CHAPTER XIII. RENAISSANCE ARCHITECTURE IN GREAT BRITAIN, SPAIN, AND PORTUGAL. ENGLAND.--CHRONOLOGICAL SKETCH.

IN England, as in France and Germany, the introduction of the Italian Renaissance was not accomplished without a period of transition. The architecture of this period is known as Elizabethan, though it lasted long after Elizabeth’s reign. Sometimes it is called Tudor; but it is more convenient and not unusual to limit the term Tudor to the latest phase of English Gothic.

Probably the earliest introduction into any English building of a feature derived from the newly-revived classic sources is in the tomb of Henry VII. in Westminster Abbey. The grille inclosing this is of good, though late Gothic design; but when the tomb itself came to be set up, for which a contract was made with Torregiano in 1512, it was Italian in its details. The earliest examples of Renaissance features actually built into a structure, so far as we are aware, is in the terra-cotta ornamentation of Layer Marney House in Essex, which it is certain was erected prior to 1525. It is however long—surprisingly long—after this period before we come upon the traces of a general use of Renaissance details. In fact, up to the accession of Elizabeth (1558) they appear to have been little employed. It is however said that early in her reign the treatises on Renaissance architecture of Philibert de l’Orme and Lomazzo were translated from Italian into English, and in 1563 John Shute published a book on Italian architecture.

John of Padua, an Italian architect, was brought to this country by Henry VIII. and practised here; and Theodore Havenius of Cleves was employed as architect in the buildings of Caius College, Cambridge (1565-1574). These two foreigners undoubtedly played an important part in a change of taste which, though not general so early, certainly did commence before Elizabeth’s death in 1603.

At the two universities, and in many localities throughout England, new buildings and enlargements of old ones were carried out during the long and prosperous reign of Elizabeth; and the style in which they were built will be found to have admitted of very great latitude. Where the intention was to obtain an effect of dignity or state, the classic principles of composition were more or less followed. The buildings at Caius College, Cambridge, Longleat, built between 1567 and 1579 by John of Padua, Woollaton, built about 1580 by Smithson, and Burleigh (built 1577), may be named as instances of this. On the other hand where a manorial or only a domestic character was desired, the main lines of the building are Gothic, but the details, in either case, are partly Gothic and partly modified Renaissance. This description will apply to such buildings as Knowle, Penshurst, Hardwick, Hatfield, Bramshill, or Holland House (Fig. 81). In the introductory chapter some account has been given, in general terms, of the features familiar to most and endeared to many, which mark these peculiarly English piles of buildings; those remarks may be appropriately continued here.

Fig. 81.—Holland House at Kensington. (1607.)

The hall of Gothic houses was still retained, but only as one of a series of fine apartments. In many cases English mansions had no internal quadrangle, and are built as large solid blocks with boldly projecting wings. They are often of three storeys in height, the roofs are frequently of flat pitch, and in that case are hidden behind a parapet which is sometimes of fantastic design. Where the roofs are steeper and not concealed the gables are frequently of broken outline. Windows are usually very large, and with mullions and transoms, and it is to these large openings that Elizabethan interiors owe their bright and picturesque effects. Entrances are generally adorned with some classic or semi-classic features, often, however, much altered from their original model; here balustrades, ornamental recesses, stone staircases, and similar formal surroundings are commonly found, and are generally arranged with excellent judgment, though often quaint in design.

“This style is characterised by a somewhat grotesque application of the ancient orders and ornaments, by large and picturesquely-formed masses, spacious staircases, broad terraces, galleries of great length (at times 100 feet long), orders placed on orders, pyramidal gables formed of scroll-work often pierced, large windows divided by mullions and transoms, bay windows, pierced parapets, angle turrets, and a love of arcades. The principal features in the ornament are pierced scroll-work, strap-work, and prismatic rustication, combined with boldly-carved foliage (usually conventional) and roughly-formed figures.”—M.D.W.

Interiors are bright and with ample space; very richly ornamented plaster ceilings are common; the walls of main rooms are often lined with wainscot panelling, and noble oak staircases are frequent.

In the reign of James I., our first Renaissance architect of mark, Inigo Jones (1572-1652) became known. He was a man of taste and genius, and had studied in Italy. He executed many works, the designs for which were more or less in the style of Palladio. These include the addition of a portico to the (then Gothic) cathedral of St. Paul’s, and a magnificent design for a palace which Charles I. desired to build at Whitehall. A fragment of this building, now known as the Chapel Royal Whitehall, was erected, and small though it be, has done much by its conspicuous position and great beauty, to keep up a respect for Inigo Jones’s undoubted high attainments as an artist.

More fortunate than Inigo Jones, Christopher Wren (1632-1723) had just attained a high position as a young man of science, skill, and cultivation, and as the architect of the Sheldonian Theatre at Oxford, when in 1666 the great fire of London destroyed the Metropolitan Cathedral, the parochial churches, the Royal Exchange, the Companies’ Halls, and an immense mass of private property in London, and created an opportunity which made great demands upon the energy, skill, and fertility of design of the architect who might attempt to grasp it. Fortunately, Wren was equal to the occasion, and he has endowed London with a Cathedral which takes rank among the very foremost Renaissance buildings in Europe, as well as a magnificent series of parochial churches, and other public buildings. It is not pretended that his works are free from defects, but there can be no question that admitting anything which can be truly said against them, they are works of artistic genius, full of fresh and original design, and exhibiting rare sagacity in their practical contrivance and construction.

St. Paul’s stands second only to St. Peter’s as a great domical cathedral of Renaissance architecture. It falls far short of its great rival in actual size and internal effect, and is all but entirely devoid of that decoration in which St. Peter’s is so rich. On the other hand, the exterior of St. Paul’s (Fig. 82) is far finer, and as the English cathedral had the good fortune to be erected entirely from the plans and under the supervision of one architect, it is a building consistent with itself throughout, which, as we have seen, is more than can be said of St. Peter’s.

The plan of St. Paul’s is a Latin cross, with well marked transepts, a large portico, and two towers at the western entrance; an apse of small size forms the end of the eastern arm, and of each of the transepts; a great dome covers the crossing; the cathedral has a crypt raising the main floor considerably, and its side walls are carried high above the aisle roofs so as to hide the clerestory windows from sight.

The dome is very cleverly planted on eight piers instead of four at the crossing, and is a triple structure; for between the dome seen from within, and the much higher dome seen from without, a strong cone of brickwork rises which bears the weight of the stone lantern and ball and cross that surmount the whole. The skill with which the dome is made the central feature of a pyramidal composition whatever be the point of view, the great beauty of the circular colonnade immediately below the dome, the elegant outline of the western towers, and the unusual but successful distribution of the great portico, are among the most noteworthy elements which go to make up the charm of this very successful exterior.

Fig. 82.—St. Paul’s Cathedral, London. (1675-1710.) Wren may be said to have introduced to Renaissance architecture the tower and spire, for though many examples occur in Spain, there is reason to suppose that he was before the architects of that country in his employment of that feature. He has enriched the City of London with a large number of steeples, which are Gothic so far as their general idea goes, but thoroughly classic in details, and all more or less distinctive. The most famous of these is the one belonging to Bow Church; others of note belong to St. Clement Danes and St. Bride, Fleet Street.

The interiors of some of these churches, as for example St. Stephen, Walbrook, St. Andrew, Holborn, and St. James, Piccadilly, are excellent both for their good design and artistic treatment, and for their being well contrived and arranged for the special purposes they were intended to fill.

Wren’s secular works were considerable. The Sheldonian Theatre at Oxford, the library of Trinity College, Cambridge, and the theatre of the College of Physicians London (long since disused), are a group of special buildings each of which was undoubtedly a remarkable and successful work. Chelsea and Greenwich hospitals are noteworthy as among the first specimens of those great buildings for public purposes in which England is now so rich, and which to a certain extent replace the monastic establishments of the middle ages. At Chelsea the building is simple and dignified. Without lavish outlay, or the use of expensive materials, much ornament, or any extraneous features, an artistic and telling effect has been produced, such as few hospitals or asylums since built have equalled. Greenwich takes a higher level, and though Wren’s work had the disadvantage of having to be accommodated to buildings already erected by another architect, this building, with its twin domes, its rich outline, and its noble and dignified masses, will always reflect honour upon its designer. The view of Greenwich hospital from the river may fairly be said to be unique for beauty and picturesqueness. At Greenwich, too, we meet with some of that skill in associating buildings and open spaces together which is so much more common in France than in this country, and by the exercise of which the architecture of a good building can be in so many ways set off.

Wren, like Inigo Jones, has left behind him a great unexecuted design which in many respects is more noble than anything that he actually built. This is his earlier design for St. Paul’s Cathedral, which he planned as a Greek cross, with an ampler dome than the present cathedral possesses, but not so lofty. A large model of this design exists. Had it been carried out the exterior of the building would probably not have appeared so commanding, perhaps not so graceful, as it actually is; but the interior would have surpassed all the churches of the style in Europe, both by the grandeur of the vast arched space under the dome and by the intricacy and beauty of the various vistas and combinations of features, for which its admirably-designed plan makes provision.

Wren had retired from practice before his death in 1723. His immediate successors were Hawksmoor, whose works were heavy and uninteresting, and Sir James Vanbrugh. Vanbrugh was a man of genius and has a style of his own, “bold, original, and pictorial.” His greatest and best work is Blenheim, in Oxfordshire, built for the Duke of Marlborough. This fine mansion, equal to any French chÂteau in extent and magnificence, is planned with much dignity. The entrance front looks towards a large space, inclosed right and left by low buildings, which prolong the wings of the main block. The angles of the wings and the centre are masked by two colonnades of quadrant shape, and the central entrance with lofty columns which form a grand portico, is a noble composition.

The three garden fronts of Blenheim are all fine, and there is a magnificent entrance hall, but the most successful part of the interior is the library, a long and lofty gallery, occupying the entire flank of the house and treated with the most picturesque variety both of plan and ornament.

Vanbrugh also built Castle Howard, Grimesthorpe, Wentworth, King’s Weston, as well as many other country mansions of more moderate size.

Campbell, Kent, and Gibbs are the best known names next in succession. Of these Campbell is most famous as an author, but Gibbs (1674-1754) is the architect of two prominent London churches—St. Martin’s and St. Mary le Strand, in which the general traditions of Wren’s manner are ably followed. He was the architect of the Radcliffe Library at Oxford. Kent (1684-1748) was the architect of Holkham, the Treasury Buildings, and the Horse Guards. He was associated with the Earl of Burlington, who acquired a high reputation as an amateur architect, which the design of Burlington House (now remodelled for the Royal Academy), went far to justify. Probably the technical part of this and other designs was supplied by Kent.

Sir William Chambers (1726-1796) was the architect of Somerset House, a building of no small merit, notwithstanding that it is tame and very bare of sculpture. This building is remarkable as one of the few in London in which the Italian feature of an interior quadrangle is attempted to be reproduced. Chambers wrote a treatise which has become a general text-book of revived classical architecture for English students. Contemporary with him were the brothers John and Robert Adam, who built much, and began to introduce a severity of treatment and a fineness of detail which correspond to some extent to the French style of Louis XVI. The interior decorations in plaster by these architects are of great elegance and often found in old houses in London, as in Hanover Square, on the Adelphi Terrace, and elsewhere. The list of the eighteenth century architects closes with the names of Sir Robert Taylor and the two Dances, one of whom built the Mansion House and the other Newgate; and Stuart, who built several country mansions, but who is best known for the magnificent work on the antiquities of Athens, which he and Revett published together in 1762, and which went far to create a revolution in public taste; for before the close of the century there was a general cry for making every building and every ornamental detail purely and solely Greek.

The architects above named, and others of less note were much employed during the eighteenth century in the erection of large country houses of Italian, usually Palladian design, many of them extremely incongruous and unsatisfactory. Here and there a design better than the average was obtained, but as a rule these stately but cold buildings are very far inferior to the picturesque and home-like manors and mansions built during the reigns of Elizabeth and James I.

Fig. 83.—Houses at Chester. (16th Century.)

It is worth notice that the picturesque element, inherited from the Gothic architecture of the middle ages, which before the eighteenth century had completely vanished from our public buildings, and the mansions of the wealthy did not entirely die out of works executed in remote places. In the half-timbered manors and farmhouses which abound in Lancashire, Cheshire, Shropshire, and Staffordshire, and in other minor works, we always find a tinge, sometimes a very full colouring, of the picturesque and the irregular; the gables are sharp, upper storeys overhang, and the treatment of the timbers is thoroughly Gothic (Fig. 83); so are the mouldings, transoms and mullions to the windows, and barge boards to the roofs. In the reign of James I. a mode of enriching the exteriors of dwelling-houses, as well as their ceilings, chimney-pieces, &c., with ornaments modelled in plaster came in, and though the remaining specimens are from year to year disappearing, yet in some old towns (e.g. in Ipswich) examples of this sort of treatment (known as Jacobean) still linger.

In Queen Anne’s reign a semi-Gothic version of Renaissance architecture was practised, to which great attention has been directed in the present day. The Queen Anne style is usually carried out in brickwork, executed in red bricks and often most admirable in its workmanship. Pilasters, cornices, and panels are executed in cut bricks, and for arches, niches, and window heads very finely jointed bricks are employed. The details are usually Renaissance, but of debased character; a crowning cornice of considerable projection under a high-pitched hipped roof (i.e. one sloping back every way like a truncated pyramid) is commonly employed; so also are gables of broken outline. Dormer windows rich and picturesque, and high brick chimneys are also employed; so are bow windows, often carried on concave corbels of a clumsy form. Prominence is given in this style to the joiner’s work; the windows, which are usually sash windows, are heavily moulded and divided into small squares by wooded sash bars. The doors have heavily moulded panels, and are often surmounted by pediments carried by carved brackets or by pilasters; in the interiors the woodwork of staircases such as the balusters, newel posts, and handrails is treated in a very effective and well considered way, the greater part of the work being turned on the lathe and enriched with mouldings extremely well designed for execution in that manner. By this style and the modifications of it which were more or less practised till they finally died out, the traditional picturesqueness of English architecture which it had inherited from the middle ages was kept alive, so that it has been handed down, in certain localities almost, if not quite, to the present century.

SCOTLAND.

The architecture of Scotland during the sixteenth and succeeding centuries possesses exceptional interest. It was the case here, as it had been in England, that the most important buildings of the time were domestic; the erection of churches and monasteries had ceased.

The castles and semi-fortified houses of Scotland form a group apart, possessing strongly-marked and well-defined character; they are designed in a mixed style in which the Gothic elements predominated over the classic ones. But the Scottish domestic Gothic, from which the new style was partly derived, had borne little or no resemblance to the florid Tudor of England. It was the severe and simple architecture of strongholds built with stubborn materials, and on rocky sites, where there was little inducement to indulge in decoration. Dunstaffnage or Kilchurn Castles may be referred to as examples of these plain, gloomy keeps with their stepped gables, small loops for windows, and sometimes angle turrets.

The classic elements of the style were not drawn (as had been the case in England) direct from Italy, but came from France. The Scotch, during their long struggles with the English, became intimately allied with the French, and it is therefore not surprising that Scottish Baronial architecture should resemble the early Renaissance of French chÂteaux very closely. The hardness of the stone in which the Scotch masons wrought forbade their attempting the extremely delicate detail of the FranÇois I. ornament, executed as it is in fine, easily-worked stone of smooth texture; and the difference in the climate of the two countries justified in Scotland a boldness which would have appeared exaggerated and extreme in France. Accordingly the style in passing from one country to the other has changed its details to no inconsiderable extent.

Many castles were erected in the sixteenth and following centuries in Scotland, or were enlarged and altered; the most characteristic features in almost all of them are short round angle turrets, thrown out upon bold corbellings near the upper part of towers and other square masses. These are often capped by pointed roofs; and the corbels which carry them, and which are always of bold, vigorous character, are frequently enriched by a kind of cable ornament, which is very distinctive. Towers of circular plan, like bastions, and projecting from the general line of the walls, or at the angles, constantly occur. They are frequently crowned by conical roofs, but sometimes (as at Fyvie Castle) they are made square near the top by means of a series of corbels, and finished with gables or otherwise. Parapets are in general use, and are almost always battlemented. Roofs, when visible, are of steep pitch, and their gables are almost always of stepped outline, while dormer windows, frequently of fantastic form, are not infrequent. Chimneys are prominent and lofty. Windows are square-headed, and, as a rule, small; sometimes they retain the Gothic mullions and transom, but in many cases these features are absent. Doorways are generally arched, and not often highly ornamented.

Cawdor Castle, Glamis Castle, Fyvie Castle, Castle Fraser, the old portions of Dunrobin Castle, Tyninghame House, the extremely picturesque palace at Falkland, and a considerable part of Stirling Castle, may be all quoted as good specimens of this thoroughly national style, but it would be easy to name two or three times as many buildings nearly, if not quite, equal to these in architectural merit.

Heriot’s Hospital, Edinburgh, may be quoted (with part of Holyrood Palace) as showing the style of the seventeenth century. Heriot’s Hospital was built between the years 1628 and 1660. It is built round a great quadrangle, and has square towers at the four corners, each relieved by small corbelled angle turrets. The entrance displays columns and an entablature of debased but not unpleasing Renaissance architecture, and the building altogether resembles an English Elizabethan or Jacobean building to a greater extent than most Scottish designs.

When this picturesque style, which appears indeed to have retained its hold for long, at last died out, very little of any artistic value was substituted for it. Late in the eighteenth century, it is true, the Brothers Adam erected public buildings in Edinburgh and Glasgow, and carried out various works of importance in a classic style which has certainly some claim to respect; but if correct it was tame and uninteresting, and a poor exchange for the vigorous vitality which breathes in the works of the architects of the early Renaissance in Scotland.

SPAIN AND PORTUGAL.

In the Spanish peninsula, Renaissance architecture ran through three phases, very strongly distinguished from one another, each being marked by peculiarities of more than ordinary prominence. The early stage, to which the Spaniards give the name of Plateresco, exhibits the same sort of fusion of Gothic with classic which we find in France and Scotland. The masses are often simple, but the individual features are overladen with an extravagant amount of ornament, and, as in France, many things which are essentially Gothic, such as pinnacles, gargoyles, and parapets, are retained. The Renaissance style was introduced at the latter part of the fifteenth century, and a very considerable number of buildings to which the description given above will apply were erected prior to the middle of the sixteenth. Among these may be enumerated the cathedral at Granada, the Hospital of Santa Cruz at Toledo (1504-1514), the dome of Burgos Cathedral (1567), the Cathedral of Malaga, San Juan della Penitencia at Toledo (1511), the faÇade of the Alcazar at Toledo (1548), the Town Hall (1551), and Casa Zaporta (1560) at Zarragoza, and the Town Hall of Seville (1559).

A great number of tombs, staircases, doorways, and other smaller single features, executed during this period from the designs of good artists, are to be found scattered through the country. “These Renaissance monuments exhibit an extraordinary degree of variety in their ornaments, which are of the most fantastic nature; an exuberant fancy would seem to have sought a vent, especially in the sculptured ornament of the style, which though at times crowded, overladen, and we must add disfigured by the most grotesque ideas, is very striking for its originality and excellent workmanship.”—(M.D.W.)

Fig. 84.—The Alcazar at Toledo. (Begun 1568.)

The second phase of Spanish architecture was marked by a plain and simple dignity, equally in contrast with the Plateresco which had preceded it and with the extravagant style to which it at length gave place. The earliest architect who introduced into Spain an architectural style founded on the best examples of Italy, was Juan Baptista de Toledo. He in the year 1563 commenced the Escurial Palace—the Versailles of Spain; but the principal part of the building was erected by his more celebrated pupil, Juan de Herrera, who carried on the works during the years from 1567 to 1579. This building, one of the most extensive palaces in Europe, is noble in its external aspect from a distance, thanks to its great extent, its fine central dome, and its many towers, but it is disappointing when approached. Of the interior the most noteworthy feature is a magnificently decorated church, of great size and unusual arrangement; and this dignified central feature has raised the Escurial, in spite of many faults, to the position of the most famous and probably most deservedly admired among the great Renaissance palaces of Europe.

By the same architect numerous buildings were erected, among others the beautiful, if somewhat cold, arcaded interior of the Alcazar of Toledo (Fig. 84), which may be taken as a fair specimen of the noble qualities to be found in his dignified and comparatively simple designs. About the middle of the sixteenth century Charles V. erected his palace at Granada; but here the architecture is strongly coloured by Italian or French examples, and much of the building resembles Perrault’s work at the Louvre very closely. Herrera and his school were probably too severe in taste to suit the fancy of their countrymen, for Spanish architecture in the eighteenth century fell a victim to debased forms and a fantastic and exaggerated style of ornament. Churriguera was the architect who has the credit of having introduced this unfortunate third manner, and has lent it his name. For a time “Churriguerismo” found general acceptance, and the century closed under its influence. We must not pass over the excellent and varied Renaissance towers and steeples of Spain in silence. They are not unlike Wren’s spires in general idea; they are to be met with in many parts of the country attached to the churches, and their variety and picturesqueness increase the claim of Spanish architecture to our respect.

The one Renaissance building in Portugal which has been much illustrated, and is spoken of in high terms, is the Convent at Mafra, a building of the eighteenth century, of great extent and picturesque effect. Great skill is shown in dealing with the unwieldy bulk of an overgrown establishment which does not yield even to the Escurial in point of extent. We are, however, up to the present time without the means of forming an opinion upon the nature and value of the architecture of Portugal as a whole.

---