, 279.

Mabillon, plan found and published by, ii, 213.

MacGibbon (David): Architecture of Provence, ii, 55 _note_.

Machpelah, cave of, i, 294. 363.

Madeleine, Paris, i, 20. Madeleine, Jerusalem, ii, 36.

Madracen, tomb, view of, i, 373.

Madrissa, the, _see_ Ispahan.

Maestricht: St. Servin’s, ii, 192. Notre Dame, 192.

Magdeburg, model of church built by Otho the Great at, ii, 250. Form and arrangements of the cathedral, 265. Nave and side-aisles, 287.

Maguelonne, fortified church at, ii, 57. 93.

Mahomed Khodabendah, city founded by, ii, 573. Splendid tomb erected by him, 574.

Mahomet, first mosque of, ii, 514. 516. His intention relative to the temple of Jerusalem, 518.

Mahomet II, number and splendour of the mosques of, ii, 557.

Mahomedanism, result of the outburst and cause of the success of, ii, 512-515. Expulsion of its followers from Spain, 556. Their habit regarding the architecture of conquered peoples, 557.

Maison Carrée, Nîmes, i, 311. Description, plan, &c., 317. 509.

Malines, church of St. Rombaut at, ii, 194. Chief points of interest, 196.

Mallay, M., on the churches in Puy de Dome, ii, 89. 92.

Mammeisi, purpose of Egyptian temples so called, i, 132.

Manco Capac’s house, Cuzco, ii, 604.

Manetho, dynastic chronology of Egypt, by, i, 90. Fragment preserved by Josephus, 93. On the Labyrinth, 111. On the Shepherd kings, 116. Confirmation of his list of kings, 129.

Manresa, collegiate church at, ii, 486. Interior view, 487.

Mantua, i, 293. Campanile of S. Andrea, ii, 6, 7.

Maplestead, Essex, Round church at, ii, 35. 398.

Marburg, church of S. Elizabeth at; Plan, section, &c., ii, 267. West front, 268. Apse, 280.

Marcus Aurelius, Column of Victory of, i, 353.

Margaret of Austria, sepulchral church erected by, ii, 159.

S. Maria degli Angeli, Rome, i, 344.

S. Maria di Ara Cœli, basilican church, date of, i, 515.

S. Maria in Capitolio, triapsal church, Cologne, ii, 232.

S. Maria in Cosmedin, basilican church, Rome, i, 515. Tower: Dimensions, 578. Elevation, _ibid._

S. Maria in Domenica, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515.

S. Maria, Florence, dimensions of, i, 24. _See_ Florence.

S. Maria Maggiore, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515. Plan, 521. Interior view, proportions, &c., 522. Modern alterations, 521.

S. Maria sopra Minerva, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515. Its style, 517.

S. Maria in Trastevere, basilican church, date of, i, 515.

S. Maria Rotunda, _see_ Theodoric.

S. Marie de l’Épine, west front of, ii, 156. Its English prototype, _ibid_. Spire, 157.

Marienburg, brick Castle at, ii, 310.

Mariette, M., Egyptian Explorations of, i, 105. 116 _note_.

Markham, Mr., on Peruvian architecture, ii, 603.

S. Mark’s, Venice. _See_ Venice.

Marmoutier, church of, ii, 240.

Marryat’s Works on Sweden, Jutland, &c., Illustrations from, ii, 316 _et seq._

Mars Ultor, temple of, i, 316. 509.

Marseilles, early colonists of, i, 363; ii, 30.

Marshall, Bishop, tomb of, at Exeter, ii, 405. 407.

S. Martin, triapsal church, Cologne, ii, 232-234.

S. Martino in Cielo d’Oro, Ravenna, i, 528 _note_.

S. Martino di Monti, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515.

S. Mary Redcliffe, a French prototype of, ii, 156.

Mashita, palace at, plan, i, 400. Triapsal hall, 402. Western octagon tower, 403. Façade, 404. Elevation restored by the author, 405.

Maspero, (M.), Egypt, domestic and military architecture, i, 136, 137.

Mass, as an element in Architecture, i, 16.

Mastaba, its meaning, i, 102. Examples, 102. 105, 106.

Matera, cathedral at, i, 597. Window, 597.

Materials in architecture: Stone and brick, i, 19, 20. Plaster, wood, cast iron, 21.

S. Mathias, near Trèves, ii, 238.

Maulbronn, Wurtemburg, Abbey of, ii, 236 and _note_.

Mausolus, tomb of, at Halicarnassus, i, 282. View and plan as restored by the Author, 282, 283. Dimensions and description, 283, 284.

Maxentius, basilica of, or Temple of Peace, its dimensions, i, 24. Considered as an example of Roman art, 306. Description, plan, sections, &c., 329-331. Its stucco ornaments, 345. Proportion of solids to area, 24; ii, 179.

Mayence Cathedral, ii, 226. Its chief features, _ibid._ Its western apse, 230. The Kauf Haus, 295.

Mecca, the Kaabah at, i, 65. 212; ii, 514. 516. Arrangements, details, &c., of it, and of the Great Mosque, 536, 537.

Mechlin, ii, 188. Intended Town-hall, 204.

Medina, Mahomet’s Mosque at, ii, 514. 516.

Medeenet Habû, temple of i, 125. Pavilion of Rameses, 137.

Medum, Pyramid of, i. 102. 104.

Megalithic period in England, ii, 337.

Meillan, château of, ii, 184.

Meissen Cathedral, ii, 276. Nave, 289. Baptistery, 292.

Melrose Abbey, ii, 420. 431. Aisle, 432. East window, 433.

Memnonium, the, i, 126.

Memphis, i, 91. Mariette’s explorations, 92. Dynasties of Pyramid-building Kings, _ibid._ Magnificence of the city, destruction of its monuments, &c., 118, 119.

S. Menoux, church at; exterior, ii, 102. Chevet and narthex, 103.

Meroë, the alleged parent state of Egypt, i, 147. Remains of Ethiopian temples and pyramids, 148. Arches, 217.

Merovingian Kings, no architectural remains of the, ii, 120.

Merzig, Church of, ii, 238.

Messina, architecture of, ii, 24. 29. The Nunziatella, 24. Cathedral, 29.

Metal used in Roman architecture, i, 346 _note_, 384.

Mettlach, Octagonal Church, ii, 249. Capital, 250.

Metz Cathedral, pleasing features of, ii, 287.

Mexico, primitive perfection of the arts in, i, 62. Early inhabitants, ii, 583. Recent artistic explorers, 584. Toltecs and Aztecs; result of the Spanish conquest, 584-586. Alleged Buddhist Sculptures: Eastern prototypes of Mexican forms, 587, 588. 591. Teocallis or pyramid-temples, 589, 590. Temple or palace at Mitla, 591, 592. Buildings of Yucatan, 593-595. Principles of construction, 597. 599.

Michel Angelo, ii, 566.

Michel, Mont St., medieval features, retained at, ii, 186.

Middleton (Prof.): Pantheon, i, 321 _note_. Trajan’s Basilica, 329 _note_. Roman Theatres, 335 _note_. Sutrium, 337 _note_. Velaria, 340 _note_. Frigidarium, Caracalla’s Baths, 346 _note_. Age of Temple of Minerva Medica, 359 _note_. Earthen pots in Roman Vaults, 549 _note_. House of Vestal Virgins, i, 375 _note_.

Milan Cathedral, i, 24. Its architecture, 608. 610. 625. Plan, section, interior, original model, &c., 625-629. Church of San Lorenzo: Plan, its mutilations, &c., i, 550, 551. Church of San Ambrogio, its atrium, silver altar, bronze doors, &c., i, 565-567. Its additional tower, 580. Tower of St. Satiro, 578 _note_.

Milan city, half German, i, 500. 558. The Great Hospital, ii, 13.

Miletus, Ionic temple at, i, 256.

Minars and Minarets, their beauty, ii, 534. Examples: Hassan, 532, 533. Kaitbey, 535. Tunis, 540. Suleiman, 561. Sta. Sophia, 563. Erzeroum, 570.

Minden, Church at, ii, 231.

Minerva, temple of, at Sunium, i, 254.

Minerva Medica, temple or tomb of, i, 359. Peculiar features of its construction, 359-361. 434. Its real destination, 359 _note_.

S. Miniato, Florence, i, 525. Dimensions, 584. Plan, _ibid_. Elevation, 585. Sections, 584. 586.

Missionary zeal of the Buddhists, ii, 586.

Missolonghi, doorway at, i, 246, 247.

Mistra, Sparta, church of the Virgin at, i, 462. 471. Apse, 463.

Mitla, Mexico, temple at, ii, 591. Palace, 592.

Modena, cathedral at, i, 570. Octagon, 580. Ghirlandina tower, ii, 5.

Mohammed, _see_ Mahomet.

Mohammed ben Alhamar, founder of the Alhambra, ii, 551.

Moissac, church at, ii, 69. Plan, 69.

Mokwi, Armenia, Byzantine church at, i, 471.

Molfetta, Apulia, church at, i, 582. Plan and section: its domes, 600.

Monasterboice, Ireland, early doorway at, ii, 455.

Monasteries: Kalat Sema’n, i, 422, 423. Troitzka, Moscow, 491. St. Gall, ii, 213-216. Ireland, 444. Spain, 502.

Monkwearmouth, ii, 343. Saxon doorway, 343.

Monreale: Plan of church at, ii, 26. Nave, 27. Its mosaic decorations, 26, 27. Cloisters, 29. Fountain, 30. Mosaic pictures or stained glass? 31.

Mons, Belgium, ii, 188. Church of St. Waudru, 197. Polychromatic effects, 197. Town-hall, 204.

Mont Majour, triapsal church at, ii, 59.

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

Mont St. Michel, Normandy, mediæval features preserved in, ii, 186.

Montier-en-Der, part Romanesque, part Gothic church at, ii, 107. Its perfectness as an example of a new style, 108. _See_ 217. 344.

Montierneuf, church of, ii, 86.

Monza, example of brick architecture from, ii, 14.

Moors, the, in Spain, ii, 461, 462. 468. 472. 495. Characteristics of the Moresco style: region in which it predominated, 497. Examples, 497-501. Their first important building, 543-545. Extent and nature of their remains in Spain; their probable origin, 555. Period of their expulsion, 556. _See_ Alhambra. Saracenic.

Moravia, ii, 210.

Moresco Style, _see_ Moors.

Morienval, church of, ii, 122 _note_.

Mosaic pavements in Roman basilicas, i, 526.

Mosaic pictures at Monreale, ii, 26, 31.

Moscow, architects of the churches in, i, 485, 486. When made the capital of Russia, 489. Numerousness of its churches, 489-492. The Annunciation and St. Michael’s churches, 492. The Assumption, _ibid_. Plan, 493. St. Basil (Vassili Blanskenoy), _ibid._ Plan, _ibid_. View, 494. Tower of Ivan Veliki, 496. _The Kremlin_. Towers on its walls, 497. Sacred Gate, 498.

Moses, the brazen serpent of, i, 567.

Mosques: Diarbekr, i, 392-394. Hebron, ii, 37, 38. Mecca, 536. Kerouan, 538. Cordoba, 543. Tabreez, 571. Ispahan, 576. _See_ Cairo. Constantinople. Damascus. Jerusalem. Mecca.

Moudjeleia, Syria, plan of house, i, 448.

Muayyad, El, mosque of, ii, 534.

Muckross, Ireland, monastery cloister at, ii, 444.

Münzenberg, castle of, ii, 259. Picturesque features, _ibid._

Mugheyr, details and diagrams of temple at, i, 158, 159.

Mühlhausen, Maria Kirche at, plan, ii, 289. Arrangement, view, &c., _ibid._

Mujelibé, probable origin of the, i, 163.

Munich Cathedral, ii, 286. Brick churches, 287.

Municipal, _see_ Civic.

Münster Cathedral, ii, 230. Lamberti Kirche at, 439 _note_.

Murano, arches in apse of, i, 406.

Murcia, chapel at, ii, 508.

Murphy, Mr., illustrator of the Alhambra, ii, 507 _note_. 543.

Music among the ancient races, i, 68, 82.

Mycenæ, tombs of the kings at, i, 243. Gate of the Lions, 247.

Mylassa, Column of Victory at, i, 353. Tomb, 371. View of same, _ibid._

Myra, church of St. Nicholas at, i, 455.

Myron’s treasury, and materials of its decorations, i, 250.

Naksh-i-Rustam, tomb of Darius at, i, 204.

Nancy, Ducal palace at, ii, 183, 184. Portal, &c., 185.

Naples, paucity of examples in, i, 583. Cathedral, 584.

Napoleon I., façade completed by, i, 629.

Naranco, church of Sta. Maria, &c., its character and ornamentation, ii, 464. View, chief point of interest, 465.

Narthex, the, in basilican churches, i, 514. 530. In St. Mark’s, Venice, 532. Cluny, ii, 99. Vezelay, 101. St. Menoux, 102. Spires, 229.

Nature, imitation of, i, 41.

Naumburg, church of, ii, 286. Choir-screens, 293.

Naval architecture, continuous advance of, i, 45; ii, 128.

Naval triumphal columns in Rome, i, 352.

SS. Nazario and Celso, church of, its original appellation, peculiarities of construction, &c., i, 554.

SS. Nereo ed Achilleo, basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515. System of which it affords an example, 526.

Nero, baths of, i, 343.

Neufchatel, Notre Dame de, ii, 219.

Neuss, church of St. Quirinus in, ii, 238. 262.

Nevers Cathedral, ii, 149.

New style, possibility of a, i, 44, 45.

Newton, Sir Charles, explorations of, i, 282. Mausoleum, Halicarnassus, _ibid. note_.

New Walsingham church, roof of aisle, ii, 400.

Nicholai Kirche, Zerbst, ii, 291.

S. Nicolo in Carcere, basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515.

Nieuport, Belgium, belfry of, ii, 200.

Niké Apteros, or Wingless Victory, temple of, i, 255. Its frieze, 264.

Nile, Egyptian rule with regard to erections on the two sides of, i, 110. 135. Course of civilization, up stream or down stream? 147.

Nîmes, Maison Carrée or Temple of Diana at, i, 311. 317. 509; ii, 49. Amphitheatre, i. 340. The Tour Magne, 362. 555. The Pont du Gard, 385. _See_ 428.

Nimroud, North-west Palace at, i, 170. Plan, _ibid_. Result of exploration of the pyramid, 191. Vaulted drain, 215.

Nineveh, i, 153. 169. Explorations, 169. Parts of Ninevite structures remaining, 198. Stairs, 201.

Nisibin, triple church at, i, 428. 466.

Nismes, _see_ Nîmes.

Nivelles, church of St. Gertrude at, ii, 189. Its circular tower, &c., 190.

Nocera dei Pagani, baptistery of, i, 546, 547. 435.

Nomenclature in Christian architecture, remarks on, i, 411.

Norman architecture, chief feature of, i, 17. Architectural province of Normandy, ii, 41. Inconsistency characteristic of the race, 105. Culminating epoch of the style, 105. Destroyers and rebuilders, 107. Examples of the style: towers and vaulting, 110-119. Pillars, 161. Result of the Norman conquest of England, 337. Effect of the wars of the Roses, 339. Norman chapels, 389. Norman gateway, 403.

Normans and Norman buildings in Sicily, ii, 22, 23.

Northampton, round church at, ii, 398. Eleanor cross in the county, 412.

Norway, church architecture of, ii, 316. Wooden churches, 332-334.

Norwich Castle, ii, 413.

Norwich Cathedral: Plan, ii, 346. Tabular items, 417. _See_ 348. 358. 386. 389. 471.

Notre Dame, Paris. _See_ Paris.

Notre Dame de Dijon, ii, 147.

Nourri, pyramids at, i, 148.

Novara Cathedral: Atrium, plan, i, 562. Elevation and Section, 563. Baptistery, 552.

Novogorod, Sta. Sophia, i, 471. 486. 488. East end, 487, 488. Interior, bronze doors, &c., 488. Convents, _ibid._ Village church, 489.

Noyon Cathedral, ii, 145. 168 _note_.

Nubia, rock-cut Egyptian temples in, i, 130. Church at Ibrim, 510. _See_ Rock-cut temples.

Nunziatella, Messina, ii, 24.

Nuremberg, double chapel at, ii, 242. Churches, St. Laurence and St. Sebald, 283, 284. Peculiarity of the Frauen Kirche, 290. “Sacraments Häuschen” at St. Laurence’s, 293. Schöne Brunnen, 296. Bay window, St. Sebald, 298.

Nylarska, Bornholm, round church, ii, 327.

Nymwegen, circular church at, ii, 249, 250.

Nyska, Bornholm, round church, ii, 327.

Oajaca, Tehuantepec, pyramid of, ii, 590.

Obelisks of Egypt, side of the Nile always chosen for the, i, 111. Earliest and finest examples, 111. 135. Their purpose, &c., 135. Assyrian obelisk at Divanubara, 192.

Octagon: Ely Cathedral, ii. 352. Of Parliament Houses, 392.

Odo, Archbishop, cathedral erected by, ii, 344.

Oester Larsker, Denmark, round church at, ii, 327. View, 329.

Ogival, French use of the term, ii, 169 _note_.

S. Olaf, churches built by, and in memory of, ii, 316.

Olite, Spain, castle of, ii, 506.

Olska, Bornholm, round church, ii, 327.

Omar, incentive to the building of a mosque by, ii, 516. His mosque, 517.

Omm-es-Zeitoun, Syria, Kalybe at, plan and view, i, 437.

Oppenheim, objectionable features in the church at, ii, 288.

Orange, Roman theatre at: Description, i, 335. Plan and view, 335, 336. Triumphal arch, 348. Church ii, 53.

Oratories: Normandy, ii, 110. Irish, ii, 450-452. Of Gallerus, 457.

Orchomenos, tomb (or treasury) at, i, 244.

Orkneys, architectural elements traceable in the, ii, 423.

Orleans Cathedral, its merits, date, &c., ii, 152.

Orleansville, double-apsed basilica at, i, 510.

Ornament, carved, principle, object, and application of, i, 31-35.

Osirtasen II., pyramid of, i, 113.

Orvieto, i, 558. 614. 617. 619.

Osman III., mosque of, ii, 564.

Osnabrück, church at, ii, 230.

Othos, German architecture under the, ii, 211. Minster ascribed to Otho III., 248. Tomb, 248.

Otranto Cathedral, i, 596. Crypt, _ibid._

Otricoli, basilica at, i, 334. Amphitheatre, 342.

Ottmarsheim, Alsace, circular church at, ii, 250.

Oudenarde, masonic trick in the town-hall of, ii, 204.

S. Ouen, Rouen. _See_ Rouen.

Oviedo, ii, 464, 509.

Oxford Cathedral, Wolsey’s roof at, ii, 366. Choir arches, 366.

Oxford Martyrs’ Memorial, ii, 413 _note_.

Oxford University: Merton College chapel, ii, 375. 393. Exeter College chapel, 393 _note_. Colleges generally, 414.

Paderborn Cathedral, transitional feature shown in, ii, 231. 307.

Padua, civic hall at, ii, 10. Its dimensions, arcades, &c., _ibid._ Church of San Antonio, i, 535. 536.

Pæstum, Doric temple at, i, 255. Peculiarities of the double Temple, 271. 273.

Painted glass, circumstances attending the introduction of, ii, 57. 70. 92. Its influence as a formative principle in Gothic Architecture, 124. Results of its omission in modern windows, 125. Extravagances of the German artists, ii, 294. Introduction into and mania for its display in England, 338. 358. 373, 374. Contrasted with polychromatic decoration, 31.

Painting and Sculpture, their province as distinguished from architecture, i, 4, 5. Pre-Raphaelitism, 12. Egyptian examples, 94. 109. Ptolemaic period, 143. Painting and Sculpture in Assyrian buildings, 188-190. How used in the palaces of Persepolis and Susa, 208. 210-211. Sculpture and colours in the Grecian orders, 263. 266. External sculpture of the French cathedrals, ii, 141. English cathedrals, 338. Mural Painting in Saxon edifices, 344. Polychromy in Sicily, 26, 27.

Palaces: Egyptian, i, 122. 125. Assyrian, 168-190. Ancient Persian, 201-211. Roman, 314. 375-380. Parthian, 390-395. Sassanian, 395. Romanesque, 556. German, ii, 256. Saracenic (Alcazar and Alhambra), 551-555. Persian-Saracenic, 578. Mexican, 592. 596.

Palæontology, its importance to the Geologist, i, 53, 54.

Palenque, probable Christian bas-relief at, ii, 593 _note_. Pyramid-temple, or Teocalli, 594. 599.

Palermo, church of San Giovanni in, ii, 24, 25. Its mosque-like form, 24. Churches in mixed styles, 25. Cathedral: lateral entrance, 28. East end, 29. Use of the pointed arch, 30.

Palestine, Italian Gothic, how introduced into, ii, 32. Examples, 33-38.

Palmyra, Temple of the Sun at, i, 228. 324. _See_ ii, 523.

Pansa’s House, Pompeii, i, 381. _See_ Pompeii.

S. Pantaleone, Cologne, ii, 260.

Pantheon, Paris, proportion of solids to area in the, ii, 179.

Pantheon, Rome, compared with the Parthenon, i, 17. Its rotunda, 319. Portico, 320. 544. Description, Plan, Elevation, Section, &c., 320-322. Discoveries by Mr. Chedanne in 1892, 320 _note_. Repetitions of its form in miniature, 357. 543. Period of its erection, 320 and _note_. 321. Plan of lighting in, 322.

Pantokrator Church, Constantinople, i, 457.

Pappacoda, Naples, church at, i, 598. Its doorway, 598.

Parenzo, Basilica at, i, 536. Plan 537.

Paris: influence of the materials of its construction on the effect produced by the Madeleine, i, 20. Notre Dame: proportion of solids to area, 24. ii, 179. Compared with the Arc de l’Etoile, i, 30. Date of erection; plan, ii, 132. Area, original and altered elevation, &c., 133. Constructive defects, _ibid._ Façade, 136. Its character as a whole, 137. Windows, 163. St. Germain des Prés, and St. Geneviève, 121. St. Martin, 163. Pantheon, 179. Hôtel de Cluny, 184. Sainte Chapelle, ii. 122. 131. 155. 338. 374. 393 and _note_. 31. St. Eustache, 492 _note_.

Parish churches, England, examples of, ii, 397-401.

Parliament Houses, London, central octagon, ii, 393 _note_.

Parma Cathedral, i, 570. Principles of design illustrated by the Baptistery, ii, 1.

Paros, island of, apses of churches in, i, 539 _note_.

Parthenon, principle illustrated by the, i, 14. Compared with other edifices, 17. Dimensions, 24. 258. Its fitness for ornamental adjuncts, 38. Its character as a work of art, 253. Elevation of a column, 260. The façade, 262. Plan, 270. Form, _ibid._ Section, 273.

Parthians, i, 389-392. Palace of Al Hadhr. Plan, 390. Elevation, 391. Mosque of Diarbekr, 392-394.

Pasargadæ, tomb of Cyrus at, i, 164. 196-198. State of remains there, 198. Fire temple or tomb, 212.

S. Paul’s Cathedral, London, i, 24. 446. ii, 179.

S. Paul’s basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515. Aisles, _ibid._ Plan, description, interior view, &c., 516-519.

S. Paul Trois-Chateaux, Provence, ii, 55. 255.

Paulinzelle, ruined abbey of, ii, 238.

Pavia, church of St. Michele at, i, 563. ii, 219. 244. Considered as an example of its style, i, 563. Section, 564. Apse, 565. S. Pietro and S. Teodoro, _ibid._

Paxton, Sir Joseph, i, 48.

Payerne, basilican church at, ii, 219.

Peace, temple of, at Rome. _See_ Maxentius.

Peacock, Dr., Dean of Ely, memorial to, ii, 382 _note_.

Pelasgi, parent race of the, i, 75. 241. Most remarkable of their remains, 243. Domes, _ibid._ Doorways, arches, wall masonry, &c., 245-247. Culminating period of their civilization, 251. _See_ i, 81 _note_.

Pellegrini’s designs for Milan Cathedral, i, 629.

S. Pellino, apse of, i, 593. Elevation, 592.

Pendentives, diagrams of, i, 434. 532. At Salamanca, 476. At Tarragona, 477.

Penrose, Mr., work on Athenian architecture by, i, 261 _note_. Discoveries in 1884 in Temple of Jupiter Olympius, Athens, 323 and _note_. Drawing by him, ii, 152.

Pepin, union of French dominions under, ii, 120.

Pergamon, German Exploration at, i, 256.

Pergamus, wooden roofed basilica at, i, 427, 428.

Périgueux, church of St. Front at, ii, 64, 65. Class of which it is the only specimen, 67. Its ante-church, 107. _See_ i, 535. 582.

Peristyle in Greek temples, object of the, i, 271, 272.

Perpendicular, late pointed, or Lancastrian style, epoch of the, ii, 339. Motto of the period, _ibid._ _See_ 376.

Persepolis, i, 153. Author’s work on the subject, 168 _note_. Parts of buildings still preserved, 198. Prominence of staircases, 200. Palaces of Xerxes and Darius, 201-209. _See_ 390. 397.

Persia, Assyrian buildings reproduced in, i, 158, 188. Palaces, 201-211. Fire temples, 212. Tombs, 212. 364. Paucity of materials for architectural history of mediæval Persia, ii, 567. Examples: Bagdad and Erzeroum, 568-571. Tabreez, 571-573. Sultanieh, 573-575. Ispahan and Teheran, 575-578.

Peru, ii, 600. Difference between its buildings and those of Mexico, 600. Remains of Cyclopean remains at Tia Huanacu, 601, 602. Sillustani tombs, 603. Houses of Manco Capac and of the Virgins of the Sun, 604, 605. Tombs, 605, 606. Walls of Tambos and Cuzco, 606-608.

Perugia, church of Sti. Angeli at, i, 545. Town-hall, ii, 10.

Pesth, i, 410 _note_.

Peterborough Cathedral: Proportions, ii, 347. 417. Nave, 357. Retro-choir, 365. Vault, 367. West front, 385. Clerestory, 471.

S. Peter’s basilican church, Rome, its date, i, 515. Aisles, 515. Plan, 516. Site, dimensions, &c., 517. Internal view, 518. Two interesting adjuncts, 519.

S. Peter’s, Rome (present building), i, 12. 24. Principles neglected in, 30. Proportion of solids to area, i, 24; ii, 179. _See_, i, 446. 618. 622; ii, 397.

Petersburg, near Halle, ruined circular church at, ii, 250.

S. Petersburg, architects of the churches of, i, 485.

Petra, i, 363. Peculiar aspect of the locality, _ibid._ The Khasné or Treasury of Pharaoh: View, 364. Section and description, 365. Question as to object of some of the so-called tombs, _ibid._ Corinthian tomb, 366. Rock-cut interior, 367.

Petrie, George, fact relative to Irish round towers proved by, ii, 450.

Petrie, W. M. Flinders, researches in Egypt. Pyramids and Temples in Gizeh, i, 98-100. 102. Medum, 104. Abouseer, Dahshur, 107. Temple of Sphinx, 107, 108. The Labyrinth, 111, 112. Hawara, Illahun Pyramids, 112, 113. Houses at Kahun, 113. 115. Wooden column found by, 115 _note_.

Phigaleia, temple of Apollo at Bassæ in, i, 273.

Philæ, noteworthy features of the temple at, 142-143. Plan, 145.

Philip Augustus, progress of France under, ii, 122.

Philip of Valois, ii, 122.

Phœnicians, the, i, 238 _note_; ii, 461, 462.

Phonetic element in art, i, 4-10.

Phrygia, object of contention between Egypt and, i, 229.

Piacenza, church of San Antonio at: Plan, i, 560. Section, 561. Façade of cathedral, 568. Campanile, 581. Palazzo Pubblico, ii, 10.

Pier arches in English cathedrals, ii, 367.

Pierrefonds, castle of, ii, 185.

S. Pietro ad Vincula, basilican church, Rome, i, 515. 525.

Pillars (compound). Diagrams of plans, ii, 162.

Pinnacles, over-employment by French architects of, ii, 174.

Pisa Cathedral, i, 540. 566. Merit of its exterior, 588. View, 587. Blind arcades, 588. Leaning tower, 578. 603. Chapel of Sta. Maria della Spina, 633. Baptistery, 602.

Pisani Palace, Venice, ii, 19.

Pistoja, Cathedral, i, 588. Tower, ii, 6.

Pitzounda, Byzantine church at: Plan, i, 469. Section and view, 470. Probable date, 471.

Place, M., excavations and discoveries at Khorsabad by, i, 161. 172-181. 176 _note_.

Planes, triapsal church at, ii, 59.

Pliny on the temple of Diana, i, 278. On the tomb of Mausolus, 283. On the tomb of Porsenna, 299.

Pluscardine Abbey, ii, 439. Doorway, 441.

Poetry, its province as an art, i, 5.

Pointed arches and style: Earliest Italian examples, i, 572. 610. Pre-Christian and early post-Christian use of the arch, ii, 45. Theory, diagram, and examples, 46-49. Norman arches over pointed ones, 83. Invention of the true pointed style, 104. Critical observations greatest recommendation of the style, 123, 124. French examples, 130-186. Claim of the Germans, ii, 211. German examples, 264-291. Early Scandinavian examples, ii, 313-334. When introduced into England, 371. _See_ Arches.

Poitiers, façade of church of Notre Dame at, ii, 85. Other churches, 86. Plan of the cathedral, _ibid._ Its most remarkable feature, _ibid._ Church of St. Jean, 107.

Pola, amphitheatre at, i, 341, 342. Arch of the Sergii, 348. St. Maria de Canneto, 538.

Polychromy. _See_ Colour. Painting.

Polycrates, temple ascribed to, i, 256.

Pompeii, i, 269. Basilica, 333. Plan of same, _ibid._ Theatres, 335. Baths, 343. Shape and arrangement of private dwellings, 380, 381. Pansa’s house, 381. Use of colours and metals, 382-385. _See_ 570.

Pontigny, abbey of, ii, 154. Chevet, 155. 171. A German copy, ii, 268.

Porches, Portals, and Porticos: Persepolis (pillars), i, 207. Bergamo, ii, 9. French examples, 51-54. 58. 184. Lorsch, 255. Gothland, 325, 326. Dunfermline, 437. Spanish examples, 473, 474. Belem, 510. _See_ Doors and Doorways.

Porsenna, Pliny on the tomb of, i, 299.

Porta Nigra at Besançon, i, 349. At Trèves, 350.

Portugal, church of Batalha in, ii, 507-509. Alcobaça, Coimbra and Belem, 509. Results of war and earthquake, 511.

Prague, church of St. Veit at, ii, 285.

Prato, Duomo at, ii, 3. Its tower, 7.

S. Praxede, Rome, Corinthian base from, i, 312. Date of the church, 515. Arches, 525.

Pre-Raphaelitism, cause of the failure of, i, 12.

Priene, Ionic hexastyle temple at, i, 256.

Proportion in Architecture, i, 26, 27. Diagrams, 28, 29. Observed in the Pyramids, 262 _note_.

Proportions of area to solids, &c., in important buildings, i, 24. French cathedrals, ii, 179. English cathedrals, 417.

Protestant worship, early French church suitable for, ii, 71.

Provence, Roman bridge and arches at St. Chamas in, i, 351. Architectural boundaries, ii, 41. 43. Early use of the pointed arch, 45. Churches, baptisteries, and cloisters, 50-63.

Prussia, East, brick architecture of, ii, 302.

Ptolemies, the, i, 91. 126. Revival of Egyptian arts under them, 139. Temples of the period, 140-143.

S. Pudenziana, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515. Scriptural interest attaching to it, its plan, &c., 524, 525.

Puissalicon, tower at, ii, 59, 60.

Pullan, R. P., and Sir C. Newton, Restoration of mausoleum of Halicarnassus, i, 282 _note_.

Pulpits in German churches, ii, 293.

Puy de Dome, churches in, ii, 89-93.

Puy-en-Velay, cathedral at, ii, 96. Its cloister, _ibid._

Pyramids, Tombs and Temples of Egypt, and their builders, i, 16, 17, 18. 55. 61, 62. Date of the pyramids of Gizeh, 92, 93. Constructive skill exhibited in the Great Pyramid, 93-95. Truthfulness of its pictures, and portrait-statues, 95. Questions suggested by these structures, _ibid._ Their site and number, 97. Dimensions, angular inclinations, &c., of the three great ones, 98-100. Details of their construction, 101. Peculiarities of that of Sakkara, plan, section, &c., 103, 104. Medum, 104. Hawara, 112. Illahun, 113. Tombs, paintings thereon, &c., 105-107. Temples, and recent discoveries regarding them: their architectural effectiveness, &c., 107-109. Structures of the first Theban kingdom, 110. The Labyrinth, its arrangement, purpose, &c., 111, 112. Tombs of Beni Hasan, 114, 115. Remains of the Shepherd Kings, 116. Mode of lighting the temples, 124. 272. Rock-cut tombs and temples, 130-135. Mammeisi, 132. Arches in the Pyramids, 217. Use of definite proportions, 262 _note_. Mexican, as compared with those of Egypt and Assyria, ii, 591. Examples at Palenque, 594. _See_ Obelisks, Thebes.

Qalb-Louzeh, church at, i, 425.

Quattro Coronati, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515.

Quedlinburg, Schloss Kirche, ii, 230.

St. Quentin, church at, ii, 147. Town-hall, 183.

Querqueville, triapsal church at, ii, 110.

Quetzalcoatl, the Mexican Lycurgus, ii, 584. 586.

St. Quinide, Vaison, France, peculiar apse of, ii, 53.

St. Quirinus, Neuss, church of, ii, 238. Windows, 262.

Rabbath Ammon, palace of, i, 407. Plan, section, 407.

Raglan Castle, ii, 413.

Ragusa (Dalmatia), palace of, ii, 21.

Rahotep, tomb of, arches found in, i, 105.

Rameseum at Thebes, its founder, dimensions, &c., i, 121, 122.

Rameses the Great, i, 121.

Rameses II., temple erected by, i, 214.

Rameses Maiamoun, tomb of, i, 133.

Ramleh, Syria, church at, ii, 37.

Ratisbon, the old Dom at, ii, 219. Scotch church, 240. Baptistery, 252. Dimensions and arrangement of the cathedral, 279. Plan, 280. Entrance, 291. Church of St. Emmeran, 288.

Ravello, Casa Ruffolo at, its exceptional style, i, 605.

Ravenna. Tomb of Theodoric at, i, 296 _note_. 554, 555. Tomb of Galla Placidia, 435. Chapel in Archiepiscopal Palace, _ibid._ Church of San Vitale, 359. 548-550. ii, 248. Ancient splendour of its basilican churches, i, 527. Examples: SS. Apollinare Nuovo and in Classe, 528-530. Its circular buildings, 547. Palace of Theodoric, 556. Tower of S. Apollinare in Classe, 577, 578.

Rawlinson, Sir Henry, explorations of, i, 155 _note_. 157 _note_. On the Birs Nimroud, 157. 159 _note_. Assyrian canon discovered by him, 168.

Reculver, Saxon fragments at, ii, 341.

Redman, Bishop of Ely, tomb of, ii, 411.

Refadi, Byzantine house at, i, 448.

Reformation, effect on church building of the, ii, 339. _See_ 349, 418.

Regulini Galeassi tomb at Cervetri, i, 297-299.

Reichenau, basilican church of Mittelzell in island of, ii, 217. Plan, elevation, &c., _ibid._ Roof, 222.

St. Remi, arched gateway at, i, 349. Roman tomb, view, 361. Its object, principal features, &c., _ibid._ Church at Rheims, ii, 121 _note_.

Renaissance style, cause of the, i, 43, 47. Small love for it in England, ii, 335. _See_ ii, 340. 442. 470.

Renan (E.), Phœnicia, i, 238 _note_.

S. Reparatus, basilican church of, i, 509.

Rhamnus, form of temple at, i, 269.

Rheims, Roman arch at, i, 349. Church of St. Remi, ii, 121 _note_. Cathedral, 131. Plan, proportions, &c., 135, 136. Elegance of its façade and buttresses, 139. 173. External sculptures, 139. Windows, 164. 166. Capitals, 178. Porch, 273.

Rhenish architecture, ii, 209-254. _See_ Aix-la-Chapelle, Bonn, Cologne, Germany.

Rhine, inferiority of its Castles to those of England, ii, 413. Settlement of the Goths in its valley, i, 558.

Riaz, Ferdinand, addition to the Giralda by, ii, 550.

Ribe, Schleswig, cathedral of, ii, 321.

Richard II., Westminster Hall rebuilt by, ii, 414.

Rickman on remains of Saxon buildings, ii, 341.

Rieux, church at, ii, 59.

Riez, baptistery at, ii, 59.

Rimini, arch erected by Augustus at, i, 347.

Ripon, Saxon remains at, ii, 341.

Rising Castle, ii, 413.

Rochester: Chapter-house doorway in Cathedral, ii, 407. Castle, 413.

Rock-cut tombs and temples of the Egyptians, i, 130. Temple at Ipsamboul, _ibid._ Other examples, 131. Dynasties by whom constructed, 132, 133. Fact deducible from the mode of their construction, 133. As to the assumed intention to conceal their entrances, 134. Monuments at Doganlu, 233. Tombs in Lycia, 234-237. Cyrene, 285-287, 367. In Etruria, 294. Petra, 363-368. Jerusalem, 368-370. Rock-cut churches in the Crimea, ii, 482.

Roda, Catalonia, church at, ii, 466, 467.

Roeskilde, Denmark, Domkirche at, ii, 318. Plan and elevation, 319.

Roger, king of Sicily, mosque-like church built by, ii, 24. 29.

Romain-Motier, basilican church at, ii, 218. Plan, view, _ibid._

Roman architecture: Pagan, _see_ Romans. Christian, _see_ Rome.

Romance language, definition of, ii, 42 _note_.

Romanesque style, origin of the, i, 411. Its various phases, 411. Distinctive features of this style and the Gothic, i, 502. Early examples in remote parts: African types, 508-510. Basilicas, 513-530. Modification of plan in St. Mark’s, Venice, 531. Basilicas at Parenzo, Grado, and Torcello, 537-541. Restrictive effect of its antecedents, Circular churches, 542-556. Lombard types. Basilicas, 558-574. Circular churches, 574-577. Towers, 577-581. Byzantine Romanesque, 582-606. [_See_ Byzantine.] Secular buildings: Example at Montier-en-Der, ii, 107. _See_ i, 563, 607; ii, 51, 73, 107, 108, 121, 221, 222, 247, 250, 257. _See_ also Basilicas. Circular churches.

Romans, architectural elements understood by the, i, 16. Their constructive merits and defects, 22. Neglect of proportion, 29. Modes of decoration introduced by them, 32, 33. First true constructors of the arch, 216. Essential differences between them and the Greeks, 238, 289, 290. Result of their early connection with the Etruscans, 290. Chief value of their style, 303. Architectural results of their marvellous career, &c., 304. First inhabitants of their city, 305. Their borrowings from the Greeks and Etruscans, 305, 306. Their extended use of the arch: Buildings evidencing their inventiveness, 306, 307. Variety and splendour of their works, 307. Their modifications and elaborations of the various orders, 307-313. Arcades, 313. Temples, 315-326. Importance attached to their basilicas, 327. Examples of same, 327-334. Theatres, 334, 335. Chief feature of admiration in their buildings, 336. Amphitheatres: Love for and result of gladiatorial exhibitions, 337. Flavian and other amphitheatres, 337-342. Grandeur of their baths, 342. Present remains of same, 343-346. Triumphal and commemorative arches, 347-352. Objectionable features in them and in their columns of Victory, 352-354. Number and importance of their tombs, 354. Tombs, columbaria, temple-tombs, &c., 355-363. Tombs in the East, their character, sites, &c., 363-375. Domestic architecture: Palace of the Cæsars, 375, 376. Diocletian’s palace, Spalato, 376-380. [_See_ Diocletian.] Private dwellings, 380-385. [_See_ Pompeii.] Use of the metals in buildings, 384. Constructive skill exhibited in their aqueducts and bridges, 385-388. Tomb of Marcellus, 454. Feature in their buildings improved on by Gothic architects, ii, 161. England after their departure, 337. Use made of their buildings in Egypt and Spain, 515. Principle of their arches and domes, i, 485. Do., vaults, 365. _See_ ii, 23.

Rome, Christian architecture of: Basilicas, i, 504-527. Extent of variations in style, 500. 502. First church towers, 577, 578. Cloister of St. John Lateran, 599. Modifications in Sicily, ii, 23. _See_ Basilicas.

Rood-lofts or screens, Troyes, ii, 181. 292. Wechselburg, 239. Naumburg, 293. North Germany, 305.

Roofs: English examples, ii, 356. 399, 400. Scottish, 435. _Artesinado_ roofs, Spain, 497. Stone roofs, i, 428. _See_ Arches. Vaults. Wooden types.

Rosheim, façade of church at, ii, 239.

Roslyn Chapel, Spanish traces in, ii, 419. 432. Exterior and under-chapel, 434.

Rotterdam Church, ii, 207.

Rouen. Cathedral: Plan, luxuriance of detail, &c., ii, 150. Its iron spire, _ibid._ St. Maclou, 160. Church of St. Ouen, i, 24; ii, 122. 131. Its beautiful proportions, details, &c., 157-160. Windows, 164. 167. Flat roof, 168. Flying buttress, 172. Lantern, 177. Proportion of solids to area, 179. Compared with Cologne, 273. Domestic architecture, 184.

Roueiha, Byzantine church at, i, 424.

Round churches. _See_ Circular churches.

Round towers of Ireland, ii, 450. Purposes for which built, _ibid._ Examples, 452-454.

Royat, fortified church at, ii, 93.

Runic carving on Norwegian churches, ii, 333.

Ruremonde, Belgium, church at, ii, 192.

Russian mediæval architecture, causes of the low character of, i, 484, 485. Churches of Kief, 486. Novogorod, 487. Tchernigow, 488. Village churches, 489, 490. Kostroma, 490, 491. Troitzka monastery, 493. Moscow churches and bell-towers, 493, 494. Church at Kurtea d’Argyisch, 495. The Kremlin, its towers and gates, 497-499.

Ruvo, i, 595.

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

Sacraments Häuschen in German churches, ii, 293.

Saint Clair, William, chapel erected by, ii, 432.

Sainte Chapelle, Paris, ii, 122. Its proportions, 155. Painted glass and walls, 155. Plan, 395.

Saintes, double-arched Roman bridge at, i, 352.

Saints, disposal of the bodies of, i, 512.

Sakkara, pyramid at, i, 103, 104.

Salamanca Cathedral, ii, 470, 475. Lantern tower, 475. Section of cimborio, 476. Pendentives, _ibid._

Salisbury Cathedral, i, 24; ii, 140. Plan, 349. N.E. view, 381. Chapter-house, 390. 393. Proportions, 417. _See_ ii, 355. 373. 385.

Salzburg, Franciscan church at, ii, 283. Arrangement, plan, &c., _ibid._

Samarkand, ii, 581.

Samos, Ionic temple at, i, 256.

Samthawis, Armenia, Byzantine chapel at, i, 474. Niche, 475.

Sandeo, Gothland, pointed doorway at, ii, 325.

Sandjerli, Armenia, church at, i, 475.

Santiago di Compostella, cathedral of: Plan, ii, 468. South transept, 469.

Santoppen, brick church at, ii, 308. View, _ibid._

Saracens, adoption of the pointed arch by the, ii. 45. 47. Epoch of their style in Sicily, 23. Example in Palermo, 24. Their use of brick, 303. Their practice in Spain, 498. Their use of the horse-shoe arch, i. 468, 469. Byzantine Saracenic style: Preliminary considerations, ii. 512-515. Examples: Jerusalem, 516-522. Damascus, 522. Cairo, 525-535 Mecca, 536. Barbary, 538. Spain, 542-555. Constantinople, 557-566. Saracenic style in Persia, 567-580.

Saragoza, church of St. Paul at, ii, 499.

Sardanapalus, i, 169. Tomb assumed to be his, 191.

Sardis, i, 229. Tumulus near, 230. Ionic octastyle temple, 256.

Sassanian architecture, i, 389. Architectural practices of the Sassanians, 395. Palaces of Serbistan and Firouzabad, 395-398. Tâk Kesra, 398-401. Palace of Mashita, 401-406; Of Rabbath-Ammon, 407-408.

Saulcy, M. de, on the Jerusalem tombs, i, 368 _note_.

Savonières, Anjou, church at, ii, 107.

Saxham, Little, Suffolk, church tower of, ii, 398.

Saxon architecture in England, foreign form analogous to, ii, 256. Examples of the true style, where to be sought, 337. Architectural motto of the Saxons, 339. Remains in England, 341-343.

Saxony, church architecture of, ii, 238. 288.

Scaligers, tombs at Verona of the, their form, &c., ii, 2. Campanile, Palazzo Scaligeri, 5. 7.

Scandinavia, form of Buddhism carried by Woden to, i, 481.

Scandinavian architecture, ii, 313-332. _See_ 398. 419.

Schiavi, Torre dei, i, 357. 544.

Schulpforta, Saxony, church of, ii, 288.

Schwartz Rheindorf, double church at, ii, 241-242.

Scipio, sarcophagus of, i, 354.

Scotch church, Ratisbon, ii, 240.

Scotland, architecture of, historical observations, ii. 418-420. Examples: Leuchars, Jedburgh, and Kelso, 420-422. Kirkwall, Glasgow, and Elgin, 423-431. Melrose Abbey and Roslyn Chapel, 431-434. Bothwell church, 435. Holyrood, Dunfermline, Dunkeld, Linlithgow, Edinburgh, Pluscardine, Iona, 436-441.

Scott, Sir George Gilbert, Eleanor-cross reproduced by, ii, 413 _note_.

Scott (Mr. G. G.), Roman basilicas, i, 506, 507 _note_. Orientation of Churches, 514 _note_. Saxon architecture, ii, 341, 342.

Sculpture, _see_ Painting.

Sebaste, church at, ii, 37.

St. Sebastian, gate of, Columbarium near, i, 356.

Sebastopol, church-cave near, i, 482, 483.

Sedinga, temples of Amenophis at, i, 127.

Segovia, Roman aqueduct at, i, 386. Elevation, _ibid_. Cathedral, ii, 470. 492. Plan, 493. Church of St. Millan, with its lateral porticoes, 476, 477. The Templars’ church, 478. The Kasr, 506.

Seleucidæ, the, i, 390.

Selim I., mosque of, ii, 558.

Selinus, Doric temples at, i, 254. 269. The great temple, 270. Plan, 270.

Seljukians, buildings of the, ii, 570.

Semitic races, i, 57. Their unchangeableness, 64. Their religion and its influence on their buildings for worship, 65, 66. Their chiefs, kings, and prophets, 66. Their worst faults: Effects of their isolation, _ibid._ High character of their literature, 67. Their palaces and tombs, 68. Their one æsthetic art, _ibid._ Their pre-eminence as traders, 69. Extent of their scientific studies, _ibid._

Sennacherib, i. 169. His palace, 183.

Sens Cathedral, ii, 147. William of Sens, 371.

Septimius Severus, triumphal arch of, i, 348.

Sepulchre, _see_ Holy Sepulchre.

Serbistan, Sassanian palace at, i, 395, 396. Its probable date, 401 _note_.

Sergii, arch of the, i, 348.

SS. Sergius and Bacchus, domical church of, Constantinople, i, 438. Plan and section, 439. Capital, _ibid._

Seven churches, a favourite number, ii, 446.

Seven Spheres, temple dedicated to the, i, 161.

Seville, ii, 479. Cathedral, 489-492. Churches, 498. The Giralda, 550. View, 550. The Alcazar. 551.

Shah Abbas, _Maidan_ or mosque and bazaar of, ii, 575.

Shepherd Kings’ invasion of Egypt, i, 90. Period of their rule, 93.

## Particulars regarding them, 116.

Shi-ites, sect of, ii, 573.

Sicily, Doric temples in, i, 254. Elements influencing its medieval architecture, i, 503. Points of interest in its architectural history, ii, 22. Its Saracenic and Norman epochs, 23. Style peculiar to each of its divisions, 24. Churches and Palaces, 24-31. The pointed arch, for what purpose used, 30, 31. _See_ 555 _note_. _See also_ Monreale, Palermo.

Siebenbürgen, Gothic architecture in, i, 410. ii, 210.

Siena, i, 579. 619. Cathedral, 614. Plan, i, 614. Façade, 615. Town-Hall, ii, 10.

Silsilis, caves at, i, 131.

Sillustani, Peru, tombs at, ii, 603.

Sinan, Sultan Suleiman’s architect, ii, 564. 566.

Sinzig, church at, ii, 237, 238. 266.

Sion, cathedral tower of, ii, 219.

Sion Church, Cologne, ii, 238. 262.

Sites of English cathedrals, ii, 387, 388.

Skelligs, beehive huts, ii, 446 _note_.

Smyrna, gulf of, tumuli of Tantalais, i, 230.

Soest Church, transitional feature shown in, ii, 231.

Soignies, church of St. Vincent at, ii, 189.

Soissons Cathedral, ii, 148. Ruined church of St. John, 176.

Solomon’s Palace, time occupied in building, i, 219. Diagram plan, 220. House of the cedars of Lebanon, 221. Materials, ornamentation, &c., _ibid._

Somnites, sect of, ii, 573, 574.

Sta. Sophia, _see_ Constantinople.

Sorrento, cloisters at, i, 605.

Soueideh, five-aisled Byzantine church at, i, 422.

Souillac, cupola church at, ii, 67.

Souvigny, ribbed vaulting at, ii, 170.

Spain, ii, 419. Early ages of its architecture, 460. Styles successively introduced; ethnological considerations; Gothic epoch, 462, 463. French and German influences, 463. Examples: Round-arched Gothic, 464. Early Spanish Gothic, 468. Middle pointed style, 478. Late Spanish Gothic, 492-497. Moresco style, 497. Civil architecture: Monastic and municipal buildings, 502. Castles, 505. Saracenic architecture, 542. Examples: Mosque at Cordoba, 543, 548. Palace of Zahra, 547, 548. Buildings at Toledo, 548. Giralda and Alcazar, Seville, 550, 551. The Alhambra, 551-554. Absence of tombs, 555.

Spalato, palace at, i, 314. _See_ Diocletian.

Sparta, i, 242. 251.

Speos Artemidos, Beni Hasan, grotto of, i, 131.

Sphinx, the, i, 107. Temple near, 107, 108.

Spiegelthal, Herr, tumuli explored by, i, 230. His notion regarding them, 231.

Spires, early examples of, ii, 87. St. Stephen’s, Caen, 112. Chartres, 138, 175, 196. St. Pierre, Caen, and other French examples, 175-177. Spire-growth in Germany, 231. Salisbury, 380. Great Leighs, Essex, 398. _See_ Belfries. Towers.

Spires, Cathedral, i. 24, ii, 112, 226. Effects of fire, war, and restorations, 226. Dimensions, arrangements, details, &c., 229.

Stability in architecture, principle and illustrative instances of, i, 17.

Staircases at Persepolis, i, 200, 201.

Steinbach, Erwin von, designs erroneously ascribed to, ii, 278.

Steinfurt, Westphalia, chapel at, ii, 241 _note_.

S. Stefano Rotondo, Rome, circular church, i, 545.

S. Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster, _see_ Westminster, St. Stephen’s.

S. Stephen’s, Caen, ii, 111, _see_ Caen.

S. Stephen’s, Vienna, _see_ Vienna.

Sthambas of the Buddhists, i, 578.

Stirling Castle, ii, 440.

Stokes (Prof.), Celtic churches of Ireland, ii, 446 _note_.

Stonehenge, i, 14; ii, 337.

Stone-roofed churches, i, 428-431.

Strasburg Cathedral spire, ii, 138, 195, 196. Blunder of construction, 266. Plan and details, 276. West front, 277. Erwin von Steinbach’s share in it, 278. Date of the spire, defects, &c., 279.

Strawberry Hill, result on English architecture of the erection of, ii, 335.

Stregnäs, Sweden, church at, ii, 315.

Street’s ‘Gothic Architecture in Spain,’ obligations of the Author to, ii, 463 _note_. Westminster Abbey, 354 _note_.

Sublimity and elegance discriminated, i, 26.

Sufis, dynasty of the, their buildings, ii, 575.

Suger, Abbé, opportune advent of, ii, 121. Abbey built by him, 122. His youth, 153.

Suleiman the Magnificent, mosques of: The Suleimanie, ii, 559-562. The Prince’s, 563.

Sultanieh, tomb of Mahomet Khodabendah at, ii, 573. Plan, section and view, 574, 575.

Sun-worshippers, bas-relief from a temple of the, i, 141. Fate of their monuments, 147.

Susa, i, 209. Frieze of Arches at, 210. Tomb of Daniel, ii, 549.

Susa (Piedmont), triumphal arch at, i, 347.

Sutrium, Etruscan amphitheatre at, i, 293. 337 and _note_.

Sweden, church architecture of, ii, 313-331. Round churches, 316.

Switzerland, ancient monastery at St. Gall in, ii, 213-216 Other examples, 217, 243-246.

Syracuse, Doric temple at, i, 255. _See_ ii, 24.

Syria, Byzantine examples in, and Asia Minor, i, 422-428.

Tabreez, mosque at, ii, 571. Its Byzantine features, 572. View, 573.

Tafkha, stone-roofed church at, i, 429. Plan, sections, mode of construction, &c., 429, 430.

Tag Eiran, Palace of, i, 407.

Tâk Kesra, Ctesiphon, builder and plan of, i, 398. Its great arch, 399.

Takt-i-Bostan, view of, i, 408.

Takt-i-Gero, Sassanian arch, i, 406, 468.

Talars, or ancient Persian prayer platforms, i, 203.

Talavera, old temple at, i, 314.

Tambos, or Peruvian caravanserai, ii, 606.

Tancarville, fortifications at, ii, 185.

Tantalais, tumuli at, i, 230.

Tarazona, Aragon, pierced stone window-tracery at, ii, 503.

Tarragona, Roman aqueduct at, i, 386. Elevation, _ibid._ Cathedral Dome and Pendentives, ii, 476, 477.

Tarsus, i, 229.

Tartars, Moscow destroyed by the, i, 492. Their architectural forms, 493. Tartar mosque and tomb at Tabreez, ii, 571-573.

Taylor, consul, Cufic inscriptions copied by, i, 393 _note_.

Tchekerman, Crimea, excavated church at, i, 482.

Tchernigow Cathedral, its domes and apses, i, 488.

Technic arts, scope and object of, i, 4-10.

Tegea, Arcadia, Ionic temple at, i, 256.

Teheran, throne room in palace at, ii. 579.

Tehuantepec, pyramid of Oajaca at, ii, 590.

Telamones, example of, i, 269.

Tel-el-Amarna, bas-relief at, i, 142. Grottoes, 147.

Templars’ church at Brindisi, i, 599.

Temples. _See_ Assyrians. Buddha. Chaldean. Etruscan. Greeks. Jerusalem. Rock-cut temples. Roman. Thebes.

Teocallis, or temples, of Mexico, ii. 589. Examples, 590. 594.

Teos, Ionic hexastyle temple at, i, 256.

Teotihuacan, Mexico, pyramid-temples at, ii, 590.

Tewkesbury, ii, 349. 411.

Texier, M., researches of, i, 417. Obligations of the Author to him, 436 _note_.

Tezcuco, Mexico, pyramid at, ii, 590.

Thann, Alsace, spire at, ii, 276.

Theatres of the Greeks, i, 280. Of the Romans, 334-337. _See_ Amphitheatre.

Theban dynasties in Egypt; Temples and tombs of the first kingdom, i, 110-116. Kings of the great Theban period, 118.

Thebes, the “hundred-pyloned city” of, i, 119. Differences between its architecture and that of Memphis, _ibid._ Comparative completeness of its remains, _ibid._ Number and grandeur of its temples, 120. Plan and details of the Rameseum, 120, 121. The Palace-temple of Karnac, its unparalleled magnitude, &c., 122-126. Temple of Luxor, its irregularity of plan, &c., 125. The Memnonium, 126. Temple of Medinet-Habu, 125. South Temple of Karnac, its beauty, &c., 127. Temples at Tanis, Sedînga, _ibid._ Abydus, &c., 128, 129. Rock-cut tombs and temples, 131.

Theodoric (“Dietrich of Berne”) tomb of (church of Sta. Maria Rotunda), i, 296 _note_, 554. Plan, _ibid._ Its peculiar roof, _ibid._ Church built by him, 528. His palace, 556. His love for, and adornment of Verona, 569.

Theodosius, temple converted into a Christian church by, ii, 523.

Theotokos, Byzantine church, Constantinople, its value as an example of the style, i, 457, 458.

Theron, temple founded by, i, 255.

Theseus, Temple of, i, 16. Its date and real title, 253.

Thessalians, irruption into Greece of the, i, 251.

Thessalonica, Byzantine churches, i, 420-421. Round churches, 435, 436. Neo-Byzantine, 458-459. Church of St. George at, plan, 435. Section, 436. View, _ibid._ Éski Djuma, 420. St. Demetrius, 421-422.

Thierry of Alsace, memorial chapel built by, ii, 192.

Thoricus, Pelasgic gateway at, i, 245.

Thorsager, round church at, ii, 329. Section and plan, 328. Dimensions, &c., 329.

Thothmes I., hall built by, i, 122.

Thothmes III., palace built by, i, 123. Section, 123.

Tia Huanacu, Peru, “Seats of the Judges” (Cyclopean ruins) at, ii, 601.

Tiglath-Pileser, i, 169. Palace built by him, 185.

Timahoe, round tower at, ii, 452.

Timour the Lame, ii, 581.

Tintern Abbey, a German counterpart of, ii, 268. _See_ 374.

Tirhakah, temples of, i, 147.

Titus, baths of, i, 343, 382, 384. Triumphal arch, 348.

Tivoli, Roman temple at, i, 322.

Toledo, ii, 463, 482, 490. Re-conquered by the Christians, 468. Cathedral: Plan, 479. Choir, 480, 482. Interior, 480. Churches: Gothic: San Juan de los Reyes, 494. Moresco: Sta. Maria, la Blanca, 495, 496, 548, 549. Nuestro Senora, or El Transitu, 496, 497, 549. Apse of San Bartolomeo, 497. St. Roman, 499. St. Thomé, 500. Saracenic: St. Cristo de la Luz, 548.

Toltecs of Mexico, ii, 583. Prosperity and adversity, 584, 585.

S. Tomaso in Limine, i, 576, 577. Plan section, and particulars, 576.

Tombs: Beni-Hasan, i, 114. Of Cyrus, 196-198. Darius, 204. Alyattes, 230. Lycian examples, 233-237. Amrith, 239. Pelasgic, 243. Mausoleum, Halicarnassus, 282. Cnidus, 284. Cyrene, 285-287. Etruscan tombs and tumuli, 294-300. Roman, 354-359. Petra, 363-368. Jerusalem, 368-370. Mylassa, 371. Dugga, 372. Armenian, 475, 476. Ravenna, 553, 554. Sta. Costanza, Rome, 544. Italian, 601. Toulouse, ii, 180. English examples, 405, 408-411. Persian, 568, 569, 573-575. Peruvian, 603, 606. _See_ Pyramids.

Tongres, Notre Dame de, ii, 194.

Tooloon, mosque of. _See_ Ibn Tooloon.

Torcello, Romanesque basilica at, i, 538. Its apse: Church of Sta. Fosca, 539.

Toro, collegiate church at, ii, 473.

Torre dei Schiavi, i, 357, 544.

Tortoom, Ish Khan church at, i, 478, 479.

Toscanella, exceptional style of the churches at, i, 572. Examples, 573-574.

Tossia family, sepulchre of the, i, 357.

Toul Cathedral, ii, 148.

Toulouse, church of the Cordeliers at, ii, 70. Suitability of its plan for a Protestant church, 71. The cathedral, _ibid._ Church of St. Sernin or St. Saturnin, its plan and interior arrangements, 72. View, exterior details, &c., 77, 91. Tomb of St. Pierre, 80. _See_ 367, 380, 486.

Tour Magne, Nîmes, i, 362, 555.

Tourmanin, Byzantine church at, i, 427.

Tournay Cathedral, ii, 190. Dimensions, plan, and section, 191, 192. Belfry, 199.

Tournus, ii, 95. Abbey church, 97. Vaults and arches, 97.

Tours, church of St. Martin at: Plan, ii, 74. Arrangements originally and as rebuilt, 74. Cathedral, 148.

Towers: Of the Winds, i, 257, 267, 279. Russian, 496-498. Italian, 577-581, 603-605; ii, 2-8. Puissalicon, 59. Of London, 111. Norman, 112. Their original purpose, 175. English church-towers, ii, 341, 383, 395. Jerpoint, Ireland, 557. Moresco church-towers, Spain, 499, 500. _See_ Belfries. Minarets.

Town-halls, _see_ Civic and Municipal buildings.

Towton, battlefield, epoch in art marked by, ii, 339.

Trabala, Lycia, Byzantine church at, i, 455. 471.

Tracery, _see_ Windows.

Trajan, basilica of, i, 327-329. His baths, 343. Triumphal arches: Beneventum, 347. Alcantara, 352. His column, 353. His bridges, 387. _see_ i, 577.

Trani Cathedral, bronze doors of, 599.

Trau (Dalmatia) Cathedral, i, 589.

Treasuries: ancient tombs so called: Of Atreus, i, 243. Of Pharaoh, 364, 365.

Trebizond, i, 229.

Tree-worshippers, i, 481 _note_.

Trèves, basilica at, i, 332. Views of same, 333. Porta Nigra, 350. Monument at Igel, 362. Original cathedral and its successor, ii, 222. 266. Plans of the two, 223. Western and eastern apses, &c., 224. Liebfrauen church, 292.

Triforium in French cathedrals, ii, 168.

Tristram, Dr., discovery of the Um Rasas Tower, ii, 451 _note_.

Triumphal arches, Roman, i, 347-352. Objectional features in them, 352.

Troitzka, near Moscow, monastery at, 491. Its doorway, 493.

Troja Cathedral, i, 589. Façade, 591. Its bronze doors, 599.

Trondhjem, Norway, cathedral and church of St. Clement at, ii, 316. Plan, View, &c., ii, 317, 318, 420.

Troy, i, 229. Tumuli or mounds on the Plain, 231. 249. Consequence of the great war, 251. 291.

Troyes Cathedral, arrangement and plan, ii, 147, 148. West front, 149. Church of St. Urban, 155. Its perfection, 156. Rood-screen of the Madeleine, 81. 181.

Trunch Church, Norfolk, roof of, ii, 400.

Tudor style, epoch of the, ii, 339. The three royal chapels, 339. 393-397. _See_ 420.

Tumuli in Asia Minor, i, 232. Attempts to discriminate their epochs, 233. Etruscan examples, 294-301.

Tunis, Mosque of Kerouan, ii, 538. Plan, 538. Entrance in court, 539. Minaret, 540, 541.

Turanian races, age typified by the, i, 55. Chief feature in their history, 57. Ancient and modern types, 57, 58. Character of their deities and religious worship, 58, 59. Government, 59. Morals, 60. Limited nature of their literature, 66. Excellence attained by them in the Arts, 61-63. Only science cultivated by them, 63. Their proficiency as builders and irrigators, 63. Points of comparison or contrast between them and other races, 63-70. 75. 81. 289. 291. Their reverence for the dead, 191, 296.

Turin, Palazzo delle Torre at, i, 556.

Turkestan, ii, 581.

Turkey, its architecture and its people. _See_ Constantinople. Mahomedanism.

Tuscany, architecture of, i, 586.

Tusculum, Etruscan arch at, i, 301.

Tyre and Sidon, non-existence of remains of, i, 219; ii, 462.

Tzarkoe-Selo, wooden church near, i, 490.

Ulm Cathedral, its merits and defects, ii, 280. The “Sacraments Häuschen,” 293.

Ulpian, or Trajan’s basilica, i, 327.

Um Rasas Tower, ii, 451 _note_.

Uniformity in architecture, i, 39. Principle followed by the Greeks, 40.

Upsala, cathedral at, ii, 313. Its French designer, 314 and _note_.

Urnes, Norway, wooden church at, ii, 332. View, 333.

Usunlar, Armenia, Byzantine church at, i, 469.

Utrecht, church of, ii, 207.

Uxmal, Central America, Casa de las Monjas at, ii, 596. Plan, 597. One of its chambers, 598.

Vaison, pointed arches at, ii, 30. 46. Churches, 53.

Valence, Aymer de, tomb of, ii, 409.

Valence, church at, ii, 58.

Valencia Cathedral, ii, 488. Its cimborio, 490. Doorway from the Ablala, 501. The Casa Lonja, 504.

Valentia, Lord, measurement of obelisk of Axum by, i, 150.

Vardzie, excavations at, i, 483.

Varro’s description of Porsenna’s tomb, i, 298.

Varzahan, Byzantine tomb at, i, 476.

Vaults in Egyptian work, i, 113. In Assyrian palaces, 176, _note_, 215, 216, 217. In Pelasgic work, 243, 244. In Roman work, 306, 307. 317, 318. 321. 331, 332. 345, 346. 357-360. At Al Hadhr, 391. 395. Serbistan, 396. Firouzabad, 397. Tâk Kesra, 398, 399. Mashita, 401. Rabbath-Ammon, Imumzade, Tag Eiran, 407. Byzantine, 430, 431. 434-444. 449, 450. 454-456. 461. 465. 468. 470. 473. 491. Romanesque, 532. 540. 547. 550. 554. Lombard, 559-566. 575-577. Byzantine-Romanesque, 596, 600. Pointed Italian, 610. 619. 621. Sebenico, 634. Palestine, ii, 36, 37. France, 45-50. 64-73. 83. Issoire, 90. Tournus, 97. Cluny, 99. Vezelay, 101. Stone vault in France first attempted, 107. Montier-en-Der, 107, 108. Intersecting vaulting, 111, 113-116. St. Denis, 122 _note_. Ribbed vaulting, 123. French system, 169-170. Germany: Spires, 229. St. Gereon, 264. Cologne Cathedral, 271. Kuttenberg, 285. Gothland, 323-325. English system and examples, 355-367. Chapter-houses, 389-392. Chapels, 394-397. Scotland, 426, 427. 432-435. 437. Ireland, 448. Spain, 469. 476, 477. 484. 487. 489. Poverty of same, 492. Cairo, 532. Constantinople, 560. Persia, 568. Origin of stalactite vault, 570 _note_. 574.

Venice: St. Mark’s, i, 530-536. Plan, 531. Capital, 532. Dimensions and particulars, _ibid._ View, 533. Its tower or campanile, 579, 581. Churches: San Giovanni e Paolo, and the Frari, 632. San Giorgio, 574 _note_. Civil and domestic examples, ii, 15. The Doge’s palace, cause and extent of its claims to admiration, its actual demerits, &c., 16-18. The Ca d’Oro, and the Foscari and Pisani palaces, 18, 19. Picturesque parts of the buildings: angle window; Ponte del Paradiso, 20, 21. Piazza, 575 _note_. _See_, i, 456. 500, 501; ii, 32.

Venus and Rome, temple dedicated by Hadrian to, i, 318. 323.

Vercelli, church of St. Andrea at, first example of the pointed style in Italy, i, 572. 610-629.

Verona, Roman amphitheatre at, i, 341. Results of Theodoric’s liking for the city, i, 569. Cathedral apse, 570. Churches: San Zenone, 570. Its façade, 571. Its tower, 581. Sta. Anastasia, 612. Tower or campanile, (Scaligeri), ii, 5, 7. Tombs of the Scaligers, ii, 2. Windows, 15. _See_ i, 500, 560, 599, 607.

Vespasian, temple built by, i, 317. His baths, 383.

Vezelay, ii, 95. Nave and narthex, 101. Vaults and roof, 106.

Vianden, Luxemburg, chapel of, ii, 241 _note_.

Viborg (Denmark), cathedral, ii, 321.

Vicenza, town-hall of, ii, 10.

Victory, columns of, i, 352, 353.

Victory, Wingless, _see_ Niké Apteros.

Vienna, St. Stephen’s Cathedral at, ii, 280. Dimensions, 280. Its beauties: elegance of its spire, 282. View, 281. Failure of the Turkish siege of the city, ii, 556.

Vienne, cathedral of, ii, 58. 102. Church of St. André le Bas, 59, 60. Peculiar decoration of the church of St. Généreux, 107.

Villena, Spain, twisted columns in the church at, ii, 493. 505.

Villers, abbey church of, curious window, ii, 193, 194.

Vincennes, keep of, ii, 185.

S. Vincenzo alle Tre Fontane, basilican church, Rome, date of, i, 515. Its characteristics, 526. Section and Elevation, _ibid._ French counterparts, ii, 106, 107.

Viollet le Duc, _see_ Le Duc.

Virgins of the Sun, Peru, house of the, ii, 604. View, 605.

S. Vitale, octagonal church, Ravenna, i, 505, 548; ii, 38. Plan and section, i, 548. Capitals, 549, 550. Copied by Charlemagne, ii, 248.

S. Vito, Roman sepulchre at, i, 357. Section, 357.

Vitruvius, temples mentioned or described by, i, 274. 291, 292. Basilica built by him, 334. Mode of decoration reprobated by him, 384.

Vladimir, cathedral and churches built by, i, 486, 488. The city so named, 489.

Vogüé, Comte Melchior de, on churches in Syria and Palestine, i, 416, 422-427. 429. 433. 437. 450; ii, 36. _note_. 37. Domestic architecture, i, 447-448.

Vulci, Cocumella tumulus at, i, 298, 299.

Vyse, Colonel Howard, Egyptian researches of, i, 97. 102.

Wady el-Ooatib, true character of the ruins at, i, 149.

Wales, castles of, ii, 413.

Walid, Caliph, mosques built by, ii, 523.

Walls: Assyrian, i, 169. 173. Pelasgian, 246. Peruvian, ii, 587, 588.

Walpole, Horace, impulse given to the revival of the Gothic style by, ii, 335.

Walpole St. Peter’s, Norfolk, as a type of an English parish church, ii, 401.

Walsingham, Alan of, examples of the architectural genius of, ii, 350. 396.

Walsingham, New, Norfolk, roof of aisle at, ii, 400.

Waltham Cross, ii, 412

S. Wandrille, Normandy, triapsal oratory at, ii, 110.

Wartburg, palace or castle on the, ii, 257, 258.

Warwick Castle, ii, 413.

Waterloo Bridge, i, 48.

Wechselburg, rood-screen at, ii, 238, 239.

Wells Cathedral, ii, 273. A Norwegian resemblance, 318. Its towers, 385. Site, 388. Chapter-house, 391. 393. Sculptures of the façade, 402. Measurements, 417. _See_ 390.

West, bishop of Ely, tomb of, ii, 408.

Westeräs, Sweden, church at, ii, 315.

Westminster Abbey: French and English elements in its design, ii, 338. 353. Apse, 349. 353. Plan, 354. Bays of nave, 370. Painted glass, 374. Measurements, 417. _See_ 371. 481 _note_. _Chapter-house_, 391. _Tombs_: De Valence, 409. Edward III., 409. _Chapel of Henry VII._, 353. Aisle, 364. Peculiarity of design, 397. A Spanish counterpart, _see_ 494.

Westminster Bridge, i, 48.

Westminster Hall, roof of, ii, 356. 395. 399. Dimensions, plan, and section, 414-416.

Westminster, St. Stephen’s chapel, ii, 338. Roof, 356. 399. Internal elevation, 394. Its destruction unwise, 394 _note_. Plan, 395. Date, 395 _note_.

Westphalian churches, architecture, ii, 230.

Westropp, Mr. Hodder, suggestions by, ii, 298 _note_. 450.

White Convent near Siout, i, 510. Plan, 511.

Wilkinson’s ‘Ancient Architecture and Geology of Ireland,’ ii, 444 _note_.

William the Conqueror, memorial church built by, ii, 111. His tomb, 118.

William I. of Sicily, building erected by, ii, 24.

Willis, Professor, Holy Sepulchre, ii, 33 _notes_, 344 _note_.

Winchester Cathedral, i, 18; ii, 349. Plan, 350. Pier arches, 368. Transformation of nave, 369. Window tracery, 379. Western entrance, 385. Anomalies of style, 387. Site, 388. Chapter-house, 390. Altar screen, 405. Bishop Gardiner’s tomb, 408. Measurements, 417.

Winchester School, ii, 414.

Windows and window tracery, ii, 123. Byzantine, i, 448. 472. Italian, i, 597. ii, 14, 15. 19. Painted glass, 124, 125. Examples from French cathedrals, 163-167. Villers, 193. Cologne, 262. English examples, 342. 361. 365. 369. 371. 379. Scotland, 419. 427. 429. 433. 441. Irish round towers, 455. Spanish, 503. Saracenic, 529.

Winds, Tower of the, i, 257. 267. Dimensions and description, 279.

Windsor Castle, ii, 413. St. George’s chapel: Vaulting, 362, 364. Feature in the roof, 364. Its merits as a whole, 397.

Wisby, Gothland, early prosperity of, ii, 321. Helge-Anders and other churches, 322-324.

Wolsey’s choir at Oxford, ii, 366. Hampton Court, 415.

Woman’s position among the various races: Turanians, i, 60. Semites, _ibid_. Celts, 72. Aryans, 79.

Wood, Mr., explorations of, i, 277, 278.

Wooden Churches of Norway, ii, 332-334. Of Russia, i, 490.

Wooden types copied in stone, i, 106. 234-237. Wooden roofs of the Gothic architects, i, 547; ii, 356. Superiority of English wooden roofs, 356. English churches, 399-401. Westminster Hall, 414, 415. Eltham, 415. _See_ Roofs.

Worcester Cathedral, chapter house of, ii, 390. Measurements, 417.

Worms Cathedral, ii, 226. Plan and bay, 227. Side elevation, 228. Dates, details, &c., 227.

Wurka, the Bowariyeh (early Chaldean temple) at, i, 158. 165. The Wuswus ruin, 165-167. 398.

Wykeham, William of, architectural works of, ii, 349. 369. 378. 414.

Xanten, great church at, ii, 287. Plan, 287.

Xeres, church of San Miguel at, ii, 494.

Xerxes, palace of, i, 205-208.

Xochicalco, Mexico, pyramid at, ii, 590.

Yaroslaf of Russia, architectural works of, i, 486.

Yezidi house, interior of a, i, 182.

York Cathedral, i, 24; ii, 352. Periods and styles, 355. The Five Sisters’ window, 372. Chapter-house window, 377. Lady chapel, 387. Chapter-house, 392, 393. Measurement, 417.

Yorkshire, remains of abbeys in, ii, 348.

Yousouf, memorial tower built by, ii, 551.

Ypres, church of St. Martin at, ii, 194. Cloth hall, 200-202. 204. Boucherie, 204.

Yrieix, Gothic house at, ii, 183.

Yucatan, race inhabiting, ii, 586. Richness of the region in architectural remains, 593. Examples, 594.

Zagros, Mount, Takt-i-Gero shrine on, i, 468.

Zahra, palace of, ii, 547, 548.

Zamora, Spain, cathedral of, ii, 471-473.

Zara, Dalmatia, cathedral of: Plan, i. 588. View, 590. Church of San Donato, 602, 603; ii. 35.

Zawyet-el-Mayyitûr, lotus pier, i, 115.

Zayi, Yucatan, palace at, ii, 596. Elevation and plan, 596, 597.

Zechariah, so-called tomb of, i, 368.

Zerbst, Nicholai Kirche at, ii, 291.

Zobeidé, tomb of, its peculiar plan and form, ii, 568.

Zurich Minster, ii, 189. View and Plan: peculiar details, 243. Cloister, 259. View, 260.

LONDON: PRINTED BY WILLIAM CLOWES AND SONS, LIMITED, STAMFORD STREET AND CHARING CROSS.

Footnotes

Footnote 1:

The first volume was published in 1865; the second in 1867.

Footnote 2:

‘Mémoire sur les Fouilles exécutés au Madras’en,’ Constantine, 1873.

Footnote 3:

‘Monumentos Arquitectonicos de España.’ Folio. Madrid, 1860, _et seqq._

Footnote 4:

Parcerisa, ‘Recuerdos y Bellezas de España.’ Folio. Madrid.

Footnote 5:

‘Gothic Architecture in Spain,’ by G. E. Street. Murray. 1865.

Footnote 6:

‘Denkmäler der Kunst des Mittelalters in Unter Italien,’ by H. W. Schulz. Dresden, 1860. Quarto. Atlas, folio.

Footnote 7:

‘Syrie Centrale,’ by Count M. De Vogüé. Paris.

Footnote 8:

‘Byzantine Architecture,’ by Chev. Texier. London, 1864.

Footnote 9:

‘Mission to the Court of Ava in 1855,’ by Colonel Yule. 4to. London, 1858.

Footnote 10:

‘Travels in Siam and Cambodia,’ by Henri Mouhot. London: John Murray. 1864.

Footnote 11:

The number of illustrations in the chapters of the Handbook comprised in this first volume of the History was 441. They now stand at 536 (1874); and in the second volume the ratio of increase will probably be even greater.

Footnote 12:

It may be suggested that the glory of a French clerestory filled with stained glass made up for all these defects, and it may be true that it did so; but in that case the architecture was sacrificed to the sister art of painting, and is not the less bad in itself because it enabled that art to display its charms with so much brilliancy.

Footnote 13:

The numbers in the table must be taken only as approximative, except 2, 4, 6, and 7, which are borrowed from Gwilt’s ‘Public Buildings of London.’

Footnote 14:

The Isis-headed or Typhonian capitals cannot be quoted as an exception to this rule: they are affixes, and never appear to be doing the work of the pillar.

Footnote 15:

See woodcuts further on.

Footnote 16:

Max Müller, who is the _facile princeps_ of the linguistic school in this country—in an inaugural lecture which he delivered when, it was understood, he was appointed to a chair in the Strasburg University— gave up all that has hitherto been contended for by his followers. He admitted that language, though an invaluable aid, did not suffice for the purposes of the investigation, and that the results obtained by its means were not always to be depended upon.

Footnote 17:

The term “Persistent Varieties” has recently been introduced, instead of “race,” in ethnological nomenclature, and, if scientific accuracy is aimed at, is no doubt an improvement. It is an advantage to have a term which does not even in appearance prejudge any of the questions between the monogenists and polygenists, and leaves undecided all the questions how the variations of mankind arose. But it sounds pedantic; and “race” may be understood as meaning the same thing.

Footnote 18:

The whole of this subject has been carefully gone into by the Author in a work entitled ‘Rude Stone Monuments’ published in 1872, to which the reader is referred.

Footnote 19:

All round the shores of the Mediterranean are found the traces of an art which has hitherto been a stumbling-block to antiquarians. Egyptian cartouches and ornaments in Assyria, which are not Egyptian; sarcophagi at Tyre, of Egyptian form, but with Phœnician inscriptions, and made for Tyrian kings; Greek ornaments in Syria, which are not Greek; Roman frescoes or ornaments, and architectural details at Carthage, and all over Northern Africa, which however are not Roman. In short, a copying art something like our own, imitating everything, understanding nothing. I am indebted to my friend Mr. Franks for the suggestion that all this art may be Phœnician, in other words, Semitic, and I believe he is right.

Footnote 20:

Had there been no Pelasgi in Greece, there probably would have been no Architecture of the Grecian period.

Footnote 21:

The derivation of the two words Heathen and Pagan seems to indicate the relative importance of these two terms very much in the degree it is here wished to express. Heathen is generally understood to be derived from ἔθνος, a nation or people; and Pagan from _Pagus, Pagani_, a village, or villagers. Both are used here not as terms of reproach, but as indicative of their being non-Christian, which is what it is wished to express, and was the original intention of the term.

Footnote 22:

‘Rude Stone Monuments,’ 1 vol. 8vo. Murray, 1872.

Footnote 23:

The above scheme of Egyptian Chronology was published by me in the ‘True Principles of Beauty in Art,’ in 1849; and the data on which it was based were detailed in the Appendix to that work. As there seems to be nothing in the subsequent researches or discoveries which at all invalidates the reasoning on which the table was founded, it is here reproduced in an abridged form as originally set forth.

Footnote 24:

Syncellus, Chron. p. 98, ed. Dindorff, Bonn, 1829.

Footnote 25:

‘Josephus contra Apion,’ i. 14, 16 and 26.

Footnote 26:

Vyse, ‘Operations on the Pyramids at Gizeh in 1837,’ vol. i. p. 297, et seq.

Footnote 27:

At Wady Meghara, in the Sinaitic peninsula, a king of the 4th dynasty is represented as slaying an Asiatic enemy. It is the only sign of strife which has yet been discovered belonging to this ancient kingdom. Lepsius, Abt. ii. pl. 39.

Footnote 28:

By a singular coincidence, China has been suffering from a Hyksos domination of Tartar conquerors, precisely as Egypt did after the period of the Pyramid builders, and, strange to say, for about the same period—five centuries. Had the Taepings been successful, we should have witnessed in China the exact counterpart of what took place in Egypt when the 1st native kings of the 18th dynasty expelled the hated race.

Footnote 29:

Col. H. Vyse, ‘Operations carried on the Pyramids of Gizeh in 1837.’ Lond. 1840-43.

Footnote 30:

This will be best understood by looking at the section (Woodcut 7), in which it will be seen that the so-called coping or casing-stones were not simply triangular blocks, filling up the angles formed by the receding steps, and which might have been easily displaced, but stones from 7 to 10 feet in depth, which could not have been supported unless the work had been commenced at the bottom. On the other hand, it is difficult to understand how the casing-stones for the upper portion could have been raised up the sloping portion completed. It is probable, therefore, that the casing was commenced at the angles and was carried up in vertical planes, thus leaving a causeway of steps in the middle of each face, which diminished in width as the work proceeded; this causeway, a few feet wide only, on each face being then encased from the top downwards after the apex blocks had been laid.—ED.

Footnote 31:

‘The Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh by W. M. Flinders Petrie. Lond. 1883.

Footnote 32:

On the north side the paving is carried under the lowest course.

Footnote 33:

Except the spires of Cologne Cathedral.

Footnote 34:

They are situated in latitude 30° N.

Footnote 35:

‘Pyramids and Temples of Gizeh,’ p. 199.

Footnote 36:

Mr. Petrie says, p. 117: “All the chambers of this pyramid are entirely hewn in the rock.”

Footnote 37:

‘Medum,’ by M. Flinders Petrie. D. Nutt, London, 1892.

Footnote 38:

Diodorus, i. 51.

Footnote 39:

M. Mariette’s discoveries in these tombs were only in progress at the time of his death: but his manuscript notes and drawings of the hieroglyphics and figures have since been published in facsimile under the title of ‘Les Mastabas de l’Ancienne Empire’ Paris 1889. They are, however, incomplete; some of the plates referred to could not be found, and M. Maspero, who edited the work, has unfortunately given no preface of his own, which might have rendered them more intelligible. At present no sufficient data exist to enable others to realise and verify the extraordinary revelation it presents to us. It is 2000 years older, and infinitely more varied and vivid, than the Assyrian pictures which recently excited so much interest.

Footnote 40:

The false door is a niche in the side of the mastaba, the back of which is carved in imitation of a wooden door.

Footnote 41:

Lucian, ‘De Syria Dea,’ ed. Reetzin, tom. iii. p. 451, alludes to the fact of the old temples of the Egyptians having no images.

Footnote 42:

The roof slabs are gone, but the lower portions of the slits are still uninjured.

Footnote 43:

The plan and particulars relating to this temple are taken from Mr. W. M. Petrie’s work before referred to.

Footnote 44:

The tablet discovered at Gizeh, in which Khufu, the builder of the Great Pyramid, is recorded to have made some repairs to the Sphinx, is stated by Mr. Petrie to be a forgery of the 20th dynasty, and his reasons are given in section 118 of his work.

Footnote 45:

Lepsius, ‘Denkmaler,’ Abt. ii. pls. 115, 116.

Footnote 46:

Syncellus, p. 69; Euseb. Chron. p. 98.

Footnote 47:

‘Hawara, Biahmun, and Arsinoe’ by W. M. Flinders Petrie, 1889.

Footnote 48:

‘Kahun, Garob, and Hawara,’ by W. M. Flinders Petrie, 1890.

Footnote 49:

‘Illahun, Kahun, and Gurob,’ by W. M. Flinders Petrie, 1891.

Footnote 50:

_Ibid._

Footnote 51:

The researches of Mr. Petrie at Kahun have shown that originally this form of column was in wood, which would account for the base on which, in Egyptian work, it is always placed.

Footnote 52:

In a tomb of the 4th dynasty found at Sakkara is a wall decoration in which the lotus column is used in a frieze, examples of it being carved in low relief to separate the figures in a procession (see plate 10, ‘Voyage dans la Haute Égypte,’ by F. A. F. Mariette. Cairo, 1878). The polygonal or Proto-Doric column has also been found as a hieroglyph in an inscription of the 4th dynasty. This carries back the date of the two columns to a period some twelve centuries prior to the example at Beni-Hasan.

Footnote 53:

‘Revue Archæologique,’ vol. iii., 1861, p. 97, and v., 1862, p. 297.

Footnote 54:

518 years: ‘Josephus contra Apion.,’ I. 26.

Footnote 55:

Layard, ‘Nineveh and Babylon,’ 281.

Footnote 56:

Tacitus, Ann. II. 60.

Footnote 57:

‘Revue Archéologique,’ vol. x. 1864, p. 170, and vol. xiii. 1866, p. 73.

Footnote 58:

Now in Sir John Soane’s Museum, in Lincoln’s-Inn-Fields.

Footnote 59:

‘Egyptian Archæology,’ by G. Maspero, translated from the French by Amelia B. Edwards. London, 1887.

Footnote 60:

The information regarding these temples is principally derived from Hoskins’s ‘Travels in Ethiopia,’ which is the best and most accurate work yet published on the subject.

Footnote 61:

Herodotus. iii. 24. Diodorus, ii. 15.

Footnote 62:

Woodcuts 982 and 1091 in the first edition of this History.

Footnote 63:

Published in the ‘Rheinischer Museum’ vol. viii. p. 252, et seq.

Footnote 64:

‘Josephus contra Apion,’ i. 14.

Footnote 65:

If the Greeks traded to Naucratis as early as the 1st Olympiad.

Footnote 66:

When the ‘Handbook of Architecture’ was published in 1855, there existed no data from which these affinities could be traced. It is to the explorations of Sir Henry Rawlinson and Messrs. Taylor and Loftus that we owe what we now know on the subject; but even that is only an instalment.

Footnote 67:

The chronology here given is based on the various papers communicated by Sir Henry Rawlinson to the ‘Journal of the Royal Asiatic Society,’ vol. x. et seq., and to the ‘Athenæum’ journal. The whole has been abstracted and condensed in his brother’s ‘Five Great Monarchies of the Ancient world;’ from which work the tables here given are taken in an abridged form.

Footnote 68:

Loftus, ‘Chaldæa and Babylonia,’ p. 167.

Footnote 69:

Journal R. A. S., vol. xv. p. 260, et seq.

Footnote 70:

Journal R. A. S., vol. xviii. p. i, et seq., Sir H. Rawlinson’s paper, from which all the information here given regarding the Birs is obtained.

Footnote 71:

Flandin and Coste, ‘Voyage en Perse,’ vol. iv. pl. 221.

Footnote 72:

I have ventured to restore the roof of the cella with a sikra (ziggur or ziggurah, according to Rawlinson’s ‘Five Ancient Monarchies,’ vol. I, p. 395, et passim), from finding similar roofs at Susa, Bagdad, Keffeli, &c. They are certainly indigenous, and borrowed from some older type, whether exactly what is represented here is not clear, it must be confessed. It is offered as a suggestion, the reason for which will be given when we come to speak of Buddhist or Saracenic architecture.

Footnote 73:

Rich gives its dimensions: On the north, 600 feet; south, 657; east, 546; and west, 408. But it is so ruinous that only an average guess can be made at its original dimensions. [Mr. George Smith, in the ‘Athenæum’ of February 1876, wrote a letter giving an account of a tablet of the Temple of Belus at Babylon he had deciphered, which constitutes the only description found giving the dimensions thereof. The bottom stage was 300 feet square and 110 feet high, the second, with raking sides, 260 feet square and 60 feet high, the third 200 feet square and 20 feet high, the fourth, fifth, and sixth each 20 feet high and 170, 140, and 110 feet respectively. The top stage, which was the sanctuary, was 80 × 70 feet and 50 feet high, the whole height being thus 300 feet, the same as the width of the base. Mr. W. R. Lethaby, in his work on ‘Architecture, Mysticism, and Myth,’ gives as a frontispiece a restoration according to these dimensions, the appearance of which is more impressive and probably approaches more closely to the actual proportions of a ziggurat than any previously published, excepting that at Khorsabad, with which in general proportion it coincides.—ED.]

Footnote 74:

Strabo, xvi. p. 738.

Footnote 75:

There is a slight discrepancy in the measures owing to the absence of fractions in the calculation.

Footnote 76:

Loftus, ‘Chaldæa and Babylonia,’ p. 188.

Footnote 77:

This chapter and that next following may be regarded as, in all essential respects an abridgment or condensation of the information contained in a work published by the author in 1851, entitled, ‘The Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored,’ the only real difference being that the more perfect decipherment of the inscriptions since that work was published has caused some of the palaces and buildings to be ascribed to different kings and dynasties from those to whom they were then assigned, and proved their dates to be more modern than was suspected, for the oldest at least. The order of their succession, however, remains the same, and so consequently do all the architectural inferences drawn from it. Those readers who may desire further information on the subject are referred to the work alluded to.

Footnote 78:

Published in 1862, in the ‘Athenæum’ journal, No. 1812.

Footnote 79:

This plan, with all the particulars here mentioned, are taken from Layard’s work, which is the only authority on the subject, so that it is not necessary to refer to him on every point. The plan is reduced to the usual scale of 100 ft. to 1 inch, for easy comparison with the dimensions of all the other edifices quoted throughout this work.

Footnote 80:

The whole of the information regarding Khorsabad is taken from M. Botta’s great work on the subject, and its continuation, ‘Ninive et l’Assyrie,’ by M. Victor Place.

Footnote 81:

These particulars are all borrowed from M. Place’s great work, ‘Ninive et l’Assyrie,’ folio. Paris, 1865.

Footnote 82:

Space will not admit of my entering into all the reasons for this restoration here. If any one wishes for further information on the subject, I must refer him to my ‘Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored,’ published in 1851. Nothing has occurred during the twenty-three years that have elapsed since that work was published that has at all shaken my views of the correctness of the data on which these restorations were based. On the contrary, every subsequent research has served only more and more to convince me of their general correctness, and I cannot now suggest any improvement even in details. [It should be noted that the author’s theory as to the covering over of the Assyrian halls with a flat roof carried on columns has never been accepted by foreign archæologists, and no trace has ever been found of the foundations which would be required to carry such columns. M. Place, who conducted the excavations at Khorsabad, and Messrs. Perrot & Chipiez, who, among others, have devoted much time and research to the subject, are of opinion that the halls were vaulted. It would be difficult now to determine the possibility of building vaults of thirty feet span in crude or unburnt brick, because we have no means of testing the resistance to crushing which such bricks might afford. The brick voussoirs found by M. Place in the arches of the town gates had been prepared in special moulds, and so completely dried that liquid clay had been used to cement them together. In some of the large halls, far away from the walls, and in some cases in the centre of the rooms, huge blocks of hard clay were found with their lower surface curved and covered with a layer of stucco; these masses were sometimes many metres long, one to two metres wide, nearly a metre thick. According to M. Place they formed part of a barrel vault covering the halls, and their size would account for the immense thickness of the walls constructed to carry them and resist their thrust, as well as for the peculiar shape of the halls; that is, their length as compared with their breadth. The sculptured slabs would seem to have been carved to be seen by a high side-light, which suggests openings of some kind, just above the springing of the vault, and above the flat roof of the smaller halls round.—ED.]

Footnote 83:

These gateways are extremely interesting to the Biblical student, inasmuch as they are the only examples which enable us to understand the gateways of the Temple at Jerusalem as described by Ezekiel. Their dimensions are nearly the same, but the arrangement of the side chambers and of gates generally are almost identical. These gates had been built 100 years at least before Ezekiel wrote.

Footnote 84:

Layard’s excavations here furnish us with what has not been found or has been overlooked elsewhere, _e.g._, a ramp or winding staircase leading to the upper storey (‘Nineveh and Babylon,’ 461). As explained above, I believe the tops of the walls, which are equal to the floor space below, formed such a storey. This ramp at Koyunjik would just suffice to lead to them, and goes far to prove the theory. If it was similarly situated at Khorsabad it would be in the part fallen away.

Footnote 85:

[This assumption is speculative, no trace of such dwarf columns having been found; to raise a solid wall thirteen feet thick to carry a gallery seems unlikely.—ED.]

Footnote 86:

This façade, as I read it, is identical with the one I erected at the Crystal Palace as a representation of an Assyrian façade, long before this slab was exhumed.

Footnote 87:

See Rawlinson, ‘Ancient Monarchies,’ vol. i. p. 398.

Footnote 88:

It is called tomb by Strabo, lib. xvi., and Diodorus, xvii. 112, 3; temple, Herodotus, i. 181, Arrian, vii. 17, 2, Pliny, vi. 26.

Footnote 89:

Texier shows columns on the fourth side.

Footnote 90:

Mr. Weld Blundell in 1892 found a column with fluted base and Doric capital, but it did not apparently belong to the palace.

Footnote 91:

[It follows from what has already been pointed out in a note respecting the roofs of the Assyrian palaces; if, as is contended by French archæologists, the great halls were vaulted, Mr. Fergusson’s theory respecting the origin of the Persian columns partly falls to the ground; in that case it would seem more probable that the Persians owed their columnar architecture to prototypes of wooden posts, covered with metal plates, such as are described as existing in the Median palaces of Ecbatana, where Cyrus, the first Persian monarch, passed so many years of his life.—ED.]

Footnote 92:

The woodcuts in this chapter, except the restorations, are taken from Flandin and Coste’s ‘Voyage en Perse,’ except where the contrary is mentioned.

Footnote 93:

It is curious that neither Ker Porter, nor Texier, nor Flandin and Coste, though measuring this building on the spot, could make out its plan. Yet nothing can well be more certain, once it is pointed out.

Footnote 94:

‘Palaces of Nineveh and Persepolis Restored,’ p. 126.

[The prayer platform or talar represented on the tomb of Darius is extremely unlike any constructional feature such as an upper storey, and may have been placed there only to give dignity and importance to the figure of the king: the hall of the Palace of Darius could easily have been lighted by clerestory windows over the roofs of the smaller chambers on each side.—ED.]

Footnote 95:

It is very strange that this similarity, like the plan of the square halls, should hitherto have escaped observation. Had any one looked at the matter as a whole we should have been spared some restorations which are too absurd even to merit exposure.

[The restorations referred to are those in which the columns of the Great Hall and of the porticoes are shown as isolated features standing on the platforms. The authors of these designs would appear to have been misled by Messrs. Flandin and Coste’s plan, in which the drains are shown as if they ran under the line of the wall proposed by Mr. Fergusson, the enclosing wall of the Great Hall. Mr. Weld Blundell’s researches (1891), however, have shown that the main drain really lies under the hall, and between the enclosure wall and the first row of columns, and that the vertical rain-water shafts which were built into the wall communicated direct with this main drain. These shafts, cut in stone, in some cases rise above the level of the platform, which show that they were not intended to carry off the surface water from the platform. Mr. Weld Blundell discovered also the traces of the foundation of walls at the angles where shown by Mr. Fergusson. It would seem that in course of time the platforms have become coated with so hard and uniform a covering as to suggest its being the natural surface; when once broken through, however, the evidences of foundations of various walls are abundant.—ED.]

Footnote 96:

M. Dieulafoy’s work on the Acropolis of Susa has just (1893) appeared, but, so far as the palace is concerned, his discoveries do not add much to our knowledge. He appears to have arrived at the conclusion that the great hall (which in plan resembles that of the palace of Xerxes—Woodcut 94) was not enclosed on the south side, but was left open to the court in the same way as the great reception halls of the later Parthian and Sassanian kings at Al Hadhr, Firouzabad, and Ctesiphon.

Footnote 97:

It is now generally considered that these two buildings were tombs; the projecting bosses, as shown on woodcut, are in reality sinkings, and were probably decorative only.—ED.

Footnote 98:

M. Dieulafoy claims to have traced the plan of a temple at Susa which consisted of a sanctuary the roof of which was supported by four columns, with a portico-in-antis in front, and a large open court, measuring about 50 ft. by 40 ft., in the middle of which was placed the fire-altar. The whole building was enclosed with a corridor or passage, with entrances so arranged that no one could see inside the temple from without.—ED.

Footnote 99:

Mr. Flinders Petrie’s latest excavations at Medum have resulted in the discovery of small brick arches over a passage in the sepulchral pit of Rahotep of the 4th dynasty.

Footnote 100:

Wilkinson’s ‘Egypt and Thebes,’ pp. 81 and 126.

Footnote 101:

‘Manners and Customs of the Egyptians,’ vol. iii. p. 263.

Footnote 102:

1 Kings vii. 1-12. Josephus, B. J. viii. 5.

Footnote 103:

Josephus, Ant. viii. 5. § 2.

Footnote 104:

The details of this restoration are given in the ‘Dictionary of the Bible,’ _sub voce_ ‘Temple,’ and repeated in my work entitled ‘The Holy Sepulchre and the Temple at Jerusalem.’ Murray, 1865.

Footnote 105:

‘Speaker’s Commentary on the Bible,’ vol. ii. p. 520; note on verse 15, chap. vii. 1 Kings.

Footnote 106:

For a restoration of this screen see ‘Tree and Serpent Worship,’ Appendix i., p. 270.

Footnote 107:

Since the article on the Temple in Smith’s ‘Dictionary of the Bible’ was written, from which most of the woodcuts in this chapter are taken, I have had occasion to go over the subject more than once, and from recent explorations and recently discovered analogies have, I believe, been able to settle, within very narrow limits of doubt, all the outstanding questions with reference to this celebrated building. I have in consequence written and published a monograph of the Temple, but have deemed it more expedient to leave the illustrations here as they are.

Footnote 108:

2 Chronicles xx. 5.

Footnote 109:

Hecateus of Abdera, in ‘Müller’s Fragments,’ ii. 394.

Footnote 110:

Josephus, Ant. xi. 4, § 2.

Footnote 111:

Josephus, B. J. v. 5, § 4.

Footnote 112:

Dawkins and Wood, ‘The Ruins of Palmyra,’ Lond. 1753.

Footnote 113:

Texier, ‘Arménie et la Perse,’ vol. i. pl. 62 and 68.

Footnote 114:

Texier, ‘Asie Mineure,’ pl. 10 to 21.

Footnote 115:

Herodotus, i. 93.

Footnote 116:

Lydischen Königsgräber, I. F. M. Olfers, Berlin, 1859.

Footnote 117:

“Toward the centre of the monument two large stones were found leaning at an angle the one against the other, and forming a sort of tent, like in Woodcut 124, under which was presently discovered a small statue of Minerva seated on a chariot with four horses, and an urn of metal filled with ashes, charcoal, and burnt bones. This urn, which is now in the possession of the Comte de Choiseul, is enriched in sculpture with a vine branch, from which is suspended bunches of grapes done with exquisite art.”—‘Description of the Plain of Troy,’ translated by Dalzel, Edin. 1791, p. 149.

If this is so, this is no doubt the vessel mentioned, ‘Iliad,’ xvi. 221, xxiii. 92; ‘Od.,’ xxiv. 71, and elsewhere. But where is it now? and why has not the fact of its existence been more insisted upon?

Footnote 118:

One of the most interesting facts brought to light in Dr. Schliemann’s excavations is that between the age of the “Ilium Vetus” of Homer, rich in metals and in arts, and the “Ilium Novum” of Strabo, a people ignorant of use of the metals, and using only bone and stone implements, inhabited the mound at Hissarlik which covered both these cities. This discovery is sufficient to upset the once fashionable Danish theory of the three ages—Stone, Bronze, and Iron—but, unfortunately, adds nothing to our knowledge of architecture. These people, whoever they were, built nothing, and must consequently be content to remain in the “longa nocte” of those who neglect the Master Art.

Footnote 119:

Fergusson’s ‘History of Indian and Eastern Architecture.’ John Murray, London 1876, page 108 et seq.

Footnote 120:

This tomb is considered by M. Renan (Mission de Phœnicie, Paris 1864) to be of Phœnician origin, who remarks generally on their work: “Phœnician tombs are generally excavated in the solid rock; their architecture is the carved rock without columns; they obtained all they could out of the solid rock, leaving it as they found it, with more or less attempt to make it graceful; the fact that it was worked before being transported suggests that as it left the quarry so it remained, no sound of hammer or saw being heard during its erection.” There is another tomb at Marathos also attributed to the Phœnicians, which is partly cut out of the rock and partially built in large blocks of masonry.

Footnote 121:

In reality the monument stands exactly over the centre of the rock-cut sepulchre. The section-line must, therefore, be understood to be carried back about 10 feet from the face of the monument.

Footnote 122:

Josephus, Ant. xvi. 7, § 1.

Footnote 123:

Beule’s excavations have proved that the outer gate of the Acropolis was in front, not at the side, as here shown. ‘Acropole d’Athènes.’ Paris, vol. i. pl. i. and ii.

Footnote 124:

For details of this see Bötticher, ‘Baumkultus der Hellenen.’ Berlin, 1856.

Footnote 125:

Pausanias, ix. 38.

Footnote 126:

It appears that on the back of the stones laid in horizontal courses were others of great size piled on the top.

Footnote 127:

The same scroll exists at New Grange in Ireland, in the Island of Gozo near Malta, and generally wherever chambered tumuli are found.

Footnote 128:

A cast of these is to be found in the South Kensington Museum.

Footnote 129:

These antæ (parastades) or responds were destined in the first case to protect the angles of the wall, and in the second case to support the beams carried by them and the columns between, the sun-dried brick wall being not to be relied on; in the later Greek temples the walls were built in stone and marble, and the parastades became therefore no longer constructional necessities, being retained only as decorative features, of which so many others are found in the style.

Footnote 130:

Pausanias, vi. 19.

Footnote 131:

The dimensions are 94 feet by 45, covering consequently only 4230 feet.

Footnote 132:

This refers only to the columns and antæ; the lower portion of the walls, 3 feet 6 inches high, were in stone; above this clay bricks were employed in building the walls, and it was to the disintegration of these that we owe the preservation of the Hermes of Praxiteles, which was found embedded in a thick layer of clay. At first it was thought that this clay had been washed down from the neighbouring slopes of the hill of Kronos.

Footnote 133:

M. J. Thacher Clarke, who directed the American expedition in 1881, is now occupied with a monograph on the subject, and a report by him was published in 1882. Boston and London. J. Trübner.

Footnote 134:

A proto-Ionic capital of early date was found in 1882 on the summit of Mount Chigri, in the Troad, by Mr. J. Thacher Clarke, and is described in the American Journal of Archæology, Baltimore. 1886. Another example ascribed to Phœnician artists was found at Trapeza in Cyprus, and is now in the Louvre; both are of the same type as that which is represented in the ivory carvings from the north-western palace of Nimroud, now in the British Museum, so that the Asiatic origin of the order is thus confirmed.

Footnote 135:

Pausanias, viii. 45.

Footnote 136:

Bohn.

Footnote 137:

[The earliest example in stone at Benihasan is of less diameter than the columns at Kalabscheh, so that it is difficult to draw this distinction; we have already shown also (p. 115 note) that wooden shafts of the twelfth dynasty have been found at Kahun, and this and the existence of the base proves their wooden origin. If therefore the Greek Doric column was derived originally from Egypt, as Mr. Fergusson believed, then its earlier wooden parentage must be accepted. Further evidence on this subject however has been afforded by the discoveries at Olympia, and the references in consequence made to Greek authors; all these show without doubt that the columns of the temple of Hera were originally in wood, and were gradually replaced by stone. The theory that the pillars in Egypt or early Greece were built in brickwork or rubble masonry is not borne out by the discoveries at Tiryns, for the walls of the palace there, in rubble and clay mortar, were of such weak construction that posts of timber were required to carry the epistyle or beam, either isolated as columns or built up against the wall as antæ.

Mr. Fergusson’s theory that a pillar, originally copied from the wooden post, is slenderer at first, and gradually departs from the wood form as the style advances, is borne out by the evidence of the Egypt lotus column; this, as found in the rock-cut tombs of Benihasan, is of very small diameter, and quite unequal to carry the weight of any stone superstructure; whereas afterwards in the temples at Thebes it assumes a proportion nearer that of the earliest Greek Doric example at Corinth.—ED.]

Footnote 138:

These facts have all been fully elucidated by Mr. Penrose in his beautiful work containing the results of his researches on the Parthenon and other temples of Greece, published by the Dilettanti Society.

Footnote 139:

For measurements we depend on Penrose, ‘Principles of Athenian Architecture,’ &c., fol.; and Cockerell, ‘The Temples of Egina and Bassæ,’ Lond. 1860. The details of the system were first publicly announced by Watkiss Lloyd, in a paper read to the Institute of British Architects in 1859; afterwards in an appendix to Mr. Cockerell’s work, and in several minor publications.

Footnote 140:

The pyramid-building kings of Lower Egypt seem to have had some distinct ideas of a system of definite proportions in architectural building, and to have put it into practice in the pyramid, and possibly elsewhere, but it has not yet been sought for in the other buildings of that age.

At times I cannot help suspecting more affinity to have existed between the inhabitants of Lower Egypt and those of Greece than is at first sight apparent.

Footnote 141:

It was called Zoophorus (_life_ or _figure bearer_).

Footnote 142:

[The reasons which induced the late Mr. Fergusson to suggest an “opaion,” or clerestory, were fully set forth in the ‘True Principles of Beauty in Art,’ in 1849. A paper on the same subject was communicated by him to the Royal Institute of British Architects in 1861, and published in their “Transactions” for that year. Since his death, however, Mr. Penrose’s discovery that the Temple of Jupiter Olympius at Athens was really octastyle has thrown a new light on the question of hypæthral temples; and, as Dr. Dorpfield remarks in his essay on the “Hypæthral Temple” (communicated to the R. I. B. A. on Dec. 19): “The words of Vitruvius have now received quite another interpretation, through the excavation of the Olympieion at Athens, to that which they have had up to the present. The most important proof of the hypæthral lighting of the temples of antiquity has now turned into a proof against the same;” and he concludes his arguments by stating: “After it has been shown by the excavations that the Olympieion at Athens is the sole example of a great hypæthral temple mentioned by Vitruvius, we can answer this much-vexed question of the lighting of the temples of antiquity in this way—that a few great dipteral hypæthral temples existed, but that the Greek and Roman temples had as a rule no light from above, and were only lighted from the door.”—ED.]

Footnote 143:

See Woodcuts Nos. 22, 24, 27.

Footnote 144:

Vitruvius, lib. i. ch. 1.

Footnote 145:

Boeckh, Corpus Inscript. Græc. No. 109.

Footnote 146:

Attica, xxvi.

Footnote 147:

Historia, viii, 41.

Footnote 148:

Among the many attempts made to restore the interior of this temple, the last and most elaborate is that by the late E. Beulé, ‘Acropole d’Athènes,’ 1854, vol. ii. pl. ii.; but it is also one of the worst. Indeed it is quite painful to see how the author twists his authorities to meet a preconceived theory. Without going into it, there is one objection which seems fatal to the whole.

Like most antiquaries when in difficulties for lighting Greek temples, he takes off the roof and makes the Temple of Pandrosus an open courtyard, in which he plants the olive. This is so opposed to the whole spirit of Greek art as to be inadmissible on general grounds, but in this instance it introduces the further absurdity that the Greeks opened three windows in the west wall of the temple to light this courtyard which was already open to the sky! The mode of lighting a temple by vertical windows is so exceptional that it would not have been introduced here had any other means existed of lighting the interior, and consequently the combination shown by M. Beulé seems simply impossible.

Footnote 149:

“Universo Templo longitudo est ccccxxv. pedum, latitudo ccxx. Columnæ centum viginti septem a singulis regibus factæ, lx. pedum altitudine: ex iis xxxvi. cælatæ, una a Scopa.”—H. N. xxxvi. 14.

Footnote 150:

[Mr. Wood places two in the pronaos and two in the posticum, thus reducing the depth of the opisthodomus; beyond the pronaos he places a vestibule and omits the staircases as shown on plan 159. In 1883, Mr. Fergusson returned to the subject again, and published in the Transactions of the Institute (session 1882-83) a revised plan, to which we refer our readers.—ED.]

Footnote 151:

The finial ornament is triangular in plan, and there are three scrolls on the roof with mortices in them, showing that something must have stood on them to support the projecting angles. Dolphins and various other objects have been suggested. My own conviction is that they were winged genii, most probably in bronze, and gilt like the neckings of the capitals.

Footnote 152:

[Dr. Dorpfield is of opinion that in the Greek theatres of the best period there was no proscenium, or raised stage, and that the actors played their parts in the orchestra on the same level as the chorus. Professor Middleton also points out that in the earliest Greek theatres built in the 5th and 4th centuries B.C. the orchestra was a complete circle, the space being gradually diminished by the bringing forward of the stage.—ED.]

Footnote 153:

It will not be necessary to enter here into all the details of this restoration. They will be found in a separate work published by me on the subject, to which the reader is referred. [The student should also refer to the restoration suggested by M. Pullan in the work published by him and Sir Charles Newton (‘Discoveries at Halicarnassus, 1862’). In the arrangement and design of the podium it accords better with other examples of Greek tombs than Mr. Fergusson’s. The three columns as shown at the angle of Mr. Fergusson’s peristyle would be quite repugnant to any student of Greek architecture.—ED.]

Footnote 154:

Hist. Nat. xxxvi. 5.

Footnote 155:

The figures given in the text are all Greek feet: the difference between them and English feet, being only 1¼ per cent., is hardly perceptible in these dimensions, without descending to minute fractions, and disturbing the comparison with Pliny’s text.

Footnote 156:

The circumstance of Asoka, the Buddhist king of India B.C. 250, having formed an alliance with Megas of Cyrene for the succour of his co-religionists in the dominions of the latter, points to such a conclusion even if nothing else did.—‘Journal Asiatic Society of Bengal,’ vii. p. 261; J. R. A. S. xii. p. 223 et seq.

Footnote 157:

Beechy’s ‘Journey to Cyrene,’ p. 444; see also Smith and Porcher, pl. 37.

Footnote 158:

Vitruvius, iv. 7.

Footnote 159:

Dionysius, iv. 61.

Footnote 160:

For more detail, see ‘The True Principles of Beauty in Art,’ p. 446 et. seq.

Footnote 161:

The Etruscan and Roman origin of the circular temple is now known to be erroneous, as remains of large circular temples have been discovered at Epidaurus and Olympia.

Footnote 162:

Even in more modern times I know of no building showing a trace of these forms except the tomb of Theodoric at Ravenna. This, however, is Etruscan both in form and detail, as will be seen farther on.

Footnote 163:

Plin. ‘Hist.’ xxxvi. 13.

Footnote 164:

A diagram is given in ‘The True Principles of Beauty in Art’ p. 459, which shows at least that there is no difficulty in designing a monument in perfect accordance with the text. Whether the latter is to be depended upon or not is another matter.

Footnote 165:

These dimensions, with all those that follow, unless otherwise specified, are taken from Taylor and Cresy’s ‘Architectural Antiquities of Rome,’ London, 1821. They seem more to be depended upon than any others I am acquainted with.

Footnote 166:

These two temples, like almost all the others of Rome, have recently been renamed by the Roman or rather German antiquaries. The Jupiter Tonans is now the Temple of Saturn, and the Jupiter Stator is decreed to have been the Temple of Castor and Pollux. The names by which they are currently known has been adhered to, as the architecture is of more importance here than the archæology.

Footnote 167:

Laborde, ‘Monumens de la France,’ vol. i. pls. xxix. xxx. p. 68.

Footnote 168:

IMP. CÆS. M. AVRELIVS ANTONINVS PIVS FELIX AVG. TRIB. POTEST V. COS. PROCOS. PANTHEVM VETVSTATE CORRVPTVM CVM OMNI CVLTV RESTITVERVNT. Isabelle, ‘Édifices Circulaires,’ p. 37, pl. xii.

Footnote 169:

When the first edition of this work was written I believed the rotunda to have been added to the portico by Severus; and if this were so it would get over many of the difficulties arising from its size and the character of its brickwork. My personal examination, however, has forced me very unwillingly to give up this hypothesis. It certainly is, however, very astonishing that such a vault should have been attempted at so early an age.

[There seems to be some probability that Mr. Fergusson’s first belief was correct, and that the Rotunda was built by Hadrian, bricks with the stamp of his period having been found in the casing and in the bond courses in the solid concrete both of the drum and in the dome. The discovery is due to M. Chedanne, one of the “Grand Prix” students in the Villa Medici, who had selected the subject for his “Envoi de Rome,” and was allowed to superintend certain repairs and restorations which were required in the Pantheon. It would seem that the portico erected by Agrippa preceded a temple with cella of the ordinary form, the pavement of which has been found nearly seven feet below the floor of the present church. From this it follows that when the Rotunda was erected in the first half of the second century, the portico, which is undoubtedly of Agrippa’s time, must have been taken down and rebuilt on to it, and this explains Mr. Fergusson’s reasons for insisting that the portico was built on to the Rotunda. The theory as to the Pantheon forming part of Agrippa’s bath is thus disposed of. Independently of that, however, Prof. Middleton has pointed out that the discoveries made in 1882, by the removal of the block of houses at the back, showed that there was no connection whatever between the two buildings. Traces exist of the original marble lining, and of cornices which were continued round the dome, showing that originally the complete circuit was exposed to view. “Moreover,” Prof. Middleton states, “if further proof were wanting to contradict the theory that the Pantheon was over the Calidarum or Laconicum of the bath, this is supplied by the fact that there is no trace of any hypocaust under the floor, but merely an ancient drain to carry away the rain-water that fell through the opening in the dome. The Pantheon, too, is on the north side of the Thermæ—a very improbable position for the Laconicum, or hot room, which was usually placed on the sunny side of the buildings.”—ED.]

Footnote 170:

The bronze plates which were removed by Pope Urban VIII. in 1626 to make cannon, and also for the great Baldachino in St. Peter’s, were taken from the portico; the coffers of the interior of the dome were decorated, according to Prof. Middleton, with mouldings in stucco painted and gilt.

Footnote 171:

This building is commonly called a temple, though it is not known to what deity it was dedicated. My own impression is that it was a tomb, or at least a funereal monument of some sort.

Footnote 172:

Owing to a misreading of Vitruvius’s statement respecting the temple it had always been classed as decastyle. See Mr. Penrose’s researches published in the ‘Transactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects,’ vol. iv. New Series. 1888.

Footnote 173:

See ‘The True Principles of Beauty in Art,’ where the reasons for this arrangement will be found stated at length. [See note on page 272.— ED.]

Footnote 174:

Canina, in his restoration, shows a flat roof with coffers, so there is probably no exact authority for its form, though it seems to be generally agreed that the centre was not hypæthral.

Footnote 175:

This basilica is generally represented as having an apse at either end; but there is no authority whatever for this, and general analogy would lead us rather to infer that it was not the case. Prof. Middleton, however, is of opinion that an apse existed at both ends, and shows the same in his restoration of the plan of Trajan’s form.— ‘The Remains of Ancient Rome,’ by J. H. Middleton, Fig. 52, vol. ii.

Footnote 176:

One of the pillars of this basilica remained _in situ_ till the year 1614, when it was removed by Carlo Maderno, by order of Paul V., and re-erected in the piazza of St. M. Maggiore, where it now stands as a monumental column, supporting a statue of the Virgin. The column, with its base and capital, is as nearly as may be 60 ft. in height; the whole monument, as it now stands, 140 ft.

Footnote 177:

As it was sunk slightly below the pavement of the peristyle, and drains leading from it were traced by Mr. Ashpitel, it was probably hypæthral.

Footnote 178:

The theatres of Curio and Scaurus were in timber, except the proscenium of the latter, which was partly decorated with marble and mosaics. The Theatre of Pompey, B.C. 54, was in stone, and parts of it still exist (Prof. Middleton). The Theatre of Marcellus was begun by Julius Cæsar, but not completed till 13 B.C., when it was opened by Augustus. It was subsequently restored after a fire by Vespasian, but the purity and simplicity of the architecture, and the refinement of the details, in comparison with those of the Colosseum, 70-80 A.D., are in favour of the earlier date assigned to it. Prof. Middleton quotes another theatre, that of Cornelius Balbus (13 B.C.), built to the north-west of the Theatre of Marcellus.

Footnote 179:

According to Prof. Middleton the Amphitheatre of Sutrium is of Roman origin, and but little earlier than the Colosseum at Rome. “There is really no evidence,” he says (p. 76), “that amphitheatres were built by the Etruscans; and there can be little doubt that they were purely Roman inventions.”

Footnote 180:

At the Crystal Palace it has always been found necessary to allow 6 sq. ft. to each person.

Footnote 181:

Considerable difference of opinion seems to exist as to the extent of the velaria which sheltered the arena; this was supported by masts fixed outside the upper part of the walls, resting on brackets, 14 ft. below the cornice, which was cut away to allow the mast to fit close against the wall. M. Gérôme suggests, in his well-known picture of the Roman gladiators, that the velaria extended over a portion of the arena only. Prof. Middleton states, “The awning did not, as has been sometimes supposed, cover the whole amphitheatre, a thing which would have been practically impossible, owing to the enormous strain of so long a bearing, far beyond what any ropes could bear. It simply sloped down over the spectators in the cavea, leaving the whole central arena uncovered.” In case of rain, however, this might have been inconvenient, and it would not have protected the spectators from the sun, supposing that the performances lasted the whole day. Besides, there is no reason why the masts should have been carried so high above the wall, as shown in the restoration in Prof. Middleton’s book, p. 70. Mr. Alma Tadema is of opinion that the velarium extended over the whole arena, and was suspended on a principle similar to that of a suspension bridge, the ridge, or highest portion lying between the foci of the ellipse. This accounts in a much more satisfactory way for the height of the masts, and would afford facilities for the draining off of the rain on to the top of the gallery round.

Footnote 182:

Maffei, ‘Verona Illustrata,’ vol. vii. p. 84 et seq.

Footnote 183:

See note on p. 321.

Footnote 184:

These baths have been carefully measured by M. Blouet, who has also published a restoration of them. This is, on the whole, certainly the best account we have of any of these establishments.

Footnote 185:

According to Prof. Middleton this magnificent hall appears to have been what Spartianus calls the _cella soliaris_, the ceiling of which he says was formed of interlaced bars of gilt bronze. When the excavations in this hall were being made, many tons of fragments of iron girders were found. These were (according to Prof. Aitchison) compound girders, formed of two T bars riveted together, and then cased in bronze. A sort of lattice-work ceiling had been formed with these bronze-cased girders, the panels being probably filled in with concrete made of light pumice-stone, worked with fine stucco reliefs, painted and gilt. Prof. Middleton is of opinion that the central part over the swimming-bath was left open for the admission of light. In the upper part of the walls deep sinkings to receive the ends of the great girders which supported the ceiling are clearly visible.

Footnote 186:

St. George’s Hall at Liverpool is the most exact copy in modern times of a part of these baths. The Hall itself is a reproduction both in scale and design of the central hall of Caracalla’s baths, but improved in detail and design, having five bays instead of only three. With the two courts at each end, it makes up a suite of apartments very similar to those found in the Roman examples. The whole building, however, is less than one-fourth of the size of the central mass of a Roman bath, and therefore gives but little idea of the magnificence of the whole.

Footnote 187:

The left-hand wing of this arch has since been restored by M. Viollet-le-Duc, and the right-hand wing cleared of the square building in front of it.

Footnote 188:

These two buildings are described further on (p. 544) as Christian edifices.

Footnote 189:

Professor Middleton states: “This building appears to be a nymphæum, or a part of some baths of about the time of Gallienus (263-268 A.D.).” It was known in the Middle Ages as the “Terme de Gallucio.” The site of the real Temple of Minerva Medica was discovered in 1887 (according to the same authority) between the new Via Macchiavelli and the Via Buonarroti, about 7 ft. below the present ground-level.

Footnote 190:

See p. 114, and Woodcut 15.

Footnote 191:

M. de Saulcy has recently attempted to prove that these tombs are those of the kings of Judah from David downwards. Their architecture is undoubtedly as late as the Christian era, and the cover of the sarcophagus which is now in the Louvre under the title of that of David is probably of the same date as these tombs, or if anything more modern.

Footnote 192:

‘Voyage dans la Marmarique, la Cyrénaique, &c.’ Didot, Paris, 1827-29.

Footnote 193:

Though the dates of all these tombs at Cyrene are so uncertain, there seems little doubt that if any one thoroughly versed in the style were to visit the place, he could fix the age of all of them with approximate correctness. The one difficulty is, that a chronometric scale taken from the buildings at Rome, or even in Syria, will not suffice. Local peculiarities must be taken into account and allowed for, and this requires both time and judgment.

Footnote 194:

‘Le Tombeau de la Chrétienne,’ par A. Berbrugger, Alger. 1867, from which the above particulars are taken.

Footnote 195:

It is understood that it too has been explored, but no account of the result has yet reached this country, and such rumours as have reached are too vague to be quoted. Even its dimensions are not known.

Footnote 196:

‘De Situ Orbis,’ I. vi. p. 38. edit. Leyden, 1748.

Footnote 197:

For plan of same, see Prof. Middleton’s ‘Ancient Rome,’ 1891.

Footnote 198:

By an oversight this difference is not expressed in the woodcut.

Footnote 199:

See p. 323.

Footnote 200:

These are well epitomised by Gibbon, Book xlvi. vol. v. p. 528.

Footnote 201:

Journal of the Royal Geographical Society, ix. pl. 9. p. 476.

Footnote 202:

The sixth great Oriental monarchy; or the geography, history and antiquities of Parthia, &c., 1873.

Footnote 203:

These inscriptions were all copied by Consul Taylor, and brought home to this country. I never could learn, however, that they were translated. I feel certain they were never published, and cannot find out what has become of them.

Footnote 204:

These are expedients for filling up the corners of square lower storeys on which it is intended to place a circular superstructure. They somewhat resemble very large brackets or great coves placed in an angle. Examples of them are shown on page 434 when speaking of Byzantine architecture, and others will be found in the chapter on Mahomedan Architecture in India, in vol. iii.

Footnote 205:

These three buildings probably date as near as may be one century from each other, thus—

Serbistan A.D. 350 Firouzabad 450 Ctesiphon 550

To which we may now add

Mashita 620

A bare skeleton, which it will require much time and labour to clothe with flesh and restore to life.

Footnote 206:

‘The Land of Moab,’ by H. B. Tristram, M. A., &c. Murray, 1873. As all the information respecting the palace is contained in that book, pp. 195 to 215, all the illustrations here used are taken from it, it will not be necessary to refer to it again. For further information on the subject the reader is referred to that work.

Footnote 207:

Rich, ‘Residence in Koordistan,’ ii. 251 et seq.

Footnote 208:

The plan made by Dr. Tristram’s party, which is all we yet have, was only a hurried sketch, and cannot be depended upon for minute details.

Footnote 209:

Flandin and Coste, vol. iv. pls. 214, 215.

Footnote 210:

Texier and Pullan. ‘Byzantine Architecture.’ 4to. 1864. Pl. iv. p. 40 et seq.

Footnote 211:

Ruskin, ‘Stones of Venice,’ vol. ii. pls. 3, 4, and 5.

Footnote 212:

‘L’art Antique de la Perse,’ by Marcel Dieulafoy. Paris.

Footnote 213:

In the Museum at Pesth are a number of objects of Egyptian art, said to have been found in this quarter. Is it too much to assume the pre-existence of a Phœnician or Egyptian colony here before the Roman times?

Footnote 214:

As a matter of fact, 12th century would be more exact; nearly all the chief problems of pointed arch construction in intersecting vaulting having been worked out before the close of that century.

Footnote 215:

[The domical construction of the vaults of the two great cisterns erected by Constantine, the Binbirderek, or thousand-and-one columns, and the Yeri Batan Seraï, both in Constantinople, suggests that there already existed in the East a method of vaulting entirely different from that which obtained in Rome, and which may have been a traditional method handed down even from Assyrian times.—ED.]

Footnote 216:

‘Syrie Centrale: Architecture civile et religieuse du I^{er} au VII^{me} Siècle. Par le Comte Melchior de Vogüé.’

Footnote 217:

‘Byzantine Architecture,’ by Texier and Pullan. Folio, London, 1864.

Footnote 218:

De Vogüé, ‘Églises de la Terre Sainte,’ p. 101.

Footnote 219:

For a careful analytical description of the church, see Professor Willis, ‘Architectural History of the Holy Sepulchre,’ London, 1849.

Footnote 220:

The particulars for these churches are taken from Texier and Pullan’s splendid work on Byzantine architecture published by Day, 1864.

Footnote 221:

Another very small church, that of Moudjeleia, though under 50 ft. square, seems to have adopted the same hypæthral arrangement.

Footnote 222:

A great deal of very irrelevant matter has been written about these “giant cities of Bashan,” as if their age were a matter of doubt. There is nothing in the Hauran which can by any possibility date before the time of Roman supremacy in the country. The very earliest now existing are probably subsequent to the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus.

Footnote 223:

The constructive dimensions of the porch at Chillambaram (p. 353. History of Indian and Eastern Architecture, 1876.) are very similar to those of this church: both have flat stone roofs, but in the Indian, though a much more modern example, there is no arch.

Footnote 224:

These are all given in colours in Texier and Pullan’s beautiful work on Byzantine architecture, from which all the particulars regarding this church are taken.

Footnote 225:

A wayside retreat or shelter.

Footnote 226:

A restoration of the church from Procopius’s description, ‘De Ædificiis,’ lib. i. ch. iv., will be found in Hübsch, ‘Altchristliche Baukunst,’ pls. xxxii. and xxxiii.

Footnote 227:

See vol. iii., in chapter on Indian Saracenic Architecture.

Footnote 228:

The Renaissance dome which fits best to the church on which it is placed is that of Sta. Maria at Florence; but, strange to say, it is neither the one originally designed for the place, nor probably at all like it. All the others were erected as designed by the architects who built the churches, and none fit so well.

Footnote 229:

[The apses on each side of central apse are said to be additions to the original structure. The triple apses in Greek churches are found, according to Dr. Freshfield (‘Archæologia,’ vol. 44), only in churches erected subsequent to Justin II. In St. Simeon Stylites and St. Sergius at Bosra the side apses have been added afterwards.—ED.]

Footnote 230:

Strictly speaking, circular with flattened sides, for the pendentive has a longer radius than half the diagonal of the square.

Footnote 231:

The two eastern cupolas have been raised in Arab times, and a cylindrical drum inserted with windows pierced in them to give more light to the interior.

Footnote 232:

There are numerous examples of this class of structure in North Syria, but whether they are memorials or tombs is not known. See ‘Reisen Kleinasien und Nord Syria’ by Karl Humann and Otto Puchstein.

Footnote 233:

[This rule cannot be made a hard and fast one. Procopius states that in the central dome of the Church of the Apostles, Constantinople, “the circular building standing above the arches is pierced with windows, and the spherical dome which over-arches it seems to be suspended in the air.” In the church of St. Sergius at Constantinople the walls of the octagon, which are pierced with windows, are carried up to the vault, and in the church of Sta. Sophia at Thessalonica the windows are pierced in an upright dome cylindrical internally. In all these cases, however, there is a marked distinction between these examples and those of the lofty cylindrical drums which were employed in the Neo-Byzantine churches. Mr. Fergusson’s rule, therefore, with these exceptions, may be taken as absolute.—ED.]

Footnote 234:

They are found in the Mustaphapacha mosque at Constantinople dating from 430 A.D., but rebuilt in the 13th century.

Footnote 235:

[It is now considered that the Church of the Holy Apostles was the original model. This church, rebuilt by Justinian, was pulled down in 1464 A.D. by Mohammad II. to furnish a site for his mosque.—ED.]

Footnote 236:

[This work has lately been undertaken by Messrs. Barnsley and Schultz, who are preparing their drawings for publication, and hope to follow up the task with a survey of the more important churches in Mount Athos.—ED.]

Footnote 237:

‘Die Kunst in den Athos Kirchen,’ Leipzig, 1890.

Footnote 238:

‘Athos; or, the Mountain of the Monks,’ by Athelstan Riley, M.A., 1887.

Footnote 239:

See the photogravure of the interior of the Catholicon at Dochiariu.

Footnote 240:

‘Églises Byzantines en Grèce.’

Footnote 241:

‘Expédition scientifique de la Morée.’

Footnote 242:

There would seem however to have been a revival in the 11th century, possibly a reflex of that which was taking place in West Europe. And it was during this period that the churches of St. Luke in Phoeis, the church at Daphné and the churches of St. Nicodemus and St. Theodore in Athens were erected.

Footnote 243:

C. Texier, ‘Arménie et la Perse.’ 2 vols. folio. Paris.

Footnote 244:

Dubois de Montpereux, ‘Voyage autour du Caucase.’ 6 vols. 8vo. Paris, 1839, 1841.

Footnote 245:

Brosset, ‘Voyage Archéologique dans la Georgie et l’Arménie.’ St. Pétersbourg, 1849.

Footnote 246:

D. Grimm, ‘Monuments d’Architecture en Georgie et Arménie.’ St. Pétersbourg, 1864.

Footnote 247:

Texier gives three dates to this church. In the ‘Byzantine Architecture,’ p. 174, it is said to be of the 7th, and at p. 4, of the 9th century. In the ‘L’Arménie et la Perse,’ at p. 120, the date is given as 1243. My conviction is that the first is correct.

Footnote 248:

Flandin and Coste, ‘Voyage en Perse,’ pls. 214, 215.

Footnote 249:

Texier and Pullan, ‘Byzantine Architecture,’ pp. lix., lx.

Footnote 250:

I am a little doubtful regarding the scales of these two buildings. They are correctly reduced from M. Brosset’s plates. But are these to be depended upon?

Footnote 251:

Even if it should be asserted that this is no proof that the inhabitants of these countries were Buddhists in those days, it seems tolerably certain that they were tree-worshippers, which is very nearly the same thing. Procopius tells us that “even in his day these barbarians worshipped forests and groves, and in their barbarous simplicity placed the trees among their gods.” (‘De Bello Gotico,’ Bonn, 1833, ii. 471.)

Footnote 252:

The principal part of the information regarding these excavations is to be found in the work of Dubois de Montpereux, _passim_.

Footnote 253:

[See paper by Mr. Wm. Simpson in R. I. B. A. Transactions, vol. vii., 1891.—ED.]

Footnote 254:

All the plans and information regarding the churches at Kief are obtained from a Russian work devoted to the subject, procured for me on the spot by Mr. Vignoles, C.E.

Footnote 255:

The first bay, as shown on plan (Woodcut No. 382), is the narthex; the five domes come beyond it.

Footnote 256:

The particulars and illustrations of this church are taken from a paper by Heinrich Keissenberger, in the ‘Jahrbuch der K. K. Commission für Enthaltung der Baudenkmale,’ 1860. A model of it, full size, was exhibited at the Paris Exhibition of 1867.

Footnote 257:

[It has been assumed that the Roman basilicas were taken possession of by the early Christians for their own religious services, but as Mr. G. G. Scott points out in his ‘Essay on the History of English Church Architecture,’ “there is no well-authenticated instance of the conversion of any Pagan basilica into a Christian church, whilst there are abundant examples of Pagan temples converted into Christian sanctuaries” (see Texier and Pullan’s ‘Byzantine Architecture,’ pp. 75, 103). Indeed, it is, as Mr. Scott observes, “on the face of it improbable, if we reflect that the conversion of the government to Christianity had no tendency to render the existing basilicas less necessary for legal business, after the peace of the church, than they had been before that event. Christianity, unfortunately, could not abolish the litigious instincts of our nature, and after fifteen centuries of the gospel the legal profession still flourishes.” The buildings which were rendered useless by the official recognition of the new faith were not the basilicas but the temples, the fact being that the class of building known as a basilica (a term never used by either the writers or architects of Byzantine times), with its wide central nave and aisles with galleries over them lighted by clerestory or side windows, and covered with a timber roof, constituted the simplest and most economical building of large size which could be constructed to hold a vast assembly of worshippers; especially as the only features which can be looked upon as having any architectural pretensions, viz., the columns and their capitals, could be taken wholesale from temples and other Roman buildings. The semicircular apse, which alone in the Roman basilica served as a court of law, became the tribune for the bishop and presbyters.

Mr. Scott is even inclined to assign an earlier and more independent origin for the basilican form. According to his theory the germ of the Christian basilica was a simple oblong aisleless room divided by a cross arch, beyond which lay an altar detached from the wall. This germ was developed by the addition of side aisles, and sometimes an aisle returned across the entrance, and over these upper aisles were next constructed and transepts added, together with the oratories or chapels in various parts of the building. Mr. Butler, in his work on ‘The Ancient Coptic Churches of Egypt,’ accepts this theory, as the churches of Egypt are rich in evidence that favours it. At the same time, the first great basilica erected by Constantine, viz., the Vatican (St. Peter’s), and the Lateran, (St. John Lateran), are of too great importance to warrant the suggestion that their origin should be sought for in the very small though possibly earlier examples in Egypt or the East.—ED.]

Footnote 258:

This probably refers to its foundation, for M. Cattaneo, in his work ‘L’architecture en Italie, 1890,’ judging by its ornamental detail, places the church in the second half of the seventh century.

Footnote 259:

‘Antiquités,’ vol. i. pl. 97.

Footnote 260:

_Eodem_, vol. iv. pl. 67.

Footnote 261:

Mr. Alfred J. Butler’s work, already referred to, has thrown considerable light on the subject, though, as he was unable to visit any of the Coptic churches up the Nile, we are still left in doubt as to the age of the convent near Siout and other buildings. From comparison of the plans and descriptions given in Denon, Curzon and Pococke of these buildings, with those in Cairo and Old Cairo, Mr. Butler ascribes them to the fourth century, that which in fact is claimed for them as having been founded by Sta. Helena. On this subject he says, p. 365: “Were there no more of evidence besides to determine the truth of this tradition, the plan of the Haikal (the central of the three chapels in a Coptic church) would decide it beyond question. The persistence with which certain churches are ascribed to Sta. Helena by a people utterly ignorant of history and architecture is in itself remarkable, and it is still more remarkable to find that these churches are always marked by a particular form of Haikal. Indeed, so regular is the coincidence, that a deep apsidal haikal with recesses all round it and columns close against the wall may be almost infallibly dated from the age of Sta. Helena.”

Footnote 262:

The older church has been so altered and ruined by the subsequent rebuildings that it is extremely difficult to make out its history. It seems, however, to have been built originally above the site of an old Mithraic temple, which has recently been cleared out, and probably before the time of Gregory the Great. It was apparently rebuilt, or nearly so, by Adrian I., 772, and burnt by Robert Guiscard, 1084. The upper church seems to have been erected by Paschal, 1099-1118. The question is, to what age do the frescoes found on the walls of the older church belong? Some of the heads and single figures may, I fancy, be anterior even to the time of Adrian; but the bulk of the paintings seem certainly to have been added between his age and 1084, and nearer the latter than the former date. If it had not been entirely ruined in 1084 Paschal would not have so completely obliterated it a century afterwards. A considerable quantity of the materials of the old church were used in the new, which tends further to confuse the chronology.

Footnote 263:

Gutensohn and Knapp, ‘Die Basiliken des Christlichen Roms.’

Footnote 264:

Cicero de Legg., ii. 24; Festus, s. v.; Smith’s ‘Dictionary of Classical Antiquities.’

Footnote 265:

The dates here given generally refer to the building now existing or known, and not always to the original foundation.

[Mr. G. G. Scott, in his work before referred to (p. 506), after giving a full quotation from Eusebius of Constantine’s basilica at Jerusalem, in which he points out that the orientation of primitive times is the reverse of that which has become general in later times, continues his enquiry into the evidence afforded by the numerous early basilicas in Rome itself. Of about fifty churches of early date, in forty of them the sanctuary is placed at the western end, and of the remaining ten (one of which is the great church of St. Paolo fuori le Mura), there are only seven which appear to have retained their original form, and which have an eastward sanctuary.

The exact orientation of the sanctuary in each case has been added to the list.—ED.]

Footnote 266:

‘Il Vaticano discritto da Pistolesi,’ vol. ii. pls. xxiv. xxv.

Footnote 267:

The new church which superseded this one is described in the History of the Modern Styles of Architecture, vol. i., page 111, woodcut 45.

Footnote 268:

It should be observed that the dosseret is first found in Italy in the Church of St. Stefano Rotondo, built 468-482, and is there of similar design to examples in Thessalonica.

Footnote 269:

‘L’architecture en Italie du vie au xi^e siècle.’ Venice, 1891.

Footnote 270:

‘Altchristlichen Kirchen nach Baudenkmalen und alteren Beschreibungen,’ von D. Hubsch. Carlsruhe, 1862.

Footnote 271:

These piers were built in the 12th century, taking the place of the columns of the original Basilican church of the 9th century, and the arches date from the same period (Cattaneo).

Footnote 272:

It is now called S. Martino in Cielo d’Oro, from its having been decided in the twelfth century that the other church in Classe possessed the true body of the saint to which both churches were dedicated.

Footnote 273:

A. F. von Quast, ‘Die Altchristlichen Bauwerke von Ravenna.’

Footnote 274:

The basilica Pudenziana at Rome has similar arcades externally.

Footnote 275:

The twenty-four marble columns are said to have been brought over from Constantinople, but they were probably obtained from Greek quarries.

Footnote 276:

[The narthex as shown in Woodcut No. 409 is of much later date than the church, and has been partially rebuilt on two or three occasions. It is now (1892) being taken down, and the removal of the central portion has uncovered the triple window which originally lighted the nave.—ED.]

Footnote 277:

“La basilica di San Marco in Venezia,” by Cattaneo, continued by Boito. Venezia, 1890.

Footnote 278:

Probably owing to its having been utilized to receive the relics of St. Mark, which were temporarily hidden there.

Footnote 279:

This church, built by Justinian, no longer exists, having been pulled down in 1464 by Mohammed II. to make way for his mosque. From the description of it, however, given by Procopius, the plan was similar to that adopted in St. Mark, being that of a Greek Cross with central and four other domes. Procopius speaks of the church being surrounded within by columns placed both above and below, probably referring to galleries similar to those in St. Sophia of Constantinople. In St. Mark’s the columns exist in one storey only, and the main wall is carried up at the back of the aisles to give increased size inside.

Footnote 280:

Originally, according to M. Cattaneo, his was the vestibule to the atrium from the south, but it is now blocked up by an altar.

Footnote 281:

[They are shown in the mosaic of the doorway of St. Alipe, executed at the end of the 13th century, as also the filling in of the great west window.—ED.]

Footnote 282:

‘Dalmatia, the Quarnero and Istria,’ by T. G. Jackson, M.A. Oxford, 1887.

Footnote 283:

In support of this statement he points out that twice during Christian times it had been found necessary to raise the floor of the church. The nave floor, which in 1857 was two steps below that of the aisles, was raised in 1881 to the same level; but two feet nine inches below the nave floor before it was raised there existed, according to Prof. Eitelberger, another mosaic pavement, which must have been the floor of the first basilica erected, and which was pulled down by Bishop Euphrasius in 543. This lower pavement extended also under the three chapels of the confessio, which suggests that these are part of the first basilica.

Footnote 284:

The same polygonal form is found in the apses of St. Agatha, St. Apollinare in Classe, St. Apollinare in Nuovo, St. Spirito, and St. Vitale, all in Ravenna, and St. Fosca, Torcello.

Footnote 285:

The apses of two churches, of the 4th and 6th century respectively, in the island of Paros, are similarly fitted with marble seats: in the 6th century church there are eight rows, so that the apse looks like a small amphitheatre.

Footnote 286:

That is on the supposition that the word kirk is derived from the Latin word “circus,” “circular,” as the French term it, “cirque.” My own conviction is that this is certainly the case. The word is only used by the Barbarians as applied to a form of buildings they derived from the Romans. Why the Germans should employ κυρίου οἶκος, when neither the Greeks nor the Latins used that name, is a mystery which those who insist on these very improbable names have as yet failed to explain.

Footnote 287:

The Tholos at Epidaurus seems to be an exception to this rule.

Footnote 288:

Isabelle, ‘Édifices Circulaires,’ plates 26 and 27.

Footnote 289:

M. Cattaneo states that it was built by Pope St. Simplice, 468-482.

Footnote 290:

Above the capitals are impost blocks or dosserets, the earliest known examples of that feature in Italy.

Footnote 291:

[The Vaults over the outer aisle of St. Stefano Rotondo were built with hollow pots, the remains of which can still be traced in the outer walls of the 2nd aisle.

Prof. Middleton points out also the existence of rings of earthen pots in the vault of the tomb of Sta. Helena (Woodcut No. 227), and also in the vaults of the Circus of Maxentius, on the Via Appia.—ED.]

Footnote 292:

In this building they now show a sarcophagus of ancient date, said to be that of Galla Placidia, daughter of Theodosius. She, however, was certainly buried at Ravenna; but it may be of her time, and in these ages it is impossible to distinguish between baptisteries and tombs.

Footnote 293:

Frederick Von Osten, ‘Bauwerke in der Lombardei.’ Darmstadt, 1852.

Footnote 294:

By an oversight of the engraver, the vault of the nave, which ought to be made hexapartite, is drawn as quadripartite. [The nave was so completely restored in the 14th century as to render doubtful the original existence of a vault.—ED.]

Footnote 295:

Étude de l’Architecture Lombarde,’ par F. de Dartein. Paris, 1878.

Footnote 296:

These are incorrectly shown on woodcut. The central pier is nearly 4 feet wide and carried a transverse rib of the same size and of two orders.

Footnote 297:

Ferrario, ‘Monumenti Sacri e Profani dell’ I. R. Basilica di S. Ambrogio,’ Milan, 1824.

Footnote 298:

“Quid dicamus columnarum junceam proceritatem? Moles illas sublimissimas quasi quibusdam erectis hastilibus contineri substantiæ qualitate concavis canalibus excavatas vel magis ipsas æstimes esse transfusas. Ceris judices factum quod metallis durissimis videas expolitum. Marmorum juncturas venas dicas esse genitales, ubi dum falluntur oculi laus probatur crevisse miraculis.” In the above, _metallum_ does not seem to mean metal as we now use the word, but any hard substance dug out of the ground. (Cassiodorus, Variorum, lib. vii. ch. 15.)

Footnote 299:

See vol. i. p. 372.

Footnote 300:

‘The Land of Moab,’ by Dr. Tristram (Murray, 1873), pp. 376 _et seqq._ [The small triangular marble panels referred to in Murano are of a very elementary character in their carving, and have scarcely the importance attached to them by Mr. Fergusson. Besides, the same wall decoration in brickwork is found in the apse of St. Fosca, Torcello (c. 1008), where, however, the triangular recesses are simply covered with stucco and painted; being closer to the eye in Murano, they filled the spaces with incised marble slabs: in other words, it seems more probable that the slabs were made for the triangular panels than the converse, which is suggested by Mr. Fergusson.—ED.]

Footnote 301:

The typical example of this class is the San Giorgio at Venice, though it is not by any means the one most like St. Pietro; many attempts were made before it became so essentially classical as this (see Woodcut No. 39, Vol. I. in the ‘History of Modern Architecture’).

Footnote 302:

From the boldness of the construction, M. Cattaneo is induced to place the erection of the building at the end of the 11th or beginning of the 12th century.

Footnote 303:

The four square towers of San Lorenzo, Milan, and the circular campanile by the side of the cathedral of Ravenna, are the earliest examples known, the latter dating from the commencement of the 5th century.

Footnote 304:

[The tower of St. Satiro at Milan (879 A.D.), is considered by Cattaneo to be the most ancient campanile known in which the wall surface is broken up with flat pilasters or vertical bands in relief, and divided into storeys by horizontal string courses, with ranges of small blind arches below, carried on corbels, and may be regarded as the prototype of the most characteristic Lombard towers.—ED.]

Footnote 305:

‘History of Medieval Art,’ by Dr. F. M. Reber, translated by J. T. Clarke. New York, 1887.

Footnote 306:

‘Dalmatia, the Quarnero and Istria,’ by T. G. Jackson, A.R.A. Oxford, 1887.

Footnote 307:

Schultz, ‘Denkmäler der Kunst der Mittelalters in Unter-Italien.’ Folio, 1860.

Footnote 308:

The polygonal form given to the apse externally shows the direct influence of Byzantine art.

Footnote 309:

The cornice projects 1 ft. 10 in., and consequently overhangs the base by 13 ft.

Footnote 310:

The present cathedral is only a portion, viz. the transept of a much vaster edifice which was never completed; but the beautiful unfinished south front and portions of the gigantic nave and aisles still exist on the western side of the present cathedral, and the drawings of it are preserved in the archives of the Duomo.

Footnote 311:

[Since this was written the façade has been completed to harmonize with the rest, but not in accordance with the original design, if we may judge by the painting in Sta. Maria Novella, which shows side gablets similar to those of the cathedral of Siena.—ED.]

Footnote 312:

If we may trust Wiebeking, the first two bays of the nave from the front were vaulted in 1588, but the work was suspended till 1647, and completed only in 1659. Yet no difference can be perceived in the details of the design.

Footnote 313:

The plan and section being taken from two different writers, there is a slight discrepancy between the scales. I believe the plan to be the more correct of the two, though I have no means of being quite certain on the point.

Footnote 314:

‘Dispareri d’Architettura.’

Footnote 315:

Within the last few years a façade has been added to Sta. Croce, but about which the less said the better. It is wretched in design.

Footnote 316:

Similar buildings at Bergamo, Brescia, and Monza are illustrated in Mr. Street’s beautiful work on the architecture of the North of Italy, from which the two last illustrations are borrowed.

Footnote 317:

In the Bodleian in Oxford is a MS. of the 14th century containing a view of the Piazzetta, engraved in Yule’s ‘Marco Polo,’ Introduction, p. xlviii., in which the outer wall of the building is shown resting on the inner wall of the arcade. This would suggest either that in Ziani’s building the upper wall was set back or that some subsequent changes were made in the two parts, of which, however, there is no record.

Footnote 318:

So called from its having been, according to Signor Boni (see Transactions R.I.B.A., vol. iii., new series, 1887), richly decorated with colour and gilding.

Footnote 319:

The same drawing shows that a calle or small street existed on the west, or left-hand side, as well as on the east, and the enriched work carved by Giovanni Bon, stonecutter (the architect of the Porta delle Carta of the Ducal Palace), was to extend along the whole front facing the Grand Canal and ten feet at each end down the two streets.

Footnote 320:

‘Architecture Moderne de la Sicile,’ fol. Paris, 1826-30.

Footnote 321:

‘Del Duomo di Monreale e di altre Chiese Siculo-Normane,’ fol. Palermo, 1838.

Footnote 322:

‘Normans in Sicily,’ 8vo. text, fol. plates, London, 1838.

Footnote 323:

## Part I. Bk. III. ch. 2.

Footnote 324:

For a complete description of the same, see ‘The Architectural History of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem,’ by Prof. Willis, 1849, the publications of the Palestine Exploration Fund, and the ‘Holy Places of Jerusalem,’ by Prof. Hayter Lewis.

Footnote 325:

Eusebius, ‘Vita Constantini,’ lib. iii. ch. xxviii.

Footnote 326:

Sæwulf, ‘Peregrinatio,’ &c. (A.D. 1102-3), p. 83.

Footnote 327:

A section of the church is given in Prof. Willis’s work compiled

## partly from Bernardino’s work (‘Trattato delle Piante al Imagini de

sacri Edifizi di Terra Sancta,’ 1620), corrected by dimension taken by Mr. J. J. Scoles and partly from models in the British Museum and elsewhere.

Footnote 328:

This plan has been worked out from the ordnance survey made in 1864-65 by Sir Ch. Wilson and from Professor Willis’s plan as published in his work.

Footnote 329:

Quaresimus, ‘Elucidatio,’ ii. p. 386.

Footnote 330:

All these are carefully described and delineated by Count de Vogüé, in his beautiful work entitled, ‘Les Églises de la Terre Sainte,’ Paris, 1860.

Footnote 331:

A small chart of the same sort has been published by M. de Caumont,[332] which, though an improvement, still leaves much to be desired; but until every church is examined, and every typical specimen at least published, it is impossible to mark out more than the general features of the chart. Imperfect, however, as they are in this one, they are still more numerous and more detailed than it will be easy for us to follow and to trace out in the limited space of this work.

Footnote 332:

‘Abécédaire d’Architecture,’ p. 174.

Footnote 333:

The use of this term is a little awkward, at first from its having another meaning in English; it has, however, been long used by English etymologists to distinguish the Romance languages, such as Italian, Spanish, and French, from those of Teutonic origin, and is here used in precisely the same sense as applied to architecture—to those styles derived from the Roman, but one degree more removed from it than the early phase of the Romanesque.

Footnote 334:

There seems to be some doubt about the age of the pointed arches in the mosque of Amrû; the earliest authenticated arches of that form are found in the Nilometer in the island of Roda which is fixed by Mr. Lane as 861 A.D., eighteen years older than that of Tulûn.—ED.

Footnote 335:

For the detail of the argument I must refer the reader to a paper read by me to the Institute of British Architects on June 18th, 1849, and published in the ‘Builder,’ and other papers of the time. See also a paper read in the same place in the following month (July, 1849), by Sir Gardner Wilkinson.

Footnote 336:

The Scotch and Irish Celts seem to have had a conception of this truth, and in both these countries we find some bold attempts at true stone roofs: the influence, however, of the Gothic races overpowered them, and the mixed roof became universal.

Footnote 337:

Laborde, ‘Monuments de la France,’ vol. i. p. 92, plates cxv. and cxvi.

Footnote 338:

[A valuable and well-illustrated work, entitled ‘The Architecture of Provence and the Riviera, Edinburgh, 1888,’ by Mr. David MacGibbon, has since added to our knowledge in this respect. Mr. MacGibbon accepts the date of 12th century for the Church of St. Paul-Trois-Châteaux, and attributes its Roman character to ancient work in the provinces.—ED.]

Footnote 339:

Wood’s ‘Letters of an Architect,’ vol. i. p. 163.

Footnote 340:

These are all illustrated more or less completely by Renouvier, ‘Monuments de Bas Languedoc.’ Montpellier, 1840.

Footnote 341:

M. Verneilh, in his work “Architecture Byzantine en France,” 4to, Paris, 1851, based his arguments chiefly on the supposition that it was copied from St. Mark’s, Venice. The discoveries to which we have already referred (p. 530, vol. I.) prove that the latter was not built till 1063-71, so that it follows that a much later date must be given to St. Front, unless the latter be, like St. Mark’s, a copy of the church of the Apostles at Constantinople. Against this supposition there remains the fact that the churches of St. Mark, Venice, and St. Front, Périgueux, are identical in their dimensions if we replace Italian feet by French feet. There is also a record quoted by Mr. Gailhabaud that the original church of St. Front was destroyed by fire in 1120; but the existing church is entirely built in incombustible material, and therefore it would seem to be more probable that a much later date, viz. 1120-1140, must be given to it. It should however be taken into account that St. Front is generally accepted as the prototype of all the domed churches in France, so that if any of its successors could be proved to have an earlier date our argument would fall to the ground. So far as the architectural details of the church are concerned they have more the character of the 12th than of the 11th century, and the introduction of the pointed arch at so early a date seems improbable, except so far as the pointed barrel vault is concerned, the necessity for which was pointed out on page 46.

Footnote 342:

This building is well illustrated in Turner’s ‘Domestic Architecture.’

Footnote 343:

See a paper on this church by Mr. Street, in 1861, read to the Institute of British Architects. (R. I. B. A. Transactions, 1860-61.)

Footnote 344:

‘Histoire Générale de Bourgogne,’ 4 vols. fol., Dijon, 1739; p. 81.

Footnote 345:

“Style Latin” is the name generally adopted for this style by the French architects.

Footnote 346:

From a paper by Mr. Parker on this subject, read to the Institute of British Architects.

Footnote 347:

This arrangement is known by the name of _hexapartite_, or _sexapartite_, because the compartment of the vault having been divided into four by the great diagonal arches crossing one another in the centre (which was the _quadripartite_ arrangement), two of the four quarters were again divided by the arch thrown across from one intermediate pillar to the other, thus making six divisions in all, though no longer all of equal dimensions, as in the quadripartite method. Both these arrangements are shown in plan on Woodcut No. 612.

Footnote 348:

The Church of St. Rémi at Rheims ought perhaps to be treated as an exception to this assertion: it has, however, been so much altered in more modern times as almost to have lost its original character. It nevertheless retains the outlines of a vast and noble basilica of the early part of the 11th century, presenting considerable points of similarity to those of Burgundy.

Footnote 349:

It is in the vaulting of the choir aisle of St. Denis that we find the earliest example of the new value of the pointed arch rib: four independent ribs rise to the centre of the aisle, it being no longer necessary to place the opposite ribs in the same plane. M. Louis Gonse in his ‘L’Art Gothique,’ however, points out one or two earlier examples such as the churches of Morienval and Bellefontaine, both in the Oise Department; the latter only is dated—1125; but no illustrations of the vault are given. The former is so crude in its design that it is probably earlier, and it is in fact evident from the perfection shown in St. Denis that many previous experiments must have been made, examples of which it would be interesting to trace.—ED.

Footnote 350:

These generally consisted of strong iron bars, wrought into patterns in accordance with the design painted on the glass.

Footnote 351:

Royal Academy lectures, delivered in 1881, by G. E. Street, R.A., Professor of Architecture.

Footnote 352:

It should be noted that the last bay of the nave and the first bay of the choir are wider than any of the other bays, and this gives an increased dimension to the aisles of north and south transepts, which contributes in no slight degree to the effect of vastness given to this part of the church.—ED.

Footnote 353:

The height of the old spire is 342 ft. 6 in. with the cross; of the new, 371 ft.

Footnote 354:

The choir of Beauvais is considered to be one of the four wonders of mediæval France, the others being the south spire of Chartres, the porch of Rheims and the nave of Amiens.

Footnote 355:

‘Compte Rendu des Travaux de la Commission des Monuments,’ &c.: Rapport présenté au Préfet de la Gironde, 1848 et seq.

Footnote 356:

A plan of the Sainte Chapelle will be found further on (page 395) when comparing it with St. Stephen’s Chapel, Westminster.

Footnote 357:

Mr. Beresford Hope, in his ‘English Cathedrals of the XIXth Century,’ contends that this church was only commenced in 1419; and also maintains that the west front was completed by an English architect named Patrick in 1429. If this were so, we must abandon all our chronology founded on style. It is all a mistake if the east end is not a century earlier. I am, however, unwilling to go to school again, on the faith of a little pamphlet published by a French curé in a remote village.

Footnote 358:

The earlier form is found retained at Noyon, at Paris, and in most of the churches of the 12th century; but in the first years of the 13th it gave place to the second, and was not afterwards revived.

Footnote 359:

See Introduction, page 29, Woodcut No. 4.

Footnote 360:

The French antiquaries employ this word as if it signified a pointed arch, whence they designate the style itself as _ogival_. There is no doubt, however, that the word has nothing to do with the form of the arch or the ogee, but is the name of a rib common to the round-arched as well as to the pointed style.

Footnote 361:

See Woodcuts Nos. 621, 629, 641, &c.

Footnote 362:

This was taken down in 1856 to relieve the piers of the tower which were being crushed owing to their defective construction. After the rebuilding of the piers in 1856-59, a poorly designed Gothic lantern was substituted.—ED.

Footnote 363:

M. Viollet le Duc’s ‘Dictionnaire d’Architecture’ contains several hundred examples of these minor architectural details of French Mediæval architecture. All are there drawn with skill, and engraved with exquisite taste. They form a wonderful illustration of the exuberance of fancy and fertility of invention of the French architects in those days. The limits of this work do not admit of more than a mere passing allusion to this most fascinating subject.

Footnote 364:

Viollet le Duc, in his ‘Architecture Militaire,’ p. 96, gives a section of the Donjon at Coucy, which, however, by no means explains how the interior was lighted, nor does it accord with what I believe I saw there.

Footnote 365:

A beautiful drawing of this façade to a very large scale still exists in the town-hall of the city, as well as a model in stone, from which the intended effect may be seen.

Footnote 366:

A large work was commenced a few years ago on the church at Bois le Duc; but after the first numbers it seems to have been discontinued, and has not been since heard of—in this country at least. [Since this was written a fine work in 8 vols., entitled ‘Documents classés de l’art dans les Pays-Bas du x^{me} au xviii^{me} Siècle,’ and illustrated with ink photos, has been compiled by M. Van Ysendyck; and although the greater number of the plates represent Renaissance work, some of the finest flamboyant Gothic buildings, both in Belgium and Holland, are there reproduced.—ED.]

Footnote 367:

See two papers on this subject in ‘Jahrbuch der Central Commission zur Erhaltung der Baudenkmale,’ vol. ii. p. 65, and vol. iii. p. 149.

Footnote 368:

The work of F. Östen on the architecture of Lombardy, and that of Geier and Görtz on the style in the Rhine country, combined with the works of Boisserée, have already furnished considerable materials for such a history. Both these first-named works were left incomplete, the former from the death of the author, the latter owing to the late troubles of the country.

Footnote 369:

See vol. i. p. 513.

Footnote 370:

All the particulars regarding this church are taken from Hübsch, ‘Altchristliche Bauwerke,’ pp. 109, xlix. Dohme ascribes the church to the 11th century, and gives the length as 283 ft.

Footnote 371:

That shown in the woodcut is a suggestion of Dr. Hübsch.

Footnote 372:

If there are any remains of the monastic buildings at Reichenau it is extremely desirable that they should be examined, in order to see how far they accord with the St. Gall plan. What if it should turn out to be a perfected plan of Reichenau sent after its completion by the abbot Heiton to his friend Gospertus?

Footnote 373:

‘Histoire de l’Architecture Sacrée du 4^{me} au 10^{me} Siècle dans les Évêchés de Genève, Lausanne, et Sion,’ 1853.

Footnote 374:

The earliest example is found in the Baptistery at Ravenna, 396 A.D.

Footnote 375:

Kallenbach, (‘Deutsche Baukunst,’) states that it was built by Bishop Garibald, 740-752. It is the chapel on the north side of cloisters of Cathedral (see ‘King’s Study Book,’ vol ii. p. 81).

Footnote 376:

At Aquileja, at the upper end of the Adriatic Gulf, Poppo, the archbishop, between the years 1019-1042, erected a building almost identical with this in every respect between the old basilica and the baptistery, so as to make a double-apse church out of the old Lombard arrangement. The similarity of the two buildings may probably bring down the date of that at Ratisbon to the 10th century.

Footnote 377:

‘Baukunst des Mittelalters in Sachsen.’

Footnote 378:

The church was burnt in 937, and is said to have had two choirs (added _c._ 816 by Abbot Engil), a western transept, and eleven bays to the nave.

Footnote 379:

It is by no means clear that there were not six pillars originally separating the nave from the aisles instead of the four now built into the piers of the Gothic church.

Footnote 380:

Taken from R. Dohme, ‘Geschichte der Deutschen Baukunst.’ Berlin, 1887.

Footnote 381:

Möller, ‘Deutsche Baukunst,’ vol. i. plate vi.

Footnote 382:

This has been entirely rebuilt, with a modern front.—ED.

Footnote 383:

For a description of this abbey see a paper read by Mr. Charles Fowler (R. I. B. A. Transactions, 1882-83).

Footnote 384:

[Much has been said with regard to the use of double churches and chapels in Germany. In the cases of the chapels at Eger, Goslar, Nuremberg, Lohra, Landsberg, Freiburg on the Unstrutt, Coburg, Steinfurt, and Vianden, it is apparent, as they were in connection with a castle or palace, that the Emperor (or Prince) with his retinue could enter the upper chapel by a connecting gallery from the palace. But Schwartz Rheindorf is so much larger than any other double church or chapel known, that it would seem probable the object of the upper church was to provide a place of worship for the inhabitants in the case of floods, which in early times must have taken place yearly: admission being obtained through a door on N. side, the sill of which is about 8 ft. from ground, and communicates with a stair-case leading to upper church.—ED.]

Footnote 385:

The building is as yet practically unedited, notwithstanding its importance in the history of architecture. I have myself examined this edifice, but in too hurried a manner to enable me to supply the deficiency. I speak, therefore, on the subject with diffidence.

Footnote 386:

Taken from Schayes’ ‘Histoire de l’Architecture en Belgique,’ vol. ii. p. 18, taken by him, I believe, from Lassaulx.

Footnote 387:

See paper by Mr. Petit in the ‘Archæological Journal,’ vol. xviii. p. 110.

Footnote 388:

Boisserée, ‘Nieder Rhein,’ p. 36.

Footnote 389:

There is a slight error in the scale of this plan, the artist in reducing it having used the scale of French instead of English feet. It ought to be 1-16th larger.

Footnote 390:

The best _résumé_ of the arguments on this question will be found in the controversy carried on by F. de Verneilh, the Baron de Rosier, and M. Boisserée, in Didron’s ‘Annales Archéologiques,’ vol. vii. _et seq._

Footnote 391:

Within the last few years also the cathedral has been isolated on all sides, so that it has now the appearance of an overgrown monster—ED.

Footnote 392:

From the ‘Jahrbuch der Central Commission zur Erhaltung der Baudenkmale,’ vol. ii. p. 37.

Footnote 393:

See ‘Mittelalterliche Kunstdenkmale Östereichs,’ vol. i. p. 171.

Footnote 394:

The façade designed for the cathedral at Louvain (mentioned p. 196) was identical with this group of spires in arrangement, though on a much larger scale, and infinitely richer in ornament.

Footnote 395:

Mr. Hodder Westropp was, I believe, the first to suggest this identity of the Round Towers with these “Fanals,” or Lanternes des Mortes. It seems to be the most plausible suggestion yet made, though far from meeting the whole difficulty.

Footnote 396:

‘Denkmäler der Baukunst in Ermeland.’ Berlin.

Footnote 397:

Mr. Tavenor Perry, in his paper on the ‘Mediæval Architecture in Sweden’ (R.I.B.A. Transactions, vol. vii. new series, 1891), points out that the architecture of the choir is of much earlier date than Étienne de Bonnueill’s advent, that the foundation was laid in 1258, and already in 1273 was well advanced. He takes objection also to the assumed French origin of the plan, which is more like German work. The plan bears some resemblance to the chevet of Westminster Abbey, the lady-chapel of which, pulled down by Henry VII., was commenced in 1220 by Henry III. There are only five chapels, as in Westminster Abbey, and they are of greater width than any French examples. Étienne’s work was probably confined to the three great portals, though Mr. Perry believes that he did much to improve the design, and probably helped to “found a new school of sculptors.”—ED.

Footnote 398:

‘The Priory of St. Mary Overie, Southwark.’ F. T. Dollman, London, 1881.

Footnote 399:

These churches are nearly all brick: those of Lund and Linköping are in stone.

Footnote 400:

Both in design and purpose this circular part of Trondhjem Cathedral is an exact counterpart of Becket’s Crown at Canterbury. That was erected as a baptistery and burial-place for the archbishops, and seems to have been afterwards incorporated in the cathedral, _more Francorum_.

Footnote 401:

The octagonal dome on the east end has been lately restored, but not improved.—ED.

Footnote 402:

The plan and elevation are taken from a description of the church by Steen Friis, published at Copenhagen, 1851. In both cuts the modern additions are omitted.

Footnote 403:

It has lately been well restored (1881).—ED.

Footnote 404:

Gothland was Christianized by St. Olaf in 1028; the first churches, in wood, were soon burnt down, and the earliest stone examples now known are those of Akebäch and Ala, which date from 1149.

Footnote 405:

An elevation and section of the church by Mr. Haig is given in the R. I. B. A. Transactions, new series, vol. ii.

Footnote 406:

Two examples are pointed out by Mr. Carpenter (R.I.B.A. Transactions, new series, vol. ii. 1886) as existing in England, viz.: Hannington Church, Northamptonshire, and Caythorpe Church, Lincolnshire.

Footnote 407:

‘One Year in Sweden,’ Murray, 1862.

Footnote 408:

‘The Ecclesiology of Gothland and the Churches of Bornholm,’ by Major Alfred Heales, F.S.A., 1889.

Footnote 409:

Two in Zealand—Storehedinge and Biernede; one in Funen—Horne, at Faaborg; one in Jutland—Thorsager; and four in Bornholm—Oester Larsker, Nykers, Ols, and Ny. (Vol. ii. p. 49.)

Footnote 410:

Documentary evidence now establishes the fact that the nave of Waltham Abbey was Harold’s original work, though subsequently enriched by carving.

Footnote 411:

This has been restored, as far as the materials admit, by Professor Willis, in his ‘Architectural History of Canterbury Cathedral,’ published in 1845.

Footnote 412:

“Qui ecclesiam in orientali parte majoris ecclesiæ eidem pene contiguam in honore Beati Johannis Baptistæ fabricavit; ut et Baptisteria et examinationes Judiciorum, &c.—et Archiepiscoporum corpora in eâ sepelirentur.”—‘Anglia Sacra,’ vol. ii. p. 75.

Footnote 413:

The internal dimensions of Durham Cathedral are 413·10 feet, exclusive of the Galilee. The nave is 81 feet wide, the choir, 77·2. (Billings.)

Footnote 414:

The proper effect of this part of Ely Cathedral has been seriously marred by the erection of the new reredos. In itself a fair specimen of modern Gothic, it is placed so far from the choir as to lose its proper effect. It is painfully dwarfed by the large plain area in front of it. But worse than this, it cuts up and destroys the most beautiful presbytery in England after the Angel Choir at Lincoln. The architects of Walsingham’s time glazed two compartments of the triforium to throw light upon the principal object in the choir, which was intended to stand two bays farther forward. It would have been well if the 19th-century restorers had taken the hint.

Footnote 415:

The foundations of the Lady Chapel of Henry III. were found a few years ago almost at the extreme east end of Henry VII.’s Chapel, so that it can scarcely be said to have formed part of a circlet.

Footnote 416:

It should be remembered, however, that the first addition, made in 1220, was the original Lady Chapel; when Henry III. determined to rebuild the church and to adopt the plan of the French chevet, the width of the other chapels would seem to have been governed by that of the Lady Chapel. This, however, was 30 ft. wide—much greater than any French chapel. To complete the ring, therefore, he was obliged to carry them further west, so that the five chapels occupy a space equal in comparison to the seven chapels of Amiens, where the width of each is only 25 ft. A comparison of the two chevets will show how ingenious was the English arrangement; and as the vaulting is essentially English in its setting out and in its design, it is only the idea of the plan which was borrowed. On this subject Mr. Street remarks, p. 426 (‘Lectures on English Architecture,’ Memoir of G. E. Street, R.A., by A. E. Street, M.A. 1883), “Here the evidence of the building itself seems to be conclusive that the king had resolved to build a church after the model of the great French churches, but employed an English architect to design it, and he made his plan on lines which are distinct and different from those of any French church.”

Footnote 417:

The roofs here alluded to must not be confounded with the barn-like roofs of remote village churches which modern architects are so fond of copying, but such roofs as that of St. Stephen’s Chapel, and many of those of the Lancastrian era.

Footnote 418:

This, and a considerable number of the woodcuts in this chapter, are borrowed from the plates of the beautiful series of ‘Handbooks of the English Cathedrals,’ published by Mr. Murray. In order to prevent needless repetition, they are marked Cath. Hb.

Footnote 419:

This has already been explained in the chapters on French architecture, especially at pages 114 and 169.

Footnote 420:

In Woodcut No. 822 the right-hand bay is that of the nave generally, the left-hand bay is adapted to the greater width of the aisle of the transept, and is less pleasingly proportioned in consequence. Woodcuts Nos. 822 and 823 are drawn to the scale of 25 feet to 1 inch, or double that usually employed for elevations in this work.

Footnote 421:

It is not necessary to repeat here what was said on the subject in speaking of French tracery, p. 164, to which the reader is referred.

Footnote 422:

This was not so much the case in Paris and Rouen, where the houses were carried up to a much greater height than in other towns.—ED.

Footnote 423:

A splendid chance of trying the effect of this occurred a few years ago, when it was determined to restore the lantern, as a memorial to Dr. Peacock. In a fit of purism, only the ugly temporary arrangement was made new. It looked venerable before the recent repairs; now that it is quite new again, it is most unpleasing.

Footnote 424:

The towers of Lincoln were surmounted by three spires, removed about 100 years ago.

Footnote 425:

The central octagon of the Parliament Houses is 65 ft. in diameter, and is the best specimen of a modern Gothic dome which has been attempted.

Footnote 426:

A chapel, properly speaking, is a hall designed for worship, without any separation between classes. A church has a chancel for the clergy, a nave for the laity. A cathedral has these and attached chapels and numerous adjuncts which do not properly belong to either of the other two.

Footnote 427:

Few things of its class are more to be regretted than the destruction of this beautiful relic in rebuilding the Parliament Houses. It would have been cheaper to restore it, and infinitely more beautiful when restored than the present gallery which takes its place. It is sad, too, to think that nothing has been done to reproduce its beauties. When the colleges of Exeter at Oxford, or St. John’s, Cambridge, were rebuilding their chapels, it would have been infinitely better to reproduce this exquisite specimen of English art than the models of French chapels which have been adopted.

The work on St. Stephen’s Chapel, published for the Woods and Forests by Mr. Mackenzie, is rendered useless by the addition of an upper storey which never existed.

Footnote 428:

The Sainte Chapelle was commenced 1244, and finished 1248. The works of St. Stephen’s were commenced apparently 1292, but were not finished till 1348.

Footnote 429:

_Vide ante_, p. 264, and p. 328.

Footnote 430:

Mr. Scott produced a free copy of one of them as the Oxford Martyrs’ Memorial, and Edward Barry another as a restoration of Charing Cross. Both are very beautiful objects, but neither of them exhausts the subject.

Footnote 431:

It is not pretended that this Table is quite correct in all details, but it is sufficiently so to present at a glance, a comparative view of the fourteen principal churches of England, and to show at least their relative dimensions.

Footnote 432:

The illustrations in this chapter being taken from the beautiful work by R. W. Billings, entitled ‘The Baronial and Ecclesiastical Antiquities of Scotland,’ the source of each will not be specified, except when it forms an exception to this rule. Mr. Billings’ work is certainly the most correct and beautiful that has yet appeared on the subject, and if completed with the necessary plans and architectural details, would be unrivalled as a monograph of an architectural province.

Footnote 433:

Britton’s ‘Architectural Antiquities,’ vol. xiv. p. 81.

Footnote 434:

For the drawings and information regarding Bothwell Church, I am indebted to Mr. John Honeyman, jun., architect, of Glasgow.

Footnote 435:

The same class of tracery is found in the Lamberti Kirche at Münster, and generally in Westphalia; some specimens being almost absolutely identical with the Scotch examples.

Footnote 436:

The woodcuts in this chapter are, with one or two exceptions, borrowed from Wilkinson’s ‘Ancient Architecture and Geology of Ireland.’

Footnote 437:

No buildings with architectural details in them are known prior to 1000 A.D.

Footnote 438:

Seven churches are also found at Scattery and Innis Caltra in Clare, Tory Island, Donegal, Rattoo in Kerry, Inchclorin, Longford, and Arranmore in Galway.

Footnote 439:

The Rev. Professor Stokes, in a paper communicated to the Royal Society of Antiquaries in Ireland, and published in their Journal, 1891, states: “The connexion with Egypt of the Celtic Church of these Western Islands of Britain, as well as of Ireland, cannot now be controverted.” He points out that the object of the ancient monks of the 5th and 6th centuries was “not to draw large assemblies, but to get as far away from them as possible; and assuredly they selected a lonely if not a weird spot when they selected the Skelligs.” The Professor gives a long list of places where specimens of these island monasteries can be found; the best example still existing being that of Incheleraun in Lough Ree, and commonly called Quaker Island, some ten miles above Athlone, where six or seven tiny churches just like those of Clonmacnoise (Woodcut No. 904) or Glendalough (Woodcut No. 902) still perpetuate the name of St. Dermot or St. Diarmaid, the teacher of St. Kieran, and a Celtic saint and doctor who lived just after the days of St. Patrick and St. Bridget. The monastic cells at the Skelligs, which are known as beehive huts, are sometimes square and sometimes circular in plan, in both cases covered with domical roofs of stone laid in horizontal courses similar to the Treasury of Atreus (Woodcut No. 124). In some cases those chambers are so limited in height and width that it is possible neither to stand upright nor lie down in them with ease. These beehive huts are apparently the prototypes of the oratories which, though rectangular in plan, are, like the Oratory of Gallerus (Woodcut No. 917) and St. Kevin’s Kitchen, Glendalough (Woodcut No. 902), covered with roofs of stone all laid in horizontal courses.—ED.

Footnote 440:

‘The Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland anterior to the Anglo-Norman Invasion.’ Dublin, 1845.

Footnote 441:

See Viollet le Duc, ‘Dictionnaire d’Architecture,’ _sub_ “_fanal_.”

Footnote 442:

One of the towers in the East that bears most directly on the history of these Irish towers is that discovered by Dr. Tristram near Um Rasas. It is described and figured at page 145 in his work on the ‘Land of Moab;’ but unfortunately the woodcut is taken from the side that does not represent the doorway with the cross over it so like that at Antrim (Woodcut No. 907), and elsewhere. Like most of the Irish examples, it is situated at about 10 ft. from the ground. There is no other opening to the tower, except one on each face at the top. It has also the peculiarity that it stands free but close to a small cell or chapel, as is the case with almost all the Irish towers. The one point in which it differs from the Irish examples is that its plan is square instead of being circular. This does not seem so important as it at first sight may appear, seeing how many circular minarets were afterwards erected in the East, which must have had a model somewhere. Practically, therefore, this Moabite tower may be described, _Hibernicè_, as a square Irish round tower.

[Illustration: 903. Doorway in Tower at Um Rasas. (From a Photograph.)]

Footnote 443:

Compare this with the contemporary tower at Ghazni, in the chapters on Saracenic Architecture in India in vol. iii.

Footnote 444:

Numerous examples of Byzantine interlaced work of all periods will be found in Cattaneo’s work ‘On the Influence of Byzantine Art in Italy from the 5th to the 11th centuries.’

Footnote 445:

So much of the information regarding Spanish architecture which is contained in the following pages, is derived from Mr. Street’s beautiful work, entitled ‘Gothic Architecture in Spain,’ published in 1865, that it has not been thought necessary to refer specially to that work in the text. With one or two exceptions, all the plans are reduced from those in Mr. Street’s book, and many of the woodcuts are also his. If any one will take the trouble of comparing the very meagre account of Spanish architecture contained in the ‘Handbook,’ with what is said in this work, they will at once perceive my obligations to Mr. Street. His work is a model of its class, and has quite revolutionised our knowledge of the subject.

Footnote 446:

Parcerisa, ‘Recuerdos y Bellezas de España,’ Asturias, p. 78.

Footnote 447:

‘Monumentos Arquitectonicos.’

Footnote 448:

‘Monumentos Arquitectonicos.’

Footnote 449:

Ibid.

Footnote 450:

These external porticoes would be admirably adapted for imitation in the climate of India.

Footnote 451:

The Spanish arrangement has recently been adopted in Westminster Abbey, more by accident than design; with an effect as disastrous as anything in Spain, and apparently as little felt. In monastic churches the choir is always in a gallery above the west doorway.

Footnote 452:

The Church of St. Eustache at Paris was commenced as late as 1532, and, although its plan is almost as Gothic as those of the Spanish examples, the details of the French church are far more essentially Renaissance throughout.

Footnote 453:

The room called Paranimfo in the University of Alcala (see Woodcut No. 89, History of Modern Architecture, vol. i.) is of precisely similar design to this, only carried out with Renaissance instead of Moorish detail.

Footnote 454:

An engraving of this tower is given in Street’s ‘Gothic Architecture in Spain,’ page 225, accompanied with a very complete enumeration of all the examples of the style to be found in Toledo.

Footnote 455:

Another example exists at Palma, in the island of Majorca, in which there are no capitals to the columns, the ribs of the vault dying into the shaft.

Footnote 456:

These were destroyed by a fire which occurred between thirty and forty years ago.

Footnote 457:

Abulfeda, ed. Reiske, vol. i. p. 32.

Footnote 458:

‘The History of Jerusalem.’ Besant and Palmer, 1888.

Footnote 459:

‘The Holy Places of Jerusalem,’ by T. Hayter Lewis, F.S.A. Murray, 1889.

Footnote 460:

‘Description of Syria,’ by Mukaddasi. Translated and annotated by George le Strange for the Palestine Pilgrims’ Society. London, 1886.

Footnote 461:

Mejr ed-Deen. ‘Fundgruben des Orients.’

Footnote 462:

Transactions of the Royal Institution of British Architects, 1878-79.

Footnote 463:

Ante, p. 228, vol. i.

Footnote 464:

I state these dimensions very doubtfully, the ground outside the present mosque never having been carefully surveyed by any one competent to restore the original plan.

Footnote 465:

‘History of Jerusalem,’ translated by the Rev. M. Reynolds, p. 409 _et seqq._

Footnote 466:

Translated by Jaubert, tom. i. p. 303. The particulars of the description in the text are taken from M. Girault de Prangey ‘Monuments Arabes,’ compared with M. Coste’s ‘Edifices de Caire.’

Footnote 467:

It should be noted that all these arcades run in the direction of the Kibleh or Mecca wall, and the same principle is observed at Kerouan, Cordoba, and other mosques built entirely for Mahomedan worship.

Footnote 468:

M. Coste makes all these arches pointed. M. de Prangey states that they are all circular; the truth being that they are partly one,

## partly the other.

Footnote 469:

Since then the arches have been built up, and it was for a time converted into a hospital. This now (1892) is under the care of the Commissioner for the preservation of ancient monuments, but is too far ruined to be long preserved.

Footnote 470:

See Coste’s ‘Edifices de Caire,’ p. 32, quoting from Makrisi.

Footnote 471:

‘The Ancient Coptic Churches,’ by A. J. Butler, Oxford, 1884.

Footnote 472:

The marble wall decoration and the mosaics which are found in later mosques are of different design and execution from that found in Byzantine buildings; in fact as Mr. Butler remarks: “this form of art was borrowed by the Muslim builders, or rather was lent by the Coptic architects and builders, whom the Muslims employed for the construction of their mosques.” “Although the Saracens in Syria borrowed the art from Byzantium and used vitreous enamels for the decoration of their mosque walls, as well as for inlaying jewelry and steel armour on a smaller scale, yet the Mahomedans of Egypt never adopted any but the native or Coptic marble mosaic, partly because its unpictorial character suited their taste, and partly because they found, ready made, both art and artists—artists whose names have perished, but whose skill is still recorded in work of unexampled splendour which adorns the great Mosques of Cairo.”

Footnote 473:

The mosque cathedrals of Cordoba and Seville and the contemporary Arabic buildings. Transactions, R.I.B.A., 1882-83.

Footnote 474:

A view of it will be found in vol. ii. ‘History of the Modern Style of Architecture,’ 1891, p. 314.

Footnote 475:

To get it within the page, the scale of the plan is reduced to 200 French, or 212 English ft. to 1 in.

Footnote 476:

When the great national work, entitled ‘Monumentos Arquitectonicos d’España,’ is complete, this reproach will be removed, but that certainly will not be the case for ten or twelve years to come, if it ever does attain completion. The scale is too large, and the total want of principle on which it is carried out renders it useless till it is further advanced. Twenty-three numbers are published, but not one important building is complete, and, excepting a plan of Toledo, not one of the larger buildings is even attempted—Cosas d’España.

The above note was written twenty-five years ago and is true now, except that the twenty-three must be now eighty-nine, where it stopped nine years ago.

Footnote 477:

Alcazar = el-Kasr, “the Castle.”

Footnote 478:

A perfect copy of this court was reproduced by Mr. Owen Jones at the Crystal Palace in 1854. Except being slightly curtailed in plan, every detail and every dimension is identical with the original.

Footnote 479:

Nothing need be said here of La Cuba and La Ziza, and other buildings in Sicily, which, though usually ascribed to the Saracens, are now ascertained to have been built by the Normans after their conquest of the island in the 11th century. They are Saracenic in style, it is true, and were probably erected by Moslem artists, but so were many churches and chapels in Spain, as mentioned above; and I am not aware of any building now extant there which can be safely ascribed to the time when the island was held by the Moslems, or was then erected by them for their own purposes. Till that is ascertained, Sicily of course does not come within the part of our subject which we are now considering.

Footnote 480:

Plate lxxxii.

Footnote 481:

For the plan and section of this mosque I was indebted to the kindness of my friend, the late M. C. Texier, who placed his MS. plans at my disposal for the purpose of being engraved for this work.

Footnote 482:

For the plan of this building I am indebted to the unpublished drawings of the late M. C. Texier.

Footnote 483:

The steps by which the transformation may have been arrived at, passing through the traditional method of constructing vaults in plaster, which is still practised in Persia, were suggested in an article contributed to the Proceedings of the R. I. B. A., 1888, vol. iv., new series.

Footnote 484:

Both the plan and view are taken from Baron Texier’s ‘Arménie et la Perse,’ which gives also several coloured plates of the mosaic decorations, from which their beauty of detail may be judged, though not the effect of the whole.

Footnote 485:

The earliest attempt in this direction that I am acquainted with is the great portal of the palace at Mashita (Woodcut No. 268).

Footnote 486:

Texier, from whose work the illustrations are taken, ascribes the building to another Khodabendah of the Sufi dynasty, A.D. 1577-85. Our knowledge, however, of the style is sufficient to show that the monument must be 200 or 300 years older than that king; and besides, the Sufis, not being Tartars, would not build tombs anywhere, much less in Sultanieh, where they never resided.

Footnote 487:

‘Travels,’ vol. i. p. 277.

Footnote 488:

Ker Porter’s ‘Travels,’ vol. i. p. 432 _et seq._ I cannot help suspecting that there is some mistake about these dimensions—they seem excessive. The Piazza of St. Mark’s at Venice, which resembles it more than any other area, is only 560 ft. long, with a mean breadth of about 250 ft. Probably 1500 feet by 500.

Footnote 489:

‘Views of monuments in Central America, Chiapas, and Yucatan.’ 25 plates, folio. London, 1844.

Footnote 490:

‘Incidents of Travel in Central America and Yucatan,’ by J. L. Stephens. 1st and 2nd series, 4 vols. 8vo. Murray, 1841, 1843.

Footnote 491:

The evidence collected by the Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg, ‘Voyage de Tehuantepec,’ seems, if it can be depended upon, to confirm this idea.

Footnote 492:

Ausland, 1845, Nos. 165, 168.

Footnote 493:

D’Eichthal, ‘Revue Archæologique,’ vol. x. 1864, p. 188, and following numbers.

Footnote 494:

Sir Stamford Raffles’s ‘History of Java,’ vol. ii. p. 51.

Footnote 495:

‘Anahuac,’ by Edward B. Tylor, 1861; pp. 188, 194.

Footnote 496:

The plate published by Humboldt, representing one of the bas-reliefs, is so incorrect as to be absolutely worthless.

Footnote 497:

There is a celebrated bas-relief on the back wall of a small temple at Palenque, representing a man offering a child to an emblem very like a Christian cross. It is represented in the first series of the ‘Incidents of Travel,’ vol. ii. p. 344. None of the sculptures have given rise to such various interpretations; but nothing would surprise me less than if it turned out to be a native mode of representing a Christian baptism, and was therefore subsequent to the conquest.

Footnote 498:

Since the first edition of this work was published, a folio work has appeared in Paris, entitled ‘Les Ruines de Palenque,’ illustrated by plates, made under the superintendence of M. de Waldeck, with text by the Abbé Brasseur de Bourbourg. The text is certainly not to be trusted. The plates add little to what we learn from Catherwood’s drawings, and I do not feel sure how far that little is to be depended upon.

In so far as they go they confirm the idea of the famous cross bas-relief being of Christian origin.

Footnote 499:

It is only fair to state that Mr. Markham (Journal Roy. Geo. Soc., vol. xli. p. 307) denies the Aymara origin of the Tia Huanacu ruins, and ascribes them to the Incas, and consequently disputes the distinction pointed out above. The truth seems to be that, until we get more photographs or detailed drawings, all conclusions regarding Peruvian architecture must be considered as more or less hypothetical.

Footnote 500:

For the principal part of this information I am indebted to Mr. William Bollaert and the photographs of the Messrs. Helsby, of Liverpool, and also to a paper on the Aymara Indians, by Dr. David Forbes, communicated to the Ethnological Society of London in June 1870.

Transcriber’s Notes

This book often uses inconsistent hyphenation and spelling, particularly with respect to accents. These were left as printed unless the author showed a clear preference for one form.

Some presumed printer’s errors have been corrected, including normalizing punctuation. Page number references and entries in the Table of Contents and in the Index were corrected where errors were found. Several instances of area being given in ft. were changed to sq. ft. and feet to square feet. The marker for footnote 483 was missing and so it's placement was assumed.

Further corrections are listed below with the original text (top) and the corrected text (bottom).

Volume I

every pains has been taken every pain has been taken p. xxii

progres progress p. 48

cotemporary contemporary p. 50

formula formulæ p. 77

Sedinag Sedinga Illustration 27.

longed ceased long ceased p. 219

Nor is is Nor is it p. 247

ines lines p. 372

Roumeia Roumeïa p. 372

Nimes Nîmes p. 385

Vogüe Vogüé p. 423

neo-Byzantine Neo-Byzantine p. 455

iconicon icon p. 460

orginally originally p. 538

turned the turned to the p. 558

100 ft. to 100 ft. to 1 in. Illustration 451.

467. Illustration 467 (missing number added)

next next to p. 596

Volume II

Churches Gelnhausen Churches at Gelnhausen p. vi

Perigueux Périgueux p. v

Gloucester Cathderal Gloucester Cathedral p. xi

Toraccio Torracio p. 3

content with the knowadge content with the knowledge p. 55

Moyen Âge Moyen-Âge Figure 548

painted plass painted glass p. 70

Le-Puy-en-Vélay Le-Puy-en-Velay p. 94

diapeared disapeared p. 145

architectual object architectural object p. 171

it canot it cannot p. 196

apparent stabilty apparent stability p. 226

p. 233 its aspidal gallery its apsidal gallery

Paul-Trois-Chateaux Paul-Trois-Châteaux p. 255

Moyen-Age Moyen-Âge Figure 735

Boisseree Boisserée Illustration 746.

enthnographic ethnographic p. 302

gables on east face gables on the east face p. 324

Duration of Late Pointed Perpendicular corrected from 108 to 156 p. 337

church inexistence church in existence p. 342

Munster Münster Footnote 120

better that better than p. 472

ribs of vault ribs of the vault Footnote 140

It total length Its total length p. 509

the slighest attempt the slightest attempt p. 516

it is dificult to it is difficult to p. 525

enjoyment if the passing hour enjoyment of the passing hour p. 554

east coast of America west coast of America p. 586

buildiugs buildings p. 589

Woodcut No. 1039 Woodcut No. 1029 p. 603