Character of Renaissance ArchitectureMoore, Charles Herbert
History
Character of Renaissance Architecture
Moore, Charles Herbert
Architecture, Renaissance
The lack of due effect of scale in this interior has been often
remarked, and it is generally attributed to the great magnitude of the
structural parts. The size of these parts could not, however, well be
different from what they are. Their magnitude is determined by the
scale of the great dome and the width and altitude of the arms of the
cross. The piers of the crossing are masses of masonry measuring on
their longer sides more than fifty feet on the pavement, while the
pendentive arches are one hundred and fifty feet high, and those of
the arms of the cross are seventy-five feet high. But with appropriate
treatment their scale might have been made more apparent. To adorn such
piers and frame such arches with a classic order is to destroy the
proper effect of scale, as well as to violate the true principles of
architectural design by using structural members without any structural
meaning.
Apart from the barbarism already remarked (p. 29) of springing a vault
from a classic entablature, the effect of the gigantic order is unhappy
in other respects; the great salience of its cornice cuts off from view
the lower part of the vaulting, and this pronounced overhanging ledge,
extending around the whole interior, breaks the continuity of the
upright lines into the vaulting, and diminishes the effect of altitude.
[Illustration: FIG. 32.--Section of aisle of St.
Peter’s.]
But not only did Michael Angelo employ this incongruous and ineffective
ornamental scheme for the interior of St. Peter’s, he also adopted a
corresponding design for the exterior which wholly contradicts the real
character of the structure and led the architect into some curious
makeshifts. For this exterior he used another gigantic order surmounted
with an attic story. This obliged him to carry up the enclosing walls
of the aisles to a height equal to that of the nave, and led to
difficulties within. For the aisle vaulting was now far down below the
top of these walls, and it therefore became necessary, unless the space
above this vaulting was to be left open to the sky, with the enclosing
wall standing as a mere screen answering to nothing behind it,[68] to
construct a flat roof at the level of the attic cornice. Figure 32, a
section through this part of the structure, will explain this and some
other awkward expedients to which the architect was driven by the use
of this colossal external order. Of the two compartments through which
the line _AB_ (plan, Fig. 31) passes, one has a barrel vault
and the other a dome, and, as each of the other corresponding parts of
the plan are vaulted in the same way, there are four small domes in
all. The effect of four smaller domes grouped around the great central
one would be happy for both internal and external effect, if they were
properly related in proportions, and the scheme were carried out in a
structurally consistent and rational way; but such a scheme could not
be developed here.
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