A plain wall of small stones and lime may convey the idea of durability, but only in a slight degree, that of power or design.A circular or angular column of the same materials, if very elevated, is better fitted for these ends, but still, is far inferior to one composed of a solid block.A lofty stone arch, again, is one of the most striking displays of power that human art exhibits.The aspect of a mass so ponderous, hanging thus securely in high air, fixes the attention, and fills the mind with awe.It is, accordingly, by a skilful management of the arch, that the grandeur of effect of what we term the Gothic architecture, is chiefly produced.All the other parts are subordinate to it, and confined within the smallest limits sufficient to bring out its powers.In the more perfect specimens, there is no dead wall; a congeries of lofty arches, supported on short, or slender pillars, is wrought into a magnificent and beautiful whole.The feeling of admiration here springs from the consideration of the power manifested, in maintaining in its place the whole high and hanging fabric; whereas, in the Grecian architecture, it rather arises from a perception of that displayed in the formation and elevation of each separate member.
The progress towards perfection, of this order of architecture, was much more slow, considering that it scarcely ever remained wholly stationary, than was that of the Grecian, for it is, in reality, far more difficult.
Several causes contributed to its advance.The great extent of country over which its elements were dig fused, occasioned the use of various sorts of stone, and produced the advantageous effects arising from a continual change of materials.The art of the mason improved, strength was obtained by joining stones into one another, rather than by cementing them together.
The use of freestone, a rock easily brought into shape, probably had considerable effect in producing this improvement.The architect was thus enabled to bring out, in greater fineness, all the parts of his fabric.The feelings of men, also, set towards the pursuit.Kings, nobles, a proud and powerful priesthood, stood ready to reward and applaud its successful creations, and assembled multitudes gazed on them in silent and delighted admiration.
It has been truly said, that it formed much of the poetry of the age.In the want of other species of intellectual excitement, men were needs very strongly moved by an art, that thus wrought on stone and lime, they knew not how, to portray some of the deepest feelings of their hearts.It seems to have been only slightly retarded, by a propensity to servile imitation.
The various kingdoms into which Europe was split, and the difficulty of intercourse amongst them, gave courage to the artists, who were themselves the greatest travellers, to attempt works from which they would have shrunk, had those who were to judge of them had easy access to established models.
Nevertheless, there is a fact, which shows that the oppressive influence of this principle was far from inert.The epochs of the most rapid advances of the Gothic architecture, were the periods succeeding the conquest of kingdoms by new races.This circumstance has given occasion, to several, to conjecture, that it stands indebted to the knowledge of its principles, which some of these conquerors brought with them.The supposition is improbable;we have no reason to believe that they brought any thing else, than what necessarily belonged to such men, a bold and untrammeled spirit.This, indeed, is an essential element, and one, as we have seen, of great power in the composition of genius.It was thus, that the prominent defects of the art under the Anglo Saxons, an exuberance of dead wall, and want of elevation, were remedied by the Normans.the Saracens in Spain, wrought also a similar change.
At no preceding period, did there exist men, so much given to the erection of permanent structures as modern Europeans, and their American descendants.
Their command of materials, their resources of power, are by much superior to those possessed by any antecedent people.It is certainly, then, surprising, that they should be servile copyists, of the arts of those whom they fitly look on, compared with themselves, as barbarians.I apprehend we can only explain the phenomenon, from the influence of the instinct of imitation.
The extended intercourse between all parts of the world, the diffusion of the products of book-making, and of picture-making, render us familiar with existing models of all sorts.An artist, therefore, who has to construct any great edifice finds it safest to copy from some one whose merits have been acknowledged, and takes the measure of a Grecian temple, or Gothic church.Thus, at least, he covers himself from censure.Hence it is, that we so often see, in the cold foggy climate of Britain, or in the boisterous one of North America, an imitation of some structure that had been admired in Greece.The claims to admiration which the copy possesses, fall, however, far short of the original.In the first place, it wants that evidence of perfect design, which arises from the complete, and easy accomplishment of a purpose.What answered the mild climate, and serene skies of Greece, is felt to be inconvenient, and therefore defective, elsewhere.Next, it is most probably a very deficient copy.The effect of the Grecian structures, depends, as we have seen, in their consisting of large masses of stone.
Our imitations are probably the work, of the mason, or possibly the plasterer, and convey, therefore, no idea of power, the very essence which it is desired to embody.There is hence, also, generally, a failure in the execution.
