|
THE EVOLUTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ORNAMENTATION ON THE
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA CAMPUS, 1906-1956
By
JESSICA MARIE GOLDSMITH
A THESIS PRESENTED TO THE GRADUATE SCHOOL
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA IN PARTIAL FULFILLMENT
OF THE REQUIREMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF INTERIOR DESIGN
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
2007
2007 Jessica Marie Goldsmith
To Albert and Arabella.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
I would like to thank my supervisory committee members for their unstinting help and
guidance during the past two years. My supervisory committee chair, Professor Susan Tate, has
been a source of inspiration since I was a college freshman in her history class. Working as her
assistant in graduate school contributed greatly to my educational experience. I must also thank
Professor Tate for introducing me to my other committee member, Professor Roy Graham. His
thoughts and insights made an invaluable contribution to my education.
While conducting my research, I had the pleasure of working with the University of
Florida archives staff. Archivist Carl van Ness located many obscure documents and was
instrumental to my research. Harold Barrand of the University Physical Plant Division also
assisted my search for drawing and documents related to the historic campus.
I would also like to thank the Getty Campus Heritage Initiative for providing support for
my research and the University of Florida historic campus.
TABLE OF CONTENTS
page
A C K N O W L E D G M E N T S ..............................................................................................................4
LIST OF FIGURES .................................. .. ..... ..... ................. .7
A B S T R A C T ......... ....................... ............................................................ 1 1
CHAPTER
1 PA R A M ETER S O F TH E STU D Y .............................................................. .....................13
Introduction............... ................................ ... ........................... ................ 13
State ent of the Problem ......................................... ..................... 14
A ssum options and H hypothesis ................................................................... ............ 16
Significance of the Study ............ .......... . ...... .......................................... ............. .......17
Scope of the Study .............................18.............................................
Definitions and Term s ................................. .. ........... ............18
S u m m a ry ................. ............... .................................................................................................2 0
2 L IT E R A TU R E R E V IE W ............................................................................... ..................2 1
In tro d u c tio n ....................................................................................................................... 2 1
H isto ry ............................................................................2 1
P re serve atio n .........................................................................2 4
Su pp ort............... ...........................................................2 5
A p p re c iatio n ..................................................................................................................... 2 8
S u m m a ry ................. ............... .................................................................................................3 2
3 SURVEY OF THE HISTORIC ORNAMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA
C A M P U S ................. ............... .......................................................................................... 3 4
Introduction ................................ ..... ......... .................... 34
W illiam Augustus Edwards and Partners, 1905-1925 ........................................ ........... 34
Rudolph W ever, 1925-1944 ................................ ....................... ................42
Guy Fulton, 1944-1956........................................ ......... 57
Integration of Ornament into the Architectural Concept .............. ................ 63
S u m m ary .................. ....... .. .. .................................................................................................6 5
4 DISCUSSION OF PREVAILING ARCHITECTURAL AND SOCIAL TRENDS
AFFECTING THE DESIGN AND APPLICATION OF THE HISTORIC ORNAMENT
OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA CAMPUS ............................................................138
In tro du ctio n .......................... ........................................................................................... 13 8
Edwards: The Dawn of a New Century ............................................................. ......138
Edw ards and W eaver: The Tw enties ........................................................................ ... ...... 140
Weaver: The Thirties and the Depression ........................................ ........................ 144
Fulton: After the Second World War ...................................................... ...................148
S u m m ary ................... ...................1...................5.........1
5 C O N C L U SIO N S ................. ......................................... .......... ........ .. ............... .. 153
Research Suggestions ...................................... .......... ....... ..... 153
P reservation Suggestion s ........................................................................... .......... ........... 153
C onclusions.....................................................................154
L IST O F R E F E R E N C E S ..................................................................................... ..................156
B IO G R A PH IC A L SK E T C H ......................................................................... .. ...................... 159
6
LIST OF FIGURES
Figure page
3-1 Buckm an and Thom as H alls: Entrance.................................... ........................... ......... 67
3-2 Thom as H all: E lives' entrance ............................................................................. ...... 68
3-3 Newell Hall: Floral ................................ .. ... ..... .................. 68
3-4 Griffin- Floyd H all: Cornucopias........................................................................ 69
3-5 Anderson Hall: Scroll over main entrance................................ ................................. 70
3-6 A nderson H all: M ain entrance ..................................................................................70
3-7 Peabody H all: Prim ary entrance. .............................................. ............................. 71
3-8 Peabody Hall: Inscribed name over main entrance.......... .......................................71
3-9 B ryan H all: T ow er entrance.............................................................................. ........ 72
3-10 Bryan Hall: Inscribed name over primary entrance ............. ..........................................73
3-11 Bryan Hall: State seal on m ain tower ................................................... ..................73
3-12 Bryan Hall: Plaque over 1939 entrance to law library.....................................................74
3-13 G ym nasium : M ain facade ................................................................................ ...... ...75
3-14 University Auditorium : W indow ......................................................... .............. 76
3-15 U university Auditorium : Corbel .......................................................... ............... 77
3-16 U university A auditorium : Interior........................................................................... .... ... 78
3-17 University Auditorium : Interior grotesques................................... ........................ 79
3-18 University Library: Windows with buttresses ....................................... ............... 80
3-19 U university Library: O original entrance..................................................................... .....81
3-20 University Library: Additional entrance................................................................. 82
3-2 1 R olfs H all: O riel w window ................................................................................. .... ..... 83
3-22 Rolfs Hall: Floral medallions in quatrefoils in the crenellation ........... ...............83
3-23 Rolfs Hall: Examples of floral plaques along the cornice line ........................................84
3-24 Rolfs H all: Beehive .................................................... ............ .. ............ 85
3-25 Leigh Hall: Names ....................................................... ........... ......... .... 85
3-26 L eight H all: G utter detail .................................................................... .... ......................86
3-27 Leigh Hall: Gargoyles engaged in chemical laboratory experiments.............................86
3-28 L eight H all: G rape ornam ent .............................................................. ...... .................... 87
3-29 Leigh H all: Bracket entrance ................................................... ............................... 87
3-30 Leigh Hall: Entrance with oriel window...................................................................... 88
3-31 Leigh Hall: Bay window and quoins .....................................................................88
3-32 Sledd Hall: Architecture and athletics plaque ........................................... ...............89
3-33 Sledd Hall: Eight student grotesques along the cornice line............................................90
3-34 Sledd Hall: Details from Spanish discovery tableau............................... ...............92
3-35 Sledd Hall: Six seals from the bay windows ..................................................................93
3-36 Sledd Hall: Doorway life casts ................................................... ............................. 93
3-37 Sledd H all: D oorw ay ornam ents.......................................................................... ....... 95
3-38 Sledd Hall: Ornaments from the cornice molding above the fenestration of the bay
w in d o w s ............................................................................... 9 7
3-39 Sledd Hall: Layers of ornamentation ...................................................... ..................98
3-40 Sledd H all: M ucozo tow er ............................................................ ............. ..................99
3-41 Sledd H all: M ucozo tow er details ....................................................................... 100
3-42 Sledd H all: M ucozo detail ....................................................................... ..................100
3-43 Sledd H all: M ucozo tow er interior ..................................................... ...................101
3-44 Infirmary: Entrance .................................................... ........... ............... 102
3-45 Infirm ary : Z odiac casts ........................... ................ ...................... ...........................103
3-46 Infirm ary: Injured student casts ............................................... ............................ 105
3-47 N orm an H all: Entrance tow er .................................................................................... 105
3-48 Norman Hall: Taunting grotesque ..................................................... ...................106
3-49 Norman Hall: Plaques flanking main tower entrance......................................................107
3-50 Norman Hall: Student corbels on main tower entrance...........................108
3-51 Norman Hall: Plaque over elementary school door....................................................... 108
3-52 Norman Hall: Squirrel corbels supporting archway ....................................................... 109
3-53 Norman Hall: Entrances with inscriptions....................................................................109
3-54 Norman Hall: West doorway details, supporting a pointed arch............... ..................11
3-55 Norman Hall: P.K. Yonge Laboratory School plaque................... ................................111
3-56 Norman Hall: Bench with inscribed names above................. ....................................112
3-57 D auer H all: W after spout ................................................................... ......................... 112
3-58 D auer H all: Lute player plaque................................................. ............................... 113
3-59 D auer H all: Stained glass w window ........................................................... ................. 114
3-60 D auer H all: W window details............................................ ........ .................................. 115
3-6 1 D auer H all: Shield detail................................................................................ . .......... 115
3-62 D auer H all: M ural details........................................................................ ...................116
3-63 Dauer Hall: European red squirrel detail .............. ..................................116
3-64 D airy Science Building: M edallions ..................... ........................... .... ........... 117
3-65 Fletcher H all: D oorw ay ornam ents........................................ ................. ............... 118
3-66 Fletcher H all: U under an oriel ................................... ..................................... 121
3-67 Fletcher Hall: Florida motif and UF Gator shields ........................................................121
3-68 Fletcher H all: Gator life tableau ................................................. ........................... 122
3-69 M urphree H all: E ast view ..................................................................... ..................... 123
3-70 M urphree H all: D oorw ay ........................................................... .. ............... 123
3-71 N ew ell H all: Rededication plaque ..................................................... ................... 124
3-72 N ew ell H all: Entrancew ay ornam ent.........................................................................124
3-73 University Library: Floor medallion after renovation, 1948 .......................................125
3-74 University Library: Spandrels with UF and 1948 intertwined.............. ............ 125
3-75 University Auditorium: Spandrels with UF and 1949 intertwined...............................126
3-76 Leigh Hall: Plaque over courtyard entrance on 1949 addition ............ ... ..................127
3-77 Leigh Hall: Plaque in belt cornice of tower entrance feature ............... ................. 127
3-78 Florida Gym : Tower entrance feature ..................................................... ............ 128
3-79 Florida Gym: Text............. .......................................... .. 128
3-80 F lorida G ym : E ast view ........................................ ......... ............................................128
3-81 W eil Hall: Bay window detail ...................................................................... 129
3-82 W eil H all: W est door .......................... .. ................ ......... .. ............ 129
3-83 W eil H all: N north entrance .............. ............ ........................................ ............... 130
3-84 W eil H all: E entrance tow er ....................................... ......... .........................................13 1
3-85 B ryan H all A addition: Plaques ........................................................................... ...... 132
3-86 Tigert H all: T ow er entrance............................................................................. ............133
3-87 T igert H all: B ay w window .................................................................. .........................133
3-88 Tigert H all: College seal exam ples ..................................................... ................... 134
3-89 Tigert Hall: Quatrefoils on railing around tower entrance ..............................................135
3-90 Century Tower: Ornamentation at belfry.................................................................135
3-91 Century Tow er: Entrance ........................................................... .. ............... 136
3-92 M atherly Hall: Entrance tower ...................................................................... 137
3-93 M atherly H all: P laque detail ............................................................... ......................137
Abstract of Thesis Presented to the Graduate School
of the University of Florida in Partial Fulfillment of the
Requirements for the Degree of Master of Interior Design
THE EVOLUTION OF THE ARCHITECTURAL ORNAMENTATION ON THE
UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA CAMPUS, 1906-1956
By
Jessica Marie Goldsmith
May 2007
Chair: Susan Tate
Major: Interior Design
The University of Florida campus historic district is listed on the National Register of
Historic Places and is significant for its compatible evolution since its opening in 1906. Rooted
in the 1905 Collegiate Gothic plan for the campus, the architectural ornamentation evolved with
each new era while remaining a character-defining feature of the campus. Architectural
ornaments, such as cast carvings, bas relief medallions, and fenestration details, can aid in
expressing a structure's major themes, develop its architectural language, and provide points of
human scale and interest. Across the campus, historical architectural ornaments are an integral
part of each building's total design concept. Many pieces aid in way-finding, signage, and a
fuller expression of the building's architectural motif. Ornaments mediate between the Collegiate
Gothic buildings and life on a twentieth century campus by expressing the design scheme of one
and the content of the other.
Beginning with the university's first buildings, Thomas and Buckman Halls, architectural
ornamentation was an important aspect of the university's built environment. The evolution of
the university's historic architectural ornamentation is significant as a manifestation of the
changes that occurred in society and architecture during the first half of the twentieth century.
The University of Florida's architectural ornamentation may be seen as a microcosm of the
complex forces that shaped American society between 1906 and 1956. Analysis of campus
features and related context establishes that architectural ornament is a significant and inherent
element in the campus history, evolution, and development. The architectural ornaments are
products of their time and place, on the University of Florida campus and as a part of the larger
national and international context.
CHAPTER 1
PARAMETERS OF THE STUDY
Introduction
After an architectural competition in 1905, South Carolinian William Augustus Edwards
was chosen as Architect to the Board of Control1. Edwards and his partners were given the task
of building the new state institutions of higher learning in Gainesville, Tallahassee and St.
Augustine. Edwards' winning design proposed a Collegiate Gothic style for the flagship
Gainesville campus. Collegiate Gothic was part of the popular Gothic Revival movement, based
on medieval Gothic and English Tudor design, reinterpreted for contemporary projects, and was
immensely popular in America. Edwards designed all the major buildings on the University of
Florida campus for twenty years, until a new architect was chosen by the Board of Control. The
second architect, Rudolph Weaver, moved to Gainesville to become head of the new architecture
program and the Architect to the Board of Control until his death in 1944. Weaver inherited
Edwards' Collegiate Gothic buildings, added to them and brought the campus into the modern
era. His associate, Guy Fulton, was appointed University System architect after Weaver's death;
he remained in that post until 1956. He continued Weaver's work while introducing new
directions to the university. Between 1906 and 1956, these three architects built the University of
Florida. Each architect altered the campus while respecting the work of earlier architects. Today,
the historic buildings are listed on the National Register of Historic Places, where they are
recognized for their individual merit and as a historic district. Because each architect remained
true to the campus heritage, a nationally acclaimed and harmonious campus was created while
continuing to express each new era.
1 Susan Tate et al., The University of Florida Historic Campus. (Gainesville: University of Florida, 2004).
The University of Florida's National Register Historic District status was awarded, in part,
because of the outstanding and unique architectural merit of the historic buildings. The
university's historic buildings make a nationally recognized contribution to the nation's
architectural patrimony. National Register status was also recognized because the University of
Florida campus was shaped by broad events in the nation's history, and the campus reflects the
university's responses to those events.
One contributing feature on many of the university's historic buildings, and one that
expresses the individuality of each era, is the architectural ornamentation. For the purposes of
this study, architectural ornaments are defined as artistically designed, content carrying elements
on a building. Sculpture, bas relief, and murals are popular media for architectural
ornamentation. Architectural ornamentation can aid in expressing a structure's major themes,
develop its architectural language, and provide points of human scale and interest. In the best
examples, the distinct elements of architectural ornamentation should work together to form a
coherent language and express a unified conceptual idea on the building.
The architectural ornamentation of the University of Florida campus expresses the heritage
and evolution of the campus. This study examines those ornaments and their unique contribution
to the history of the university's built environment.
Statement of the Problem
Beginning with the university's first buildings, Thomas and Buckman Halls, architectural
ornamentation was an important aspect of the university's built environment and the architect's
vision for specific buildings. Thomas and Buckman Halls were both designed by Edwards' firm
in a traditional Collegiate Gothic style, with complementary architectural ornament. Later
buildings by Edwards exhibited a growing creativity in the design of architectural ornament, as
traditional gargoyles were replaced with grotesques in the form of football players. When
Weaver began designing buildings for the university, he used a plethora of custom architectural
ornaments. These ornaments were developed by Weaver and members of his staff, who closely
monitored the design of each piece2
Ornaments were fabricated by different firms throughout the southeastern United States,
including the Atlantic Terra-Cotta Co. and Arnold Brick Stone and Tile of Jacksonville3
Fulton's buildings were all constructed after the Second World War, when popular architectural
styles had almost abandoned ornamentation, yet many of Fulton's works incorporated
ornamentation in a modern style. This study focuses on the themes expressed by the architectural
ornamentation throughout the tenures of the three early architects4.
Architectural ornament, working with its structure, can further develop a particular
architectural style, but it can also tell users about the building's function, location, and time in
history. A tour of the historic campus reveals a wide variety of themes expressed by the
architectural ornamentation. Some pieces are traditional Collegiate Gothic elements, but many
were inspired by the function of the building, the University of Florida's campus, or its region's
natural and social history.
2 Receipts, correspondence, and stamped photographs of process models, Series 75: Architect for the Board of
Control building Program Records, 1925-67, Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers
Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
3 Receipts, correspondence, and stamped photographs of process models, Series 75: Architect for the Board of
Control building Program Records, 1925-67, Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers
Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
4 Dexter Neil Webb, "Fifty Years of Building the University of Florida," (Thesis, University of Florida, 1997).
William Augustus Edwards was Architect to the State Board of Control from 1905 to 1925. Rudolph Weaver served
as Architect to the Board of Control and director of the School of Architecture from 1925 until his death in
1944. Guy Fulton was University System Architect from 1944 until 1953, when he had a stroke and retired.
Guy Fulton's position was not refilled; lobbying from the Florida chapter of the AIA encouraged
lawmakers to close the position and begin hiring outside architects for each individual building.
The following investigation into the changing content of the University of Florida's
historic architectural ornamentation is guided by this thesis: Between the years 1906 and 1956,
the University of Florida Collegiate Gothic architectural ornamentation assimilated influences
that reflected the unique purpose of the building, historical or geographical context, and changes
in society and architecture. As a microcosm of changes occurring in the world, the architectural
ornamentation is a key to the significance of the university's architectural heritage.
Assumptions and Hypothesis
This study assumes that the content of the University of Florida's architectural
ornamentation can be determined by observation of that ornament by the researcher and by
analysis of surviving primary sources about the historic campus. The architectural ornamentation
on the University of Florida campus generally falls into two categories: elements that work
symbolically to develop the Collegiate Gothic architecture, such as crenellation, finials and
balustrades, and pieces that are primarily pictorial in nature. When a pictorial form such as a
palm tree is shown, the designer intended for the ornament to be appreciated as a palm tree, not
as a discussion about negative space, massing, or another esoteric architectural concept.
Ornament is part of the larger visual composition of its building, but its ability to carry
independent content information is one of its major features. Historically, ornamentation was
designed to be understood and appreciated by people with a variety of backgrounds who would
be the users of the dormitories, classroom, and administration buildings at the University of
Florida. Because most of the university's historic buildings still stand and the buildings available
for study today are representative of each architect's work on campus, there is an extant
representative pool from which to draw examples for the study.
The following investigation into the changing content of the University of Florida's
historic architectural ornamentation is guided by one research question: The University of
Florida's architectural ornamentation evolved between the years 1906 and 1956 from traditional
Collegiate Gothic elements into individualized pieces reflecting the unique function, location,
and/or history of the buildings, campus, or geographical region, the changes in the ornament
reflect changes in society and architecture. As a microcosm of changes occurring in the world,
the architectural ornamentation contributes to the significance of the university's unique
architectural heritage.
Significance of the Study
The University of Florida's architectural ornamentation is a significant form of
architectural expression that adds value and interest to the campus context. Architectural
ornamentation is a unique form of signage that can allow a building to tell the story of its history
or function using easily accessible methods. Signs and plaques may tell a user the name or
function of a building, but they lack the personal storytelling quality that architectural
ornamentation contributes to a structure. Representative sculptural forms can inform the users of
a building about many diverse topics. The artistic storytelling function of architectural
ornamentation adds value to a building and contributes to the unique sense of place felt on the
university campus. For example, new freshmen in Sledd Hall can remember that the entrance to
their dormitory wing is marked by a lintel of squirrels playing among orange tree branches,
rather then a just a sign with a few numbers typed onto it. Ornament is also significant because
of its ability to mediate between disparate elements. For example, exterior ornaments can tell the
story of the building's interior functions while other ornaments tell the story of the region's
history.
The architectural heritage of the University of Florida campus is also an expression of the
region's social history and development. Architectural ornamentation can reflect larger issues
prevalent in society at the time of the ornament's design. Ornament, through its application,
design, and content, can tell the story of its society's interests and values. It also reflects the
trends within architecture, since it usually changes in concert with larger architectural design
trends. Ornament's ability to illustrate the values of its society and track developments in
architectural history is one of its significant features.
Substantial analysis of how a set of historic ornaments developed from traditional Gothic
style elements into pieces whose design and content was inspired by local interests and activities
contributes to the body of knowledge on architectural ornamentation. The connection between
ornament and its place of application is significant because it illustrates ornament's ability to
express and develop a sense of place. In an increasingly global and homogenized world,
ornament's ability to create a unique sense of place is of growing interest to designers, users, and
scholars.
For the University of Florida, a new examination of the historic architectural
ornamentation will contribute to the community's knowledge of the historic campus and its
diverse architectural features. By better understanding their architectural ornamentation,
members of the university community may be inspired to appreciate and preserve it.
Scope of the Study
The scope of this study is limited to extant architectural ornamentation on campus.
Secondly, only ornament that was an integral part of the architecture will be considered in the
study. Finally, artworks on or in buildings will not be included in the study.
Definitions and Terms
A variety of specialized terms are necessary to discuss and quantify the architectural
ornamentation found on the University of Florida campus. Because the evolution of the campus's
architectural ornamentation is especially significant in terms of content, most of the following
definitions deal with the content of the ornament, rather then its physical function or location on
the building.
Architectural ornamentation: can include a broad range of building details, but this study
primarily focuses on figural architectural ornamentation containing complex content information
within its design. For example, a sphere is a geometric design, but a sphere with rays emanating
outward from it represents the sun and contains 'sun' as its content information. More abstract
and symbolic architectural ornamentation that is used to develop a design scheme, such as
Gothic, is discussed as it relates to the campus's architectural evolution.
Traditional Collegiate Gothic ornament: architectural ornamentation whose style and
content are clearly inspired by Gothic, English Tudor, or a similar historic European style of
architecture. For example, linen fold and quatrefoils are characteristic of Medieval Gothic,
Gothic Revival, and Collegiate Gothic.
Transitional Collegiate Gothic ornament: is a term developed for this study, although
examples of this type of architectural ornamentation can be found on many Gothic Revival
buildings. Transitional Collegiate Gothic architectural ornamentation is based on traditional
Collegiate Gothic forms; however, the design tells the story of the building's unique function,
time period or geographic location. These pieces illustrate how historic forms of ornamentation
can be slightly modified to create architectural ornamentation inspired by time and place, while
continuing to present a unified Collegiate Gothic concept.
Unique architectural ornament: is architectural ornamentation that tells the story of a
building's function, geographic location or place in history. Inspiration for these ornaments can
be derived from the natural or social history of the area, purpose of the building, recent local
events, or the broader social context of the building. Ornamentation that helps to define a
building's place in history by expressing the passions of its contemporary society will also be
included in this category.
Summary
The University of Florida's historic campus was listed on the National Register of Historic
Places because of its outstanding historical and architectural significance. One aspect of many
historic building's architectural significance is their architectural ornamentation. Architectural
ornamentation is the designed integration of medallions, friezes, grotesques and other sculptural
forms into a building's total design concept. Architectural ornamentation is an important element
on many buildings; it can aid in way-finding, tell the story of a building, develop the building's
design concept, or place in time.
This study analyzes the university's historic architectural ornamentation. Examination of
the University of Florida's historic architectural ornamentation demonstrates an evolution from
traditional Collegiate Gothic elements into unique architectural ornament reflecting the purpose
of the building, historical or geographical context, and changes in society and architecture.
Analysis of the unique architectural ornamentation of the campus will add to the university's
knowledge about its architectural heritage and contribute to broader understanding of the role of
ornament in architecture.
CHAPTER 2
LITERATURE REVIEW
Introduction
Architectural ornamentation has been a popular subject of architectural literature since at
least ancient Egyptian times, when papyrus bundles inspired architectural ornamentation5.
Recent literature on architectural ornamentation typically falls into at least one of four
categories: texts on the history of ornamentation; technical discussions on the preservation of
historic architectural ornamentation; arguments supporting architectural ornamentation; and
testimonies of appreciation of historic ornament. Support for the significance of this study can be
found in histories of ornament, along with a greater appreciation of the university's ornament.
The growing body of work dedicated to preserving ornament demonstrates that the importance of
architectural ornament remained after the rise of Modernism.
History
Recent histories of ornamentation began after the Crystal Palace exhibitions in London
fueled an interest among the Victorians in historic and foreign styles of ornament. These early
works were illustrated pattern books, with pages labeled according to historic style and they fed
the Victorian's love of ornament and the exotic6. Owen Jones' influential Grammar of Ornament
(1856) and Auguste Racinet's Handbook of Ornaments in Color (1875 and 1888) were the
highlights of this genre, but many black and white texts of line drawings survive from the
Victorian era. These works contributed to the widespread use of exotic and historical ornament
5 Beinecke-Reeves Distinguished Professor Roy Graham, personal communication, January 2007.
6 James Trilling, Ornament: A Modern Perspective. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003).
SL 'Ornement Polychrome
styles during the era8. These pattern anthologies also contributed to the Modernist disgust with
ornament, because the texts encouraged craftsmen and patrons to mix and match increasingly
bizarre combinations of ornaments. The German publishing company, Taschen, issued a full
color 2006 republication of Racinet's combined works, illustrating the continuing popularity of
these nineteenth century texts. Meanwhile, Dover Publication's many books of copy-right free
motif designs demonstrate the continuing popularity of simpler pattern books.
After the rise of Modernism, serious research on architectural ornamentation was severely
limited for several decades. With the help of British Museum staff, Eva Wilson,9 in Ornament
8, 000 years. An Illustrated Handbook ofMotifs worked to overcome the flaws of many surviving
nineteenth century anthologies of ornament by including explanations on the more obtuse
meanings and histories of motifs. The text still relied primarily on simple line drawings and it
remained largely limited to motifs and patterns, taken out of their three dimensional context.
Head of the Designs Section in the Department of Prints, Drawings, and Paintings at the
Victoria and Albert Museum, Michael Snodin, and University of Sussex Professor of Art History
Maurice Howard, wrote Ornament. A Social Historyo1 after curating the European Ornament
Gallery at the Victoria and Albert Museum together in 1992. Their work addressed many of the
short comings of earlier histories by organizing ornament by application, then chronology, and
providing photographic examples illustrating ornaments in their intended location. By illustrating
ornament in context, Snodin and Howard allowed specific pieces of ornament to be understood
and appreciated in their intended place. Many ornaments derive much of their meaning and
8 James Trilling, Ornament: A Modern Perspective. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003).
9 Eva Wilson, Ornament 8,000 Years: An Illustrated Handbook of Motifs. (New York: Abrams, Inc, 1994).
10 Maurice Howard and Michael Snodin, Ornament: A Social History Since 1450. (New Haven: Yale University
Press, 1996).
purpose by working with the larger item that forms their context. By encouraging an
understanding of historic ornament within original context, Snodin and Howard encouraged their
readers to engage ornament more fully and appreciate its contributions to design.
Former curator of Old World Textiles at the Textile Museum, Washington, D.C., James
Trilling's, in his 2003 work Ornament: A Modern Perspective11, addressed the history of
ornament, types and styles of historic ornament, and ornament's place in the modern world.
Trilling espoused the concept of a language of ornament. Since the Paleolithic era, ornamental
motifs have traveled and changed with the spread and changing of diverse cultures across the
globe. Historic and recent examples of ornament continue to demonstrate the care and
craftsmanship that designers, patrons and craftsmen put into every ornament. Ornament has been
a subject of immense human efforts and interest for millennia and Trilling encouraged his
readers to place unornamented twentieth century trends in their historic context.
By examining some of the finest examples of ornament from history, including twentieth
century examples by Loos and Matisse, Trilling developed guidelines for ornament viewers to
read and understand ornament: well designed ornaments interact with each other, the item they
are placed on, and the surrounding spaces. Ornament is also designed to interact with its user.
Whether by delighting their emotions or intellect, ornaments serve observant users by engaging
them more fully with the ornamented design. By teaching the complex, but readable, language of
ornament, Trilling prepared readers to engage historic and modern ornament.
Trilling12, as well as earlier anthologies and histories, defined how to see and read
ornament. An ornament has both immediate contexts, for example the facade of its building, and
1 James Trilling, The Language of Ornament. (New York: Thames & Hudson, 2001).
12 James Trilling, The Language of Ornament. (New York: Thames & Hudson, 2001).
a larger context within the culture that designed and uses it. By reading ornament within its
immediate physical environment, and understanding it as a specially designed product of its time
and place, Trilling encouraged users to actively engage the ornaments in their space, despite an
ornament's age or culture of origin.
Preservation
Historic ornament may be a character-defining feature of a historic building and key to its
preservation. When the University of Florida's College of Liberal Arts and Sciences received
major funding in 1998 to restore historic Flint and Anderson halls, reconstructing Flint's
complex terra-cotta facade entrance was an important aspect of the award winning restoration
work3.
The National Park Service has created a variety of bulletins to guide the maintenance,
repair and restoration of many types of historic architectural ornamentation. De Teel Patterson
Tiller' s14 bulletin, The Preservation of Historic Glazed Architectural Terra-Cotta, discusses
factors involved in terra-cotta restoration, while John Waite's The Maintenance andRepair of
Architectural Cast Iron15 covers similar issues facing cast iron ornamentation. Richard Pieper's
The Maintenance, Repair, and Replacement of Historic Cast Stone16 bulletin explains some of
the many threats facing this material, a popular medium for the campus's architectural
ornamentation. Tiller, Waite, and Pieper's work instruct preservationists and demonstrate the
13 M. Jane Gibson, "$3 Million Gift will Trigger Restoration of Historic Flint and Anderson Halls," Alumni
CLASnotes, Spring 1998, http://clasnews.clas.ufl.edu/clasnotes/alumninotes/98spring/.
14 de Teel Patterson Tiller, Preservation Briefs 7: The Preservation ofHistoric GlazedArchitectural Terra-Cotta.
(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office, 1979).
15 John Waite, Preservation Briefs 27: The Maintenance and Repair ofArchitectural Cast Iron. (Washington, D.C.:
U.S. Government Printing Office, 1991), hltp \\ \\ \ .cr.nps.gov/hps/tp efsriefs/brief27.htm.
16 Richard Pieper, Preservation Brief42: The Maintenance, Repair and Replacement ofHistoric Cast Stone.
(Washington, D.C.: U.S. Government Printing Office), http://www.cr.nps.gov/hps/tps/briefs/brief42.htm.
importance of historic architectural ornamentation to the government and people throughout the
nation.
Fan17, Grossman 18, Martin19, and Prudon20 produced technical bulletins for the Association
for Preservation Technology. Each discussed a case study involving the preservation of
architectural ornamentation. They illuminated the care and interest felt by preservationist and
citizens toward their building's historic architectural ornamentation.
Support
Architectural ornament in the twentieth century was both censored and devalued by
proponents of Modernism and the International Style. Any study conducted after the rise of
Modernism, concerning architectural ornament, must first defend architectural ornament and its
relationship with architecture and human expression. Ornament sculptor and Adjunct Professor
of Architecture at Yale, Kent Bloomer examined and rebutted the devaluation of ornament that
occurred during the Modern movement in his seminal work, The Nature of Ornament21. He
grappled with a definition for ornament that expressed its relationship to design and human
expression, its interdependence with architecture, and its independence from art and decoration.
17 Rene Fan, "Terra-Cotta Mosaics at Sea View Hospital: Endangered glazed ceramics on Staten Island," APT
Bulletin 32 (2001): 37-42.
18 Elizabeth Grossman, "Architecture for a public client: The monuments and chapels of the American battle
monuments commission," Bulletin of the Association for Preservation Technology 11 (1979): 30-52.
19 Wilson Martin, "Oolitic limestone conservation: A case study in conservation and maintenance, governor's
mansion, Salt Lake City, Utah. Bulletin of the Associationfor Preservation Technology 17 (1985): 24-33.
20 Theodore Purdon, "Simulating Stone, 1860-1940: Artificial marble, artificial stone, and cast stone," Bulletin of the
Association for Preservation Technology 21 (1989): 79-91.
21 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000).
Furthermore, he explored the nature of architectural ornament as "a natural and universal system
of human communication that can present a valuable segment of human thought" 22
Since this study seeks to reveal the changing content of the architectural ornamentation on
the historic campus, it deals with the thoughts of the designers who developed the campus's
ornamentation and an understanding and appreciation of ornament as a communication tool is
vital. Bloomer found that ornament provides people with an avenue for expressing their
thoughts. Ornament is important to people because it helps to tell their story and, when in place
on a structure, ornament creates human scaled interest points. In his final chapter, Bloomer spoke
particularly to the significance of this study:
By incorporating visions of the world at large and convening with ordinary and profane
things, ornament can articulate the complexity and mythology of particular times and
places...the act of ornamenting can be as much the cultural proclaiming of place as the
informing of a utilitarian object. Ornament gives luster to its objects and to the event of
envelopment. This positive act is also defensive, in that it shields the object or place from
the dreadful anonymity of an existence out of place, from being simply a denoted thing or
only a utility or merely a parcel of land. Ornament exalts ordinary properties by
incorporating extraordinary images and individuals' memories within patterns that can
simultaneously intermingle with a particular history and with local flora and
fauna....ornament can register place as a living event23.
If ornament is an expression of human thought and has the ability to "intermingle with a
particular history and with local flora and fauna" 24 then the moment when the ornament on the
university campus began to intermingle and express local culture is important because the
ornament could then be considered an expression of the university community and the local
context.
22 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000), 12.
23 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000), 231-32.
24 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000), 232.
Trilling25 continued the defense of ornament from a cross cultural, historical viewpoint.
Trilling developed the swirling history of ornament's development throughout history and its
travels through different cultures.
Trilling26 and Bloomer' s27 defense of ornament stems from their architecture and art
history backgrounds; however, ornament has attracted a variety of supporters from other fields.
Professor of Mathematics at the University of Texas at San Antonio, Nikos Salingaros28 applied
principles of mathematics and the evolved preferences of the human eye to argue for an
evolutionary, psychological need for ornament. Architectural ornamentation provides multi-
scaled detail on building surfaces. A building with smooth, plain facades lacks detail and
resembles the drab surfaces seen by suffers of a variety of debilitating neurological disorders.
Salingaros believed that the blank surfaces of Modernist buildings do not provide enough
information to the human eye and contribute to stress among normal viewers. People need
buildings that provide them with a variety of visual details and architectural ornamentation has
been developed to provide those details; its absence from modem buildings can be intellectually
understood, but it can not be emotionally withstood.
Dr. Llewellyn Negrin29 of the University of Tasmania discussed the role of ornament as a
carrier of meaning. She affirmed ornaments ability to carry complex meanings within its designs.
She divulged into the recently maligned history of ornament and believes that this is an aspect of
its association with the feminine qualities of architecture. Negrin called for a renewed
25 James Trilling, Ornament: A Modern Perspective. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003).
26 James Trilling, Ornament: A Modern Perspective. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003).
27 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000).
28 Nikos Salingaros, "The Sensory Value of Ornament," Communication and C. ',,iii 'a, 36 (2003): 331-351.
29 Llewellyn Negrin, "Ornament and the Feminine," Feminist Theory 7(2006): 219-235.
appreciation of architectural ornamentation because of its ability to develop and express complex
meanings, including feminine ones.
As the first century in human history to celebrate an absence of ornament waned, a variety
of authors from different fields began to reevaluate ornament's place in design. Ornament's
ability to express complex meanings gives it a unique place in a designer's repertoire. Bloomer30
and Trilling,31 along with a variety of authors from diverse fields, have worked to raise
awareness about the value of ornamentation and its unique qualities. This study draws support
from these arguments; it highlights ornament's important contribution to design and its value to
people. The study also capitalizes on ornament's ability to carry complex meanings by studying
how those meanings change throughout the University of Florida's historic campus.
Appreciation
As academics and architectural historians explored the history of ornamentation, many
places and individuals across America rediscovered the ornamental legacy of their
neighborhoods. Increased awareness of local architectural resources may lead to greater
preservation of ornament. In at least one instance, it has lead to the development of new
architectural ornament. Photographer Robert Flischel32 photographed the architectural ornament
of Cincinnati's public schools, documenting its history and development.
Architectural ornament was important to the people of Cincinnati. School children,
teachers and citizens all donated money to pay for the ornamentation of these schools. They
30 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000).
31 James Trilling, Ornament: A Modern Perspective. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003).
32 Robert Flischel, ed., An Expression of the Community: Cincinnati Public Schools' Legacy ofArt and Architecture.
(Cincinnati: The Art League Press, 2001).
believed that the architectural ornament could express their culture and their pride in the public
schools33.
Flischel found that the architectural ornament of the Cincinnati public schools was loved
by residents and, over many decades, had developed a complex and thorough lexicon. The
architectural ornament could teach by illustrating history, stories and model student behavior34. It
was also inspired by the local community; the themes explored in the architectural ornament
related to the buildings' function as schools and to the target audience, students35. The
architectural ornamentation also taught students about their heritage by painting idealistic scenes
of the Dutch countryside, the origin of many Cincinnati citizens36. Flischel's work is reflected in
this study because it demonstrated a people's love of their local architectural ornament and how
they used their architectural ornament to express their place and cultural values. The Cincinnati
public schools are an excellent example of well-developed ornamentation in an academic setting
and the specialization of ornament to the setting.
Enthusiast Darleen Crist's37 photographic essay of American gargoyles and grotesques,
American Gargoyles: Spirits in Stone, demonstrated the popularity of historic architectural
33 Beth Sullebarger, "Foreword" in, An Expression of the Community: Cincinnati Public Schools' Legacy ofArt and
Architecture, ed. Robert Flischel (Cincinnati: The Art League Press, 2001), 6.
34 Anita Ellis, "Ornament and Artistery in the Cincinnati Public Schools" in, An Expression of the Community:
Cincinnati Public Schools' Legacy ofArt and Architecture, ed. Robert Flischel (Cincinnati: The Art League
Press, 2001), 9-17.
35 Anita Ellis, "Ornament and Artistery in the Cincinnati Public Schools" in, An Expression of the Community:
Cincinnati Public Schools' Legacy ofArt and Architecture, ed. Robert Flischel (Cincinnati: The Art League
Press, 2001), 15-17.
36 Anita Ellis, "Ornament and Artistery in the Cincinnati Public Schools" in, An Expression of the Community:
Cincinnati Public Schools' Legacy ofArt and Architecture, ed. Robert Flischel (Cincinnati: The Art League
Press, 2001), 15.
37 Darleen Crist, American Gargoyles: Spirits in Stone. (New York: Clarkson N. Potter, 2001).
ornament and it is an interesting survey of many unique pieces of ornament. The text organized
its collection by content, and provided photographs depicting examples from each content group.
President of the Friends of Terra-Cotta, Susan Tunick38 documented the use of terra cotta
architectural ornamentation in New York City and the history of the architectural terra cotta
industry in America. The development of the language of ornament during the first half of the
twentieth century is explored in the text, with examples from New York City. Several of the
stylistic trends seen in the development of New York City's architectural terra cotta can also be
found in the ornamentation on the University of Florida campus. For example, there are
gargoyles on the New York Life Insurance Company headquarters that are very similar to the
ones found atop Leigh Hall. The New York Life Insurance building was completed in 1928; only
one year after Leigh Hall. Tunick found that ornamental architectural terra cotta was a thriving
industry in the first decades of the twentieth century and at least one of the companies detailed in
the text, the Atlantic Terra Cotta Co, sold products to the University of Florida39
Architect Louis Sullivan created aesthetic unity in the skeleton frame buildings of the early
years of the skyscraper. Sullivan used ornament, not as a superfluous decoration, but to
emphasize the structure and the function of his buildings. The famous adage "form follows
function" comes from the following statement by Sullivan:
It is the pervading law of all things organic and inorganic, of all things physical and
metaphysical, of all things human and super human, of all true manifestations of the head,
38 Susan Tunick, Terra-Cotta Skyline: New York's Architectural Ornament. (New York: Princeton Architectural
Press, 1997).
39 Receipts, correspondence, and stamped photographs of process models, Series 75: Architect for the Board of
Control Building Program Records, 1925-67, Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers
Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
of the heart, of the soul, that the life is recognizable in its expression, that form ever
follows function. This is the law40
Architect Ronald Schmitt41 produced an exhaustive look at the ornamentation developed
by Sullivan, especially in Chicago. Sullivan is famous for his ornament derived from foliage and
geometric patterns, and this text chronicled the development of that lexicon throughout
Sullivan's life. Professor of Art History at Northwestern University, David Van Zanten42
explored the meaning of Sullivan's ornamentation, thereby expressing his belief that
ornamentation can express particular ideas. Van Zanten and Schmitt's research on Sullivan
contributes to this study; it provided examples of the evolution of architectural ornamentation
through time. They also provided further support to Bloomer43 and Trilling44, by developing
their theories about Sullivan's ornamentation in terms of its ability to express complex thoughts
and grow throughout a designer's career.
Many other writers have also worked to promote the architectural ornamentation of certain
designers or places. Notably, architect Ernest Burden's45 discussion of the Nebraska state capital
highlighted its architectural ornamentation and illustrated how the buildings' architectural
ornamentation expounded local culture. The Nebraska capital building was constructed over a
ten year span starting in 1922, while many of the University of Florida's ornamented historic
40 Wikipedia contributors, "Form follows function," Wikipedia, The Free Encyclopedia,
http://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Form follows function&oldid=l15258832.
41 Ronald Schmitt, Sullivanesque: Urban Architecture and Ornamentation. (Chicago: University of Illinois Press,
2002).
42 David Van Zanten, Sullivan's City: The Meaning of Ornament for Louis Sullivan. (New York: W.W. Norton,
2000).
43 Kent Bloomer, The Nature of Ornament. (New York: W.W. Norton, 2000).
44 James Trilling, Ornament: A Modern Perspective. (Seattle: University of Washington Press, 2003).
45 Ernest Burden, Building facades: Faces, figures, and ornamental detail. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996).
buildings were being built. On the Nebraska capitol building, stone carvings, murals and mosaics
tell the history of democracy, and the natural and social history of Nebraska's Native Americans
and settlers46. A nineteen foot sower crowns the dome and proclaims Nebraska's agricultural
pride and skill, similar to the football players on the University of Florida's Sledd Hall.
These works illustrate a growing appreciation of historic architectural ornamentation. They
support this study by demonstrating methods to explore specific sets of architectural ornaments.
These authors also demonstrate a growing interest in historic architectural ornamentation and an
understanding of the important content information found within the ornamentation. This study
will profit from the increased understanding and appreciation of architectural ornamentation
created by these works
Summary
Architectural ornamentation has been a valued, cross-cultural element of architectural
design throughout the history of the built environment. During the first half of the twentieth
century, many architects were actively using ornaments in their projects; however, other
designers declared a war on ornamentation. Their successful campaign caused the use and study
of architectural ornamentation to all but cease during the twentieth century. In the last decades of
the century, an interest in ornamentation reemerged. First, new histories and anthologies of
historic ornament exposed a fresh, post-Modem audience to the fantastic world of ornament. As
Modernism's grip on the design community waned, architects and designers began to explore the
value of ornament, its place in a human world and the unique features that it can bring to a
project. Today, the work of many preservationists to save historic ornament encourages people to
examine the historic ornaments in their community and allows them to appreciate the continuing
46 Ernest Burden, Building facades: Faces, figures, and ornamental detail. (New York: McGraw-Hill, 1996), 56.
relevance that ornament has with its building. Whether as members of a preservation team or just
curious individuals, people across the country have begun to rediscover their community's
architectural ornament. Their efforts to promote their ornament and arouse new interest in
ornament have inspired this study.
The existing literature is significant because it develops historic architectural
ornamentation as a valuable segment of architectural design, worthy of individual consideration.
The significance of ornamentation is supported by evidence of its ability to further develop an
architectural style, carry complex content information, and express the interests of the local
community. While many works on ornamentation have been published recently, research is still
needed to increase understanding on how collections of ornaments develop and work together.
Also, considering the interest in creating ornaments that are inspired by the local community,
further research in needed to understand how ornament is designed and implemented in an
architectural project. This study will contribute to the body of knowledge by analyzing how one
collection of architectural ornamentation was created and developed over time.
CHAPTER 3
SURVEY OF THE HISTORIC ORNAMENT OF THE UNIVERSITY OF FLORIDA CAMPUS
Introduction
Beginning with the first two buildings built on campus, Thomas and Buckman Halls, and
traveling through the tenures of university architects Edwards, Weaver, and Fulton, the
university's historic architectural ornamentation can be seen to change. Analysis of the
architectural ornamentation on the University of Florida campus suggests changes from a
traditional Collegiate Gothic application into a unique expression of place: geographical,
historical, or cultural. By scrutinizing the changes in the campus's historic architectural
ornamentation, this idea can be tested.
William Augustus Edwards and Partners, 1905-1925
William Augustus Edwards and his partners were commissioned to design the new
University of Florida campus after winning a design competition against Henry John Klutho.
Edwards, of South Carolina, presented the State Board of Control with a Collegiate Gothic
design while Klutho, of Jacksonville FL, submitted a Beaux Arts entry47. The Board of Control
chose Edwards and the Collegiate Gothic for their new flagship university. The Collegiate
Gothic style architecturally connected the university with the grand, established institutions of
England and the Continent, sending the message that the University of Florida was one member
of a collegiate chain stretching back to the early gothic period in Europe. The first two buildings
were completed on a university campus of sandy wilderness, wetlands and pine hammocks.
Thomas and Buckman Halls, completed in 1906, are simple, almost identical Collegiate
Gothic buildings. Designed as dormitories, they housed the university's students, dining,
47 P.K. Yonge, chair, "Pay report: $300.00 to H.J. Klutho for Architectural Services." Report of the Board of Control
of the State Educational Institutions ofFlorida for the period beginning June 5, 1905 and ending January
1, 1907. (Tallahassee: State Printers, 1907), 120.
lecturing, and administrative facilities during the opening semester of 1906. These two building's
established the university's palette of red brick offset by ivory details, roofed in terra-cotta tiles.
The architectural ornamentation of Thomas and Buckman Halls works to further the Collegiate
Gothic design. Lightly colored cast balustrades, quoins, and delicate water spouts all work
together to develop the Gothic architecture. These details are aided by crenellation and heavy
stone framing around the major windows, details to symbolically connect the dormitories with
Gothic European architecture.
The cast concrete face (Figure 3-1) is repeated in the hood mold over almost every
doorway to Buckman and Thomas Halls. A male face is a traditional ornamental element in
Gothic and Renaissance decorative design48, and the traditional European motif is further
developed by the ornament of playing woodland elves (Figure 3-2) on Thomas Hall. Both of
these ornaments reflect traditional Collegiate Gothic content, male faces and elves, but even
these ornaments display some sensitivity to the university's environment. The man (Figure 3-1)
is somewhat wild; his wavy, loose hair is crowned with leaves and berries, and his expression is
fierce. Meanwhile, the elves are playing in a thicket of oak branches (Figure 3-2). The Collegiate
Gothic style drew from centuries of European tradition and within that style, a plethora of design
inspiration was available to Edwards. While the architectural ornaments all work together to
develop the traditional Gothic Revival style of the buildings, Edwards' choice of forest elves and
wild men may have been a deliberate comment on the university's location in the Florida
wilderness.
Completed in 1909 and designed as the Agricultural Experiment Station, Newell Hall
continues the Collegiate Gothic design of Thomas and Buckman Halls. The ivory crenellation is
48 Auguste Racinet, Racinet's Historic Ornament in Full Color (X: Dover Publications, 1988).
clearly offset by its red brick and tile background. Combined with the water table and
fenestration details, the ornament continues to develop a traditional Collegiate Gothic language
for the campus. Under the eaves, a small repeating floral motif develops the Gothic style in more
detail (Figure 3-3).
In 1910, Flint Hall's ornamentation furthered the Gothic Revival on campus. Ornamented
crenellation along the parapet, and detailing around the fenestration emphasis these elements.
The entrances are under a gable end and highlighted by ornamentation similar to the examples
from Anderson Hall (Figure 3-5 and 3-6).
Transitional architectural ornamentation, as defined in this study, is traditionally styled
ornament that may reveal the function of the building, or tell about the local area. The University
of Florida began making tentative steps toward the development of a language of transitional
ornament as early as 1912, with the construction of the Agriculture Building, later named
Griffin-Floyd Hall.
Griffin-Floyd Hall incorporates many traditional Gothic ornaments: detailed window sills
and lintels, cornice, and water table masonry. The central tower feature, under a gable, on the
eastern side divides the facade and marks the main entrance. Tower features were often
incorporated in Gothic Revival buildings; they structurally related the building to ancient castles
and their towers while accenting entranceways or important windows. Here, the ornamentation
works with the tower feature to further develop the entrance way. A terra-cotta cornucopia
(Figure 3-4) marks the doorway centered in the tower, while other finials and trim pieces frame
the fenestration and detail the tower. The cornucopia's large shape and ivory color stand out
against the red brick facade of Griffin-Floyd Hall, facilitating way-finding by clearly indicating
the entrances to the building. The cornucopia also tells visitors about the greater purpose of the
College of Agriculture, to develop methods and educate individuals to feed the state of Florida.
The overflowing bounty of the terra-cotta cornucopia illustrates that the College of Agriculture is
capable of carrying out its mandate and the ornament graphically expresses the purpose of the
college. This ornament, installed six years after the founding of the university, illustrates the
ability of traditionally styled ornaments to express the function of the building and the purpose of
its users. The cornucopia mediates between a traditional architectural style, rooted in ancient
precedents, and the contemporary functions of its twentieth century American building by
expressing the design style of one and the function of the other.
Edwards' next building, Language Hall of 1913, now Anderson Hall, has traditional
Collegiate Gothic ornaments, and a scroll over the main entrance names the building (Figure 3-
5). Like Griffin-Floyd and Flint Halls, Anderson Hall's primary facade is broken by a protruding
tower entrance feature. On it, the main entrance's ogee arch is crowned by a finial and
emphasized by surrounding ornamentation (Figure 3-6). Lightly colored masonry window sills
and lintels, the water table, and crenellation details expand the Collegiate Gothic vocabulary of
Anderson Hall.
That same year, Peabody Hall was completed for the Teacher's College. Peabody Hall
features an even more elaborate tower feature along its main facade. First, the tower steps out to
showcase two stories of fenestration encased in light, rusticated masonry with quoin surrounds
(Figure 3-7). On the ground floor, the entrance way projects further and is detailed by
ornamental finials, pointed arches, and detailed masonry. Carved text in a traditional font is
arched over the entrance, naming the building and incorporating the signage into the
ornamentation (Figure 3-8). The top of the tower is outlined in light masonry and crowned by a
matching finial and shield motif. The Gothic ornamental language on Peabody Hall's tower
feature is supported by coordinating water table and cornice courses in light colored masonry,
and window sills and lintels. Although the architectural ornamentation does not pictorially
provide information on the function of Peabody Hall, the way the cornucopia on Griffin-Floyd
Hall does, the ornamentation does work together to promote the Collegiate Gothic design
language.
In 1914, Edwards' firm again incorporated ornamentation into both a building's
architectural style and modern function. Bryan Hall, constructed for the College of Law, uses
both traditional Collegiate Gothic detailing, such as a prominent water table and cornice masonry
course, and pieces that specifically relate to the function of the building. Bryan Hall has a large
projecting tower feature, situated slightly to the south along the main facade (Figure 3-9). The
primary entrance is through the tower. A limestone masonry frieze above the doorway reads
"College of Law" (Figure 3-10). Below the crenellated top of the tower, a plaque (Figure 3-11)
depicts a version of the state seal on a shield held by two vines. On the other side of the tower,
another plaque is detailed with the scales of justice. On Bryan Hall, the situation of two plaques
in the tower places the ornamentation in a prominent position along the facade and allows it to
aid way-finding by highlighting the entrance. It is noteworthy that this method of using ornament
would be emulated in an addition to the law school thirty-six years later.
For the growing Law Library, Weaver added a small, compatible addition to the north side
of Bryan Hall in 1939. The additional entrance is smaller in scale then the original tower, but it
also incorporates a plaque below the cornice line (Figure 3-12). This plaque, of a lawyer with a
book and scales, continues the work of the earlier ornamentation by telling the story of the
building's function. The style of the plaque is significant as a statement of its own time; it
bridges the gap between the original building's ornamentation and the plaques on Fulton's 1950
addition.
The university's first gymnasium was completed in 1915 (Figure 3-13). The building's
ornamentation continues the Collegiate Gothic language through several cast stone masonry
courses, pointed arched lintels over the fenestration and brick buttresses, capped in more
masonry. Along the front, a raised facade with stylized crenellation along the parapet and
flanking buttresses create a tower entrance with a large centered doorway. United, these
architectural elements help to create a Collegiate Gothic building, integrated with a gymnasium
space and its rows of clerestory windows along the sides.
The last building that Edwards completed as Architect to the Board of Control was the
University Auditorium. Built between 1922 and 1925, the Auditorium's architectural
ornamentation combines many of the elements already seen throughout the campus and includes
new details. Along the matching east and west sides, a water table runs along the building and
large Tudor arched windows with intertwined tracery arches sit under each projecting gable
(Figure 3-14). The building is crowned by a pinnacle with radiating arched buttresses. Brick
buttresses capped in cast stone details visually support the edges of the building and continue the
Gothic language. In addition to the Tudor arches and finials, the exterior of the building features
four mask corbel casts (Figure 3-15) in a traditional style, supporting the Tudor arches for two
windows (Figure 3-14). Together these details create a Gothic ornamental language that develops
the building's Gothic Revival style and improves to its ability to express that style. This building
was the culmination of Edwards' career at the university and has one of the best preserved
interiors.
The interior continues to develop the Gothic ornamental design language. Linen fold
paneling along the balcony railings, exposed trusses, and Gothic style chandeliers add to the
building's Gothic atmosphere (Figure 3-16). The most significant ornaments on the University
Auditorium are plaster carvings springing from the hammerbeam trusses (Figure 3-17). These
faux-wood painted plaster cast gargoyles speak directly to university life. Like the cornucopias
on Griffin-Floyd Hall, these figures are designed to resemble traditional Gothic Revival
ornaments; however, they are clearly inspired by archetypes of university life and relate to the
users of the building. This is significant because it illustrates that inspiration for Gothic styled
ornaments could come from the twentieth century campus upon which those ornaments would be
used.
Edwards designed two more buildings for the University of Florida after the Auditorium,
completed during the term of his successor, Rudolph Weaver. The first of these was the
University Library, renamed Smathers Library. Along the west side of the building, a row of
clerestory windows (Figure 3-18) light the interior reading room. These window bays are set in
compound pointed brick arches and flanked by buttresses, an element of Gothic Revival
architecture. Courses of ivory masonry along the water table and cornice combine with matching
caps on the buttresses to further convey the Collegiate Gothic symbolism. The greatest
concentration of architectural ornamentation is on the original tower entrance feature (Figure 3-
19).
As the library expanded, a new, compatible entrance was added (Figure 3-20) by Weaver.
This tower entrance features a central doorway crowned by a large compound pointed arch
leading through a shallow vault to the doors. Brick buttresses capped in contrasting light stone
masonry flank either side of the opening. Above the doorway, architectural ornamentation
connects the doorway opening to a small set of windows. Pointed arches, sills and lintels are
interconnected to emphasis this space through their contrasting color and detailed texture. On the
second story of the towers, a large recessed window crowned by a compound pointed arch
repeats the detail language on the first floor and differentiates the tower windows from the row
of clerestory windows along the side. The architectural ornamentation of the University Library
enhances the Gothic language of the protruding tower entrances and fenestration pattern. The
ornamental details connect the fenestration, emphasis the entrance, and complete the building's
Collegiate Gothic statement.
Completed in 1927, Edwards' Horticulture Science Building, renamed Rolfs Hall, uses
architectural ornamentation to enhance to Collegiate Gothic architectural language and tell users
the story of the building's function. First, traditional Gothic Revival details such as label molding
over the fenestration, quoins, and prominent oriel windows with checkerboard pattern friezes
above the cornice line enlarge upon the Horticulture Science Building's Collegiate Gothic design
(Figure 3-21). Then, along the cornice course and in the indentations of the battlement (Figure 3-
22), detailed floral medallions (Figure 3-23) begin to tell the story of the building's function.
These medallions wrap around the building and their story telling ability is enhanced by the
inclusion of a bee hive plaque encircled in a wreath of fruit and flowers (Figure 3-24). Thus,
users of the Horticulture Science Building are surrounded by the focus of their studies, flowers,
and the means to create more, bees, are also provided by the building's architectural
ornamentation. This is significant because, like Griffin-Floyd Hall, it is an example of how
architectural ornamentation can both compliment its building's archaic architectural design style
and tell users about the building's function in the twentieth century.
Rudolph Weaver, 1925-1944
In 1925, several gentlemen from the State Board of Control did an exhaustive search for an
architect who would reside in Gainesville and work exclusively designing for the State Board of
Control, which managed the state's four educational institutions49. They eventually persuaded
Rudolph Weaver to take the positions of Architect to the Board of Control and head of a new
architecture program at the University of Florida.
Shortly after Weaver's arrival in Gainesville, President Murphree wrote with pride to the
state legislature,
Under the Board's authority the country was surveyed to find the ablest man, a man not
only in love with teaching, with experience as a teacher of architecture, but one who had
also the ability and experience to serve the Board as its architect in a building program.
Fortunately, such a man was found. Mr. Rudolph Weaver, who is director of the School of
Architecture and Architect to the Board of Control, is a man of eminent training in the best
schools of the East. He has successful experience as an architect and teacher of architecture
in some of the larger institutions of the West. Since coming to the university in late
September, 1925, he has organized a force of draftsmen, set up the School of Architecture,
has equipped it, and has paid salaries and expenses of these two divisions of his work out
of the usual six percent architect's fees on buildings for which plans and specifications
were committed to his hands.50
Weaver had designed for the State College of Washington, University of Illinois and
University of Idaho51. He invited his colleague from the University of Idaho, Guy Fulton, to
accompany him to Gainesville too. The first building Weaver designed and completed for the
49 Albert Murphree, "President's Report of the University of Florida." Report of the Board of Control of the State
Educational Institutions ofFlorida for the period beginning July 1, 1924 and ending June 30, 1926. chair.
P.K. Yonge. (Tallahassee: State Printers, 1926), 12-13.
50 Albert Murphree, "President's Report of the University of Florida." Report of the Board of Control of the State
Educational Institutions ofFlorida for the period beginning July 1, 1924 and ending June 30, 1926. chair.
P.K. Yonge. (Tallahassee: State Printers, 1926), 12-13.
51Photographs and drawings of work from Weaver's previous institutions, Rudolph Weaver Architectural Records,
Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
University of Florida was the Chemistry-Pharmacy Building, renamed Leigh Hall in honor of its
dean.
Leigh Hall's original wings were completed in 1927. In 1949, a coordinating Collegiate
Gothic wing was added on the west side, creating an interior courtyard. The original wings of
Leigh Hall use a plethora of architectural ornaments in a Collegiate Gothic motif to tell the story
of the building's purpose and develop the architectural language. A belt course of ivory colored
masonry features the names of famous chemists and pharmacists throughout history (Figure 3-
25). These names are carved in a Gothic style font and serve two symbolic purposes. First, they
proclaim the function of the building by celebrating famous practitioners in the field, but they
also serve the same symbolic purpose as Collegiate Gothic, they connect the University of
Florida with the established institutions of Europe. These names unite the university's chemistry
and pharmacy program with iconic European scientists and their institutions of learning.
The chemistry ornamentation is further expounded by chemical symbols on the gutter
drains and in masonry along the facade (Figure 3-26). Along the cornice line, four repeating cast
stone gargoyles, or grotesques (Figure 3-27), also tell users about the building's function.
Resembling traditional Gothic gargoyles, each one is engaged in a common laboratory function.
These Gothic style grotesques tell the story of the building's function and the activities inside;
thereby becoming mediators between the interior and exterior of the building, and the building's
traditional architecture and twentieth century function.
In addition to these story-telling ornaments, Weaver used a traditional Collegiate Gothic
grape ornamentation around an entrance (Figure 3-28). Another entrance displays traditional
scroll brackets and text to relate to the Collegiate Gothic design and inspire students (Figure 3-
29). Oriel windows with checkerboard patterns distinguish the entrances further (Figure 3-30)
and quoins, instead of buttresses, emphasize their protruding edges (Figure 3-31). Most of the
fenestration is detailed by label molding and heavy sills. Along the roof line, balustrades
continue the Collegiate Gothic language of the building. The Chemistry-Pharmacy Building's
architectural ornamentation is significant on campus because it combines a variety of traditional
Collegiate Gothic ornamentation and detailing with ornaments that tell the story of the building's
function in symbolic and pictorial ways.
In 1927, Weaver completed a building for the College of Engineering. The Mechanical and
Engineering Building, Walker Hall, was built as a companion to Edwards' 1911 Benton Hall.
Benton Hall was the college's first building and was destroyed in the 1960s to make way for
Little Hall. Walker Hall is a simpler Collegiate Gothic building, but it does use several
traditional details. The entrance is centered in a projecting tower feature, now obscured by vines.
Compared to many on campus, this tower is less prominent because it is the height of the cornice
line and does not extend above it, over the roof. The opening for the entrance is a compound
Tudor arch leading to a shallow vault before the doorway. The fenestration and cornice line are
outlined in contrasting masonry, and quoins emphasize the edges of the building.
In 1928, the university built a new, Tudor style building to the south of campus for WRUF
Radio Station. It now serves as the Police Building. The high pitched roof, and half-timber,
waddle and daub style, distinguish it from the large buildings of the main campus. Dark wooden
exposed posts and beams outline sections of brick and further reflect the Tudor Gothic Revival.
The entrance is sheltered by a projecting gabled roof and is detailed by a brick semi-circular
arched opening, rather then the more typical contrasting light stone masonry arches used on other
buildings. These details reflect the smaller scale of the radio building while continuing its Gothic
Revival architectural language.
The University of Florida continued to grow throughout the twenties and Rudolph Weaver
completed an additional dormitory in 1929. Thomas and Buckman Halls had been the only
dormitories on campus, and the university's students were overflowing Gainesville in their
search for housing. Sledd Hall, first called the New Dormitory, was built between Thomas and
Buckman Halls. According to campus legend, together with an additional dormitory, completed
in 1939, Thomas and Sledd Hall form the letters UF, naming the campus from the air.
Sledd Hall, constructed during the height of the Florida Boom in the late nineteen twenties,
features traditional details as well as novel architectural ornaments. Sledd Hall's builds on the
elements used on the first dormitories: a cast stone ornament over every entrance, bay windows,
water table, and cornice moldings. Along the south wall, bricks form a large diaper brick pattern,
the largest example of this masonry detail on campus and a traditional Gothic element. Like
Walker and Leigh Halls, rusticated quoins, rather then buttresses, emphasis the edges and
projections of the building. Light cast stone masonry molding draws attention to the fenestration.
The cornice line and crenellation are also emphasized by masonry moldings. Along some parts
of the facade, the indentations in the crenellation are filled with cast stone balustrades. The
Collegiate Gothic design language is further developed by several two story bay windows.
In addition to these traditional details, Sledd Hall has many custom cast stone ornaments
integrated into the facade. One ornament may be the signature plaque of the architect or an
advertisement for the architecture program, depicting men with drafting tools and sporting
equipment, it seems to promise students that they will have time for both activities (Figure 3-32).
This plaque is set over a door in the brick facade, where passing students can easily see it.
Sledd Hall was opened with fanfare in 1929 and a brochure published to celebrate the
completion of Sledd Hall, "The Stone Carvings of the New Dormitory, University of Florida",
states that:
An attempt has been made in the stone carvings of the new dormitory to portray local
interests, activities, and historical events rather then use conventional motives ordinarily
employed.
Aside from the Florida animal, bird, sea and plant life largely made use of about the
individual entrances, the life of the Florida Indians at the time of the Spanish discovery is
shown above the arcade entrances above the residence tower. The Spanish discovery is
also shown in the stone panels of one of the oriel windows. In addition to this, various
phases of student activities are demonstrated here and there about the exterior of the
building2.
Along the cornice of the building, several cast stone sculptures represent different activities
performed by University of Florida students (Figure 3-33). A graduate, soldier, reader, and
athlete are some of the different guises of the student body and these casts. They reflect the lives
of the student's living inside Sledd Hall and connect the Collegiate Gothic dormitory with its
users. The student grotesques are significant because they relate to the users of Sledd Hall.
Sledd Hall's ornamentation tells the story of Florida's history through a scene of early
Spanish ships discovering the state (Figure 3-34). This tableau celebrates Florida's history and
discovery by Spain. The Spanish ships plaques are noteworthy because they tell the story of
Florida's history. The student cornice figures and Spanish discovery ornaments relate Sledd Hall
to its location on a university campus and to the Florida history of Spanish exploration.
Sledd Hall's architectural ornamentation also promotes the preferences of the founders of
the university. When William Augustus Edwards' Collegiate Gothic design was chosen as the
vision for the new campus, it was because the founders wanted the University of Florida to be
52 Brochure, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967, Special and Area
Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
architecturally linked with the great historic institutions of Europe. While designing Sledd Hall,
Weaver contacted many historic universities in Europe, asking for permission to place carved
replicas of their seals (Figure 3-35) on Sledd Hall53. "The Stone Carvings of the New Dormitory,
University of Florida" describes these seals as one of the main attractions of Sledd Hall and
hopes that "[o]n subsequent additions to the building it is hoped that more of these seals may be
obtained, finally using the seals of our own older Universities54'.
Sledd Hall's ground level ornamentation depicts a plethora of sea and animal life. Sledd
Hall followed the early campus tradition of successive entrances to separate groups of dormitory
rooms. Two entrances have several small carvings of plants and animals (Figure 3-36) around
the trim. Other entrances have animal life ornaments in their spandrels and in friezes above
(Figure 3-37). Since a different arrangement of architectural ornaments marks each entrance,
users of the building can easily remember which doorway leads to their wing and the ornaments
aid in way finding. Along the lower cornice line of the bay windows, plant carvings (Figure 3-
38) add another level of ornamentation to the multilayered facade (Figure 3-39). Many of the
plants and animals found around Sledd Hall can be found in Florida and they augment the
building's sense of place by depicting scenes from the region's natural history. These ornaments
are significant because they work with traditional elements of Collegiate Gothic design, yet their
content is inspired by the local environment.
Sledd Hall's elaborate connecting tower (Figure 3-40) to Thomas Hall further develops
Sledd Hall's Collegiate Gothic design and history lesson. It symbolically depicts the relationship
53 Notes and Letters, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967 Special
and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
54 Brochure, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967, Special and Area
Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
between the early Spanish explorer Juan Ortiz and his friend, an important local Native
American, Chief Mucozo55. Although the relief carvings on the tower (Figure 3-41) show Plains
Nations items and motifs, Mucozo (Figure 3-42) and Ortiz are clearly labeled and the tower's
designer, University of Florida art professor W.K. Long intended for the tower's ornamentation
to symbolically represent the local Native Americans for which it is named, although he used
Plains artifacts as models56. A similar design solution was used for the first Seal of the State of
Florida. Designed in 1865, the seal depicted a Plains Indian woman scattering flowers until 1985,
when she was replaced with a Florida Seminole woman57. The ornaments on the tower were
constructed by the Arnold Stone, Brick and Tile Company in Jacksonville, FL5
The Mucozo Tower was the subject of discussion and debate among the university faculty
and administration. Architect Rudolph Weaver sent out letters requesting suggestions from
members of the university community59. The tower was originally planned as the first of a pair
of towers, with a second intended for the north side of the dormitory courtyard. Townes R.
Leigh, dean of the Chemistry-Pharmacy School, sent a letter to Weaver requesting for the first
tower to be named after the famous local Seminole, Chief Micanopy, and for the second tower to
be named for Micanopy's wife, Tuscawilla. Leigh's interest in the names and ornamentation
55 Sharon Blansett, A History of University of Florida Residence Facilities, Revised 2nd Edition (Gainesville:
University of Florida Department of Housing and Residence Education, 2003), 11.
56 Sharon Blansett, A History of University of Florida Residence Facilities, Revised 2nd Edition (Gainesville:
University of Florida Department of Housing and Residence Education, 2003), 11-12.
57 Florida Department of State, "The Florida State Seal," Cultural Historical and Information Programs,
Ihp in %\\ .flheritage.com/facts/symbols/seals.cfm.
58 Photographs and Receipts, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967,
Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
59 Letters, notes and memos, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967,
Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
planned for Sledd Hall's tower demonstrates the interest members of the university community
felt in their architecture and its ornamentation. Leigh wrote, "[b]oth of the names, Tuscawilla
and Micanopy, are very musical and towers to their memory will be found no where else, since
they are ancient local celebrities"60. Although Leigh's suggestion was supplanted in favor of the
slightly more famous and less controversial Mucozo and Ortiz61, the dialogue Weaver initiated
shows that he wanted to create a Gothic style tower that would commemorate the local history of
the area.
The Mucozo Tower is one of the most elaborate examples of architectural ornamentation
on the University of Florida campus. Both sides of the tower have ornamentation celebrating
early Florida history with Mucozo and Ortiz. Walking through the tower, a cast stone ribbed
vault (Figure 3-43) and a Gothic pendent lantern continue the Collegiate Gothic language of the
tower. On the second and third stories of the tower, an oriel window with a diamond pattern cast
stone frieze between each story's windows draws more attention to the tower. It is also a full
story higher then Thomas and Sledd Halls and capped by crenellation. The Mucozo Tower is a
traditional Collegiate Gothic feature that illustrates how architectural ornamentation can be used
in a traditional manner, but be inspired by the local community.
The Infirmary building for the University of Florida was completed in 1931. The entrance
is centered along the main facade and most of the building's architectural ornamentation is used
to emphasis this feature. Instead of using a more formidable tower entrance feature, Weaver used
60 Letter, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967, Special and Area
Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
61 Micanopy Historical Society, "Chief Micanopy," Micanopy Historical Society Museum,
ihp \ \\ .afn.org/~micanopy/micanopy.html.
Chief Micanopy was Chief of the Seminole Nation during the Second Seminole War, which lasted seven years.
After the war, he was captured and sent to the Oklahoma Territory, where he died in 1849. Chief Mucozo,
on the other hand, is famous for sheltering Juan Ortiz after he escaped from Chief Ucita.
an oriel window to highlight the entrance (Figure 3-44). The entrance protrudes slightly from the
building, but it is nestled under the window's overhang. 'Infirmary' is cast into the masonry
above the door in a Gothic font. Small cast stone sculptures of several of the signs of the zodiac
(Figure 3-45) wrap around the underside of the oriel window, easily viewable to entering
students. Between the second and third story windows on the oriel, a checkerboard pattern of
brick and masonry wraps around the window. Along the higher cornice course on the oriel
window, injured cast stone students languish (Figure 3-46). These ornaments are significant
because they tell the story of the building's function and relate the Collegiate Gothic building to
its users, sick and injured university students. Around the Infirmary building, crenellation,
cornice and water table courses develop the Collegiate Gothic language.
The Teacher's College was first housed in Peabody Hall, constructed in 1913 across from
Griffin-Floyd Hall. In the early nineteen thirties, the Teacher's College received a generous
donation from P.K. Yonge, a member of the State Board of Control, and additional private, state,
and federal funding to construct a research school, providing hands-on practice for the
university's student teachers62
Weaver's Collegiate Gothic P.K. Yonge Laboratory School opened for 470 secondary
students in 193463; university classes were also taught in the building. In 1958, the Laboratory
School moved to a new location, further away from the university campus. The building was
renamed Norman Hall in honor of Dr. James Norman, dean of the College of Education from
62 Letters, notes and memos, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967,
Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
63 College of Education: University of Florida, "College of Education History Highlights." College of Education,
hillp \ \ .coe.ufl.edu/College/Documents/Historv.html.
1920-1941, and an important fundraiser for the Laboratory School. After the move, the College
of Education began teaching its university students in Norman Hall.
Norman Hall continues the campus's Collegiate Gothic detail language. Crenellation along
the top and a water table establish the Gothic ornamental language. The main entrance is set in a
large tower feature with a clock and a two story bay window leading into the vaulted entrance
(Figure 3-47). Around the cornice course of the tower, several gargoyles (Figure 3-48) taunt
students. Plaques (Figure 3-49) on either side of the tower's entrance are noteworthy; one
features an airplane, a source of fascination and inspiration in the nineteen-thirties. The airplane
is significant because it marks the building's place in time. The pointed archway over the door is
supported by corbels of dutiful pupils (Figure 3-50). Further west, a wise owl watches over
students entering and leaving the building.
Across from the tower, a plaque over the main door to the elementary school depicts a
woman giving a dove, symbolizing peace and knowledge, to a young girl (Figure 3-51). The
pointed archway of that door is supported by two little squirrels (Figure 3-52). The gentleness of
these cast stone pieces reflects their location over the main elementary school entrance. Another
door to the elementary school bears the inscription, "Education and the Obligation of Youth the
Republic's Safe Guard" (Figure 3-53A). This inscription and another over the entrance to the
auditorium, "That they may have a more abundant life" (Figure 3-53B) were carefully chosen
after debate within the College of Education64. The dean wanted to choose phrases that would
both inspire and awe the young students65. Another doorway, leading to the secondary school,
64 Letters, notes and memos, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967,
Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
65 Letters, notes and memos, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967,
Special and Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville,
Florida.
uses two corbels of students, one an athlete and the other a reader (Figure 3-54). These
ornaments, like the cornice sculptures on Sledd Hall, are significant because they relate to the
users of the building by depicting their activities.
Under the gable end of the elementary wing, a signature plaque with intertwined flowers
gives the name of the school (Figure 3-55). Below this plaque, another plaque inscribed with the
names of famous intellectuals sits over a bench (Figure 3-56). This ornament is significant
because it relates to the function of the school by working to inspire students, and, like the names
on Leigh Hall, it symbolically links the school with the great historical institutions and thinkers
of Europe.
Weaver's next project was the Florida Union, now Dauer Hall. Constructed slowly over
the Depression years, Dauer Hall originally served as a multi-purpose student center66. It has a
prominent chimney, pointed doorway arches and bay windows. Decorative water spouts (Figure
3-57) continue the detailing. One compatible wing was added in 1966 by Guy C. Fulton and
Associates. It blending into the original building, and is dominated by a long arcade of pointed
arched windows. The projecting entrance has a plaque of a musician (Figure 3-58) over the
doorway. Since Dauer Hall was the Student Center, this plaque related to the function of the
building as a place for student gathering and recreation. The player's instrument, a lute, relates to
Dauer Hall's Collegiate Gothic design, as the lute is often associated with medieval players
Dauer Hall's most prominent piece of ornamentation is the stained glass window (Figure
3-59) under a gable end. The window was fabricated by D'Ascengo Studios of Philadelphia. The
window's room was originally intended as a quiet, nonsectarian chapel-like space and the
66 Susan Tate et al., "The University of Florida Historic Preservation Plans and Guidelines, Draft Update April
2006," (Gainesville: University of Florida, 2006), 17.
hlp ~\ w\ .facilities.ufl.edu/cpD/df/Edit%020CoDv%20Plan%20Guidelines%20ADr% 2006.pdf.
window appears to depict six scenes related to the creation of the earth: forming of the seas,
creation of the cosmos, sea life, plant life, and animal life (Figure 3-60). Interspersed between
the creation medallions are the signs of the zodiac. The zodiac was a popular theme during this
time; Weaver used zodiac carvings on the 1939 Collegiate Gothic infirmary he designed for the
Florida State College for Women in Tallahassee67
Dauer Hall also incorporates Florida inspired shields; one is intertwined in the tracery
above the stained glass window (Figure 3-61). A matching shield was incorporated into the 1948
addition, and like the lute player (Figure 3-58), may have been moved to the additions when they
were added to the original building (Figure 3-61). The shield depicts four popular Florida motifs:
sunshine, palm trees, Spanish Galleons, and Native Americans. Another Florida inspired
ornament (Figure 3-62) is painted under a vaulted ceiling, north of the stained glass window. The
mural illustrates several local plants and animals: blue jays, woodpeckers, and orange tree
branches; however, the squirrel (Figure 3-63) resembles a European Red Squirrel, Sciurus
vulgaris, with tufted ears and a bushy red tail,68 instead of the local grey squirrel. On the mural,
the artist inscribed, "Ugo Galluzzi from Florence painted in the year AD 1936, the fourteenth
year of the Fascist era."69 The artist painted his local squirrel, amidst the exotic Florida natives.
Completed in 1937 for the Dairy Science Department, the Dairy Science Building is a
simplified Collegiate Gothic structure. The building's main facades, east and west, have a long
arcade of windows with a cast stone course along the roof line. Recessed behind this wall, a
higher line of short windows ventilates the laboratory space inside. The gable ends on the other
67 Photographs, Series 75: Architect for the Board of Control Building Program Records, 1925-1967, Special and
Area Studies Collections, George A. Smathers Libraries, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida.
68 Olivia L., "European Red Squirrel," Blue Planet Biomes, ed. Elisabeth Benders-Hyde, (2002).
hup \ \ "\ .blueplanetbiomes.org/euro red squirrel.htm.
69 Italian Lecturer Jennifer Testa, personal communication, March 26, 2007.
two sides of the building relate it to the more traditional Gothic buildings on campus. The
entrances, on both long sides, are delineated by a projecting wing with a gable roof, reminiscent
of the tower features on the campus's more traditional buildings. Each projection has a barrel
vault leading to the interior doors, and was originally highlighted by a round medallion above it,
under the gable. The two medallions (Figure 3-64) are more modern in style then the campus's
early ornaments, complimenting the simplified style of the building, but they are used in a
traditional manner, as part of the entrance sequence. The medallions, one of a baby drinking
from a bottle and one of an older woman churning butter while children enjoy buttered bread,
illustrate the products and purpose of the Dairy Science department. The first medallion
illustrates milk's importance to human consumption and the second illustrates one of the
important products of milk, butter.
In 1985, the Dairy Science department moved from their historic 1937 building into a new,
unornamented building. In a move now unthinkable on the historic campus70, then department
chairman Dr. Roger Natzke climbed a ladder and chiseled out the two medallions. He then had
these medallions installed at viewer height along an exterior corridor of the new building because
he felt they would provide continuity for the program and express the department's identity.
Although ornamentation (like architectural artifacts worldwide) should not be removed,
Professor Natzke's commitment demonstrates the meaningful relationship that the university's
architectural ornamentation can have with a building's faculty and staff1.
70 Today, changes occurring on the historic campus are overseen by the Historic Buildings and Sites Committee.
1 Dr. William Thatcher, personal communication, December 19, 2006.
In 1939, Fletcher Hall was completed as an addition to Sledd Hall72. Fletcher Hall
continues the Collegiate Gothic language developed for Sledd Hall ten years earlier.
Crenellation, quoins, and contrasting belt courses carry over from Sledd Hall. Continuing
Weaver's original goal, more shields from respected institutions are used to connect the
University of Florida with Europe's great historical institutions. Like Sledd Hall, Fletcher Hall
has many entrances into the dormitories. Each of these is highlighted by a different set of
architectural ornaments combining Collegiate Gothic elements, such as Tudor arches and
spandrels, with depictions of regional flora and fauna (Figure 3-65). Because the combination of
Sledd and Fletcher Halls is so large, Fletcher has several vaulted passages linking the courtyards
to each side. These are emphasized by oriel windows above and curving plaques on the
underside of the windows illustrate locally inspired scenes from the natural environment (Figure
3-66).
In 1929, Weaver had planned a tower for Fletcher Hall, to compliment Sledd Hall's
Mucozo tower. When Fletcher Hall was built, a simplified tower was included along the north
facade. A statement of its time, Fletcher Hall's tower does not include elaborate ornamentation
comparable to the Mucozo tower, but it does have two shields along the cornice molding (Figure
3-67). These shields are significant because they distinguish the tower and proclaim its place on
the university campus.
On the western side of Fletcher Hall, a tableau promotes school spirit (Figure 3-68).
Wrapped around the bay window of Fletcher Hall's reading room, it illustrates the life of a man,
with an alligator on each side. For the university's all male student population, the succession of
life-stage illustrating medallions, capped by the school's mascot, may have indicated that they
72 Sharon Blansett, A History of University of Florida Residence Facilities, Revised 2nd Edition (Gainesville:
University of Florida Department of Housing and Residence Education, 2003), 13.
were gators from birth till death. Inside the reading room, walnut paneling carries the Gothic
Revival architecture to the interior. The architectural ornamentation on Fletcher Hall is
significant because, like Sledd Hall, it illustrates that ornaments could be used in a traditional
manner, but depicts scenes of local interest and inspiration.
Completed the same year as Fletcher Hall, another dormitory, Murphree Hall,
demonstrates how the Collegiate Gothic style was slowly changing on campus. As a result of
increasing student enrollment, the building is larger and more massive then earlier buildings.
Along the outer facades, repeating bay windows and entrances wrap around the building (Figure
3-69). The water table along the building also forms the pointed arch over each entrance, which
is edged in quoin blocks (Figure 3-70). Unlike the campus's previous dormitories, sculptural
details are not used to highlight or differentiate the openings. The openings on the two story bay
windows are outlined in thick contrasting ivory masonry, but windows along the main facades
are trimmed in brick. Instead of crenellation or balustrades, dormers are used to extend the height
of the top floor and increase livable space, another concession to the growing student population.
While the molded water table, pointed arches, and bay windows all contribute to the Collegiate
Gothic design, and Murphree Hall shares these details with the earlier dormitories, the lack of
sculptural details, like those used over the entrances of the previous dormitories, foreshadows
some of the changes occurring on campus.
After Fletcher and Murphree Halls were completed, the Second World War almost halted
new construction on campus. During the war, few new projects were started, but Newell Hall
underwent a major renovation. After the renovation, it was rededicated and a wooden plaque
(Figure 3-71) was installed in the entrance way. Since the university's previous plaques were
carved stone or cast in metal, the use of painted wood for this one may have been the result of
wartime shortages. As such, it is significant as an indication of the building's place in history. A
thin metal ornament in the doorway was added with the building's old and new names (Figure 3-
72).
Rudolph Weaver died in 1944 and his associate Guy Fulton was appointed University
System Architect. Guy Fulton had come with Weaver to the University of Florida when he was
first recruited and had worked in his office throughout his almost twenty year tenure. Fulton
inherited his position during a tumultuous time. The Second World War was ending, changing
everyone's lives and flooding the university with thousands of new students. In 1947, the
university became co-educational, bringing in more new students and new architectural
dilemmas to the campus. In the world of architecture, the modern styles were beginning to
consume the nation. Fulton began to experiment with more modern designs almost immediately;
however, throughout his career he continued to work with the university's established palette of
red brick, with clay tile roofs and lightly colored detailing.
Guy Fulton, 1944-1956
After the Second World War, construction on the University of Florida campus accelerated
rapidly. The use of custom architectural ornaments decreased, due in part to changing
architectural styles and pressure to complete more buildings faster. Fulton also began to hire
consulting architects to deal with the university's increasing demand for new buildings. Jefferson
Hamilton, an architect from Weaver's and Fulton's office on campus, often filled the role of
consulting architect, as well as firms from Florida. As the pace of campus growth continued to
accelerate, consulting architects took greater responsibility for new buildings. Among Fulton's
many building, only a few utilized the architectural ornamentation discussed in this study.
In 1948, Fulton renovated the University Library. During the renovation, he added a
terrazzo floor in the lobby (Figure 3-73) with the lamp of knowledge in the center. He also used
spandrels inside, to date his changes (Figure 3-74). When Fulton added additional entrances to
the University Auditorium in 1949, he used another pair of complimenting spandrels to mark his
changes (Figure 3-75). These ornaments are significant because they were designed to
compliment the historic building, while informing users about the changes to the building.
Fulton's 1949 addition to the Chemistry-Pharmacy building, a west wing, harmoniously
blends with the original wings by continuing the belt courses, water table, and fenestration
detailing; however, the carved ornaments on the cornice molding, scientist names, and chemical
symbols are not continued. The addition has a tower like entrance feature leading through the
building into the interior courtyard. Over its segmental arched entrance, a cast stone plaque
(Figure 3-76) does continue the themes developed by the architectural ornamentation on the
original wings. A floral wreath wraps around chemistry laboratory equipment, proclaiming the
building's function. This ornament, and the plaque further above in the tower (Figure 3- 77) are
significant because they continue the ornamental language developed for the 1927 building:
small cast details, in a traditional Collegiate Gothic style.
In 1949, Fulton supervised the completion of two new major buildings on campus, the
Florida Gymnasium and Weil Hall. The Florida Gymnasium's architectural ornamentation
continues to relate to the Collegiate Gothic buildings on campus, but it also pushes the design
toward a more simplified form. The main entrance is part of a tower feature, similar to earlier
ones, but wider (Figure 3-78). The entrance and two stories of windows above are all wrapped in
light cast stone masonry, which stands out from the brick facade and highlights this aspect of the
building. At the top of the tower, 'Florida Gymnasium' is spelled out in metal letters in a
modern, rather then Gothic, font (Figure 3-79). Along the sides of the front facade, a water table,
cornice, and simplified crenellation all connect the building to its more Collegiate Gothic
predecessors, but they also emphasis the flat roof and horizontal width of the structure.
Over each set of windows of the east and west elevations, a pointed compound arch
connects buttresses running down the sides of the building and capped with cast stone. These
buttresses relate the Florida Gymnasium to traditional Collegiate Gothic architecture and many
of Edwards's buildings, such as the University Library, but between each buttress, the windows
have brick lintels and simple cast stone sills, instead of pointed arches (Figure 3-80). Along these
facades, the combination of rectangular windows with minimal detailing and buttresses
connected by pointed arches demonstrates simplification within a Collegiate Gothic design.
South of the Florida Gymnasium, the Engineering and Industries Building, now Weil Hall
was completed in 1949 for the College of Engineering. Like the Florida Gymnasium, its massive
size was required by the growing population of the university and its need for space. Along the
primary facade, a water table, quoins, and a bay window contribute to the Collegiate Gothic
design scheme. Small ornaments of Gothic motifs are incorporated into the bay window (Figure
3-81) and on the west entrance; a Tudor arch creates two spandrels (Figure 3-82) similar to those
on the University Auditorium and Library. Each one has a small shield wrapped in oak leaves, a
traditional scheme. Oak leaves have been used on several pieces of the ornamentation on the
University of Florida campus, including a plaque on Thomas Hall (Figure 3-2) in 1906. One
spandrel on Weil Hall gives the building's date, 1949, and the other reads 'UF'.
Another entrance to Weil Hall is marked by a plaque above the door (Figure 3-83). The
plaque shows several engineering tools and is significant because it tells about the building's
function as an engineering school. Furthermore, compared to earlier ornaments such as the
overflowing cornucopia on Griffin-Floyd, this plaque is restrained and more contemporary;
however, it is used in a traditional manner, highlighting an entrance.
The main entrance is part of a tower sequence. Nestled in the corner of two wings, the
entrance is up several steps and through a compound pointed arched vault (Figure 3-84). The
entrance way is surrounded by rusticated masonry, which stands out from the brick facade and
emphasizes this feature. A cast stone plaque with the name, Engineering and Industries Building,
sits above the entrance. The outline of a gear is cast into the center of the plaque. Above the
entrance, a quoin surround highlights each window and differentiates them from the other
windows along the facade. At the top of the tower, more small Gothic motifs complete the
ornamentation. The ornamentation on the Engineering and Industries Building is less pronounced
and the fenestration introduces a new proportion found in campus buildings of this era of
construction.
The following year, in 1950, Fulton completed an addition to the law school building,
Bryan Hall. The original Bryan Hall building of 1914 already had a small addition on its north
and south sides, and Fulton's addition connects to Weaver's north addition. On Edwards' 1914
building, several Collegiate Gothic details had been used across the building to develop the
Gothic style. Additionally, in the entrance tower feature, a plaque (Figure 3-11) was placed
below the cornice molding.
In the 1950 addition, an open arcade along the main facade forms a courtyard with the
original building. The two story arcade is punctuated by three towers, one at each end and one in
the middle. Each of these towers has a plaque relating to the function of the building and
designed in a late art moderne character (Figure 3-85). These ornaments are significant because
they are placed on the addition's towers; like the 1914 plaque was on the original towers
entrance. Also, like the 1914 plaques, they draw inspiration from Florida and the law school, but
are designed in the building's prevalent architectural style.
On the Bryan Hall addition, the cornice line indents to hold each plaque, connecting them
with the building. The lightly colored cornice line on the addition relates to the one on the
original building too. Along the arcade, openings are outlined in heavy masonry, contrasting the
lightness of the openings and emphasizing this feature. The other sides of the addition are
simpler, with brick trimmed fenestration.
Completed in 1951 with the help of Jefferson Hamilton and Kemp, Bunch and Jackson
architects, Fulton supervised the design and construction of Tigert Hall. Tigert Hall became the
university's new administration building and its prominent location and function made it a new
gateway to the campus. Tigert Hall is significant as a transitional link in the architectural history
of the campus.
Like many traditional Collegiate Gothic buildings, the entrance to Tigert Hall is through a
central tower feature (Figure 3-86). Tigert Hall's tower is a massive block, with contrasting
masonry outlining an inset rectangular column of glass in the center, replacing the traditional
combination of smaller windows wrapped in contrasting masonry. Like the traditional Collegiate
Gothic buildings, Tigert Hall emphasizes the entrance by its location in a projection stressed by
the use of contrasting materials along its vertical facade. At the top of the tower, modern font
metal letters, like those on the Florida Gymnasium, form 'Administration Building'. Along the
roof of the tower, crenellation continues the Collegiate Gothic references.
Along the sides of the building, crenellation with balustrades wrap around the roof, relating
the building to Gothic styles. Tigert Hall has several bay windows (Figure 3-87), another Gothic
element. These windows are outlined in ivory colored, contrasting masonry and each one has
several incised ornaments. In between each story's windows, small incised ornaments depict
each college on campus in 1950 (Figure 3-88). The ornaments proclaim Tigert Hall's role as an
administration building for all of the colleges. Additionally, small incised quatrefoils adorn the
bay windows and the railings around the raised tower entrance (Figure 3-89). The modified
Gothic features demonstrate Fulton's respect for the campus's early buildings and the founders'
goal to architecturally connect the University of Florida with the ancient institutions of Europe.
Some ornaments also work to tell the story of the building's purpose, an important function on
campus.
By tracing its history to a parent institution, the University of Florida was able to celebrate
its centennial in 1953- Century Tower was erected to mark this momentous event. An ornament
to the campus, the tower combines many traditional Collegiate Gothic elements and is capped in
a crown of ornamentation (Figure 3-90). Buttresses run up each side of the tower and terminate
in finials. Around the openings for the Carillon bells, lightly colored masonry arches are slightly
pointed, a Gothic innovation. Above, more arches, finials, and small-scale crenellation all work
to express the Collegiate Gothic inspiration for the tower. Carved text over the entrances at the
base of the tower (Figure 3-91) continues the Gothic design. The ornamentation of Century
Tower is significant because it demonstrates a post-Second World War awareness of the
campus's Collegiate Gothic heritage, and a desire to continue drawing inspiration from that
architectural heritage.
Throughout the post-Second World War period, projects on campus employed traditional
Collegiate Gothic details, such as the tower entrance feature, in new ways. Large expanses of
glass, with simplified detailing, became a prominent feature along the facade. Water table and
belt courses became smaller and more streamlined, before disappearing. Despite these changes,
the campus maintained a unified, harmonious design by using the brick and tile materials palette
set by Edwards in 1906 and details relating the new buildings to the Collegiate Gothic ones.
Matherly Hall was built in 1953 to house the growing College of Business Administration.
Hamilton was the consulting architect and Fulton supervised its design and construction.
Matherly Hall has a prominent tower entrance feature (Figure 3-92), like many Gothic Revival
buildings. The tower's entrance is recessed under a flat lintel, rather then a traditional arch. Over
the lintel, metal letters form 'College of Business Administration' in a simple, modern font.
Above it, a several story window lights the interior stair. This window is capped in a multi-
segmented arch, a nod to the campus's traditional architecture. Crenellation on the top of the
tower holds a plaque (Figure 3-93). Depicting man driving technology and transportation, it
exhibits all of the hope that many people felt during this time: technology, progress, and
University of Florida were working to move the world forward. This ornament is significant
because it is used traditionally, to crown a Gothic inspired tower, but its content is inspired by
the progress of modern technology.
Along the facade of the building, long rows of large windows with running courses of cast
stone form the sills and lintels of each expansive opening. These running courses also emphasis
the large size and horizontality of the building. In this way, the ornamentation draws attention to
the modern size and scale of Matherly Hall, emphasizing its architectural style.
Integration of Ornament into the Architectural Concept
Architectural ornamentation was incorporated into the historic campus as part of the
overarching visual concept for each building and it often serves a functional purpose as well.
Collegiate Gothic utilizes several different types of ornamentation to architecturally develop its
structures and provide references to European Gothic architecture. Quoin, like those on Griffin-
Floyd, Leigh, and Weil Halls, emphasis the protruding edges and corners of the building mass,
and develop the Gothic symbolism. They are also functional; large masonry blocks are sturdier
and less likely to become dislodged.
Both the University Library (Figure 3-18) and the Florida Gymnasium (Figure 3-80) use
buttresses to segment the facade and highlight the fenestration pattern. All three architects used
buttresses around entrances and edges, where they draw attention to these elements and provided
an important Gothic reference.
Water tables, belt courses, and cornice moldings divide the horizontal surfaces and provide
linear continuity around buildings. Water tables are also functional; they help deflect water from
the building's foundation. Cornice moldings on campus have projecting eaves, which keep rain
water off the buildings. Starting with Newell Hall in 1909, Edwards and Weaver often placed
cast sculptures at regular intervals along the cornice molding. Cornice molding casts provide
another layer of detail to buildings and develop the building's signage by telling the story of its
function or users. Above the cornice line, crenellation added another layer of ornamentation and
a niche for cast ornaments; for example, Rolfs Hall (Figure 3-22).
Bay and oriel windows serve an important, functional purpose in Florida. In buildings
without air conditioning, like Thomas and Buckman Halls, they allow interior spaces to capture
extra breezes. These protruding windows breakup the long facades of massive buildings and
provide a symbolic Gothic reference. Rolfs Hall was the first building to include sculptural
ornaments within the oriel window design, but it became a campus tradition. Leigh, Sledd,
Fletcher, Weil, and Tigert Halls all use sculptural storytelling ornament around their projecting
windows. Fletcher Hall's gator life tableau (Figure 3-68) is significant because it occurs between
two layers of windows; Tigert Hall's small college casts are also situated between window
stories (Figure 3-87). Windows, especially projecting ones, are significant architectural elements
and all three architects placed additional detailing and ornamentation around them.
Beginning with Thomas and Buckman Halls, entrances are the primary location for
sculptural architectural ornamentation. Lightly colored cast stone ornaments aid in way-finding;
they are conspicuous against brick facades. On Thomas, Sledd and Fletcher Halls, lighting
fixtures were originally integrated into doorway ornamentation, as they are on the library
entrance (Figure 3-20B). Entrances are significant architectural elements; they connect the inside
and outside of buildings. Projecting tower entrance features or flanking buttresses emphasis
major entrances and provide a Gothic motif. Architectural ornamentation around entrances and
projecting entrance towers continues the effect and develops the concept further.
Edwards designed the campus's first Collegiate Gothic buildings. His use of architectural
ornamentation established campus precedents. Weaver built upon Edwards's designs and used a
greater variety of sculptural cast details. Fulton continued to use the ornaments developed by
Edwards and Weaver, but he also introduced new motifs. The university's three architects,
Edwards, Weaver, and Fulton, each added something to the ornamental lexicon of the campus.
Weaver and Fulton both drew from previous work to maintain continuity across campus.
Summary
During the tenures of the university's first three architects, the historic architectural
ornamentation on the University of Florida campus has fulfilled several functions. It has worked
to create a more complete expression of its building's Collegiate Gothic design scheme,
furthering the symbolism inherent in that style. It has simultaneously increased the functionalism
of many buildings; projecting, ornamented entrances are easy to find, eaves and water tables
deflect rainwater, and bay windows capture cross breezes. Within this scheme, many ornaments
were designed to proclaim the function of their building. Other pieces have told stories about the
natural and social history of the area around campus. Some ornaments have drawn inspiration
from university life, depicting students, faculty and colleges. These ornaments reflect the
dynamic forces at work on the campus, helping it to grow into "a splendid and harmonious
whole73."
73 Susan Tate et al., "The University of Florida Historic Preservation Plans and Guidelines, Draft Update April
2006," (Gainesville: University of Florida, 2006), 4.
hup \ \ \ .facilities.ufl.edu/cp/pdf/Edito20Copy%20Plan%20Guidelines%20Apro2006.pdf. Quote taken
from the University Record of 1906.
AFigure 3-1. Buckman and Thomas Halls: Entrance
B
Figure 3-1. Buckman and Thomas Halls: Entrance
Figure 3-2. Thomas Hall: Elves' entrance
Figure 3-3. Newell Hall: Floral
-'EN '11I III1
____ 4
A
B
Figure 3-4. Griffin- Floyd Hall: Comucopias. A) Main entrance, east. B) Main entrance, north.
Figure 3-5. Anderson Hall: Scroll over main entrance
Figure 3-6. Anderson Hall: Main entrance
Figure 3-7. Peabody Hall: Primary entrance A) Tower entrance B) Finial cap
Figure 3-7. Peabody Hall: Primary entrance. A) Tower entrance. B) Finial cap.
il l
Figure 3-8. Peabody Hall: Inscribed name over main entrance
t~.7"~;:
~ ~c AC
''
Figure 3-9. Bryan Hall: Tower entrance
Figure 3-10. Bryan Hall: Inscribed name over primary entrance
Figure 3-11. Bryan Hall: State seal on main tower
Figure 3-12. Bryan Hall: Plaque over 1939 entrance to law library
Figure 3-13. Gymnasium: Main facade
Figure 3-14. University Auditorium: Window
Figure 3-15. University Auditorium: Corbel
Figure 3-16. University Auditorium: Interior
r~ T~S
I
.J
ki
Figure 3-17. University Auditorium: Interior grotesques. From left to right, musician with lyre,
scholar with open book, football player with football and engineer with gear.
.:?V. I
Figure 3-18. University Library: Windows with buttresses
Figure 3-19. University Library: Original entrance
81
A J VF ",BM
B
Figure 3-20. University Library: Additional entrance
Figure 3-21. Rolfs Hall: Oriel window
r WYs AM
''liW"~ <^i~~' ^ I
Figure 3-22. Rolfs Hall: Floral medallions in quatrefoils in the crenellation
A ".... ......" B
C D
E F
Figure 3-23. Rolfs Hall: Examples of floral plaques along the cornice line. A, D, and E are
abstracted floral designs. However, the others show locally growing plants. B) Iris. C)
Dogwood flower. F) Oranges on a branch.
n m m --- --
Figure 3-24. Rolfs Hall: Beehive
A
B
Figure 3-25. Leigh Hall: Names
Figure 3-26. Leigh Hall: Gutter detail
Figure 3-27. Leigh Hall: Gargoyles engaged in chemical laboratory experiments. A) Adding. B)
Grinding. C) Heating. D) Mixing.
Figure 3-28. Leigh Hall: Grape ornament
Figure 3-29. Leigh Hall: Bracket entrance
P-F~
-9U EdId
El II'"
Figure 3-30. Leigh Hall: Entrance with oriel window
Figure 3-31. Leigh Hall: Bay window and quoins
Figure 3-32. Sledd Hall: Architecture and athletics plaque
E F
Figure 3-33. Sledd Hall: Eight student grotesques along the cornice line. A) Student with
backpack. B) Chemistry student. C) Football player. D) Freshman with freshman
beanie. E) Graduate. F) Reader. G) Solider. H) Fraternity member.
r .......... ............. .
G H
Figure 3-33. Continued
Figure 3-34. Sledd Hall: Details from Spanish discovery tableau
A B
C D
Figure 3-35. Sledd Hall: Six seals from the bay windows
7Fi me mm as.)mm n
A
Figure 3-36. Sledd Hall: Doorway life casts. A) Entrance way. B-H) Plant and animal casts.
BC
D E
H
Figure 3-36. Continued
Smm-i mI
B
wmW mm, ,mm m a
iimam. m immmii
Figure 3-37. Sledd Hall: Doorway ornaments. A) Squirrels and mockingbirds in oak branches
door. Hole in top plaque held a light fixture. B) Detail from door frieze. C) Sea life
entrance. D-H) Details from sea life entrance.
F
Figure 3-37. Continued
A B
C D
E
Figure 3-38. Sledd Hall: Ornaments from the cornice molding above the fenestration of the bay
windows. A) Oranges. B) Grapes. C) Dogwood. D) Bananas. E) Flower.
Figure 3-39. Sledd Hall: Layers of ornamentation
Figure 3-40. Sledd Hall: Mucozo tower
99
A 3
Figure 3-41. Sledd Hall: Mucozo tower details
Figure 3-42. Sledd Hall: Mucozo detail
|
RSS
