They ignored, as much as possible, the clear exhibition of the pointed
arch, and, even when they did use it, not unfrequently introduced it in
such a way as to shew their contempt for it as a feature of
construction; employing it often only for ornament, and never hesitating
to construct it in so faulty a manner that it required to be held
together with iron rods from the very first day of its erection. This
fault they often found it absolutely necessary to commit, because they
scarcely ever brought themselves to allow the use of the buttress; and
this reluctance was a remarkable proof of their Classic sympathies.
Classic architecture was as distinctly symbolic of rest as Gothic was of
life; the column and lintel of the one were as still and symbolical of
perfect repose, as the arch of the other, sustained by the strong arm of
the flying buttress, was of life, vigour, and motion. Italian Gothic
architects then, in never resorting to the buttress, avowed their
feeling that a state of perfect rest was the only allowable state for a
perfect building, and they preferred almost always to use the arch for
its beauty only, and avowedly not for its constructional value, which
they evidenced by tying it together with iron bars at its base, which
there was no intention of disguising, and therefore no shamefacedness in
the use of. From this, I believe, at least one beauty arose. It is
obvious that the pointed arch, descending upon the capital of a shaft
without any visible stay or buttress to retain it in its place, would
look weak and thin; and it was soon perceived that, in order to overcome
this difficulty, the only course was to add to its substance by cusping
it on the under side. Thence came the trefoiled arches so frequent in
Italy, and always so very lovely. As so much depended upon them, no
pains were spared in bringing their outline into the very purest form.
To this we owe the absolute perfection which characterizes some of the
trefoiled arches in early Italian work; of this we have an example (to
take one instance among many) in the tombs of the Scaligers, at Verona,
in which the mass of the trefoil descending from the arch conveys to the
eye the impression of a firmness which, in part, it certainly gives, but
which would nevertheless be insufficient in reality for the stability of
the work, without the aid of the connecting rod of iron below.
Public-domain text, read in full here on John Shaqi.
Reviews
Reviews
No reviews yet
Be the first to share your thoughts on this work.
Elsewhere in the archive
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account