Renaissance architecture, element of individuality in, 4, 6; the classic style which was followed was that of the decadent Greek schools as represented in Roman copies, 4, 247; architects were generally also painters and sculptors, 6, 96; a surface architecture, 6; little heed given to structural propriety, 23, 64, 66, 116; use of the classic order, 29; passing of the entablature through the arch imposts, 29; use of stucco, 32; alternation of wide and narrow intervals, 38; misapplication of the classic orders, 43, 247; the designers worked on a foundation of mediæval ideas from which they could not free themselves, 43, 247; use of Roman models, 43, 117, 119, 247; breaking of the pediment, 93 (cut), 117; use of structural members without structural meaning, 116, 133, 135, 156, 165; entablature removed between the ressauts, 117; later architecture the work of men of little genuine artistic inspiration, 119, 133; architectural shams extensively produced by later architects, 121, 132; attempt to make half a metope fall at the end of the frieze, 121–122 (cut); barbaric compositions of frequent occurrence in later, 124; based on order and symmetry of a mechanical kind, 133; independent personal effort to be original at the bottom of most of the mistakes of, 206; no architects of, had a true conception of the principles of classic art, 230; theatrical in its spirit, 232; no true adaptation of classic elements in Renaissance design, 247; great influence of short-sighted and mechanical Italian rules in modern times, 248, 250; claims advanced for it as the only architecture of correct principles since that of classic antiquity are without justification, 250; sculpture of, _see_ Carving, architectural, of the Renaissance.