Character of Renaissance Architecture — John Shaqi
Character of Renaissance ArchitectureMoore, Charles Herbert
History
Character of Renaissance Architecture
Moore, Charles Herbert
Architecture, Renaissance
It has been thought by some writers that the rib system of the dome
of Florence gives the structure a somewhat Gothic character, and it
is sometimes called a Gothic dome.[15] But there can be no such thing
as a Gothic dome. It is impossible for a dome of any kind to have
the character of a Gothic vault. The difference between the two is
fundamental. A Gothic vault is a vault of concentrated thrusts, and
it requires effective concentrated abutments. A dome is a vault of
continuous thrust, and for sound construction it requires continuous
abutments, as in the Pantheon. Whatever use the ribs of Brunelleschi’s
vault may have, they do not, and cannot, perform the function of the
ribs in Gothic vaulting. Their use is to strengthen the angles of the
dome, and to augment its power of resistance to the weight of the
lantern which crowns it. They do not support the vault as the ribs
of a Gothic vault do. Being composed of very deep voussoirs, they
have more strength to withstand thrusts, as well as to bear crushing
weight, than the enclosing shells have, and thus to some extent they
may hold these shells in. But it appears plain that the architect did
not feel confidence in their power to perform this function without
reënforcement by a chain, or chains, which, in his own words, “bind
the ribs and hold the vault in” (che leghino i detti sproni e cingano
la volta dentro). However this may be, the ribs of a dome cannot
have any function like that of the ribs in Gothic vaulting. The
shell of a Gothic vault is not held in by the ribs, nor is it in any
way incorporated with them. Both shell and ribs are held in by the
buttresses. This point will be considered further in connection with
the dome of St. Peter’s.
The whole scheme of this dome was a daring innovation of one man, and
in this it differs from former architectural innovations, which were
the comparatively slow outcome of corporate endeavour, progressive
changes being so gradual that no wide or sudden departures from
habitual modes of building were made at any one time, or by any one
person.
It was a prodigious undertaking. The span of the dome is nearly
a hundred and forty feet, the springing level is a hundred and
seventy-five feet above the pavement, and the height of the dome
itself, exclusive of the lantern, is about a hundred and twenty feet.
Such a project might well appall the most courageous of building
committees, and we need not wonder that the Board of Works drew back in
dismay when it was first laid before them.[16]
The successful accomplishment of the work, and the stability which it
has thus far maintained, show that the architect was a constructor
of great ability,[17] and the fact that he managed to raise the vast
fabric without the use of the ponderous and costly kind of centring
that had been commonly employed in vaulting, makes the achievement
still more remarkable. The precise manner in which he did this is not
clear, but of the fact there appears no question.[18]
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.
Join the Discussion
Join the discussion
Sign in to leave a comment or review.
Sign InorCreate an account