Encyclopaedia Britannica > Volume 3, Anatomy-Astronomy

432
ARCHITECTURE.
History.
The term Architecture is derived from the name of
its professor, Architect. It is the art of contriving and
constructing buildings; and the thing produced is by
metonymy called by the name of the art which produces
it, as the art itself is named from its professor. Ihe
word is directly from the Latin architectura, irregularly
formed from the deponent verb architector, which is itselt
from the Greek substantive agx/rsxrwv, Latinized archi¬
tector, architecto, and architectus ; all of which are used by
Latin authors. A more regular but less relevant deriva¬
tion of the Latin words architectus and architectura is
found in the substitution of the participles of the verb tego,
to cover, &c. for the derivative of the Greek r£u%ai, to
build i •
When architecture is spoken of simply, without a quali¬
fying adjective, the designing and building civil and religi¬
ous edifices, such as palaces, mansions, theatres, churches,
courts, bridges, &c. is intended; and it is called civil, to
distinguish it from naval and military architecture. A -
though every description of building may thus have the
term applied to it, it is by common consent restricted to
such edifices as display symmetrical arrangement m the
general design and fitting proportions in its parts, with a
certain degree of enrichment effected by means of cor¬
nices, blocking courses, and quoins, or by pillared, colum¬
nar, or arcaded arrangements. Architecture may indeed be
said to bear the same analogy to building, that literature
does to language. A plain brick wall covered in the
nary way with bricks on their edges is not architectural, be¬
cause it is poor, rude, and unadorned: it produces no pleas¬
ing effect, and is such as a totally uninstructed workman
would construct merely to answer the purpose required of
it. As man, however, is endowed by nature with a taste
for beauty and elegance, mere rugged utility does not de¬
light him ; as he becomes civilized, he seeks to embellish
whatever he produces, that it may give him positive in¬
stead of negative pleasure, by presenting to his sense of
vision what his mind may dwell on with complacency ;
and he is thus disposed to avail himself of the dispositions
and decorations which constitute architecture. It may be
asked, what standard of beauty there is in this art, on which
taste may be formed; though it must be obvious, that, like
other children of the imagination, such as poetry and music,
no other can be assigned than such compositions and modes
of arrangement as by their harmony and simplicity attract
the attention of the rudest mind, which is pleased without
being conscious why, and of the most learned or practised,
which discovers in them those proportions and peculiari¬
ties of form which always produce the most pleasing im¬
pressions, and appear to be dictated by nature. Painting
and sculpture have, to a certain extent, their originals in
the external works of nature, so that the most uncultured
taste may be gratified, or otherwise, with them, as they give
faithful or unfaithful representations; music is more artifi¬
cial, and the taste must be cultivated to judge of and enjoy
its higher productions; but architecture is purely conven¬
tional, requiring a knowledge of its system, and a mind in¬
formed as to the principles on which it depends for beauty,
even to its appreciation.1 . ... ,
As it is necessary, in erecting a new edifice where an
old one has stood, to remove all that was falsely construct¬
ed and insecure, if not entirely to clear out the founda- History,
tions • so it is at this time necessary, in writing a treatise V—
on architecture, to show the false grounds on which the
old system is founded, and remove the false impressions
which it has generally induced.
The earliest extant author on the subject is Vitruvius,
who, being ignorant of any other than his native architec¬
ture, which was Roman, and generally derived from the
Greek, concocted or adopted a silly fable about the 01 ig111
of building, and pretends to trace from it the invention of
what are called “ the orders” by the Greeks ; giving, how¬
ever, to each a separate fable of its own. He professes
to give the proportions, arrangements, and disposition of
the architectural works of the latter people, and the rules
by which they were composed. He describes with con¬
siderable minuteness various species of temples and other
edifices of both the Greeks and Romans, and endeavours to
give reasons for almost every thing connected with them.
His account of the advance of man from a state of savage
wildness to civilization, the discovery and acquisition of
fire, and progress in the art of building, made by the ear y
fathers of the human race, is only surpassed in absurdity
by his stories of the invention and proportioning of the
various columnar ordinances of which the ancients made
use ; if we except perhaps the fact, that this crude system
has been received and propagated throughout the civi¬
lized world ever since the resuscitation of the work four
centuries ago. How could a man, who evidently knew
nothing of the early history of the world, of the Celtic
monuments, or of the history and architecture ot Egypt
and the East, be supposed capable of describing the in¬
ventions and advances in knowledge ot the human race t
Nor is this all: How can Vitruvius be received as an
authority, when it is found that he does not correctly de¬
scribe any existing edifice in either Greece or Italy, and
that no example of ancient architecture, either Greek or
Roman, is in perfect accordance with his laws ? I his we
shall show in its proper place, and proceed now to take a
view of the rise, progress, and history of our subject, with¬
out reference to the popular system, which is based on such
fallacious ground. , „ . . ^ .
Although it is very probable that men built houses toOngm and
shelter themselves from the inclemencies of the weather history «,i
sneiter tnemseives num ^ ^ . ar(.hitec-
before they constructed temples to the divinity, yet it
, • n i 1 oarltr mctrivv
must be obvious to all who have studied the early histoiy
of the human race in connection with its antiquities, and
have considered the analogies afforded by the lude and
simple nations of the world at the present time, and parti¬
cularly by those who occupied the western side ot the
Americas on the discovery of those continents, that
though the art of building may have originated in the per¬
sonal wants of man, the science of architecture was the
result of his devotional feelings and tendencies. In Egypt
and in India, in Greece and in Italy, in Gaul and in Bri¬
tain, in Mexico and in Peru, structures connected with
the worship of the divinity existed, and still exist, of the
earliest date, or rather of dates beyond the range of posi¬
tive chronological information; some evincing a greater and
others a less advance in taste and refinement, but all re¬
taining some analogy, bearing upon the same point, and
tending to what may be called architectural arrangement.
edizione novissima, tomo iii. p- 25.)