Title Page
 Table of Contents
 Slide list
 Chronological building list

Title: Leopold Eidlitz
Full Citation
Permanent Link: http://ufdc.ufl.edu/UF00102129/00001
 Material Information
Title: Leopold Eidlitz
Physical Description: Archival
Language: English
Creator: Bessette, Ted
Publisher: Ted Bessette
Place of Publication: Gainesville, Fla.
Publication Date: 1976
Copyright Date: 1976
Subject: Architecture -- Florida   ( lcsh )
Architecture -- Caribbean Area   ( lcsh )
 Record Information
Bibliographic ID: UF00102129
Volume ID: VID00001
Source Institution: University of Florida
Holding Location: University of Florida
Rights Management: All rights reserved by the source institution and holding location.


This item has the following downloads:

UF00102129_00001 ( XML )

Table of Contents
    Title Page
        Page 1
    Table of Contents
        Page 2
        Page 3
        Page 4
        Page 5
        Page 6
        Page 7
        Page 8
        Page 9
        Page 10
        Page 11
        Page 12
        Page 13
        Page 14
    Slide list
        Page 15
        Page 16
        Page 17
        Page 18
        Page 19
        Page 20
    Chronological building list
        Page 21
        Page 22
        Page 23
        Page 24
        Page 25
        Page 26
        Page 27
        Page 28
        Page 29
        Page 30
        Page 31
        Page 32
        Page 33
        Page 34
        Page 35
        Page 36
        Page 37
        Page 38
        Page 39
        Page 40
        Page 41
        Page 42
        Page 43
        Page 44
        Page 45
        Page 46
        Page 47
        Page 48
        Page 49
        Page 50
        Page 51
        Page 52
        Page 53
        Page 54
        Page 55
        Page 56
        Page 57
        Page 58
        Page 59
        Page 60
        Page 61
        Page 62
        Page 63
        Page 64
        Page 65
        Page 66
        Page 67
        Page 68
        Page 69
        Page 70
        Page 71
        Page 72
        Page 73
        Page 74
        Page 75
        Page 76
        Page 77
        Page 78
        Page 79
        Page 80
        Page 81
        Page 82
        Page 83
        Page 84
        Page 85
        Page 86
        Page 87
        Page 88
        Page 89
        Page 90
        Page 91
        Page 92
        Page 93
        Page 94
        Page 95
        Page 96
        Page 97
        Page 98
        Page 99
        Page 100
        Page 101
        Page 102
        Page 103
        Page 104
        Page 105
        Page 106
        Page 107
        Page 108
        Page 109
        Page 110
        Page 111
        Page 112
        Page 113
        Page 114
        Page 115
        Page 116
        Page 117
        Page 118
        Page 119
        Page 120
        Page 121
        Page 122
        Page 123
        Page 124
        Page 125
        Page 126
Full Text





by Leopold Eidlitz



ARCHITECTS by Le~opold Eidlitz

by Leopold Eidlitz

by Le6opold Eidlits

by Charlaes Henry Hearrt

by Henry-Russel Hitchoook

by Montgomeryp Schuryler









10 21
March 29,1823- March 22, 1908

New York, N.Y. (F.A.I.A.)

1 Leopold Eidlitz was a leading architect in this

country during the late ninteenth century. He was born

2 in Prague, Bohemia (now Czechoslorakia), March 29,1823.

He never forgot his birthplace. Reminiscence of his

early architectural experiences can be seen in much

3 of his work. The towers of the Dry Dook Savings Bank,
the Clergy house of St. Georges, and the towers of

4 the Church of the Holy Trinity are fine examples of

the impressions the architecture, such as the pictur-

5 esque bridge head of his native city, left with him.
11 Leopold Eidlitz began his education in the facil-

ities of Prague and then transferred to the Viennar

Polytechnic. While in ViennaL he was taught a close

connection between the science and art of building,

which elsewhere were harshly divorced to their mutual

disadvantage. In Vienna the "See3iety of Architects

and Engineers" is a single institution. Eidlitz strove

persistently to reunite the two, as they were united
in the Middle Ages, to base architecture upon science

and to infect engineering with art. His education to

this point was not distinctly architectural and he

did not resort to Vienna to study architecture. His

first architectural experience was working for a land-

steward, within whose jurisdiction utilitarian classes

of buildings called for in the administration of an

estate were erected. It was while engaged in altering

how to do these that his imagination took fire at the

possibility opened before himt of doing wor~thier and

larger buildings.
In 184) he arrived in this country at the age

of twenty, already in intention, an architect, with

the benifit of more than an ordinary training in

architcture. Upon arrival in New York he hastened

to offer his draftsmanship to the local architect

whose work most appealed to him. It was his good

fortune to find employment as draftsman with Richard

Upjoh~n, and in the office of that noted ecclesiastical
architect, leading exponent of the Gothic Revival in

America, he acquired skill in church design. Trinity,

a Gothic Revival church was well under way and the

drawings for it were completed when Eidlitz arrived

in the office of Upjohn, but the exposure to church

design was still very valuable to him.
A few years later he formed a partnership with

a young Bavarian1 by the name of Blesch, and for a time

they practiced together. Of their works in New York

12 however there is record only of St. George's Episcopal

Church in Stayvea~nt Square, completed in 1848. It

is difficult to apportion the credit but Eidlitz said

"The exterior was mainly his, and the interior mainly

mine". Both partners were penetrated with enthusiasm

for the South German phase of Gothio or more properly

the Romanesque revival. Blesch fell ill and was

disabled almost imme~diatty,, and the work was entirely

executed under the superintendency of Eidlitz, who

was the only architect of the church recognized by

13 its authorities. The front lost its spires, which

14,15 were its crowning ornament, in the fire of 1865. The
rector, Dr. Tyng, being a good Evangelical had no

more use for supports encumbering the floor and ob-

structing vision than he had for storied windows

richly sheeding a dim religious light, and would not

have such things in his meeting house. As a result

16 he got, as the church was origionalty built, hanging

galleries supported by bracketing anchored into the
17 buttresses, though, as reconstructed after the fire,

slender posts were substituted for the brackets. The

hanging galleries were designed by Eidlitz and were
a novel and startling interior feature at the time.

The popular success of St. George's was immediate and

striking and with that success the young architect

found himself fairly launched as a Gothic practitioner.

18 Although I am not sure just how this building

relates to the firm of Blesch and Eidlit, in 1846-48

Eidlitz designed Iranistan. P.T. Barnum (1810-1891),

of circus fame, was captivated during a trip to

19 England by John Nash's Oriental Brighton Pavilion

(1924~r), built for George IV. He asked a London
architect to reproduce the pavilion, then, fortified

with these drawings, he sought out an American archi-

tect -Eidlets as it turned out- to make an equalty

18 fantastic equivalent as a domed and minaretted admix-

ture of Byzantine, Moorish, and Sacracenic forms.

Thed.caoes of *Iranistan" were lath, in a spirit of

hilarity or of mockery. Barnum bought land in Fairfield,

Conn., for this house in 1846 and moved into it in

1848. It was destroyed by fire in 185j7.

After the partnership with Blesohbrku

Eidlitz carried on his work independently, with the

scope of his work including churches, public buildings,

business structures, and residences. His more important

works include:

20 1853 Church of the Holy Trinity, Madisoan Avenue and

42nd Street, New York, N.Y. This church represents a

revision to the evangelical "auditorium", and is a

much more radical version than any of its predecessors.

The churches rootor, Stephen H. Tyng, Jr., wtas the

son of the rector of St. George's, the first big

21 success of Eidlitz.At this time there was a demand
for auditoriumss" among the more churchlyy" congrega-

tions. Eidlitz called this church nantheatre with

ecclesiastical details." This church is no longer


22 1853-55 All Souls Unitarian Church, New York City,

Jacob Wray Mould, Architect. Eidlitz wrote enthusi-

asticly about this building praising its design and

especially its bold use of color which is intended to

be blended by the eye.

23 1854 The Chalet, Hamilton Avenue, Newport, R.I.
In this chalet on Haliden hill much of the architec-

tural charactaredepends upon the bold expression of

the diagonal braces necessary to support the balconies

and the roof. The style of the SwissohbhtBit, a strong

influence in the residential work of Eidlits, can be

seen in this house.

24 1856-57 Continental Bank, New York City. This bank

was his second essay in commercial building,(Whis be

referred to as his second bomercial building but I was

not able to locate bbs fi~rst.)twand. rchi~tcturally it

shows a great advance over the first according to

Schyler.The building has an appearance of massivaess

and solidity. The interior was a framework of iron

supports carrying ceilings of stone slabs. This

building was replaced by a modern building.

25 1856-59 Second congregational Church, Greenwich,

Conn. As it looked in the summer of 1908. This is

a German geometric Gothio that has an indigenous and

26 homegrown and vernacular aspect. It appears to be a

simplified Gothic that is the work of an inspired

stone mason.

27 1857-59 American Exchange National Bank, Broadway,

New York. This building was the first fireproof

commercial structure in New York. The building has

a feeling of great massiveness but still has large

v E~u in the walls for light penetration. At this
time the ascension of the unassisted human leg fixed

the height of a commercial building at five stories

accept for an a e story, lighted through holes in
the cornice, for the janitor and his family who

were assumed t~o have strong legs. The cornice was

made very large because Eidlitz felt this was neces-

sary if he could not express the roof. In 1859
28 James K. Wilson built a warehouse in Cincinnati

using the same design.

29 1858 Hamilton Perry House, Brooklyn, New York.

This building is an interesting example of mere

carpentry with its very bold timber hoods projecting
over the slips on the water front, and its triplet

of gables and emphatic framing on the land front.
This is considered the most interesting,aarchitectu-

ra y,<.0 the~ ferry houses
30 1859 Broadway TabernaCgle, 34 th Street and Sixth

Avenue, New York. Pictured during erection, the

Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, gives the date of

construction of this building as 185j9-1905, however

it is also reported that the building was razed in

1865 and replaced by a commercial building.

31 1860 Cottage at Englewood, New Jersey.

At this time hardly anybody thought of invoking an

architect for a city house, Almost everybody was

content with a ready to live in habitation. It was

only in sub irban and country houses that the
architect came in at all. In this building Eidlitz

took for his prototype the Swiss chalet as the

highest development of timber construction, super-

posing the timberwork on a basement of rough steon
and half-timbered construction with brickwork.

32 1860 Cottage, New Jersey. This cottage has

half timbered construction on a basement of brick.

33 1860 Academy of Music, Brooklyn, New York. Although

the street facade offers very little excitement, the

34t interior with its Gothic details and its double side

balconies create a vory exciting space. This building

was destroyed by fire in 1903.

35 1860-67 Christ Church, St. Louis, Missouri. This
was considered his most successful church. Charles

Kingsley, a noted critic, called it "the most churchly"
church he had seen in America. This church has the

cathedral complement of nave and aisles and transepts

and clerestoryp, and the opened timber ceiling excepted,

carried out in solid masonry. The opened timbered

ceiling is 27 feet higher than the vaulted ceiling

of Trinity in New York, which has a much greater ,-

length. This fine example of Gothic is an Eidlitz

masterpiece in the stricter kind of church architecture.

36 1860-85 Old Produce Exchange, New York. This German

Gothic building consisted of the Exchange room itself

with subordinate room underneath at first rented out

for offices, but afterwards knocked out into one to

meet the need of additional room for the Exchange.

This created ventilation problems and these combined

with the increasing demand for space led to the ab~an-

donment of the building.

37 1865 Building in Troy, New York. This is another

colorful building by Eidlitz combining the German

Gothic features and a Mansard roof.

38 1866-68 Temple Eman~u-E1, New York City, One of

the most conspicuous and most meritorious works of

39 Eidlitz. The central feature of the nave is the rose

window of Gothio tracery in a pointed recess between

minareted towers. Its butresses culminate with

minatreted pinnacles, surmounted with an arcade belt

and a. hipped roof, instead, of the gable that would

40 be expected. In the interior the light gallery over

the ark at the east end is lighted from invisible

41. openings at its ends. He uses bold vivid colors

which are intended to be mixed by the eye to create

the desired tones. In his articles Schuyrler criticizes

Eidlitz for using the cruciformn plan for a Synagogue.

42 Brooklyn-Union Building, Brooklyn, New York. On this

triangular site Eidlits used a corner entrance and

again used Gothio details and a Mansard foof. I

believe Eidlitz prefered the Matnsard roof on his tall

building because it allowed the roof to be expressed

by being Visible from the street.

1870-75 Dry Dock Savings Bank, New York. In its

time this High Gothio building was criticized for

looking to much like a church. The beauty of this

building cannot be questioned and it was the chief

architectural ornament of the Bowery.

1870-91 Old peaker Building, Union Square, New York.

This building has a Venetian look on the front due

to the combination of brick and stone and the-mnild

polychromy of the stonework. This is tospped Of~)'by a-

the superposition of the mansard over the arcade.

This is considered to be a model shop front for the

pre-elevator era.

1875 State capitol, Albany, New York. Eidlitz was

also connected with work on the State Capitol at

Albany. In 1875 he was appointed with F.L. 01mstead

and Henry H. Richardson to an Advisory Board aut~hor-

ized to pass upon the work already done by Thomas

Fuller, the previously appointed architect. Following

their decision which disapproved Mr. Fuller's contin-

uation of the work in accordance with his plans,

Eidlitz and Mr. Richardson were appointed to supervise

the work, commissioned to modify, revise, and enlarge

the plans for the building.

The already built basement and first story of

Fuller's design were prese9~rved practicaly unchanged.

Eidlit~z, being a much older architect than Richardson

and better known at this time, was responsible for

most of the work done on this new project. Eidlitz

designed the greater part of the exterior, however,
on the interior there was a definite division of labor

roughly from southeast to northwest. Richarsson way
to design the Senate side, except for the front corner

47 staircase which is by Eidlitz, and Eidlitz the Assembly

48 side. Eidlitzes Assembly Chamber is a large monumental

49 SpaceCG with f~our enormous columns in the corners. The

50' room had a boiled-vegetable dullness of tone. Eidlits
51 also did the room design for the Court of Appeals,

52-56 the senate corridor, the Senate staircase, and the

59( "golden corridor".
The architectural profession criticized this

changing of architects while the building was under

construction and the problems aEreated by the change

of designers, combined with the problem of the orig-

ional Renaissance style being changed to Romanesque

by Eidlitz and then being legislated back from

Romanesque to Renaissance, make it miraculous that

the building came out as beautiful as it did. In

the end the confusion resulting from the attempt to

divide the work brought about the appointment in 1903

of Isaac Perry as State Architect, and the subsequent
withdrawal of both Eidlitz and Richardson. Under

Mr. Perry's direction the work was expedited and

brought to final completion.

58 st. Georges clergy House, East 16th Street, New York.

In this building reminiscence of the German Gothic

of Prague can be seen. This building has features

similar to those of the bridge head of his native

city (see slide 5).

59 Interior of addition to the County court House,

City Hall Park, New York. In his later years Eidlitz

did additions such as this and did not receive the

large commissions of his early years.

60 Dining Room F, State Hospital, Central Islip, Long

Island, New York. After the Capitol and the Court

House, the architect's remaining works, done in the

early nineties,were very minor. This dining room

was done on a very small budget and is very plain,

it is merely a four hipped steep roof standing on the

ground. It was with minor works such as this that
Eidlitz finished his career.

Eidlitz felt that mten in general have very poor

taste and he leaves us with this to think about:

"American architecture is the art of covering

one thing with anlotther thing to imitate a third

thing which, if genuine, would not be desirable."

Leopold Eidlits



1 Leopold Eidlitz
Architectural Record, r.24 p.164 Nov. 1908

2 Prague, general view.
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia, Brian Knox,
p.171 illus. 3a

3 Dry Dock Savings Bank, N.Y., 1870-75, Eidlitz
American Architecture and Other Writings,
Schuyler, p. 170

4 Church of the Holy Trinity, N.Y., 1853, Eidlitz
Americarn Architecture, Schuyler, p. 150.

5 Prague, charles Bridge, special attention to
bridge head,
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia, Brian Knox,
p.169 illus. lb.

6 Prague, Charles bridge looking west.
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia, Brian Knox.
p.169 illus la.

? Prague, general view.
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia. Brian Knox.
illus. 2a.

8 Prague, general view.
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia. Brian Knox.
illus. 2b.

9 Prague, New Town, St. Mary of the Snows. A church
Eidlitz might have experienced.
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia. Brian Knox.
illus. 6b.

10 Prague, Hrad, Cathedral of Svaty Vit. Architecture
Eidlitz might have experienced.
Architecture of Prague and Bohemia. Brian Knox.
illus. 7a.

11 Illustration, no significance.
Architectural Record. April-June 1892, v.1 p.484.

12 St. Georges Church, 1848, Stuyresant Square,
New York. Eidlitz.
Architectural Reserd, Sept. 1908, p. 166.

13 St. Georg@s Episcopal Church, New York City,
1846-50. Fire of 1865, showing original towers.
American Architecture, Schuyler, Fig. 17 p.138.

14C St. Georges Episcopal Church, New York City.
View of 1890 showing condition after fire.
Blesch and Eidlitz.
American Architecture. Schuyler. Fig. 17 p.139.

15 st. Georges church from the rear, 1848, Stuyresant
Square, New York City. Blesch and Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.166.

168t2 St. Georges Church, New York City, 1848, original
American Architecture, Schuyler, Fig.18 p.140.

17 St. Georges Church, interior, 184C8, New York
City. Blesch and. Eidlitz
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.167.

18 Iranistan, exterior, Fairfield, Conn., 1846-48,
Slide Library # 23786

19 Royal Brighton Pavilion, east front as rebuilt
in 1824. John Nash.
Slide Library # 48204

20 Holy Trinity Church, N.Y., 1853. Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Schuyler, p.151.

21 Holy Trinity Church, N.Y., Tower, 1853. Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Schuyler, p.151.

22 All Souls Unitarian Church, New York City, 1853-f55.
J.W. Mould. Eidlitz wrote an enthusiastic article
about this building.
American Architecture, Schuyler, p.153.

23 Chalet, Hamilton Avenue, Newport, R.I., 185rc,
Architectural Heritage of Newport, R.I., 1854.
Downing, Pl. 169.

24 Continental Bank, N.Y., 1856-57, Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Schuyler, p.164.

25 second congregational church, Greenwich, conn.,
1856-59. Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Schupler, p.146.

26 Second Congregational Church, Greenwich, Conn.,
1856-59. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.171.

27 American Exchange Bank, Broadway, N.Y., 1857-99.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.278.

28 Warehouse, Cincinnati, 1859, James K. Wilson.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.279.

29 Hamilton Ferry House, Brooklyn, N.Y., 1858, Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.110.

30 Broadway Tabearnacle, 1859-1905, during ereetion,
N.Y., Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.172.

31 Cottage, E~nglewood, N.J., 1860, Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.168.

32 Cottage, N.J., 1860, Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.169.

33 Academy of Music, Brooklyn, N.Y., 1860, Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.283.

34 Interior, Academy of Musio, Brooklyn, N.Y.,
1860-61, Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Schuyler, Fig. 26 p.169.

35 Interior of christ Church, 1860-67, St. Louis,
Missouri. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.173.

36 Old Produce Exchange, N.Y., 1860-85. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.282.

37 Building in Troy, N.Y., about 1865. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.285.

38 Temple Emlanu-E1, N.Y.,1868. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.176.

39 Temple Emnsuu-E1, N.Y.,1866-68. Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Sohuyler, Fig. 23 p.156.

40 Temple Emanu-E1, N.Y., Interior, 1866-68. Eidlitz.
American Architecture, Schuyler, Pig. 24C p.158.

41 Temple Emanu-E1, N.Y., Interier, 1868. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Sept. 1908, p.177.

lG2 Brooklyn-Union Building, Brooklyn, N.Y., 1869.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.289.

43 Dry Dock Savings Bank, Bowery, N.Y., 1870-75.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.286.

44 Dry Dock Savings Bank, N.Y., 1870-75, Interior.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.287.

45g Old Decker Building, Union Squarer, N.Y., 1870-91.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.288.

46 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., Court front of the north
centre, 1878. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.365.

iC7 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, Assembly Chamber.
American Architecture, Sohuyler, p.176.

48 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, Assembly Chamber,
N.E. Leopold Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.367.

49 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, Assembly Chamber.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.366.

50 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, Assembly Chamber
looking west. Eidlitz.
Architeogural Record, Nov. 1908, p.368.

51 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, room design for
the Court of Appeals. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.370.

j2 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1880, Senate corridor.
American Architecture, Schuyler, Fig. 29 p.179.

53 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1880, Senate corridor.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, P.374

54 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, The Senate staircase.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.376

55 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1875, senate staircase.

56 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1885, base of Senate
staircase. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.375.

57 Capitol, Albany, N.Y., 1878, "Golden Corridor".
Architectural Record, Nov. 1908, p.371.

58 st. Ge~orgset clergy House, East 16th Street, N.Y.,
1887. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.290.

59 Interior of addition to county court House,
City Hall Park, N.Y. Eidlitz.
Architectural Record, Oct. 1908, p.281.

60 Dining Room F, State Hospital, Central Islip,
Long Island, N.Y., 1890. Eidlitz.


1846-48 Iranistan. Fairfield, Conn.
Destroted by fire in 1857.

1848 St. George's Episcopal Church. Stuyresant Square,
Nw York

1851 st. Peters church. Westchester, New York.

1853 church of the HolY Triit. Madison Avenue and
2nStreet, New York. No longer standing.

1854 The Chalet. Hamilton Avenue, Newport, R.I.

1854-55 City Hall. Springflield, Meas. No longer standing.

1856 Continental Bank. Nassau Street, New York.
Replaced by a modern building.

1856-59 Second Cong~reatfiona~l Church. Greenwich, Conn.

1857-59 American Exchange National Bank. Broadway, New York.
Fist fireproof commercial structure in New York.

1858 Halmilton Ferry House. Brooklyn, New York.

1859 Broadway Tabernackle. 34th Street and Sixth Avenue,
New York. Razed in 1865 and replaced by a
commercial building.

1860 Cottage. Englewood, New Jersey.

1860 Academy of Music. Brooklyn, New York.
Destroyed by fire in 1903.

1860-67 Episcopal Cathedral, Christ Church. St. Louis,

1860-85 Produce Exchange. Whitehall St., New York.

1865 Building. Troy, New York.

1868 Emanuel Synag~ogue. Fifth Avenue and 4~3rd Street,
New York. Destroyed in 1928.

1869 Brooklyn-Union Building. Brooklyn, New York.

1870-75 Dry Dock Savings Bank. New York.

1870-91 Old DeIcker Builldng. Union Square, New York.

1875 State capitol, Albatny, New York.
Still standing.

1887 St. Georgecs ClTrgy House.a East 16th Street, New York.

1890 Dining Room F, state Hospital, central Islip,
L--ong slatnd, New York.


Downing, Antoinette F. and Vincent J. Soully, Jr.
The Architectuzral_ Heritag of Newprt Rhode
Island. Clarkson N. Potter, Inc./publisher.
New York.

Eidlitz, Leopold. uctol aii oachtcs
(In Roycal inst~ituteofBishahtesJorl
1896-97 3d ser v 4 p.213-212, 462-468.)
Eidlitz, Leopold. The architect of fashion. (In the
Architectural record. v? 3 p.347-353, April-
June 1894.)
Eidlitz, Leopold. The nature and function of art, more
special of architecture. London: Sampson, Low,
Marston, Searle, -And Rivington, 1881.
Eidlitz, Leopold. The vicissitudes of architecture.
(In The Architectural record. 7 1, p.4}i-4G84,
April-June 1892)
Heart, Charles Henry. Art in architecture. A book
review of The nature an function of art, Eidlitz,
Leopold. (In American architect and building news,
v.11, p.172-173, April 15,1882.)
Hitchcock, Henry-Russell, The Architecture of Henry H.
Richardson and His Times. New York: Museum of
Modern Art, 1936.

Knox, Brian. The Architecture of Pragfue and Bohemia.
Faber and Faber limited, London, 1962.
Meeks, Carroll L.V. Romanesque Before Richardson in
the United States. (In Art Bulletin, 35, March
1953, p.17-33.)
Schuyler, Montgomery. American Architecture and Other
Writings. Cambridge, Massachusetta: The Belknap~
resso Havard University Press, 1961.
Schuyler, Montgomery. A g~reat American architect: Leopold
Eidlitz. Ecclesiastical aend domestio wok. In, The
Architectural record. v.2rl, p.16F-179, Sept. 1908;
p.277-292, Oct. 1908; P.365-378, Nov. 1908, illus.)
Upjohn, Everland M. Richard Upjiohn, Architect and
Churchman. (New York~, 1929
Werner, M.R. Barnum. (NeW York, 1923), opp. p.106.



by Leopold Eidlitz
( In Royal institute of British archi-
tects Journal 1896-97 3d ser v 4 p213-
222, 462-468.)



Read at the General Meeting of the Royal Institute of British Architects, Ist March 18)7.

DURING the last half of the present century the questions How are architects to be
discussion. The answers to the first of these questions vary between the two extremes
-" Architects shall not be educated at all and They shall be taught to know everything ;
and to the second, that We shall probably never have a new style, but such a thing may
happen in the course of time "--a long time. These discussions are carried on with mutual
forbearance and good feelings, but without any other result than an expression of opinion by
the majority of the disputants, that students o~f arhicturee shall learn somethingr of
technique of buildings, if this cane done without t~e supplresi~on. _of inrhetren enius. Genius
in this case means a lively poetic~ imagin~!ation2c, capab~.of le frmebrng eecig adc
bining existing forms into a whole, which, shall be picturesque. It has been observed by
practical architects that an extended mathematical and scientific trainFin breeds able con-
structors (engineers), but is detrimental to the artistic perceptions of the students. Existina
fomsmay be repeated or combined by h~uman imagination, but new forms canl resullt only
from new functions lpgiceally developed. A musician may perform, with precision and feeling,
existing compositions, but in order to compose new music it requires something more than a
repetition or combination of existing themes. The basis of musical composition is the kInowl-
ledge of the nature of sound, andl of possible combinations of it which shall be harmonious and
expressive. This knowledge is purely mathematical.
Up to the thirteenth century, architects were buildecrs who arrived at progressive methods
of construction, mainly by practical experiment, the laboured results of which~ were stored up
as rules-of-thumb by guilds and individuals, and -modelling and decoration were mainly
matters of feeling, but of the feeling of men~who thoroughly nelmw their methods of con-
struction. The guilds and their rules are past and gone, but during the last century the science
of mechanics has been developed. This science enables us to compute with precision the strains
caused in all combinations of matter which, have served, or may hereafter serve, to form con-
atructional elements. To illustrate briefly : We krnow, a, certain distribution of weights being
given, which is to be sustained between two points of support, what is the line of pressure caused
by these weights, hence what the form of the arch to sustain them with the least~aamount of
material. Or, the form of an arch being given, what is the ideal distribution of loads which
corresponds accurately to its resistance ? Or, again, the form of an arch being given, which
Third1 Series. Vol, 17. No. 9.-4 Muarch 1807. a 4


we kinow nlot to correspond with thle distribution of its loads, what willbe the magnitude of thle
strains: produced in anly part of it, and how are these strains to be resisted. We know exactly
what is the lateral pressure of a given arch, and what is the stability of an abutmlent needed
to resist it. We can- compute thle transverse strength of a beam or a lintel, thre bending
moment of a ~pillar, or the deflection of either, under loads so small that it cannot he measured.
Now, we are all ready to admit that this krnowledger is useful, anil perhaps necessary to
the student of architecture, to enable him to construct buildings that shall be stable abnd
enduring; but many of us doubt that it has anything to do with architecture as a fine art,
which means with the composition of architectural monuments which shall be beautiful to
lookr at, and expressive of their purpose and meaning.
I presumne that all architects agree that form, modelling, and decqration constitute the
elements of beauty and expression, and that of these ~formn is the most important. If we
imagine every piece of sculpture, carved decoration, and' moulding removed, say, from the
Cathedral at A~miens, so that nothing remains but the bulks of, filers, arches, vaults, and
buttresses, the ruin will still express a Chrlistianl monument of great beauty. Now, the
ecclesiastical expression is owing to wvhat in music would be called the motif, which is
Christian in character, lofty in its conception for a house of God, and.in the ~groupin11g of its
parts, which designate worship in the chevet, the presence of officiating priests in the tran-
sept, the people in the nave, the aisles with their processions, chapels, aind confessionals;
while harmony is certainly due to a just and accurate treatment of structural parts and their
mechanical value, which is determined by local strains. In music, neglect of a strict mllathe-
matical relation of sounds results in discord. So, mn architectuug, harmon~y of fomcl e
attained only by at strict observance of the mathematical relation of strains.
Harmony of strain means that stores sho uldl be awlways resisted by a proporionat
amount of material, no more, no less. This does not mean that there should be no uor~e
~material used than is absolutely necessary to perform a given amount of mechanical wolrk,
'such, for instance, as we consider proper in economic structures, factories, warehouses,
tenements, &~c.; but whatever the amount of mater~ial to be used in a, given aIrchitcturatl
monument, which, in the opinion of the architect, is commensurate to its character of
stability, dignity, and elegance, shall be proportionate to actual strains thr~oughlout the whole
design. To be explicit, each building material sustains a certain amount of strain at the breakring
point. The alctuatl strain permitted in any structure in practice is but a fraction of the
ultimate strain of the material at the! breakiing point. This fraction is known as the factor of
safety, and should, for the same material, vary in different buildings in accordance with
their dignity. The architect may use one factor of safety for a school-house, another
for a library, and yet another for a, church. The factor of safety so chosen becomes the keyJ-
note of his design, and a, constant reference to it insures harmony. Factors of safety vary
with the different materials, and more or less depend on limits of elasticity, methlods of conl-
struction, probable effects of the weather, corrosion, &c. Strain is the sum of weight, its
direction, and resulting bending moments. *
It appears from the above that the greater the ultimate resistance of the material, the
greater is the admissible muaxim~um strain, hence the more elegant thle str~uctural forms. It
occurs that in the use of modern rolled iron, form becomes attenuated far beyond the limits
of the forms the architect is familiar with. 191. Ruskrin exclaims, There is no law, no pr~in-
ciple based upon past practice, which may not be overthrown in a moment by the arising of
a nzew condition~, or the invention of a n~ewu material." We must answerthis despondency by
stating that there is still the law of mechanics which cannot be overthrown by new conditions
or new materials.



The impression prevails that the masses of architectural monuments are far greater than
those which would be required by scientific construction. While this is true in some instances,
in many more the reverse is also true. An example of an existing building recently erected
may serve to illustrate conditions of gross discord in the formation of architectural masses.
A, BZ, and a, b, c, d, f, g, are granite columns three
feet in diameter and of equal length; a, b, c, d; 'f, g,
support a portico some thirty-five feet high, while
A, B', support the front wall of the main building,
which is over 300 feet high.* The shafts of the latter a a s
columns, moreover, consist of two pieces vertically joined. The resistance to a vertical load of
column of the length and diameter in question is reduced in a ratio of from five to three by
a vertical division as described. The actual weight upon each of the columns under the main
building is 480,000 lb>., and that of each of the columns under the p~ortico is 40,000 lb. It
seems clear, therefore, that the author of this building was entirely oblivious of the fact that
harmonious relations of the masses must be determined by relative strains. What did occur
was that the main' building was.,onstructed of anl iron frame, housed in a stone envelope;
andC as the form and colour of- the iron posts which support the front did not please the.
architect, he enclosed them in two pieces of granite, convex on the outside and concave on
the inside, and converted the iron posts into stone columus--a form of support krnowyn to
him in Greek and Renaissance architecture.
It may be asked here, and doubtless many a respectable member of our profession would.
ask, what the author could have-done with anl ugly iron or steel pillar riveted up of rolled
material. Without discussing that question at this tinfe--although it may be asserted with
confidence that a post of that description is not at all outside the pale of esthetic possibilities--
it may be suggested that a cast bronze column was perfectly practicable, and so was a granite
column of sufficient diameter to carry the load. What the architect had in mind, however,
was not the question of mechanical woprk to be done, nor the question of relative strains and
aln harmonious architectural development of forms, but the beauties of the Greekr portico,
which must be preserved in spite of new conditions and the invention of new material. Of
course, no new style of architecture can be expected when new conditions, such as a twenty-
five-storey office building--or the invention of a new material, such as rolled steel--are
referred to the Greek: portico, iblstead of to the law of gravitation.
A great stumbling-block to the student of architecture is the constant and exclusive
reading of its history, which is tacitly presentedl by schools, and avowedly accepted by3
students, as a sytm of building which serves all the pupssof a philoph ora
science and art-coompetent to teach buildifi~~~ng scientifically narisicIl under conditions
which neverc~Ee iteso fthe past. The mathematical trrtaining in modern schools
and universities is usually sufficient to enable the student to devise methods of construction
and, when devised, to compute with accuracy resulting strains. Students who then enter an
architectural course are turned over to a special teacher of architecture, who tells them to design
buildings of any krind--from a storehouse to a cathedral--not in accordance with4their acquired
knowledge of mechanics, but in accordance with methods pursued by the Greekrs, the Romians,
&E., who were not at aill familiar with the science of building azs now understood, but who
constructed merely in accordance with their practleal experience. For further information
the student is referred to Arlt H~istory. Now, thfe G~reekS, the Romn~s, and the master-builders
of the Middle Ages, though not scientific in the modern sense, understood form, because they
practically knew the mechanical function of structulral elements, and had a realising practical

FOe-m shook) be
express$ sh-ckors ly


sense of the relation of masses, hence also of the form, modelling, and decoration of these
The moderri student of architecture has no experience in building, and, when he enters
the academic course, discards from his mind his previous scientific attainment, which never
existed in the shape of forms, but merely in an aggiregnation of mathematical reasoningsl. He
is not tjinglt how to refer to thtresonngindevelopin gr forms, but, inYste i se d to stuxdy
forms in the abstract as presented in history. The avstem of the Ecole des Beaux-Arts, which
is imitated in many schools outside of Frannce, is utterly subversive of possible logical architec-
ture. Stridents are required to prepare sketches, often of important architectural monuments,
in from six to sixteen hours. B3y rules of the school, these sketches may be mleasurably foggy,
so long as the finally completed drawings can- be construed to be somehow indicated in the
originnal sketch; this means that the process is a matter of composition of form, and not a,
rational development. Criticism of these designs by teachers admits transgression against
good construction as comparatively pardonable, but insists on observance of traditional tr~eat-
ment of form as imperpttive.
The study of architectural history (more especially if perused critically) is. doubtless
beneficial to the architect, but should be postponed for a post-graduate course, or should be
left for private reading after the academic course is completed. A future text-bookr of architec-
ture for universities, polytechnic schools, and academies of thle art of architecture will
doubtless bear the title-Th~le Thel~ory, Pracct~ice, andz Art of' Build~inq This text-book would
assu me th e_ student to hav~e attain a, mathematical ~training sufficient to read with comfort,
and referto wit~h ea~Lse,_say Rankine3_'s APle ehnc rayohrwr qiaetto
itmat leats~t as~_I~~~?_, fa ssaisaecnend t would contl!esainc esa n thle su~bjiect of mode~?dllln
Ilmoulling) sheeiltura.;l par~l.(.,i withl i.l~~.ference (II Ine1.!1)an:ical worl.: ilone and~ the strength~tl andl
el~egance with which it is to be done when considered ~in connection with te igntyof ou
byiblings, and1I Unwans. -ling'!; I~ j cal~e.:1.=4 1 .;, th nllac1.I ~iLe o~f _the nallterial uIsct A~~~l~so a esq
on carved ornament~ anld colour-dec lbora~ctiolan thi eainto mllecha~tinfica~.l~ fucin h
cli acero f thc ~ r'lrull!'.;-ne an fll tl: l I it Is 1. .1 I.f Un l lt.- I ste ia su J i. All this would be illustratedl
with diagrams a~nd decorative designs, selected fr~om existing sources, composed, anew from
natural objects, conventionalized in accordance with the nature of the material. Then
there would follow the architectural scales, which, likie the scale~s in music, would serve to
train the student preparatory to the workl of actual complosition. Wha~t is here meant
by architectural scales may be best illustrated by one or more ealls for instance :
Given a pillar of a, certain length, and t140 load lit supportss ian pounds, what will be its
sectional area, and wha~t its form, modelll! i ng, c ?rvecd ornament, ad .colour decoration (if
an~y) in 0, warehouse I4ulblic school, ae library, a court-h~ou~se and a gish church,_when! Ic
th pllr smae f oocast i-pk t?74 k95 brickr, sand-stonemreo
gr~anit~e ? The text-book would answer these questions, and illustrate the answers by drawings
and diagranms. It would state .how variations of treatment would accrue by reason of
difference in the length of the pillar; also hlow pillars of similar nature have been treated in
notable monuments of the past, and discuss thle mnerit of such treatment, and point out its
material defects. Wall piers considered as pillarls would be treated in the same waiy. Thenr
would follow the consideration of braces, capitals, and corbels. Further, thatt of lintels, arches,
groins, and cupolas, and the resulting lazteranl pressures and abutments; and also of roofs,
stairs, and incidental structural elements.
Assuming the architectural scales to comprise the first part of the' text-book, thle secondl
part will treat of the egnstruction' of single cells, and the combination of these into piles.
The students would attend lectures on- the ratio~nate of s~tructurall cenleents and compositions,


bult would devote most of their time to drawing structural parts, and finally entire buildings
and monuments, not by copying from the text-booki, but by an individual treatment of the
subjects contained therein under the guidance of a professor and his assistant or assistants.
The latter would see to it that adherence to strain is strictly pursued. By this process,
students would in their wolrk he corrected and helped daily, and would progressively aqquiro
a habit of referring design to building, and its mechlanical import. That monuments thus
conceived and designed will be expressive of their meaning, and the individuality of their
author, cannot be doubted; nor that they will be harmonious in themselves, and will vary from
the forms of the past in the degree as new wants, new material, new methods of construction
vary and excel those handed down to us in history.
When a natural organism decays and dies, it still exists in its elements, though not in
its original form. ~These elements under different environments combine again into new
organic forms of different functions. Science a~nd art obey a similar law. Principles esta-
b~lished by experience continue to live as accepted truths, whlen the forms of artificial organisms
which they originally developed have ceased to be fitting or' useful to human needs, more
especially when those principles first crudely announced have becomeo accur~ately determined
by qluantitative analysis. The cross-bow and modern rifle, the spinning-wheel and the present
spinning-machinesi, and the ancient galley and the armouredl steamer, all serve as practical illus-
trations of the above. Architecture alone, of all humnan pursuits, retains obsolete forms and
neglects underlying principles and organic laws. It must be remembered, however, that this
was not the case prior to the fourteenth century. Five hunndred years of decrepitude leads
thinking minds to question a possible resuscitation ; and when now and then such a, possibility
is seriously contemplated, we talki of centuries and generatiolns, because past progrress has con-
sumed such periods of time. But when w~e cOmfider the great strides of the present century,
owing to the kinowrledge and application of positive scientific mlethodls-the metamorphosis of
Japan, for instance, within the last generation, purely by the acknowledgment andc practicalI
acceptance of these methols-wvre must come to the conclusion that a period of one generation.
is quite sufticient to initiate renewed rapid pr~ogr~ess in architectural art, always providled that
we are ready and willing to refer it to its true and fundamental principles, and to teach it
The President, Professor AIrramson, A.R.A., in the Chair.

Mu. JOHNJ SLATER [F.~], B.A., who, in the
absencoe of thle author, had undertaken to read the
Paper to the Meeting, made thle following intro-
dluctory remarks:-M~fr. President and Glentlemen,
I find some difficulty in explaining my position
here as reading this Paper. When asked a few
days ago if I would read Mr. E~idlitz's Paper to
the Meeting, I said 1 hlad not Meen the Paper, and
kinew nothing ait all about it ; so in consenting to
heo the foster-father to thle Paper, I: mu~st not be
understood to adopt thle bantling as my own. The
Paper is characteristicatlly and essentially America n.
We knowv thalt the Americans ar~e strictly utili-
tarian people: they have rather a contempt for
tradition and traditional usage, and have adopted
methods of their own with regard to building;
and I am bound to say that with a great deal of
what-is in this Paper I myself could not, personally
agree. Mr. Eidlitz, is an architect. practisinlg- in

New York, and the author of a book on Thze
Naturte andzt Funlct~ioL of Art, which is inl the
Institute Library. I have only been able just to
glance at thle work: it is rather a large volume,
and contains mu71ch suggestive maLtter. There are
points also in this Paper which themselves are
very sulggestive. But when al a~rchitect asks8
people to throw over tradition altogether, anud
believes that, thle study of old worked is of very little
use to the archlitectural student, and ought to be
put off till after his student days, I aml afraid at
great many people! in England will hardly algree
with him. T'he main point made by MVr. Eidlit&
is thait form in architecture should always be on
nectedl with a proper relation of points o upr
to the strain of weights thecy habve to car'ry. No
doubt a great truth unlderlies this statementt, and.
I remember that somne years ago Mr. Stathakm
read a Panper before the Royal Institution in


which he very happily commented upon thle lack
of this element in construction with preference
to one of our bridges, where there was a. huge pro-
jecting pier, of which I think he gave a diagram,
supporting a young lady with a~ parasol! There is
no doubt a, great truth in the fact that your points
of support ought to be correlated to the weights
they have to bear. My own opinion is that the
disappointing feature of American architecture is
largely due to the fact that the huge, lofty build-
ingos erected in the S~tates are constructed solelf~of
iron; the iron supports are cased with stone to
look likie stone piers; and we have a building,
thirteen or fourteen storeys high, apparently rest-
lug upon a stone pier, which it is perfectly evident
is: not sufficient to carry it. I hold most strongly
that the supports of a building ourght not.- onlly to
be actually, but also apparently proportional to
the weights they hlave to carry, or we cannot
derive any satisfaction from the aspect of the
building. I am afraid, however, that if we were
to adopt, as the text-book of our architectural
studies or our architectural education, thle-mer~e
mechanical formula of proportion of weight to
strains, we should not clothe the dead bones
of building with any archlitectural life at all.
[The Paper was then read, and the following
discussion ensued :]
I shall be happy to propose a vote of thanks to
Miir. Eidlitz for his Paper. I have already somle
knowledge of hris writings, and have read them
with great interest. I have listened ~to this short
Paper with a mingled feeling of interest and some-
thing of melancholy, as to the last attempt made
to found a new and perfect theory for evolving a
new style of architecture. There are some valuable
suggestions in thle Paper, but they will, I fearl, go
the way of all the others, so far as arriving at aly
practical result. There is some value in hris
suggestion for an architectural scale, that is, for
giving pupils a problem of this kind: Giv-en a
pier of a certain length, and given its supports in
pounds, what should be its sectional areaL and its
width ? You can go as far as that. Th~en he
goes on to say what should be its moulding anld its
carved ornamlent;; but that, it appears to mle, has
nothing to do with its practical power of strain at
all. It struck me particularly that this P'aper
re~peats again, what I call the old fallatcy thnt
we have heard again and again during thle last
twenty years or so, that we should endeavour to
carry out architecture as people carriedcr it out
before thle fourteenth century, without referetnce
to precedent. It would be well if we could onlce
for all recognize the fact that that is absolutely
impossible; it may be right fr'om a phlotlophical
point of view, but it cannot be dcone If we
could catch a generation of archlitectur~al students,
take possession of them as soon as they are born,
and k~eep them out of sight of anly buildings, thlen

send then to a desert island, and keep them away
from a kinowledgie of anly books, or history, and
tell them to construct buildings to suit their
purpose in the best way they can, I suppose they
light then evolve something new! But we are
not in thle position of people before the ages of
pr~inting~. The people whlo built the fourteenth-
century cathledrals, the people who evolved G~othic
out of round-arch Gothic, worked in a spontaneous
way, and without reference to other studies, simply
because they ktnew of nothing else; they did not
travel, or hardly at all, and were not acquainted
with other places. Now here we have before us,
in books, photographs, and by travel, ai knowledge
of everything in other countries, andl of everything
that went before us. Even the RZomlans hlad no
real knowledge of G~reek- architecture; Vitruvius
wrote? about Greeke architecture, but it is improb-
able thlat he ever visited Athens. There was a
reason, then, for individual styles being naturally
evolved, in a position of things which hlas gone for
ever, and which, I say, never can revive; and I
think thle sooner people r~ecognise that the better,
because then they will give over pursuing this
kind of phantom of a return to a spontaneous
architectural style, without reference to anything
thatt has preceded it. As soon as people have
anly knlowledge of styles, the human mind is so
constituted that they must be affected by it. They
cannot help it. Mr. E~idlitz in his Paper haus
said somle hard things about thle system of the
Ecole decs Beaux-Arts, which is said to be subver-
sive of true archlitecture. The system may be
rather conventional, but I should like to recall
this fact, that one of our ablest anid most thoug~ht-
ful art critics, the late PJ. G. H~amerton, who spent
many years: inl Fr1ance, left it on record, as his
decisive conviction, that architecture is more a
living art inl France at this moment than in any
other country in the world. That opinion is the
more remairkiable as coming froly HaImerton because
he was not an architect ; he hadL; no particular proU-
judtices of education, and as an art critic was a
manl rema~rktably independent in feeling; he did
not muove in ordinary grooves at all; and that is
thle view which modern French architecture at its
best presented to a very thoughtful a~nd enthusiastic
lover of art. There is, I think, a great deal of
truth in that. F~or some years past I have made
a practice of looking through the archlitecture at
the Salon every year, and though there is a grreat;
deal of mnere school worki-no doubt students'
dra~wings--thlere is much thant is decidedly originally
a~nd thloughtful inl the new buildings growing up
there, as well ats in and around Paris; so that oneo
canlnot consider that the teatch~ing given ~in thle
Eccole des Beaux-Arts is entirely a falilure, or ha;s
led to merely conventional architecture without
anly ideas in it. Particularly larst year I noticed
that the Gold Medal for Architecture at the Salon
was given, not to ai piece of school architecture at


all, but to an absolutely practical technical build-
ing, a great set of drawings for the Central Depit
of the Post and Telegraph Department, by M\.
Scellier de Gisors. That shlows that in Fra~nce they
are carrying out what is sensible in the principles
of this Paper; they are giving a man thle G~old
Medal for havings shown admirable technical
treatment of a purely technical building, without
anything of what one may call academical art in
it at all. So that I think the reproaches cast at
the Ecole des Beaux-Arts are sterner than they
need be, and that it has not brought about all thle
unhappy results Mr. Eidlitz is inclined to suppose.
I agree with Mr. Lidlitz so far as thinkting that it
is a great advantage to students to direct their
minds to the consideration of thle strains their
work has to meet, and to design in relation to that ;
but I do not think it is of any use to try to shut
them out from any architectural precedents;
because, if shut out from it in the school, they
will get it out of doors; and if one tries to kieep
them from all boos andl knowledge of archi-
tectural history, they will have nothing to go
upon as a basis for designing at all. No one
generation of men can absolutely originate a style.
It always depends--it always hats in former times
--on what has gone before; and as long as human
nature remains the same it will continue to be so.
I have, however, great pleasure in proposing a
vote of thanks for what, though short, is a very
thoughtful Paper, and containing some useful
much pleasure, Sir, in seconding thle vote of
thanks to Mr. Eidlitz for his interesting Paper.
I think the teaching of the toole des Beaux-Arts,
which is essentially that of classical architecture,
and therefore means low buildings some two or
three stoleva in height, is really subversive of the
architectural problem that Mr.: Eidlitz wishes to
workr out--a problem, that is to say, of construct.
ing an architectural building of, say, from fifteen
to twenty-two storeys high. That, it seems to me,
is the sole architectural problem in this world
that he thinks worthy of solution. In a building
in America twenty-two storeys high, naturally it
comes to a construction of steel or iron, which I
think I have heard you say, Sir, is the architecture
of the period, and which we ought to study at the
present time.
wcish to confine myself to one practical and intelli-
gible phase of this subject, which was very well
indeed brought out by Mr. Slater in his introdue-
tory remarkse. I gather Mr. Later's views to be
these, that it is wrong to encase a pier or column
of iron with stone or other material. That brings

the column or pier carry that superstructure, but
it should appear to carry it. In other words, that

supposing with a cast-iron stanchion encased in
stone you canl carry a superstructure with a
diameter of 2 feet 6j mches, Mr. Slater's theory,
carried into practice, would mean, speakingr
roughly of course, a pier or column 5 feet in
diameter. That, mn thle case of a commercial
building, would be a pier which would not be
tolerated by thle individual who had to pay for
the building; and it would be ignoring the fact
thatl in the smaller diamueter we take advan-
tage;~ 1 material that has come to us since the
thirteenth century. It; is, to my mind, of no
avail to sa'y that you do not find the stanchion of
iron-work employed in the thirteenth century.~
Thle reason is that thle thirteenth-century builders
did not know of the existence-mi that form at a~ll
events--of thle vertical supports which we know
to-da y. I think it is a perfectly defensible pro-
position that an architect should take advantage of
a cast-iron stancluon. I say that it does not
interfere with legitimate architecture that he may
employ such a stanchion, and may enclose it
with terraz-cotts or stone, and mnay therefore re-
duce the area of support. So long as that
column is in proportion, it is, I contend, quite at
defensible design. I have a case in which I have
done it myself, and in this way. I wanlted to
have a galugedl red-brich col~umn. The diameter
of that columnn as desired would not have been
suflicient unless a cast-iron stanchion had been
introduced into that column; that cast-iron
stanchiou has been introduced;l it has been en-
tirely covered up; and I ha~ve been enabled to get
my red-brick column, which otherwise could not
have been got. One of the objections raised
against thle Tower B3ridge is that the employment
of iron there encased in steoe is an indefensible
design. I think it thoroughly defensible. The
architect has really taken advantage of the mat-
terial at hris disposal; and, so long as the work is
in proportion, I maintain that its ergployment in
that form is a thoroughly defensible and excellent
form of design.
Mua. C. H-. B3RODIE [A.]suggested that it would
be interesting to add a note to Mr. Cates's remarks
[p. 290] giving the ages of those who had won
the Soane M~ednllion during the last ten years.*
THE~ PRESIDENT.-SBome seven years ago I
happened to pick~ up Mr. Eidlitz's book on The
Naltueo and Funlction of Art, mrore especially of
Architectulre, at an old bookrshop, and was struck
by its title. I read it through--no small task, I
may say, for it is a book of some 500O pages--and
I found the author was the only person I have
ever comeo across in my life who had a due belief
in thle importance of art to mankind. I have

against the names of future winners in thle Registers
published in the KlmBNAn.


spoken to a great many artists at various times,
but they almost all agree in the modern maxim
that art is solely for delight. Now Mr. Eidlitz is of
opinion that it is one of the great means of edluca-
tion of the masses; thatl the sort of vague ideas
that they get from it are the only ones that they
can possibly get; and, as hie says, at present it is
thought that we canl do without art. But it is
just as necessary now, if you want to teach
the people, as it was two thousand years ago.
That alone is a great charm in thle bookt. I can-
not say that I wholly and entirely agree with all
his remarks about architecture, and amongst other
things I do not agree with his idea that tle
whole thoughts and practice of architecture can be
changed in a generation, or anything like it.
Nevertheless, I consider that the Panper we have
had to-night is one of the most important Papers
ever read in this Institute since I have been a
member. One of the great difficulties of archli-
tecture is its proportions. Now these proportions
no doubt were originally laid dowln by the early
architects as the results of their experience on
the strength of materials--I have not the leass
doubt of that, although I cannot prove it. Well,
these proportions have come from being studied,
and also from their being so constantly before us,
to take a form that is agreeable to our eyes;
custom will do that; Mr. Eidlitz in his Pa~per
shows how in this direction one step forward may
be taken in architecture. He says you will fmnd
that if you take a constant according to the desire
that you have to give elegance or solidity to your
building, and that if you multiply by that chosen
constant every portion according to its stability,
its absolute doing the work that it has to do, you
will get the proper proportion for each part with-
out any more trouble; and that, in my opinion,
is a true and most valuable remark. Mr. Statham's
observations about the effect of things past on the
minds of the present are certainlly perfectly true.
I do not think, though I must say I have only read
this Paper curs~orily, that there is anything in Mr.
Eidlitz's Paper to show that he is of a different
opinion. I agree with his remarksr about thle
usual study in our own country of what is called
historic architecture. As applied now it is not
only perfectly useless, but destructive of any
kind of progress in the art, for, as Mr. R~ushin
remarked, l*it is not wanted to be put into a
storehouse for use, but into a gallery for study."
What, in my opinion, we want to do is to
express in the taste of the day the things that
are wanted. We want to arrange a building
as exactly as possible for the purpose; we
want to make it bear what it should bear in
each portion; and we want also to take this
constant, and, where we want a building to look
very strong, to multiply each part by the sane
constant. We want to give it the ornament
necessary to convey to persons of our own age a

view of the use the building is to be put to, and to
evokie thle emotions this use should engender; and
I thiiq all these things are more or less emlbodiedl
in Mr. Eidlitz's Paper. But there is one point on
which I cannot agree with him. He believes thlat
not only may the rough form, but thle absolutely
finished form, be got by means of those strains;
and that, I think, is not the case. Archlitectur~e,
I think, appeals rather to those human emotions
thatnIo mere mechanical method will ever produce.
It is the desire of miankind to express something
that the mlere strains will not of necessity giveo.
But he goes further than that : he thinks that
each particular weighlt to be carried, or strain to
he resisted, will give its proper formn to the part if
it could be properly carried out; andl he thinklis
also that there is some natural concurrence of
colour withl these. Well, I confess it is beyond mec
if there is ; I have never been able to see it. Thle
only thing I would say about Mr. Stathamn's
remazrks is that the Rloman, and even the e~r~lier
Romanesque, architects were not .so .absolutely
without anything to give them an idea. TIhe
Romans got hints fr~om the native architectures
of all the countries they conqluered. The Romnan-
esqlue architects hlad the Roman ruins, and the
works of the B3yzantines. The Romanesque
architects learnt what little they could get from thle
Rtoman and Byzantine bunilding~s about themn; but
this was nothing to what thecy afterwards achieved,
when they had made thle tour through Eiurope,
Asia Minor, and Syria. And it will be ~remembered
that it was not till 1291l that the Crusadlers were
eventually driven out of Acre. Thlerefore these
people had not only a fine opportunity of seeing a
great manly things thait had been done, but thecy
were also inl contact, as well ats inl conflict, with
those people who were thlen the most civilised inl
the world--the Baracens. They must have seen
an immense quantity of their rather ephemeral
works ; and I believe! it was the endleavour to rival,
rather than to imitate, them which gave the pecu-
Jiar chlaracter which Gothic, and especially late
Gtothlic, tookr.

Msl. ARTHUR CATES [IF.], who had been
asked to favour the Institute with a few observa-
tions on the subject of Mr. Eidllitz's P~aper, sent the
following communication, which was read to the
Meeting by the H-on. Secretary :--
The educational training of alrchitects, with
which the Institute is concerned, is clearly not
one in which they shall be taught to know
everything," nor is it one the aim and object of
which is to produce the evolution sof a new style,"
whatever that once much-used phrase may mean.
The educational training which is now organised
aims at fitting the student for the acquisition of
the knowledge necoasarry for thle satisfactory
practice of his prof session, in developing his natural,
artistic, and scientific ability, so that he may ap~ply


" future text-book( of architecture for universities,
polytechnic schools, and academies of the art of
architecture, which will doubtless bear the title,
The~ Theory, Practice, and Art of Buildling,"
It is not easy to comprehend what would
be thle exact nature of this text-book, which
would profess to give the form, modelling,
carved ornament, and colour decoration (if anly)
for pillars and probably other details in a ware-
house, a public school, a library, a courthouse,
and a parrish church." Azid out of this; text-book
are to be evolved monuments that are to be
expressive of their meaning and of the individuality
of their author.
The factor of safety," which it appears may
vary in different buildings in accordance with
their dlignity, is apparently thle kiey to this "L texrt-
bookr," from the study of which such excellent
results a~re to be obtained; but surely the first
elements of design dictate that the considerations
of formn, outline, masses, and stability, in both
appearance and farct, must be the essentials to be
primarily dealt with; and these, as well as the
character of the detail and of the ornament, must
be governed by thle nature of the material to be
employed; thle still and talent of thle architect are
displayed in his artistic and scientific use of such
materials, in accordance with their qlualities; and
in their application to the best advantage for con-
venience, strength, and beauty:-no text-booki,"
no "' architectural scales, no "1 ( combination of
single cells into piles," will enable thle architect
to effect this. His success will depend on his
application of the capabilities of the materials
he used, andl will be the greater as he may have
beenl blessed with the divine inspiration of artistic
genius, and hanve cultivated and developed it by
earnest study, of which mechanical and con-
structive details would not have occupied the most
important part.
The Institute has an excellent opportunity to
afford oncouragellint to the study of the means of
satisfying now wants, by the use of new materials
and now m~letho~ds of construction, and the mor~e
extended app]-lication of those materials with the
existence of which we are familiar, but of whose
capabilities in perhaps unexpected directions we
have no appreciation. The 80oane IVedallion and
its accolupanying travelling studentship is in the
free and uncontrolled dlisposition of the Inlstitute.
At present thle only quai~ficattion of competitors is
that they shlall be British subtlects under the age
of thirty years," with the result that there is each
year a great amount of misdirected and wasted
energy on the part of untrainled competitors who
have entered on' deqignl before they have mastered
the essential prlncples which should govern it.
Byj alter~ing the conditions to secure that those
princilels should have been mastered, and even
by securing that the competitors should have ha~d
some rcoasolnable training, by making Associateship

both to the expression of his ideas in design and
in the realisation of his conceptions. In thle
complex conditions of the practice of the day the
architect must aim at acquiring thle power to
attain success in designing buildings which shall
be convenient and appropriate in arrangemlenlt;
shall be of stable construction; and shall be of
suitable and beautiful design, both as regards
masses, form, and detail.
The first studies of' the aspirant should be
devoted to a mastery of Classic and Mediteval work
---intelligently studied, with a thorough acquaint-
a~nce wyith form and detail- -leaving~ the
Renaissance and later developments to a subso-
quent period when he can bring to bear on their
consideration the knowledge acquired in the first
years of his studies. In both periods the sedu-
lous cultivation of the art of accurate and effective
delineation, and of sketching detail and ornamenot,
from buildings and from memory, thus bringing
eye and hand and brain into harmonious and
mutual action, is of the highest importance.
Concurrently with this, the study of the history
of the several periods of architectural art is of thle
greatest value, not as a mere matter of dates and
names, but as giving life and interest to thle
subjects studied, connecting them with the actual
social life of the .people by whom they were
evolved, and with th~e political, social, and religious
influences which controlled their design. These
historical studies train the mental and artistic
powers, and by giving a keener appreciation of the
excellence of excellent things, and of the causes
of such excellence, refine the taste and strengthen
the judgment,
It has been well said by Professor Williaml R.
Ware *-
I calinot help thinking that this discipline is calculated
to calm the anxiety of those who fear that- too prolonged
courses of academic study mnay enervate the powers, instead
If dtiusai ihm ainid, as mna~h b-ed, bury or barn out
that these fealrs have in general but little foundation, and
that it is not through over-education that talents are lost
to the world, and fail to bring increase to their owners, so
much as through their lying neglected, or, as sometimes
hlpe u be ing too etaefulla >te ded bby th ir aossnor le t
true that in thre conduct of life, and especially in tle
practice of the arts, whichl is but the finer krind of living,
it is the special personal equality, the sparki of individuality
and originality which lights every man who comesi into the
xot n st tsh semsintrni vaue ten though te rsk o
exaggerated, it is not possible to exaggerate the impol~rtance
of fostering and magnifying it. Thecre is no0 knowing whbt
fire it may not kindle. If ever you hanve a new idea, how-
ever slight and unimportant it may seem to be, cling to it,
chrsh i, 1di opoy land some day you may awaken and
This immortality, if to be one of honour, is not
likely to be attained2 by the study of the suggested
TheL StudyE of Architctzural H-istory/ at Columblia


them by precept and thle example of history that in art, as
innlife, temperaitoe and rellinemomt of e nduc cueome fo
are the only sur~e memns to thlese ends.
All reatsonable men must agree with thle con-
clusions so well expressedl by IProfessor Ware', anld
ho content to awatit thle development whlichl must
follow carefully conducted edu~cational tralining,

relsIlsjtuf ne ed ota ol flther allec t 1n
110 n anue sthesufas~tuly ou th crtsatlrealy
members shall have had that thorough and sys-
tomatic artistic, scientific, and practical training,
based on a sound general education, which will
ensure that the title of architect and memlbership
of thle Institute shall imply that its possessor mnay
reasonably be expected to be a reliable and trust-
worthy adviser on all artistic and practical details,
and also a well-educated man, standing at1 least
on a level with the average of hris clients inl knowN-
ledge of all ordinary topics of art and general
history, and superior to them in lus special anrd
technical knowledge. An architect will then, so
far as personal characteristics may permit, inl
som1e degree combine the imagination of thre
artist, the intatlectual clearness and precision of
the mathematician, and the experience andl roadsi
ness of thle practical man with the culture and
refinement of the educated gentleman.

or qualification therefore an express condition, the
results would certainly be more satisfactory, the
cause of the educational training of architects be
greatly advanced, while some new developments
of design arising out of the applications of new
materials night possibly arise.
geIhen ques 10n sused b lToe Tis-boe 'o s

diffeethst nd oienat bynth cCournittree ci hlducad
Professor W. Rt. Ware, in the Paper above quoted'
says in relation thereto:
The Committee on Education expressed the hope that
if the study of the historic styles wats systemantisedl and co-
ordinated in the schools, such an effective concentration
ef ielligent ftot hmigh adb indve 13ix a. sytm
and should be more accurately adjusted to thle expression
of modern American life than those nlow in vogue. We
do not feel that it very much concerns us to exert ourselves
to any such end; we do not see that we have any cause to
ponuct the fut r,a so ata 1ooce aon to yt p t
that can be devised. We distrust the science which, in our
present state of ignorance, undertakes to foretell or to
control the architectural weather. All we can be sure of
is that the architecture of the future will be good or had,
n0chaatr in hand. All we can undertake to do is, if possible, to
inspire the young men who come ~under olur hand wvith a
certain measure of good sense and good taste, teaching


in its inception, still greater in its develop-
ment, but greatest of all in its promised
fruits. Our profession is also great, very great and
noble, in its antiqunity and history, distinguished
in every age and nation by glorious achievements ;
but whether its future will eclipse its past will
depend on whether it will, or will not, continue
to advance, as heretofore, on the crest of the un-
resting wave of human progress.
The very name of' Architecture proclaims its
proud precedence in the order and rankr of technical
art and work. B3ut this has of late years been
strangely overlooked by the promoters of sys-
tematic technical education, and it may well be
asked by every architect zealous for the dignity of
his calling: ''How has it come about that, why~ile
princes of the blood royal, soldiers, sailors, and
professional men of all other sorts have been more
or less active in this great movement for technical
education, architects have takecn scarcely any
place, much less the arch,' or chief, place in

Read at the Meeting of the Northern Architectural
Association, 3rd February 1897.

their counsels ?" Thereby hangs a tale, which,
for the credit of our profession, hadl better remnain
untold. A tale of declension-generation after
generation of the race of B~ritish architects, ever
dwindling in mental capacity, and continually
growing feebler in spirit, whlile simultaneously
increasing in numbers, content with thle pursuit
of artistic trifles, while permitting with little or
no protest those maj~estic wvorkts which have
rendered our nineteenth century the moste wonderF-
ful of all the centuries to pass out of their -weak
hands into those of thle distinctly modern race of
civil engineers who have succeeded in demnon-
stratting~ to the admiring world that--Solomlon
notwithata~nding-the battle is to the strong.
Buot while we must mournfully acknowledged
that the atrchitecet of this and the seventeenth
andl eighteenth centuries have themselves to thalink
for the loss of much prestige which it should have
been their glory to win, yet the blame has not
been wholly theirs. The chief of the Old WorldZ
Wisemnen, when Yick of himself and surfeited wvilth
his own philosophy, wrote these words : G~od
made men upright, but they sought out many
inventions." WVe are left to guess what wereu the


- -

i .-


A Rejoinder.*
O Heaven I And are these things for ever impossible
thcn ? Not awhit !
To-mlorrow IzI.....mb. they mlight all begin to be and io
on through blessedl centuries reatlisingy themselves, if it
were not thlt--alas, if it were not Ini~t we ar.e um a o f

cease to be, I hlope.- Cur~ide,
HE motives governing professional discus-
sions on science andl art ml architecture are
- apt to be mainly comlmercfiabl, whicl mleanls
that the well-bcingb and success of ar~chlitecture
are subordinated to the supposed ;inanledia~te
interest of the architect as a genus, and more
frequently as an individual.
The methods emnployed do not refer ito the
principles involr-ial, but are purely political, in
that modern sense of the wordl which meansII thle
pursuit of temporary expedients. The results are
disastrous to the profession. In controver~sics
with branches of Government which control pubhe c
monuments, the architect is inva~riably put in
the wrong by trained politicians, who successfully
appeal to the judgment of the masses on grounds
of economy, or' by at playful indiffAerenceu to archli-
tecture as an art, and by arraigning the works of
architects for their shlortcoomings.
The public hans therefore lost falith in the
authority of the architect, in the sensfe in whichl it
respects tha~t of science, law~, theolog:y, mnedicine,
or the dicts of Courts, even the opinions of com-
potent mechanics and artisans in their own
specialties. The profession, made painfully aware
of this fact by salient criticarnl, proceeds fr~om
time to tune to enumlerate for the ear of the
public the scientific attainments involved in the
construction of monuments, anld the artistic skiill
in modelling and decorating their masses. Of the
latter, much stress is laid upon taste andi geniud r
as the motive force which enablesb the architect to
cope with this problems; but as taste is a faculty
possessed by all men, and as fr~equenltt ppeals: to
public taste place the profession in a noausurably
*Mr. Eidlitz's Paper, whichl was read bf a~ tl e hIst
tute on the 1st M\arch l8'37, isi printed, with thle dliscussion
the:reon, in No. i) of the present volume, pp, 213-222.

dependlent position, the assertion is azddedi that thle
taste of the architect is especially cultivat~ed by
the reading ofi art hist~ory.
This is thle last tiangible position tak-en to ex-
plain to trained logical mIinds that there is anl
Lctual scientific and arlistic foundation to thle
otherwise patently dlilousarrte talke of tasto a~nd
Let mle ainilit broadlly thai~t thle history of any
science or r isan.jd51 essentlial appendix to the study
of it, pr~ovidedl it be aLccompamedi by a philosop~hic
scheme of odlucation, comprising all the requisite
linmoledge now attaina~ble. Alone, yvithout con-
nection with such a scheme of education, the reaid-
ing of the: history of architecture may also bucome
valuable to thle extent in which it is treaztod anla-
lytically ; but when not so treatted, it becouiles
Whle~n the s~tudlent sees in history nothing g miore
thlan a collection of p~ictures of ulonuments of
various dates, or wfhen, whatl is worseB, he albsor~bs
erronecous criticisms: of the author (as I havL~e
abundlantly shown elsewvhere, in the case: of
Fergusyson,, thle author mlo-i frequently consulted
b-y Englflishl r~eaders of this tiay), and when more~
readling of history is: imagined\ by professors to be
a Hystem11 of odullcation inl architectu i, it becomes
of qluestiona:ble benefit to the student who has
not as yet maiistered t heG rud~cime nts of architecture

'The truth of all th~is maiy be sufficiently p~rovren
from,~t the dlictsl of the professional abrchitects who
dicussed,,, my P)aper1 of thle 1St 1\farch.
191r. William Woodward says [p.l' 219]:--
10 Jues~ not interfere with :....a a;~~~irchitecture that1
he maI;y emlployr such a stancholionl, alndl nusy enclosed it with
telrracotta or. stone, and may thierefore reullce thle area~i of
support. So long as that column is in proportions, it is, I
contend, quite a dlefensib~le de~sign. T h~avc; :1 case in which
1 1v tc it uya l, n II ill tinSc < R tr
as5 de:sjilned wouvir nlot hauve been surjicienlt unlessit at Least-
ironl st~anchilml hadL Ibeen inltr.oduced inlto tha1t collunm; thait
cast-ir~onl stachlion has beenl introdu~cedl; it hans beenl
entlirely covc!ere up,~ andl I haive beecn enabledl to geLt mly
rtod-brichicolumnl, v~licl onot! rwia e cofl not ohavt eleat a.
maintalin thatt its employment in thlat form is a thourouyhly
decfensible andi excellent forml of decsign.
Observe thle terml anl excellent forll of deosign."'
To Ilth is gntleumi n theu history of ar~llcitectae is
nothing b~ut a collection of designsl, nlot of buildl-
ingrs, and he imagines proportion as possible to
exist; outside of the mlechani2ical relations o/mnatter
whichl relati~l hre admits to have boeen detective in
the case~ cited'. Hep felt warral~ntedl in resortinlg to
th~is exspedielt; without regiard to artistic treatltent;,
whichl wouldl denumlalc aL frantk avowal oIf the
mletallic stanlchicln, or', at least, at visible presella-
tionl of it; in the form of the colunm; bult Mlr.
WC1oodwardl claims to be of suflicient author~ity
andl gives no mnechanllical or testhetic reason for it
beyond the ~unproved assertion that, so lonlg na


Ihe wor'k is inl 1'propotion3," its employment,
&c., &0.
It would be of interest to learn where, in what
book, Mlr. Wood~want~ found the authority for the
size of his brickc cohann. I never mlet wvithl such
a bookc. I fear that he Ir'iferlS to the proportionls
of column71s as laid down inl V~ilruciuS, or' perhaps )
dedlucel f~oml StuaLrt and R~evett, or :;inle mnore
recent melasuremuents of thle struc~ill'ral parts of
Greek; temp~les. He seems qulite! toi overlooki tle
fact that; Greekr architects in using these pr~opor-
tions were g'overnedi by m~echlanical1 reasoning,
derived from pramctical exper'ionc. Further more,
he hasL evidenthly omittedl tlo obser~ve that these
proportions are necei,arily mod,~ified by th!e narture
of the load,land the resisting on pacrity of the
material. Greeki temples were bulilt of marble;
his columnn was built of brick. D~id he takec into
considleration that a columnl resists pressure, not
in proportion to its diamleter, but to the square of
the diameter ?' I say I fear that Mrl. Woodward
overlooked all this fromn the fact thait inl thle dis-
cnusion of' a Paper on thle education of architects,
he failedl to state thle rationalo inlvolvinlg thee
points, which could~ have supportedi hris assertions.
M~r. John Slater seems to be aware o thle
te'Sthetic formlalli, That~ structural parlts: of
monlumlents must; be: a~2>arentlUy proportionecd to
the weight they carry." He! says [p. 218) :- -
I10( holdost strongly that thle supports of' a building
ough~t not only to be actually, but also appatreanyl rtmean-
ingh visibly] proportional to the weighlts thecy haveu~ to carry,
or we cacnnot der1ive anly satisfactionl orom thle aspect of thle
buildings. I am a:frl~nd, however, that if we we~re to adcopt
aF; the textl-h~ook o~f our architectural studies, or our ar~chiteu-
turnl e~ducatioul, thle mere mech anical fannula~~l of proporrtion
1~l..nbou, with any architecturall life at illl.
I cabn only say to Mlr. Slaterr, a 130 nlot he afr~aid."
Natulre ha~s attemptedl the process: of clothing the
bones of her~l animalil anld vegetable creations with
grn:ht success, and wvith the univrtlsal ap~prov al of
numlberless generations of wise melcn, includling, I
trust, Mlr. Slatter himnself, in accor~dance with thle
formula of ritra~ins atnd weighlts, statics and
dynamics. I knlowR this to be tlrue, because these
formube have been dleducedi fr~oml the1 phen1omena II
observed inl nature; and as it; is luniversablly con-
coded tha~t art its the hlumaln efftort; at creation in
inlitatio~n of nature, the neglect of those formuhe l
denotes m~is~conce~ption1 of the nature~ of ar~t,
I aml duly girateful to Mr. HT.11cathcote Stulatham
[p.~ ~ ~ ~ ~~l 211frhi ut.n l ov'ing a vote of
thanks for mly P~aper, anld forI hliS fav\ourablle notice
of other of my writings, withl which hre seems to
be conlve'Sant. I also wish1 to conve'y to himl mly
cordial condolence on thle mlelaucholy arou~sed by
the ap~probousion that I reconaunendd~c the undue
pursuit of a new style of ar~chitecture~, whlich ie
might halive readily escaped b~y reading, or listn1-
ing to the reading of, my Paiper. Heo declls tle
" new style mania "' a fallacy; and so do 1,

as long ats the effort is prerneditalted and is
supposedly' to be attained by thle stl.rueingl of the
a~rchitctural imagiination aftel~~r\ new forms, or
after new comnbinationsluof old forms. The p~roper
dlevelopmentll of architecttlura or anly other art
forms~ is onlly possible whlen it conlformsl to the
law~s of nlature.
I amn now remninded of the grent; help it would
be to our Iprofecssionl if thle lounl architect and
all its derivum~ Is could be abandloned~ inr ourr art
discussions. Wh'len thle Mlediecval mlaster-mlason
wase tranlslated into the archlitect, which practi-
caLlly melcanls thle s;Lnto thing, thle idlea got abr~oal,
and still exists, tha~t theu Greeki terml nlow means a
person" not connected~i with the proclcess of build-
inlg, b~ut enowtloed withl the faculty of marking
buildiings beautiful to looi ;It.
O~f thle p~rocess of beautifying~ structures~, of the
natlure of Leauty, we! get nro aLountC in the Ecole
dles Ileaux-Arts, int polytechnic Pchorlols or uni-
ver~sities. Of thle dlitorences: betwoo~cn the beauty
of'; a IIIChur, at palace, a, court-lousl, a library, andi
as (cl ago~, inl thc SenseY inl whliChl 10ditigu
between t~~l he beautyi~d of a1 humming-b~ir, an eagle,
al bull, a h~orse;, ai liionl or at tiger, or again the
beabuty of at spinuing ori w-eaving machinolil, a steaml
eng'ine, a, telescope, a theodolite, or a, trip,-
hammecr, there is nlo defmition inl any odlucational
institution. Wheln you aski for inflormuation of
the professional architect-Mrl. Stathamn, for
instance you are told thant it cannot be
explained by anly process of definition, but is
illustraltedi by thle enius of thle architect since
1800 A.D. witl what information hie canl gather
froml thle wo:~rks of thle Inaster-mnason prior to
1300) A.D. Hlence, read aLrchitectural hlisto~ry.
Shall I find thle why anld whlerefore inl archi-
tectura;l history ? No. That you havte nothing
to do wvithl. TIhat is the special province of the
archal~olog:ist. Sue P'rofessor Aitchuisonl' s excellent
paper~ on ;-t. Hophlia : he digs dloop1 inlto thle roots
of why andl wheccfreore Thrello youl will also find
a lucid alppendix by Mr1. E. W~. arnm, whereinz he
gives ma~thlematical, inconltrovertible proo~f that
thle dlonwl of St. Sophio is in a state of eqluilibr~ium..
Thle or~inarly practitioner would be? apt to say
thatl we( ab1 ll knw this from the falct t~hat it has
not; fallonl downl during these thlirtootcn hlundredl
yearsY w\ithout~1 g~oing inlto the thiosome process of
his mahnaulioities.
ha you,., need,,,,, to know,",, M~r. Stathatm might
retort, is simprlly th~e facut thalt St. Hop~hia is
bea~utifurl; andl~ whenC1 you are crllledl up~on to build
at SCt. HophliaL, or anly other church, or~ a ra~ilway-
staltio.n, youl mullst makeo it as nearly as beau~tiful
as~ Hi. Hophlia as you can."
Now, thel geniuns thcory has been pochl-pookeod
onl severalL occasions by thlose whlo knlow, althloug h
thle genleral pub~llic accepts it with its mlout~h op~en,
as 1Iunch1 as. to SaLy, W e haird`IY ly kowl what to
mlake? of it, but thele mnust be si~lomthingll: inl it.")


Most architects talk about it, but for a discussion
at the R.I.B.A., there is really nothing more
solid to fall back upon than history, thlle-honrolred
tradition, and the like. But here comes an
American froml Ameorica, a, man without tradL(i-
tious orl proper respect for aLntiquity, a~nd suggejists
thait, a~fter' all perhaps, more recital of histor~ical
facts and illustration of historical baildlings mlay
prove indigestible mental food to liL, unsophlisti-
calted youngf student, unless it be accomlpanied
with a mchanical andi Iasthetic analysis. If' you ~
tell your student to follow this hlistoricatl ahi- (;li
ture as a whole, or rather to follow onle par~t of
it at a, time in his ownl wvork, he~ mli:IhtI an1Swer :
"' I observe in this hlisto~ry great step~s ofT progre'lss
in methods of consltr action, treabtlloont of nlator~ial,
dlevelopmecnt o~f ideas, aInd their poetic conception.
I will accept the history as a foundliation, at sort of
ground-work for future progress. I will begin
where it ends, at 1300 A.D."
B3ut the practitioners and professors might tell
him: 'L This is ranke heresy. You see this history
is wisely divided into b~ook~s and chapters. Anly one
of these books contains a history of a, period anld
of a style complete within itself. FollowY which l
over pl01 Il~ilese, andcl you will become at greot
arLchitect. Bunt do not argue; Ilo not analyse;
do not talk of prlogretss, of the reclabtion between
the? mechanical deve-c~lopent of ulasses and their
decoration, and the likeo."
I say, when the American from America tallks
thus in thle citadel of learning, no wonder Mr1.
Statham is indignant, thlough aN host of thle
occasion his. politeness curbs his indlignatlion.
Hie admtits that his guest may be right phlilo-
siophically, but insists that practically he is wrong.
And this is strange, for usually Amerienn 4: are
practically right and philosophically wrong.
It would be impossible, says Mr. Shell1.III to
prevent architects from w~orking, inl styles. As
soon as people hasve aLny knowledgeo of these, tle
humnntl mindl is Ho c~onltructe~d that they (the
architects) must be allb.cetal by it. They cannot
heulp it.
If we could catch a gienerationl of architectual
students, take posseasion of theml as soon as thecy ape
born, and keep them out of sigiht of anIy bulildings8, then l
loww Tgm o any bok k l I i tnody, altlj ti ll tlc la ool
struct buildings to u;nit their purposes inl the best wly
they can1, I HIuppIose theIy mlig~ht thlen evolve sometching
now! B ut we are not inl the position of people beobre Ihe
agoe of printing [p. 218 unrte]*
To sum up the above, it amounts to this :-Th'le
authors of thle cathledrals evolved them spontale-
ously, not because thoy ~understood methlodH of
evolution of architectural mlonumnts~l in genzrall,
but bectausel they d7ida not knr~ow how other mon~-
mout~s, such as pyraraids, temples, theatres, basi-
Ulcas, &C., had been evolved by prior authlors
of monuments. In fact, to the m~ind of M~r.
Statham, evidently, there has at no time beenl an

inteclligrent process of reasoniing on the creation
of atrchitectural mlonume~nts, but merely aL
sp'ontaneous inspiration which culminatedl in the
It seems to follows that but for the invention of'
thle printings press, engr;Lving, photography, atnd
thle faicilities: of' travel madte possible by t~he steamn
engine, the artchitects of to-dlay woull Lto crea-ting
mnonrlnenlts as faril ;;:Jerior to the cathedrapls as:
thle cathledals ;I;. ito ;Ie pyramids.
An1 intelligoinl .:nallystls of anutique and Miediawal
m)onIumen~tS, sLUch as mayK be foundi inl several hlis-
toricuL nl ndarChleolognica lwors, Showsacon01tinuilI
progress in art development,, resulting purely froml
p'rogr'essingi Illthods of construct~ionl and treat-
mouct of mater~~l~ ial, the coulventionabljsinlg of natural
orgianic fomals to fit them~ for structurall de~corat-
tion, andt a, rigid adap~tation of these dloeorativer
features to thle organismsl ofl construction, with aL
V~iuW to emlpharsize their cOsllrossion. 11118s progress
den~lotes nlot ignorance of the passt acquisit~ions of
archlitoeture, but a, contlinuous mentall effort to
impl~rov andl add to th~em. It is possibly true
that V~itruvius ncver visited Gre~ece~, but the most
Curs'or'y ghnteIe atL~ Rtomant monumenlllts shows their
Grekcl t~elemenlts. Tlhe RZomalns changel~c d fonulr s to
adalpt theml to Roman uses merely, rather thanl to
p"rogress in~ the art of' architecturo-helnce much
of thelcir failure. MrL. Stath~am Seems to thlinkl
that~i the wanlt of phlotograpl~hs of Greekr templies,
and1( of a~ convenCienlt lillrailro to Atlenls, implllies
igloran~e of' (reek archlitecture, in sp~itet of the
inlt.(r.liL ovilidence of Romnan mIonuinents to thle
contrariL1y. ThI[iS )Pov es the 1 l.1(.I~' of thle pro
se!nt system of teachingi the rt ilt of building with
expr'lession by the mere readling of architctluralb
history, for thle suffiicint reeiuns:19
(a) Th'lat architectural history is not supple-
mcntedl or pre'tcededl by instructionl inl theB mlthe-
mnatical reasolnjin whichl governls thle relationl of
ma~ctter in an a~rchit~ectural olrganism when ocrileate
by main inl imnitation of nature.L. Jus~trulctionl inl the
science of Inlochanics (thet sole gunidea to a p~roper
relatioon of malsses) should takte into account~ thle
mocha~nical function of these masses, and the
resisrtnnce to external force of the matterial1 of
which they! aIre comlposecd.
(b) That;11 thel arithmotictl relattions~of structu:ratl
parts (as laidl down by varrious authors) of temples,
chlurchest, andi other strucl[turest, areC nothing mlore
thanl surveys of indlividualll monlrluments, nd catnnolt
be appliedl inl that form to structure of diffe~rent
mantterials a~nd magjnitudles, without refeer nce to
thle laws of moohanics.
(c) Thalt; while relations of massesC: in lantiq~ue
andl MethoiLval monumenlltsl~ are' based onl the
mlechanicacu l knowledge of the tiimes inl whichl they
areo creetedoi, that knvowledge was entirely empirical,
and mus~t be reconsidered in the light of the posi-
tive and alccura~te knowledgec of our own times.
(td) That mcthlodl s of mnouldling, decoratinrg, ald.


colouring structural masses are the means of
accentua~ting these structural elements in their
mechanical functions. To ctnoidate this subject
with a reference to hlistorica~l Iloonuments exceeds
the scope of this Paper, andt I canl only refers to
chapter xxii. page 310j, of thc!NatureB andr FunI)ction
9/' Art, where I have cursorily touched upon the
principles involved,
(e) Every science and art has its history. The
main object of all these histories, as taughlt in
eduncational institutions, is to collect inl chr~ono-
logical order the development and progre~tss of the
past (sometimes also its retrogressionsr) with the
sole view that the student mlay judliciously use
thle kno-wledge acquiredl up, to drate in~ its totality
in thle further pursuit of the science or art ie
may select as a field for future action.
To add to past exp~erien~ce by present action, I.o
group and to deduce gencrarl Latws froml isolated c
historical facts, and to extend recoginised laws
over recent experiuce, is thle aim and pride if
ever y;situdent. No, not every student; the student
of architecture under the present systems of in-
struction is a notable exception. H-e is taulght,
or induced to believe, that architectural forms are
nothing more thanl a fashion of the time in which
they appear in history, complllete within thlem-
selves, and entirely unrelated to anly fundamnental
system of either science or art, andl that, whatever B
mental motive there was for changlingf themll now,
it has no potency,
(f) Under these condlitions, progress in archli-
tecture becomes impossible~. Decadence sets in,
~and has been prevalent for isi hundred years.
Architects have lost the meaning of functional
members of structures. Professor H-oskmig, an
eminent Blritish- tluthority, speakiing of buttresses
and cornices, says, that Ilthy were (once upon a
time) abutments and wall coverings cannot be
doubted, but now their funcmtion in a~rchlitectu~e
is to throw a shadow over uninteresting surfaces
of compositions." Hes has in mind a dlrawilg
and not a building. See chapter iv. p. 51,
Naturle anCd Funct~ionZ of A~t.
Mr. Woodward thinkse al pillar musb be so many
diameters high, whethlel r hilt of marletLl or brici,
whether it sustains the liediiment of at pocrtico or a
three-storey house. Statircases, originally con.
structed of stone, hanve been ulnitated2 in woodl, re-
tainling much of their origiinali form ; 1and now stone
staircases ara bililtj supp~orted uponlwrought and oust
iron frames, ni limitation of those woodenl stairs.
Stone arches of ontormous voussoirs, far too large
for the loads they carry, have attenuated atbut-
ments. Imposts of doorways anld other openinlgs
aire made of wood; ironl and copper cornlices in
imitation of the form of the Greek marble cornlice
are fastened withl iron straps to the face of brick
walls, &c. T~he meaning and purpose of strulctural
elements are nlot considered, and the forms theml-
selves, without reference to function or materials,

are atpplied to constitute what architects call an
exce~llenlt forml of design."
The1( idean of' buildings is lost, anld t~he design has
boec use a; feature to cap~ltiva~te' unwarIy laymorn.
(be Unwis muen cr~y out for at new scyle; wise
men~ dupllor~e thie fact thait with thle great changes
inl fundcamuental ideazs, with the p~rogress possible
by acculrate klo-wledlge of cons~truction, audlwith the
constant introductionn of nlew iinster~il1S, not onfly do
ar1chitc!Cturr al fonna(. bettray no0 progress in~ the art
of architecture,, butc ii is evident that thle ar~t forms
of thle pasb ;Ire muisundeor stood in mnodeurna ttemnptsat
pu~e imitartionl, nd that the rnotivesYandp rinciples
which f'Irst called themY into being are not nlow
regardedi ats a~ logical systems, a philosophy of
buildings:, and an art dev~elopmentl of expression.
When we~ askr why it is that architecture alone of
all arts and1 scienlces is taught without a textl-
bolok wh-ilch exp~lainsl thle mathlematical nature of
construction and the methlods~ of accoutuating
construction by dlecoration, by Ino anls of convren-
tionalised natural forms11 distrtiboul. ! and1 arran&lgedl
aga~inl wit~h strict reference to nu~chanicalle strains,
we are ~oldl thaut it mlighlt b)e r~ight from11 a philo-
sophliica l oint of view, but it cannot be done."
What cannot be: dLon ? TIhat weo should endeavour
to carry out air bit~etuure as peoplle caLrriedl it out
before thle fourt~eluth century, without reference to

.Now Mlr, Statham has written a very" interest-

So I takte the liberty of qunoting from its p~reface
such passages as sh~ow the drpift; of the author's
mind in Iregard to ai-c~hitecture as an art :
Archlitecture, hie syns (in the onlly point of view in
wh~ichl it is worth the regard of th--.ul Ihuntl people), is the
art of erecting exp~ressive and beautifull buildlings. . .
bulldinlg can never heI beautiful, architecturally speakingr,
unlesY s it hais eXpwo son:(II. 1Yhat do wet meanl by exspressionl,
all:-il eln by 01lt nn ncios ]isp2osj in tit
son :-;; a Uillding cannot be said to ha1ve. I a elc
thet Imlootionl of thluos who dlesigneld it, or. it maty exIpress
facts of internal trulrcturo andL anlull.. ....n
In aL more1 restr'icted[ sense, a b b'jlllllem i,.y express con-
purpse, ouht o do anhi~anul sa 11o atetr isito
he aI melre ornamental screen for concealing prosaic facts.
Thel~n ai designl is dependent on structuratl conditions
;tlso, and if these hre nlot observed, thle buildlingr will not
standll, andt henlce it is oIbvious tll1 hat Itheachitecturll~
dtignlll~ OXLtt.e: theseU strewU~tU' L i:0o itionX; it, II~t
niot -In...Il (It.. modern shop, fronts;), andi its whole exterior
arppearanceJ ought to be inl accordlance with, andl convey
thle idean of, thle mannner and principle on which it is cou-
stlructed. Th'Le interiors mlust be shown ts suchl externdlly
by emphlasis of treatments,
In MXr. Stathamn's bookr we find alsIo an1 dum-I1I
brated notion that architecture is, like music, a
meltlph~ysicall art. The parallel cannot be said t~o
be defined beyond the broad statement that the
analogy is very close, and that "' there is in archi-
tecture, as in music, somsething whlich delies


atnalJysis, which appeals to ourp sense of delight we
know not how or why, anld probably do not want
to krnow."
It is touching to notice how the author here
takes the reader into hlis confidence \a We~ sp~ecu-
lating earnestly, anld yet nlot without \'vivcity, on
the nature of aLrt. There is nlo spirit of con-
descension to tle: general reader wloml le
desires to instruct, and yet it is: well known that
this gtovera'tl readerl is ill prepalredl to receive
instructionl on this ;i Ustruse subject. Andl agamn,
the author is doulbtle~ss right in selectingb tle
general reader for anl audience in preferencl to
addressing the professional architect, who is not
apt to, be docile under inlstructionl or in thle dis-
cuhssion of anly statement which on the sp~ur of the
m~oment seems to him to be hleter~odox. I saly it
is touching to sonc the author takling thle reader c
into htis confidencei~ while specu~lating uponl the
na~turel of architecture as; a flue' art, b~ciluse tle
discussion of thle subject, as fa~r as I have. luo~ted
it, and indeed as far as.: I canl discov-r it in reading ill
the bookr, seems no~thing mnore thanl speculatliol.
It nowhere chnlina:tes in a final definition of
ar~chit-cture sulch as a professional aLrchlitect ma;y
grasp and reaslise in practical professional work].
Andl yet how near he comels to it, n~ot inl its
entirety, but inl its elemnents Hlow vividlly le
thinks of it, unfortunately not as aL buildlingt, bu~t
as a design! Th'ie ground pla~n must be feHl in
the elevation, and so mlust methods of' con acilc-
tion. As at whole, it is a species of' music, Eln-
pondeirable, metaphysical. We kinow nlot hlow
andc why, and probably do not want to krnow."
Thrus the author abalndons the idea of connecting
the material in buildlingi with, the spiritual, wh~liclh
alone he considers to be the art effort. He
ascribes it to the inspiration of genius. Hie says
(and so sary multituldes of professional ar~chitotcs,
whom 11r. Wigrht of C~hicago has dubbod the
conservatives school"'): "L Let us try to im~itat the f
geniuses of the pasut ats displayed in their worksc.
Let us read history, andi tr~ust to providlouce."
The devotees of natural science not ver~y lolg
ago underwetul a simtilar mental pr~ocess. Lighlt,
hleat, electricity, remalineud inexplicable as phe~-
nomenal entities, other thanI aS impl)ondCera'b le C
matter, until they weore demlonstratedl to be not
matter at all, but condlitionS of matte~r. It is t!Ven
so with atrchitectulre, and with all art. We find in
it something impllondeurable, and1 we attribulte its
existence, as 1\Jr. Stathamu has it, to the spoutba-
neous eruptionl of genius," to a melltaphySical
similarity with mus~ic," to something, thle how
and why whereof we do nlot know." But thenl tle
author of Ai~crchcture for GcuraBl lreaders tlurls
to the: subjective effect~ of architcture with some a
degree of success. Hle says, as it wer: I do not
krnowv howv architectural monumnents aIcquireo tle
spiritual property of art, bult I knlow hlowi we are
affected by thia spiritual property. I do not knlow

wvhy it is so much lIke! music, but I do know what is
our feeling~ when we Le~holdi it. Wep findi it l0beautifull
and1 e-presss-ive. Yets, architect~ure is thle art of
erecting~ expreissive andi beautiful buildlings.
Now, the translating ofi a,n objctivec condition
into its subjective resuli., does not amouno~t to a
Count Rlumlfordl dlid not content himlself, in
dlefinin caloric, to saby that rm~tter com~binedc with
it feels hot to thle touach, nld !;hon~ it is withldr;wnl
it fels old He ait : I h;Lve weighled non tollr
hol ,t and colld, andi find no IIIn !.1.... o f weight. I
halve prodtwod: c sen~sible heat bS I'r t!io~n; hence
caloric is nlot muatter, but a, condllon of thle
motion of ma~tt~er.
A debui~itionl of the beaiutiful aInd of expression
will help us to reatlise the extentl to wvhichl flunction
(gr~ound plaLn) andi constructio nl enltr intlo thle
creationl- of a true wforke of alrchitectulre. Thle
workis of nature, we ;lacll adit, are beaut~iful and
expressive. Thet degrees olf beaunty andl expression
realized by thle observer vary.5 with hlis cpcit~liy to
cobse-r\-e. Thec ornlitholo=ist will exlaliin to youI
hlow a sea-gutll flies. 11,~ knlows thle ature of thre
mch:nism required for tle pu~rpose. He~ ha:s
examined~t it anantomicallly, ;andt ana~lysed thle
tiss~ue of Its mnuscles chlemnieni) :ry l a lnd unr thle
microscope~ and~ if he is pouetic~ally inclined, hre
will wind up hlis dliscoursc wcithl aL dsc;riptio nl of
thel expres~sive form of heri 14rd, aznd its gr~acec of
mrotionl while flyingr aroundlr a sternmer crossingi
thoil tlantic. Itijsmlostheau;Ltiful linked ; bealutiful
to look a~t, he will tecll you. If you are a wise:
aInd mlodest man, you wvill feell overwhelmed w~ithl
the material facts r~evealeld to~ you1, and1; rendor01
your' tribute to nature inl aldmli'ing silence. If
youl are dlilcttante, you will obrservo comlallrcenltly
thatl you always th~oughlt it wyas a beatutjiful sighit
to see~ aL birdl clouvrc thle iril inl its Bfigh.
TChus a~ vague conceoptionl of the bea~utiful iH the
alphaU, and anrl inltelligenl rsealisation of expressive-
nloli inl n~t~ure is thle oulcga of' onle amll( theu santo
impres~sio n.. Inl naiture. formLI bOtraLys fun1ction1,
and~ our1 ideas~l of bearuty are~ proportionaste to t~he
decgree of this exspressionl as realised by the
sub~jec~t It stanlds to Ireasonl, thewf1ore, that; the
deg!ree! of beauty r'eallIsed i, b)othl t;ubljetwo~~) and
objiootive -inl all casesc, hC\owevert our1 appreia~~lition.
of the( beautiful inl naullre, as wecll as inl lut, is
nlolhingi more thantl thec surprised eti ther ar~t; forea
dlisplalyed by thle authlor of at worke of artl, or by
nauture, anld amounlts more'1 or1 less to thel dlegree
to which we are familiarl with thle ob~ject inl
clueStionl; hcnce it is that objects ofE great loaiuty
often f:Lil to excite adcmirabtionl inl the ignorantl.
TIo sunlr it al~li up, we mlust comne to thI conlclu-
siionl that form1, Ixp~ressive of function, c~onstituntes
ob~j!ctivea beauty~, derpendintg outirely up~on the
p-erf;ctj,, ionlr and accuracy~ of expresnsion a~ttineod.
ArchitecturaL l monurmentu are works of hallinan
art in imitation of nlatulre, nlot inl imlitationU of


form11s existing in nature (for there are no such
formus), but mlodelled, in their organ~ismn, inl ac-
cordanlce witl thle laws of natureo. The: greater
the a~cc~urcy in the applicationl of these mnechani-
caL1l h\wS, the grea~ter the exprJessionl of the organ-
ism, anld the gre~ater its beauty, if that its the
ultimate ob~ject.
Sitatical relations of mai~tter' manifest themselves
by local strains. When exter~nal strains are resisted
by the internal atomlic cohesion of maltter, there
enlsues statical equnilibrillrn, which inl art formns is
calledrl repose- ant essential elem~ent in producing i
satisfaction inl the beholder.
Thle elemlents of expression, strains and space
(dimlenuion, massL8), constitute str'ucturail formII, thle
samie ats soundc andl timne constitute mlusic --hecnce
their analogy. It is entirely physical, a~nd not at
allmetph).*-d, nd e iay nowit.In mlusic
notes too lugh1 ol Itoo low prloduce discord.
Freqluent discords and irregulatrities in tiumresu'Yllt
in a jumlble un~lintellig~iblel to the ear1 an: uln ex-
preusson of an idea. At the present timue, and l
for the last six hundred years, we worki in~ styles.
Mr11. Stathamn tells us that we cannot~ hlel), it. Let
us see: whether we can or'not. lu1 the first place,
it is not; strictly true that we worki in styles. TIhe
Greekcl s expressedl cer~tinil simpllle tanibSlle physical
ideas in archi treture in thle mlanner:Pof simple tunes
in mulsic. The so: tunes are ag~ainl simpllle a~rchi-
tectural formsJ. Thesefioriluswe imitatesrsfornis,
without looking at the G-lreek score for their
clamelnts. WVhen -we have to expre~ss somlewhut
complllicated mlotifs," mlore compl)licated than
those of the? Greekls, wel do nlot wr~ite: a new score
in thle styleu and on thle principles upon which
G:reek architectural music is: based; but we repeoat
Grleeke tunes over and over aga~inl under the
childish notionl that a simple tune repeated con-
stitultes a tSymplhony or anl opera;. Mlen like
Schinklel and~ Hle'acke of IIerlin r~ealiSed[ the fabllacy
of this proceeding, and thelir pa;rtiatl nrccess in
G~racku architecture0 is attrtibutablel to ai fine our for
music and a~ lively musical organis nation Thlat
theoy did nlot ultimately and perfootly succeed is
owing to the fact that they didunotwrite theirnIew
score in the light of musical progress since the
days of Pariles.
Gothic architecture is a jilaphonyll~ of mlnly
" motifs," physical and mletaphysical. TIhe latter
have Fr~ightclned the generaL l pblic and the
majority of atrchitects inlto the arms of thle Renais-
snnoce --t~he style of reprouing~ the Grseek tune over
and1 overT aginil in thle! snebu structure, no matter
what its mlolif or cphtlliliities of conlstructionl- and
inlto the so-calledl styles and t 1pe I adlugsl from11 and l
reclated to it. By tGhos archlitects whoU, inlI~ll dini-
tion of the Gothic symlphonly, still per~sisted in
imitabting itsl formns in sp~ite of their spiritual ex-
pressiion, which is nlot in accord with the! spirit of
our own timne, much good wor~k hans been done in
Eugllb ndlh and Uormalny, bu~t nowhebre has the
score boeen revised in the solentific sense possible

nowv, which process azlone: would enable usi to
utilize llthe scientlific andi ar~tis~tic basis of all monu-
maents of the past, also thle scientiine anld iesthetic
elemoults as thley exirs t t present, wrlhlout reta~in-
ing~ thle expressionls peculiar to past per~iodsl whichl
are not inl accord with the ideas of our own
It would leadc me beyond the permlissible limits
of this Paper to brinlg before the windi of the
rea;der thle perverse and( illogical processj of con-
ce~ivinlg i schleme for; a proposed1 Structur~Le now
conunllonly pu~rsued by the: professional aLrchitect,
L lu ~ lh irst place, he: has in minld not a building,
butll~ le deignl for a building, which shall plealse
the owvnir, a colnunittee, or perhaps be exhlibitedl for
the alpproval1 of thle pulblie. In the nlext plalce, the
order of thle groundlc p'ila,mnothlods of construction,
selection of mnterjial, inl fact, every a piressiv e
elemelnt or feabture p~ertainingr to colou~r andIC formll,
are perva\dedl by the dominlating idea of style.
St~yle, it mnust be re~membered, as it exists in the
bralinl of tho nuthor01; not as a mnechanicatl organisml,
bult as a p~ictu~re, t~he flights anda shades of which
are expected to prlodluce effects judgedl of ats
des-ira~ble, or, Lundetr the: cir~c:umstances atta~inable,
pleasring to the author, the p~ropr'ietor, thle public;
not emuinently something~ which grows out of
enlvironmnent, whlethetr it; he( modern or ;unciout.
It would lead mle too~ fair to enter upon the
mlethlods inl detail which should be pulrsuedl in
comlposing~ a stru~cture. Lot it suffice to say that
next to aL development of single cells and their
rconncutions wYhich are to serve thea ideal use of
the person, or groups of pcerons, ivho occupy thle
structures, the la~ws of mochlanies mlust be the sole
gu'ide in thle development of its form.
A critical analysis of mechanicall strains mnust
be institutedl, not onlly for thle purpose of ascer-
taining whether lle iI the parts of thle p,~,ropsed
str'uctulre are'( -llu~o l; I( Str'ougf to) Su1Stainj Ithir
load, bult whethelcr thr~oughout thec st~rucl~tlur the
stra(insB are' renisted1 hac,'rmonive~sly/. I Say har'-
monliously with intenlt to conve~y the idea, thLt; they
are not to be resisjted throughout the structure
with equal'1 facility (thili would be mlonot~ouy of
exp~ression), but wvith a vigiour proportionate to
the functlion of eachl part of the structures.
Manly of our colleabguc~ abre doubtless confilenlt
that; long' practices enable)I S thenll to de~tect wintj of
harmony (insuflicincy or excessq of strenthlfil) by
merely lookingl6 at the~ design1 for a buildings as a1
whlole or inl part.
Admitting thatb this is ~oussible within the
rangeH' of certlainl routine limits for stiructu~res
which~ callIn hrdly claim to be a'chijtectural mon01u
munts, R1uch as~ shops~, tenatuen01tS, or Hmll 'Law
tories, Ilth eye is it poor gulide to a sjoundl judg-br
meunt in Ithe matter of conlstruction, proportionz, or
beaulty inl artl
Matny praclitioners consider themnselves prodii
g'ious judges of the strength andl beauty of
utl~rutural forms, Aill they need to do iu to look


at them to find out whether they please them or
not. If they would start thle practice of aLc-
~col~l.n Im-,;n original skebotchs with a strain shleet,
they would flud that in mallny cases their con-
culptionl of forms is: entirely at fault, and in
abaslot all cases it needs considerable filingS, with
the further result that in the treatment of new
problems the forms indicated by mlathematical
analysis will alway:; prove more or less of a sur-
prise to them.
Mlr. Arthur Cates [pp.) 220-2r2] does nlot approve
the suggestion contaLined in my Papeir, malinily on
the ground that its aimu seems to hint to be the evo-
lution of a new style."' in fact, it onlyI treats
upon evolution of any krindl in contra~di;;tinlction to
the stagnation anid deterioration which doubtless
exist, andl are purely the result of mistakein
methods of education, or, to express it more
ac~curaltely, of the education of architects in thle
way in which they at present practise their
profession, and not in the way in which they
should study their ar~t,
Not to, leave us in doubt upon this subject, ie
reccinuneudss a geoneralI education oni a level with
the ;Iveragre of the architect's clients in~ knlowledge :
of all ordinary topics of art and genral~l history,
and superior to them in his special nand technical
The answer to the salient questions, W\hat
this technlical knowledge is to b~e," is somewhat
obscure. H-e says:
His success will depend on his application of the
capablilities of the materials he used, and will be: the
g'reater as he may haive been blessed with thle Jli\ine
inspiration of artistic gemlus, and have cultivatedl anti
deeoe iv bd t truest study, 01f leich mechdan irral il
important palrt.
This means, whatever the architect's success, it
will not depend upon his technical kinowlolede.
What will it depend upon ? Divine inspiration,
by the study of history, mastery of drawing, &~c.
What will it produce ? Mlr. Cates tells us:
In the complex conditions of the practice of the day thle
architect must aim at acquiring the power to attam l
success in dlesigning: buildings which shall be convenient
and appropriate in anrrangemen:!t; sh1al be of stable con.
struction; and shall be of Yluitable and beautiful design,
both~ as regardls masses, form, aind detail.
I am of opinion that mass and form are
mechanical relations of matter, and detail, like
unto them, is exp~resslve of those relations. M~r.
Oates thinks not. H~ow is thlis qIuetion to be
decided 9 By history I
Six hundred years1' have passed since the build.
ing of the cathedrals, abnd to thle history of thlose
six hundred years I ilppeaol for a decision of this
pregnant qnuetion. What has divinle insp~iration
done during this time in the development of
masses, form, detail, architectural monumouwts,
and decoration ? Why,nothingl % he very utle
bases, capitals, architraves, cornlices, egg and dart
moulding~s, dentils and triglyphs, which wvere the

Gfreek style properties of Roman architecture, are
current to-day, rudloly mlisapp~liedl in manny cases,
oftenl inappropriate to the! material employedl, and
never thle result of origilird analysis.
Ground plains ear forcedt into preconceived formsl
without reference to the function of single cells,
When the architect mootus with a refra~ctory~ iron
beam or girder, does he treat it as at stenotaral
oelement to be enriched and decorated in accord-
ance with the nature of thle material ? No. It is
covered with somle sort of boxing of wood, terra-
cotta or plaster to represent a, stone g~irder,
which girdecr, wer~e it really of stone, would break
under its own weigild~. TIhi:; girder is sup~portedl
by -walll brackets, whlichl, weco~ they real, wYould
shoa~r off under the load, andt when the architect
finds it all somle~what unsat.isfalctory, he paints it
in limitation of oakr, black walnut, or mnlagan,:uy.
Away with it I canl discover no dlivineo insiraiition
A~ll this taRlk abJout generl education enough to
talk to c~lienlts, of !(tempranf:~1ce and honour', is, to
say the least of it, at mlero sh~am.l
Enagineers, lawyers, doctors, chemists, electri-
cians, all have a, fair geniial1 education, a knlow-
lodgje of the history of tlle special science, but
besides this, they one: and all1 study thle natu~lrall
laws whichl govern the practice of their pr~ofe~ssion.
No one relies upon divine inspiration for doing
scient~ific or art workl; it is not; accepted as a basis
of reasoning at this Eand of the nineteenth cen-
tury. No matter wh:il expression a utonlument
conveys, the lianguageb' in which it speakrs is aL
relation of matter, just ats in music thle languagilbe
is a, relation of sounds. To those who do not
understand either language, an approximate idea
of its meaning is conveyed, which leaves a melntatl
impression in thle direction in which it is intenlded
to convey thought of more or less inltensity.
TIo thle musical complloser, and to the a~rchitect,
who by his straining is able to read his nlursic mn
stone, this impression awmouts to a krnowledge a~s
definite as that which onaLbles thle scholar~ to nead
Spoeml. When Mlr. Caltes hopelessly series oulr :
I cannot see how the future text-book onl blhe
theory, practice, anld art; of building will teach wle
the language of structural monnluments, andl~ how
the facts which govern resistance to luccaniLlcal
strain forml the keoynote of narhitectwurl com-i
position, it proves but one thingr beyond per
adventure--that this loxt-book should be wr~ittenl
at nceIC, and that it is high- time that "its use be
enforced in schools of architecture.
I cannot close this Patper without returning mly
cordial thanks to Professor Aitchison for his kind
reception and counlraeous defense of mly Pa;per
(in the face of overwhohning opposition), purely
in the interest of art.

Newo York, 31st Jul1U*


by Leopold Eidlitz

(In The Architectural record. v. 3, p.347-353,
April-June 1894)

ArCztlitectural Ftrarb.,

No. 4.


EFORE proceeding to
consider the architect
of fashion and his in-
fluence upon current
building, it is neces-
sary to recognize that he is the product
of his environment. He could not exist
and flourish except in an anomalous
condition of the art of architecture,
such as now exists and has existed in
Europe and America since the fifteenth
In thye first place, it is only under
the pressure of great civil, religious
and social enthusiasm that a develop-
ment of new ideas becomes possible,
and only with the help of a poetical
rendering can these ideas be material-
zed into human acts which call for
architectural monuments which the
technical skill of the architect can de-
velop into works of art. Thbe church,
the state and society at large, are
at this time engaged not so much in
developing ideas as in discarding those
that have become obsolete., We are
jn estate of transition, and just now
very busy in tearing down, rather than
mn building up. Mentally we are given
to science, to the observation of phe-'
nomnena, and their recurrence. From
these we learn the laws of nature, for
the pure sake of knowledge. Some of
us apply them to the material benefit
of mankind. '
If under these conditionsmonuments
of the higher social, political and re-
ligjous ideas are at present impossible,
those. embodying practical and mate-
rial interests inay be accurately defined
and artistically developed in accord-

ance with mechanical organic condi-
tions. Exceptional efforts~ in this
direction are made with more or less
success. A respectable number of
architects, both here and abroad, prac-
tice architecture as a living art. They
compose architectural designs ~with
reference to the uses and purposes of
the building in hand and also with ref-
erence to the nature of the material
used and to the mechanical conditions
of structure. They certainly abstain
from covering actual constructions with
forms which represent impossible me-
chanical relations of matter, and also
from copying forms of doubtfulbfitness,
used elsewhere, merely because they
seem picturesque.
The tendencies of the young archi-
tect who has received a good education
are generally' in the right direction.
His ambition is to excel in his profes-
sion. He is devoted to his art and
permits no motives of personal interest
to swerve him from this great aim.
That but few- continue in this course
for any length of time is attributable
not entirelyi to the weakness of archi-
tectural human nature, bi~t to the
weakness of the human nature of cli-
eats as well. The commercial demand
for architecture in this country and at
this time is exceedingly great and the
profession is interested in knowing
definitely its nature and function, as
understood by its patrons. Our pa-
trons of art know architecture only as
a commercial commodity, with which
they are not otherwise familiar and
which must -be approached with due
business caution. The business way

Copyright, z894, by Currrosu W\. SWnEET. .41 right5 TeSCved

Tel. 111.-4.-2.




of ascertaining the value of merchan-
dise is to find out what the majority of
people will pay for it. In the mean-
time one must not betray his igno-
rance, but gather information as he
Let it be known that you wish to
build anything whatever, and it is sur-
prising how, without effortan your part,
this sort of information flocks in upon
you. Wherever you- are, on 'Change,
at your club, at board meeting, at your
house, at your office, friends drop in on
various errands, and one and all wind
up by recommending some clever archi-
tect of their acquaintance. Direct ap-
plications for employment, personal
and by letter, are not wanting. Arch-
itects of repute are known to send rec-
ommendations, references, testimonials
and even sample drawings of their own
manufacture. What is most gratifying
to thef patron in these personal visits of
architects (which primarily seem a great
bore) is the growing conviction that
after all he knows more about archi-
tecture than he thought he did. He is
told so in various forms. His views
betray great common sense," it is sur-
prising how they illustrate the motives
of the early masters." "His sugges-
tions are interesting as new problems
in art." It is delightful to converse
with a client so well informed ?" A
future professional relation is antici-
pated with pleasure, and a resulting
progress in art is confidently predicted.
As the patron of art acquires confi-
dence in himself, he becomes more and
more reconciled to the men who supply
him with it. He talks of what he likes
and dislikes and is assured that to fol-
low the bent of his taste is the sure
road tosuccess. In the meantime, asa
shrewd business man, he has made notes,
and filed all papers and drawings, and
finally renders his judgment in accord-
ance with the preponderating weight of
testimony in favor of some one appli-
cant, yielding not a little to personal
impressions produced by the candidate.
It is self-evident that a relation of
architect and client thus initiated gives
the lead to the client in the matter of
art.~ The architect is not employed as
are other professional men, to direct an
enterprise involv-ing questions of science

and art by reason of his knowledge in
the premises, but because he has al-
ready conceded his client's views to be
perfect, and has assumed the position
of a mere draughtsman to carry them
Now what are these views of the client?
They are the feeble umbrageous im-
pressions received by him from cur-
rent architectural work, asfar as he has
observed it. He says, when he comes
to think of it that this he likes, and
that other he dislikes. Whatever you
do, he says to his architect, or at least
implies by his conversation, let it be
not unlike this and not at all like the
other. Nothing outside of current
practice, no matter how good, is there-
fore admissible, and all the faults and
errors of current practice are perpetu-
ated. The greatest of these may be
summed up by stating that the archi-
tectural forms of our time are con-
ceived without reference to construc-
tion, and that the real construction is
concealed by a false one, which in
cases is in itself practically impossible.
This state of things has created the
fashionable architect, the man who has
the faculty of procuring himself to be
talked ..about most, and who avoids
architecture fer se as a thing irrele-
vant to his business. The architect of
fashion is he who aspires to be the
fashionable architect. Like the mod-
ern politician, the architect of fashion
has no convictions, but follows adroitly
in the' wake of public opinion. His
aim is not to be a great architect, but
to do a big architectural business, and
in this he very often succeeds. Prac-
tice with him has in time developed
even a positive dislike for architecture
in the abstract, for whenever he has
attempted it, in any degree, the result
was disastrous from a business point
of view.
To do justice to the architect of
fashion, let us say here that he was
not born so, nor is he consciously ma-
licious or even cynical. He is shrewd
enough to look after his material
interests, and when he fmnds these in-
consistent with the interests of archi-
tecture he drops architecture, rather
than let the architecture drop him.
Of course he has abandoned all claim


t immortality, to a statue in the Wal-
Hla, or a niche in Westminster Abbey,
t he enjoys life while it lasts as a
highly respectable member of society
belonging to the most fashionable
clubs, and although at times he gets
very tired of it all, because of the hu-
miliation of constant drumming and the
silent gnawing of his professional con-
science, he has the consolation of suc-
cess and feels sure of pre-eminence until
supplanted by an architect, even more
eminently fashionable.
To understand him thoroughly, we
must permit him to speak for himself:
Your talk of Architecture as a living
art is most delightful, and reminds me
of Kugler, Lubke and Viollet-le-Duc and
old Ungewitter; but it is not practical.
Everybody admires it, but nobody
wants it. My interpretation of Archi-
tecture as a living art is an art by
which an architect can live. When I
w~as young and enthusiastic and all
that sort of thing, I procured with
much labor an introduction to A. X.,
the great life insurance president, a
dignified old gentleman, who received
me in his office after waiting an hour
and a-half in an outer room. He
listened to me over his shoulder while
stood behind his big arm chair, as he
Tad not offered me a seat, and I re-
~eated w~ith much trepidation a well-
considered brief lecture on archi-
When I had finished, there was a
a pause of a minute or two, during
which he read over twice an open let-
ter he held in his hand; then he turned,
with an evident effort to be amiable as
far as his rooted dignity would permit,
and said : 'Young man, my friend in
this letter speaks of you in very high
terms as a promising young architect.
I dare say you talked art to him as you
did just now to me. It sounds well and
is apt to impose on persons less familiar
with the subject than I am. Architect-
ure, my dear fellow, is not a living art.
G;reek Architecture died before Christ,
and Gothic Architecture before the
Reformation, and that is the reason
w~hy we need, architects well versed in
art history to design our buildings. If,
as y;ou say, it w-ere a living art, then
any- one could do it. Good morning. sir.'

Now that I am older I know better-
I never talk architecture to my clients
When a man is engaged in building a
house or a store or a bank, his mind is
naturally preoccupied. He doesn't want
to be bored with architecture. Besides,
between you and me, of what earthly-
use is architecture to an architect ?
Let me tell you it is a hindrance to
success. WYhat a man. of business
wants to know is that you can do the
thing you undertake to do well and
promptly, and the only way to convince
him of that is to tell him so. For
instance : After listening attentively
to the wants -of my client I say
modestly, '1 believe, Sir, that I
now have your views regarding
the building, yet I cannot be quite
sure of that. You have matured the
matter in your own mind. To me many
of the features are quite new though
intensely interesting. I must ask you
to grant me another interview, perhaps
two or three after I have commenced
plotting it out on paper. When I have
fully mastered the subject as you have,
then the work will go on rapidly. I do
not ex-pect to succeed with a first sketch
nor a second nor a third or perhaps a
tenth. I throw them off at the rate of
two or three in a day, and reject all un-
til I am satisfied. When once satisfied,
however, I am sure you will have a de-
sign as near perfect as the human mind
can produce. I then put from ten to
twenty draughtsmen and two or three
clerks upon it at once, and in two weeks
from now we can proceed with the
building. I need only six months to
build it in. I can do it infive if need
be. Ai client of mine said to a mutual
friend of ours what I like in him is
his promptness. He knows what he is
about, and he tells you at once what
he can do and what he can't do."'
A4s to style, The Architect of Fash-
ion continues: It is wisdom to con-
fine yourself to the vernacular. It is
the only idiom which is popularly un-
derstood ; not exactly understood, but,
I should say, tolerated by public opin-
ion. Ever since the beginning of the
sixteenth century, say nearly during the
last four hundred years, the bulk of
the architecture of the civilized world
bas been Renaissance in style. WIhen


men feed upon a steady diet physi-
cally or mentally for twelve successive
generations the race acquires a taste
for it. Not because it has analyzed
its hygienic or intellectual properties,
and has found them adapted to its
physical or mental needs, but because
the digestive apparatus has become in-
capable of assimilating other matter,
Of course, you will tell me all about
the revival of medieval architecture
during the last half century. You will
point to the great achievements of
Scott and Street, of Schmidt and Han-
sen, of Viollet-le-D~ue and Gaertner and
many others. You will speak of the
restoration of the cathedrals, of Mu-
nich, the modern Romanesque City, of
the Gothic work done in London and
Vienna, and even in this country, but I
will tell you that during all this last
half century the bulk of the archi:
tectural work done, say nine-tenths of
it or more, has been Renaissance. Tlhe
pioneers of the revival of medie-
val art are passing away one
after another, and there are
no successors to fill their places.
mainly because the movement has not
been a popular success. As for myself
I prefer to rely upon the great majority
for a supply of clients, and as clients go
they pay well, and are not exacting,
provided you humor their -notions and
recognize their good taste, and that is
only human nature after all."
Thus speaks the architect of fashion,
and thus he acts. It is desirable to
know what becomes of architecture
under his management, andincident-
ally how it affects the architect. To
dispose of the latter first in as few
words as possible; it seems clear that
the architect is rapidly descending from
his' high professional position and
ranging himself with that class of mer-
cantile enterprise which, having no con-
fidence in intrinsic merit and real use-
fulness to society, seeks recognition by
drumming and advertising. Trhe law-
yer, physician, clergyman, engineer,
yes, even the mason, carpenter and
horseshoer, claim to have acquired a
knowledge of the theory and practice
of their respective vocations which is
not shared by the public, and tacitly
deny the right of their clients to decide

upon the methods and means to be used
in carrying out the work intrusted to
The Architect of Fashion defines his
position somewhat as follows : Archi-
tecture," he says, "is a science as far
as it relates to mere building, and an
art in clothing the building in certain
forms. The latter isa matter of taste,
and the architect being an artist is pre-
sumably possessed of a large share of
this taste, but in as much asthe forms of
architectural monuments .are deter-
mined for us by architects of past
periods, and cannot now be changed,
and as furthermore our clients have a
preference for certain architectural
styles, it is but reasonable to admit
public taste as co-ordinate with that of
the architect."
There are those who assert that there
is logical relation between construc-
tion and the development of form,
which is not a mere matter of taste or
convention, but one of scientific demon-
stration, But the moment the archi-
tect of fashion admits this argument he
practically denies his client's influence
in the premises, and risks the loss of
his patronage. By ranging on the side
of the public. clients are prepossessed
in his favor, and the number of his com-
petitors is reduced to those who prefer
business to professional convictions.
When to the architect is given the
privilege of exhibiting his work on the
corners of streets, on the highways and
public places of the world, he can well
afford to wait- for recognition of his
merit without advertising or personal
drumming, unless, indeed, he has lost
faith in his own w~ork or in the intelli-
gence of the public.
The architect of fashion kas lost faith
in the intelligence of the public. They
don't like Shakespeare," he says, "so I
give them variations upon Potter of
Texas.' Variations because they don't
like 'Potter of Texas,' pure and
simple for any length of time. They
want something new; some marked
change, but the change again must be
in the style of 'Potter of Texas.' So
last year we had the Italian Renais-
sance with a decided feeling of the
Colonial. Wlhat isthe Colonial ? WhV
the carpenter's interpretation of th'e


Renaissance as expressed in wood
during the seventeenth and eighteenth
centuries, delicate moldings hardly
practicable in stone, decorations and
carvmngs with just a touch of relief, for
in the Colonial times much of this
work was done in putty. It takes very
well, for most people hate things de-
cided either in form or color. Still
they got tired of it, so this year they.
longed for something vigorous, and we
treat the lower stories of our buildings
with aggressive rudeness, rough stone
ashlar, small openings, great iron grat-
ings in front, of them and above we
continue with the Colonial Renaissance.
The contrast is striking. .Next year, no
doubt, we will have to go iii for the Roc-
oco, the latest phase of the Renaissance
in France and Germany.' It is clabor-
ate, and doubtless will take on that ac-
count. Yet some of our most fash-
ionable architects are of opinion that
the early Renaissance of the Italian
school, plain walls, bulged ashlar,
openings far apart, small and plain in
treatment, will be the leading style,
They say that Boston is already pre-
pared for it, and if it succeeds there
Chicago is sure to follow. New York,
however, is more conservative. There
is a strong talk here of a return to the
Grecisn of the Treasury Building and
he Custom House (the old Merchants'
Exchange in Wall street), and if that
tide sets in in time, it may save that
building from being demolished. Queen
Ann, it is now agreed, is dead, and past
the possibility of another revival
Bold innovations, such as piling up
quarry-faced stone, grotto fashion, ex-
aggerated by pitching off the edges so
as to produce a projection from the bed
of six or eight inches, huge arches with
immense voussoirs and no abutment to
mention, enormous. entrance doors ex-
tending to the full height of the build-
ing, are striking features of no artistic
merit, quickly appreciated and admired
and as quickly cast aside. Thus the
architect of fashion maintains a wrell-
stocked repertory of striking architect-
ural forms; striking, because most
frequently gathered from periods of
architectural decay, and also of hetero-
geneous building material, loud in color
and contrast and peculiar in form and

texture. From these he compounds
combinations which constitute the
fashion of the day.
Considered from a business point of
view it saves much time. Once the
leading draughtsman of the office is in'-
formed of the annual change, office
work takes care of itself.
The old method of spending weeks
and months in designing in the seclu-
sion of one's library is utterly imprac-
ticable with the modern business habits
of the architect of fashion. Two or
three hours in the morning must suffice
for office work, which consists mainly
in receiving prospective clients, in brief
and rapid interviews with clerks of the
works, in signing certificates for pay-
ments to builders and dictating a few
letters generally directed to hurrying
delinquent work, for the architect of
fashion must maintain a high reputa
tion for doing work promptly and
rapidly. The afternoons and evenings
are devoted to social intercourse with
probable clients who are visited at
their offices, met on 'Change, inbanks
and insurance buildings, and later at
clubs, receptions and public meetings.
The architect of fashion is ubiqui-
tous. His problem is to procure new
orders--jobs, as he calls them--and to
this he devotes all his time and
Now, let us turn to architecture to
see how she fares under the rule of the
fashionable architect. Architecture
has ceased to be an art and has become
a business, a fashionable business car-
ried on by business methods on business
The chief of the business, the Archi-
tect, no longer pretends to be a man of
learning, o~f varied attainments, of a
liberal education, of studios habits,
retiring, modest, shrinking .from con-
tact with the world, devoted solely to
hlis art. No, he is aman of business, a
man w~ho startles the world by~his bold
combinations of architectural bric-a-
It is said of Worth, the great French
artist in female garments, that he will
contract to make a fine dress for a few
hundred francs, but for a few thou-
sands he will produce what he calls a
dream. The fashionable architect also


deals in dreams in architectural inspira-
tions, combinations of fancy; hence
he is a genius, too, a genius a la mnode,
like Worth.
Art, in the general acceptation of the
term, is the skill (technical knowledge
and mechanical facility, the results
of study and practice) by means of
which man is enabled to create organ-
isms, or represent them in matter in
imitation of nature. Fine art means
the creation or representation in mat-
ter of organisms which express an
Raphael's iMadona,' Thorwaldson's
" Apostles," Dante's Inferno," the
cathedrals of the thirteenth century,
Bach's Oratorios;" all these- are
works of fine art. They express in
painting, sculpture, music, poetry and
architecture the Christian idea of re-
ligion. Similar instances may be cited
of the various fine arts of Greece and
It is not fine art to copy any one of
these works or to combine parts of
them into one whole. For instance,
a series of quotations from various
poets, though it may bear upon the ex-
pression of an idea and may even be a
meritorious literary effort, is not a
work of fine art. The same applies to
architecture. To copy a building or
to combine features of various build-
ings, no matter how meritorious the
originals, is not in any sense a work
of fine art.
The fashionable architect not only
copies buildings as a whole~which, by the
way, is not the worst of hi's sins, but he
combines features of various buildings
into what he calls a design. More than
this, he decides beforehand what par-
ticular features he intends to combine
fotr the next year or two for use in all
buildings without reference to their
nature or materials. Theatres, acade-
mies, club houses and bankEs are all
built after these models of fashion.
For instance, during the fifteenth
and early in the sixteenth century the
palaces of Florence, like the Strozzi,
Riccardi, Ruccellai and others, had
high basements above the street level
devoted to domestic offices and ser-
vants' quarters, which basements were
lighted on the street with small square

windows, the sills of which are from
eight to sixteen feet above the floor.
Now there was a very good reason
for this. The feuds and factions of
families were very warm in Florence
in those days, and the palaces had to
be fortified against popular risings. No
such necessity exists with us at the
present time, yet we see many speci-
mens of basements of the kind, of
which the small windows are besides
protected on the outside with heavy
iron gratings.
The portico of the Greek temple
consists of columns supporting an en-
tablature and cornice, upon which rests
the gable orpediment. The cornice is
the covering of the structure, its pro-
tection against the weather, hence its
projection. The entablature is the
lintel which sustains the cornice and
the superincumbent pediment between
the columns. If for the colonnade we
substitute a wall the entablature be-
comes superfluous, and the magnitude
of the cornice, although accepted as
proper in a temple and perhaps also in
a palace, should doubtless he reduced
in secular structure, both in height and
in projection. We observe this to be
the case, not only in the earliest Roman
domestic structures, but also in the
Basilicas. Renaissance architecture, as
derived from Vitruvius and his expound-
ers of the fifteenth century-, maintains
the cornice and entablature as an indivis-
ible whole whether sustained at intervals
or continuously by a wall and by
columns. Moreover, this crowning
feature is introduced at every, story,
with a full projection of cornice, as
though it were the top of the build-
The architect of fashion accepts
these forms as of good authority, and
adopts them in his combinations. More
than this, he is swayed ~by motives .of
habit, otherwise tending in opposite
direction. During what is termed the
colonial period, cornices and entabla
ture were made of wood, and atten-
nated accordingly. The subsequent
invention of the zinc cornice enabled
ambitious architects to indulge in ex-
aggerated cornices at a moderate cost.
The architect of fashion builds his cor-
nices of stone, but vacillates between


the meagre colonial and the exuberant
zinc in their form and magnitudes.
When art is the result of logical
reasoning, errors are gradually cor-
rected ;when it is only a matter of
fashion, errors in one direction are
superseded by errors in the opposite
Dress is by fashion designed inde-
pendently of the needs of the human
figure. The architecture of fashion
also means aggregation of forms, inde-
pendent of the purposes of the build-
ing, its construction and material.
A modern building in the City of
New York, intended to be let for offices,
came under my observation recently.
Two stories of this building are abso-
lutely useless for the purpose, because
the windows are exceedingly small
(square in one of the stories and round
in the other), and in both cases placed
5 feet above the floor. Upon inquiry,
I was told that the architectural ex-
igences of the structure required
this arrangement. This is a strik-
ing illustration of the superstition of
the fashionable architect that archi-
tecture is independent of the uses and
purposes of the structure to be designed,
that a design is to be a mere aggre-
gation of architectural features arbi-
trarily combined by force of genius and
not at all constructively developed
from the environment, use, position and
The painter of portraits, skilled in his
art, adroitly engages his sitter in con-
versation until he hits upon the sub-
ject of greatest interest to him which
brings out an animated expression of
his favorite ideas. This expression he
endeavors to depict upon his canvas.

He finds it to be elusive, consisting as
it does of peculiarly modified lights and
.shades. The portrait, perhaps, looks
cunning, while the painter desires it to
look wise. Finally he hits upon it.
A certain high light of very small
dimensions is modified by a minute
dot of gray and the cunning man.100oks
The lights and shades of the human
face and figure are the result of modifi-
cation of the muscles, which in their
turn are affected by nervous action
originating in the brain, the seat of
thought and ideas. Architecture is the
art of celebrating human ideas in the
monuments it creates. The architect,
unlike the painter, cannot hope to appre-
hend them in a model. He must study
their organic developments by means
of mechanical relations which consti-
tute the nervous system of a building.
He must recreate with the help of na-
ture's laws, as the Greeks and the
masters of the middle ages recreated
before him. When science has fur-
nished him with forms, he must model,
decorate and color these forms in
accord with the laws of construc-
tion. To do all this successfully, he
must be the master of his work, not the
slave of a layman's crude conception of
what ought to be. This means pro-
lessional independence, ample time for
study, love of the art, and devotion to
it first of all without regard to mere
business interests.
The methods of the architect of
fashion lead to the opposite of all this,
hence he has become one of the most
pronounced and prominent of the
obstacles to the progress of archi-
Leopold Biditz.


by Leopold Eidlits

( In The Architectural record. v.1, p. 4C71-
484, April-June 1892)

velopment of past architecture (Egyp-
tian, Greek and Mediaeval) is coinci-
dent with the culmination of great
religious ideas.. In harmony with these
ideas, but subordinate to them, secular
structures express social and polit-
ical ideas of, lesser import, per-
haps, but of undoubted individ-
nality and force. The priest and
the soldier, the representatives of
human ideas, are celebrated in archi-
tectural monuments. Their functions
and those of the people in relation with
them, form the acts of human groups,
which expressed in a building become
a monument of a social or religious
idea. Without material acts of this
description ideas cannot be conveyed
to the people at large. In the past this
was universally recognized as a fact.
At the present time, since the invention
of printing, it is unfortunately assumed
that the discussion of an idea is suffi-
cient to instruct the masses who are
able to read. So it would be if they
did +ead.
AIrchitectural monuments, expressive
of social, religious and patriotic ideas,
are as necessary to-day as they were in
the times of the Pa'rthenon and the
cathedrals. It would be unjust to the
nineteenth century to say that these
ideas are no longer foremost in anen's
minds--but it is true,that they lack the
definite and positive form they assumed
in the past. They are under discussions,~
and more mental energy is engagedl i
freeing them from the cobwebs of the
past than in giving them positive and
definite form. Besides, we are busy inC
improving the material condition rei
mankind and are apt to look upoi e't!F-

HE stude nt of
''Architectural Art
History is over-
'whelmed with the
'r ~E~PI number, magni-
tude and intrinsic
merit of the mon-
uments of the
past and cor-
respondingly despondent when he con-
templates the efforts of our own time.
The historic past, however, begins with
Egyptian remains of foundations, built
of dressed rectangular stone, of prob-
able wooden superstructures which date
back 6,000 years before Christ. The
era of the Fy~ramids extends from 4,000
to 2,500 years B. C. The past, there-
fore, as far "as concerns architectural
monuments which have come down to
us, is a matter of 6,000 to 8,000 years.
It is not surprising that much good
work has been done during that time;
doubtless a vast amount o~f bad work
which has been allowed to decay has
also been done in the same time, for it
must be remembered that monuments
of art merit are not only preserved by
their superior stability, but also by the
fostering care of man. An illustration
of this on a large scale, may; be found
irr the restoration and completion of the
cathedrals of the thirteenth century in
our own time.
Moreover, a review of the known
monuments of the past will show that
the dates of their creation are not
equally distributed. They are efforts
of special periods separated by centu-
ries of sterility and inactivity.
Another broad view of the subject
reveals the fact that the highest de-
Vo~l. 1.--4.-48.




lfilwaukee. Wis.


S. S. Beman, Architect.

Philadelphia, Pa. BETZ BUILDING. U. Decker, Architect.

ical relations not so much as paramount
in themselves, but as adjuncts to ma-
terial well-being. The priest and the
soldier no longer govern the world.
They are relegated to the position of
servants of the people, and the mer-
chant, the manufacturer, the builder of
railroads and ships are the representa-
tives of material prosperity and have
taken the place of kings, bishops and
It is not the province of this paper to
inquire whether this condition of things
tends to the greatest good of the
greatest number, but it may be ques-
tioned whether it is conducive to the
development of great moral ideas, to
their celebration by popular acts, and
finally to the fostering of art in general
and architecture in particular. Nor has
it so far been the motive for the cre-
ation andl the poetical development of
ideas which may serve as a .basis for
architectural monuments, nor are archi-
tectural monuments possible in the
absence of such positive ideas.
TIo illustrate: The majorityof build-
ing-s which command the attention and
services of the architect at the present
time and in this country are strictly
business buildings. Prominently among
them are railroad stations, insurance
and office buildings, stores and news
offices. Considered from an archi-
tectural standpoint these buildings, by
their simplicity and economic con-
struction, should express a mere busi-
ness purpose. Upon them, however, are
lavished in costly material and decora-
tion the forms of courts and palaces, in
order to appeal to the attention of the
community and to a remunerative pat-
ronage. Architecture is ransacked to
deck these simple clowns of material
use with the shields of the warrior, the
crowns of kings and the forms of libra-
ries and courts of law. The architect
is practically retained to advertise a
plamn business purpose by clothing
these structures with whatever ornate
forms he may find handy in his repe~r-
toir of architectural monuments.
Of~course, we build courts of justice
an'd capitols; they, certainly, it will be
said, represent vital social and politi-
cal ideas. True, but these ideas by late
definitions have been deprived of their

poetry, hence they cannot be poetically
expressed. A judge no longer performs
the functions inherent in his office in the
past, he has sunk down into a referee
who decides upon the cogency of the
arguments of contending lawyers, and
by a fiction of modern law deputes the
cognition of facts to a jury. Hence it
is a fact that a court-room is nothing
more than a convenient apartment for
legal discussion, and a number of such
compartments are habitually packed
into a rectangular structure which can
in no way be distinguished from .sur-
rounding business buildings.
The same applies to our State houses,
or capitols as they are called. No one
can possibly consider our legislative
bodies and their surroundings from the
standpoint of art as poetical expressions
of an idea.
But then we-are to have a cathedral.
Let us here express our unqualified
reverence for the Ecclesiastical Institu-
tion which intends to celebrate its exist-
ence by erecting this architectural mon-
ument, also our admiration of the men
engaged in the undertaking. Their in-
telligence, moral purity and broad char-
itable intent must be patent to all. TIhe
Episcopal Church has long ceased to
content itself with protesting against
dogmas, and has turned its attention to
the moral and material well-being of
its parishioner outside as well as inside
of the church. A great work of instruc-
tion, material help and intellectual re-
finement of the people at large is being
silently and effectively done, large sums
of money and, what is more potent, a
great amount of intelligent, per-
sonal labor are expended annually
upon this work, and magnificent en-
dowfments for the same purposC are
showered upon the church. A broad
and liberal interpretation of charity has
thus been added to the conventional
formula of Christian faith, but has not
as yet been incorporated in its outward
manifestation. The positive religious
idea of modern Christianity is a mere
extract of that of the Catholic Church.
Some reductions hav-e been made, but
nothing has been added excepting the
tacit understanding that Catholic ritual
is to be abandoned; and no new demon-
strations have been substituted for it.


Jas, Neale, Architect.

BRushey Heath, London, Eng .



To-day, as of old, the cathedral is a
place where the bishop meets the clergy
and people of his diocese to speak to
them, not by words but by the help of
art, by pictures, music and processions,
by the expression of the building itself of
the great Christian idea he represents.
Catholic methods of doing this are con-
ventialized into forms which partake but
little, not. only of modern Christian
ideas, but of modern methods of
expression. It is not at all difficult to
supersede these with more forcible and
less conventional forms. This may be
the work of time, but it need not to be
a long time if the necessity of the work
is but recognized and is pursued with
zeal and energy. Nor need we to enter
upon the probable detail of it; it is not
the function of the architect to do this
at any time, but we may state that
with regard to the proposed cathedral
no steps have as yet been taken to de-
fine modern ChristianityT other than by
a general protest against the Chris-
tianity of the fourteenth century, and
its forms of art expression. The church
has not felt nor expressed the want of a
fitting place where the bishop may
meet his clergy and people, to address
them on the essence of modern Chris-
tianity. What has been said, and it is
the only: reason which has been ad-
vanced for building a cathedral, is that
New York has now arrived at a state of
magnitude and affluence when the world
expects that it should possess a cathe-
dral. The only reason for building a ca-
thedral in the City of New York, there-
fore, is that the great commercial me-
tropolis should be provided with
architectural bric-$-brac of this kind.
What sort of a cathedral a Protestant
cathedral is to be has not been deter-
mined any further than that it must of
necessity be a Catholic cathedral in
some way modified in order to express
a protest. No -solemn conclave of
Protestant divines has convened to
determine the positive idea which
is the essence of modern Chris-
tianity, nor the ritual which will
express this idea poetically. A Pro-
testant cathedral, therefore, is as yet
Similar conditions of architectural
sterility, the result of the same cause,

may be observed in the art history of
Egypt during ten or fifteen centuries
before the Christian era; also at its
beginning, in Greece, when the temples
had ceased to interpret the religious
ideas of the times and Christianity had
not yet sufficiently crystallized to
generate Christian monuments.

The prime vicissitude of architecture
at the present time has been shown to
be the want of definite ideas, which
must always be the motive of a mon-
ument. The second may be formu-
lated as follows: Given a well-defined
idea, is the architect of the nineteenth
century, by his education, prepared to
develop it into a monument ?
It is not much more than a quarter of
a century ago that in this country no
institution existed where architecture
was taught in any form. We have now
a reasonable number of polytechnic
schools and universities where young
men may receive an architectural train-
ing as good as that of the best foreign
institutions of the kind.
In those days, the young aspirant to
the profession served an apprenticeship
in the office of a practicing architect
and acquired a training by absorption
in an architectural environment. Of
these it is not intended to speak here;
nor is the educated architect to be held
personally responsible for his short-
comings in dealing with an idea. The
question is: Are the methods of the.
best obtainable .architectural training
of such a nature as to enable the arch-
Itect to develop a monument out of
an idea ? "
By the scientific branch of his studies
the architect becomes familiar with
methods of construction, the nature
and intensity of forces acting and the
resistance of the material employed.
The artistic branch teaches mainly
architectural history. The student is
overwhelmed with a mass of architect-
ural monuments, assorted with regard
to style, and referred to- the different
countries where built and the' periods
of time in which they were built.
The purpose of these monuments, be-
yond the general indication that they
are churches, temples, palaces, theatres,
etc., etc., is not especially discussed in


St. Paul, Mlinn.

S. S. Beman, Architect.


---- ~~~~




NewYo~rk -

.FPesidence o lr. ohh rat bews
.Riverside Drive and Ninetiethr .5. I

* Lamb lad Rich Architects



relation to social or religious progress
or retrogression, and the influence of
construction upon form is not carried
beyond the necessary technical descrip-
tion of the monuments.
The impressions on the mind of the
student at the completion of his train-
ing will best illustrate its efficiency.
He believes all monuments of the past
to be perfect works of art. They are
all equally indisputable precedents for
future efforts.
B3ut few architects would be willing
to risk their reputation on a Presby-
terian Church inl the Egyptian style,
but many, probably a majority, will
consent to build it in anly other style
whatever, and they will do it with a
clear architectural conscience. The
facts that Greek Temples were not
meant to receive a congregation in
their interior, that Roman architecture
does not express religious edifices at
all, and that Romanesque and Gothic
architecture express a phase of Christi-
anity as diverging from ultra-Protest-
antism as the religion of the Greeks
and Romans, are not a bar to imitating
these monuments for ultra-Protestant
worship. It cannot be said that these
architects are entirely oblivious of the
incongruity of the problem; they cer-
tainly have a feeling (which means a
vague impression which is in no sense
the result of logical reasoning) that
something will have to be done to
pacify not architectural objections, but
sectarian prejudices; they are con-
tent, however, with the conclibsion that
a certain amount of crudeness, plain-
ness and nakedness of form and mode~l-
ing will accomplish this purpose.
An architect familiar with methods
of art composition before beginning to
design would probably address the
building committee somewhat in this
wise :
You have retained me to build you
a Gothic church, but in order to con-
ceive such a church I need some in-
struction. If by stipulating for a Gothic
church you mean that I shall avail my-
self of the progress of architecture up
to the fourteenth centuty, I will only
say that since that time the science of
construction has been greatly advanced,
and I must ask whether or not I am
Vol. L.-4.--43

permitted to make use of this advance.
I quite agree with you that, in the mat-
ter of artistic expression, the thirteenth
century may be accepted as a culmin-
ating era. But if you expect a church
edifice which will in form resemble the
churches of the Middle Ages, you will
probably be disappointed.
In order to arrive at a clear under-
standing of the subject, permit me to
state my impressions of the arch~i-
tectural needs of a * church,
and I beg you will correct me when I
am wrong. In the first place a *
church is not a place of worship--you
say it is but, pardon me, I speak in
an architectural sense. WYhat I mean is,
that while an ultra-Protestant Church,
theoretically, is a place of worship,
practically, at least as far as worship
can in a building be architecturally ex-
pressed, it is not a place of worship,
simply because the congregation while
assembled within the church does
nothing that may be construed into an
act of worship, hence cannot be visibly
accommodated in doing this noathing by
any modification of the building. I
quite understand that the worship of
God is fostered and mentally discussed
in a church, and is also in a literary
way Illustrated by prayer from the pul-
pit. T'he congregation, however, re-
mains quiescent,
The preaching and praying as per-
formed by the minister, however, is a
visible act. 'There is preaching on
the one hand and listening by the con-
gregation on the other. TIhis act re-
quires a structure, and that structure
may be made to express the act. WYith-
out going into detailed description of
the process, I may say that the
result will be a form not unlike
a theatre, not a modern theatre,
but like a Greek theatre, covered
with a roof. The scena, however,
will be a simple cathedra. The
roof may be a light iron construction in
place of an awning. This iron construc-
tion is capable of expressive architect-
ural treatment if properly understood.
To illustrate the need of visible acts
let us imagine a future progress of your
church in the direction of its present
spiritualizing tendencies. The sermon
at present is practically a weekly re-



fC '

Albasiy, N. Y.


Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.


e~aL~ ~


r .&n


ligious essay read from the pulpit. This
may in course of time be replaced by
a monthly or quarterly religious magaa-
zine sent to the residences of the par-
ishioners; hence you will need no
church at all.
I trust you will not think me irrever-
ent because I pursue this argument to
an extreme. My object is to show
clearly the necessity of a materialized
idea' for the purpose of art expression
in any form, and more especially in that
of an architectural monument."
Should an architect be bold enough
to indulge in plain truths like the fore-
going, his building committee would be
surprised to the extent of employing
one of his brethren who is willing to
design a church without a definite
idea, or in other words not to de-
sign a church at all, but to compose
a picture of a Catholic church which
shall be deprived of its architectural
expression. -
On7 the other hand, if a building com-
mittee should be found bold enough to
have a church unlike those -built by
kindred congregations during the pres-
ent century, for the sake of artistic
truths, is the architect by his education
enabled to design it for them? To
illustrate: 'The most renowned prima
donna is in7 the habit of practicing the
scales for two or three hours daily. If she
should neglect this training she would
soon cease to be a prima donna. The
architect of the present day never has
practiced his architectural scales (viz.,
the construction and modeling of parts
of structure) even during the years
of study, and if he has done so
then, to any extent he has ceased to do
so since. A scientific analysis of any
organism, such as a structural part,
leads to a proportionate relation of
masses (no matter what the factor of
safety assumed), and this relation of
masses is to the mechanical engineer
almost always a surprising result, dif-
feringa materially from conventional
forms. Parts of structure are the ele-
ments of a harmony which forms finally
the mass of the monument. If these
elements are imperfectly studied, the
result is a discord, and if not studied at
all (and this is the prevailing practice),
the result is without meaning or ex-

pression--a jumble of discordant and
deformed elements.
His education has measurably famil-
iarized the architect with a series of
tunes of which he remembers but a lim-
ited number of interesting snatches.
The moment he is called upon to design
a building, these tunes and snatches of
tunes rise in his mind, and if they fail
to rise abundantly or to be directly
available, he refreshes his memory by
a resort to books and photographs.
He begins to sketch a completed build-
ing by combining various architectural
forums as found in ancient, medieval
and modern buildings, always provided
that they seem picturesque and do not
differ too much in style.
When such a sketch has arrived at a
point when the architect says to him-
self "I like it,"' he hands it to a
draughtsman to be drawn to a scale.
In the meantime he proceeds with a
similar sketch of the interior. It is
soon found that the two sketches do
not agree, the one or the other has to
yield, generally the interior. Then the
whole is turned over to the engineer of
the office who is to contrive a construc-
tion which shall make this design a
possible structure. This part of the
work the architect dislikes more or
less because, since his student years,
he has become somewhat rusty in
mathematics and mechanics.
This architectural engineer often
finds it difficult to devise a practicable
construction. There are loads without
or with inadequate support; there is
lateral stress with insufficient abut-
ment. He refers the matter back to
the architect in the hope of a change
in the design which will avoid the de-
fect. In this he is doomed to be dis-
appointed. The architect cannot be
induced to believe that his work of art
is defective simply because it happens
to be an imperfect mechanical orgoan-
ism, he is inclined to believe rather
that his engineer but imperfectly under-
stands mechanics. Tie-rods are resorted
to in the place of abutments, and arti-
ficial trusses are introduced to discharge
weights from weak supports upon
others at a distance which are stronger
than is required for the mechanical
work they are doing.

Bar Harbor, Me.


Rowe &~ Baker, Architects.


Now the process of designing an
architectural monument is just the re-
verse of all this. You begin with a
single cell and construct it carefully
and scientifically, selecting your ma-
terial and constructive methods in
accordance with the degree of strength
and elegance due to the nature of the
monument. By constructing it, is
meant here that you build it in your
mind and note your work down in a
drawing, testing it mechanically as you
progress, which means that you accom-
pany your drawing with a strain sheet
of the forces acting and the stress upon
the material. .
When each cell is separately treated
in this manner you place th~em in prox-
imity to each other irr an order which
will most effectually respond to the
uses of the monument. When this is
done, modifications of form and con-
struction owfing to the combination
must be made to meet changed rela-
tions of forces. If you now look upon
the exterior of the whole before any

modeling or decoration is attempted you
will find its masses and form not only
expressive of the purposes of the monu-
ment, but entirely new in character.
A mechanical apparatus, a machine,
is built by this process, and artistic
expression is the result without a
special effort.
Let us imagine a similar training
and its result in case .of the education
of mechanical engineers. Let the
student be instructed by one teacher
in mathematics and dynamics and by
another in the art of giving form7 to
his engines which will express their
functions. Let the latter teacher~pur-
sue the system of teaching the history
of machines up to the thirteenth cen-
tury and no further, with the special
injunction to pupils that the forms of
machines in practice must be purely
those of anly one era selected and that
forms of different eras must not be
combined. An engineer thus educated
could not possibly design a steam-
Leofold Eidzlitzt.



by Charles Henrfy Heart
A book review of The nature and function of art
by Loeoold. Eidlitz. (In American architect and
building news, v.11, p.172-173, April 15, 1882)


Sfroml a purly'~S physical
~~ want and is there~for~e thle
(i~uk~least perSOna'l of all tle
arts. It h~as to~submit, to
mlany controlling circum-
.I ~stances fromn whichl other
arts a~re free. It has t~o
accommodate its work to
.thle predestined purpose
of thle monument to be
~h~r)erected and its construc-
Lf r em tion must be basel ulpon
sound and immut abl e
mathematical lawsv. It is
so decpendlent upon geometry andl mechanics that sentimnent and
imanginadion have but little share~c in its work~. Archlitecture is thlus
both a Science andl an Art, andi it is in this dlual capacity that Mr.
Leop~oldl Eidllitz, one of the( foremost of Amnerican architects, treats
thle broad subject in the important work before us, which' is. an ear-
nest plea for th~e advancement of architecture out of thle slough into
which~ it has been sinking for the last five? centuries, by infusing into
its cr~eationa nor~e true art art being the expression of an idea in
a malterial form. "It is thle object of this volume to inquire into the
caulses of thle present conditions of architecture; to define th~e nature
andl functions of art in general and of archlitecture in particular, in
order to show hlow architecture maU again become a living and crea-
thve art."
Hefor~e we enter upon a consideration of thle questions here dis-
cussedl let us look for ai moment at thle personality of thle author who
sets before us this plea, that we may learn something of Iris fitness
for thle work in haRnd. Mr. Eidllitz is an Aulstriann and ha;s just en-
teredt upon hris sixtieth year. 110 receivedt hris professional education
at the well-known polytechnic schools of Prague awnl Vienna, ani,
cominrr t'o this country,. establishedl himself inl New York, where for
thec last thlirty-seven years hie hlas been a p~ractising architect. Hlis
fistnotable knildling was St. Georre's Church. erected for D~r. Tyng
in 1845-48. Since! then hie has2 bltilt mlany promlinent edlifices, amlone
thecm theCucho he Hl rt, thle D~ry-Dock Maviner Fund'
and thle Produlce Excclhane; New York; thle Academy of Music,
.11rgooggn; Chlrist Church~ in St. Louis, and perhaps hris most impor-
tntm ok the Temple Emmalnuel at Fifth Avenue andl Forty-third
Street, in his adopted eity'. This synagogue hals~been regardned by
comnpetent authority as orne of the most perfeclt.architect~ural mong-
mnts i~on ths ounr combining faultless constriction wvitl dlue re-
galrd to tlo a purposes of the edlifice and ornamnented in an qupropriate tt~
alsul symoldical manner. ]n illi thle Site Clifital at Alliany
whichl was begurn or Er extravagant plaln an untler false estimate'
of its coat, was tulrnedt over to Mr. Eilllitz to fnih III, hlas since
built thle Assembly ChaRmber, thle Court of Appeals andi thleadjgig.
ing~ corr~idor, thre fralndl sair.case and ~ithe c lrorrior of the ?ictare.
Chlamber.l It will thlus be seen that he not only hlas a plractical
knlowledlge of thle subject he considersP, but thant theu r'ePIut of that
ktnowledget, as exhlibite~d in his artistic works, givecs to hris words a
consideration worthy\ of careful and stuldious attention,
Let no oneo be beguiledl by5 their love! for art" into the idean thnt
this is a leisurel~-hour volume, "' a new art-h~ook," one of 11he manly
ophcomr~a emanating fr~om the recent susthletic craze, On1 thet col-
trary it is a technical andl phrilosophical treatise to be thlought~fully
read~t, nay more than read, to be thoughtfully studliedl. In psavin',
thlis we do not mean for a moment that we agree with, all thart Mtri
Eildlitz sas--all his phlilosophy andl all of his conclusions. Fr
fl~ro it. WVe think a large portion of the text could have been ad.
varntageoutsly omirtted. Theee parts have~ no dlirect bearinR ulon
thle su~bject-matterr of thle volumle aInll deal too largely with ablstranc~t
metaphlysics. TIhe workl woulld hasve beecn bectter anl ruaore: uefiul
withlout th1n, but thle volume is in thle right direction and thrclefore
we cordially welcome it.
Thle book is dlivildedl into three! parts, eachl one treating separately
the respective snbdtivisions set forth in thle pr~eface as thle object of
thle volume; but in considcr~ing each of thlese thlemes, the wildest lati.
tude is taken and metaphy~sical speculation takes the place mn many
chanpters of goodl pr~actical c~ommon-sense suggestions upon thle topics
considered. M~r. Eldlitz's opening words many of us can secretly
take hlole : There ar~e men whoe believe not in_ God~, bult they all -
beclieve in their ownl c~ommon-senne and~ taste."' "This text ap.
Iplies to thle profession as well as to I.laymn andl is the key-note to tle
entire trai andl the whole treatise, as far as its practical healrincgs
are' concerned, mnay be said to be deduced from this text. Mlr. Ed.
litz points oult in no equ~ivocal manner how archlitecture as a Ncince
1Endan ailia derisiafefhyl ing mad to serve this intan ible
fldstfl~m to its i certain sty. 'Thrl f a ai, 'le
says, 'L pronounacingr upon thle beanlty of anything while hre himnself
wears a starchled shlirt-front, a cyiindrical hat, muhton-chlop whlis.
kers, and pantaloons stripped horizontallyt I In thle great cities of
Eu~rope sad compounds callled play.s, withlout p~late, without senti.
mlent, without meaning, are p~layedl to full hlouses for hlundfreds of
I'rhe Nalture and Functions of Art, mlore especially of Archlitecture, by Ceo-
poldl EidHllt, Architect. New~ York: A. G. Amrstronlg & Son, 1881. 8vo pp.
usii, 19.

nighlts in succession, and y~et thle persons who visit these perform-
ances speak with confidence of their taste 11sn~i-ve-in--4mmest
built of small hlemlock jefist nailed together In themo~st _slovenlyl
likiiflrilllc In witlifinlan igg~~_l_,i ao n ac on theoutsid with a.
weak Ino~ of sandstone, overtopp~ed with a tin cmrlice painted in
imiitation o ~stone, -aniT i nsisll.tt hat1 kyare rm~net..of tae I The!
Loolrtll~s illd ft sr~eet corners are crowdellS with thle pur~chasersa of the
cheap novel, whiile: the average daily attendance of the greaBt libra-
ries does not exceed a few persons. Thle literature consumed by the
masses is veriest trash, and yet each one who reads it believes hlim-
self or herself a man or woomanl of taste." We are obtuse enoughl
to boast that we are a people of taste, able to distinguish thi: bea~uti-
ful froml thle ugly; yet cevery year we go into ecstasies over thle beau-
ties of thet prevailhng fashions. We: lug~h at the unfortunate who
lacks thle taste to change his last yearr's coart, hris superannuated car-
riage, hris unfashlionable: frulnitur~e, etc., all of whlichl awhile ag'o we
extolled to thle skies as adlilrable specimlens of human ar~t."
theJ tone, as may be seen, is not conciliartory, and hie is mercilessly
seveel~, but not without a good 'show of reason, upon buildings comn-
mrittees who without proper means and opportunity for for~ming accu-
rate judgments, without prior edlucation or practical knowledge, sit
upon" monumental plans about whichl they know nothing, and issue!
their fint in favor of: this design or thant design, upon their immutable
tast. Anarciet"h as,"wocne to comjpete that is
Sguetcorrect it acce or recfuse it--has alre~ady iven up his
poio a aprkesinaman.'"onde thle manl of taste who
sits in judgment upon ideas of which hee never hleard and of their
expression ill art whlichl he hlas never studlied." It is thiis state of
thling,RS in greatly pasrt, whlich hlas kept ar~chitecture fr~omn progress~ing
sad keep~ing aparce with thle thrnes. Yet we can hardly agree withl
blr. Eidllitz thlat "it h~as been silent since thle thir~teenthl cerntur~y,"
as reciter~ated through many porltionls of hris wor~k. His whole advo-
eacy is for a having order of ar~chitecture; an anrchitecture that will
reveal its meanings in its wvo~k-s, by its forml andl construction. Andl
is this not the true ainn? "L ArchlitectureC is a speies of language.
it tells us as much of Greece as Homer dlid, and of the middlle ares
muore than hais been expressed in literature." Look at thle runins of
nlaulnumnts of thle past, ruins from whichl all or~iginal detail hlas dlis-
appeared"', or at thle foundation of monuments never built or. entirely
destroyed: they tell thle story of the object and purpose of thlese?
structures. Wec know them as temp~les or thecatr~es, forums, baths or
dwellingrs. Whly thecn should not our buildings tell their story tool
Al<. E:ldlitz dloes not advocate by any measns an .abandlonmenrt of
the works of thle past, either their inethods or their manrnler; bult
rather to use theml as guidecs for study as we do in history, phlilos-
ophly and literature, as well as mn paintihg and sculpture. Of all thle
bygDone orders of atrchlitecture, Mlr. Eldlitz finds most to approve andl
recommend to m~ediaoval work, and especially thle true Gothic whichl
was developed out of it. He does not, it seems to us, p~ay that re-
gar~d to thle dignified simplicity and p~urity of the Greek forms thast
onle wouldl look for from an artist as sensitive as hie shows hlimself to
be. 111. disdain for thle so-called Rcnatissance order of architecture
almost loses hunm his equanimity when melntioning it. He says:
"( When we examine thle dome! of St. P'eter's at Rloanesw~~il whih mst,
alter all, he co~nsideui~ralit Tasllc g~ie gretesomutc oT the Kcnatenalnce
w ;njeenitl It~i~t~ lIiilT-eek pi-oblein tolliildl
strongly and maike thlat hihis strong appear weak, to buildl a mlon
usment of great magnitude and malike it look emlail, to use costly
manterials andl make threm look mean, to carve statues andi place the!m
where thley do not belong, or wher~c by~ grlavity or position thley couldl
not possibly abide; if, furthlermnore, thris was to be rendleredl mor~e
confused by tawdlry carving, misapplied color and all kinds of un-
mecaningn decorantson, that problems is solvedl in thle interior of St.
Pecter's at Romne." Speaking of thle dome, again, hie asks, "LIs is not
an abomnisusion, rudler, mor~e vulgar, unmeaning and unjulstifiable
sh~an anytliung ever invented by civilized or uncivilized ruan ? "
h'ronsr these citations some general idea can be gleaned of the
direction taken by M~r. Eidllitz inl his teaching, andl there can be no
questions but he is thleoretically right in arll of hris views upon taste, andt
style, anDi (071, Rnild conarSEPHOL1, Rail (10Coration. 'r10 diffijcity is
that there pre but few mren of tr~ue gene~ius t aon us, andl it reparel~s
a ma3n of gen~iusto develop anything~ new into life and practOICal
use. Another dlilliulty~ itilii iovany at thle present ema is thle all-
powerful swayingi of public opinion, origiinating oftentimecs in somne
carrant spark, caught upl by thle pi'ess and spr~eadl broadcast over thle
landl, without its originator ever once turning to look at andi consider
theu base from whlichl it flew. H~ow few pEople think for themselves
rad hlow many take all their thoughts andl views upon public qlues-
tions and private matters second-hasnd from the columns of their
favorite orgaln, we need only look among our own acquainltances to
ranwer. Above all this is the c ase with artI Ar~t is fashlionable,
andl not to be "up41 inl art is not to be fashionlable, andl we? all recogr-
rrize, of course, that one might aLs well be out of thle worldl as oult of
the funahon. Thle result is thate our newspapers and periodlicalls
seemr withl dissertations upon this artistic subject and upon that, wr~il-
ten in mtost instances by persons who haove taken artl~ up since thle
fainaon cayme in, and who write withe abO shwf learning~ly an n s
nlutuption of authority that would be amulsing were i o o h
j r~isonous seedls of superficiality and false knowledge Ile'1 cte
~Qoad. Art is a study of a lifetime, and perhaps thlere is no de-

apartment of art mnore difficult to truly master thasn architecture. The
reason for this is simple enouh:r l it consists of so many diff-erent ele-
ments thlat its unity is always in danger of being destroyedl.
Mech~anics, material, sculp~tur~e and palinting all forml part of its lab-
oratory, andi their relative p~ositions have to be worked together in
the crucible of thle artist's brain. Yet with these indisputable facts,
that hlydra-hleaded monster public opinion, formed in thle manner de-
scribed, is ready to set itself in opp~osition~ to the life-long student.
Mr. Eidllitz is no cowardl in thle expression of his convictions, and
the keenness with wh~lich he first analyzes and then disposes of two
writers hlighl in popular estilnatioir-F ergusson and Rtuskin -is
very amusing and highly to be commended. The thirdc part of his
book, thant onl the nature of architecture, and which occupies three-
fiftls of thle entire volume, is by all degrees thle most valuable, im!-
portant and interesting; while the final chapter, on the education of
the architect, should be placed in thle ha~ndls of all concerned in the
adlvancement of this great art. MrI. Eidlitz's book is a notable con-
tribution to the literature of art and bears evidence of a mind prac-
tisced in thle subject treated. As a literaryp comnposition it is excel-
lent. Hisu terse, vigorous, pointed English leaves no un~cer~tain mean-
ing: to be gathecred by the reader, and hris excellent choice of illustran-
tion clearrs up anty portion that may seeml befoggerd. Thle volume is
clearly and beautifully printed, but lacks anl adequate index.


The Architecture of H.H. Richardson
and His Times
by Henry-Russel Hitchcock

New York: Museum of Modern Art 1936




53. New YJorki State Capitol, Albany. Perspective project by Eidlitz wvith Richardson's collaboration, '875-
54 (insert). New York State Capitol, Albany. Plan of third floor, 1875-95-

r~ n~


r~i i
-' '
~:-~ ~s~n
i :

work in America or in France and equally unlike his own personal
Romanesque style which appeared almost fully developed in his de-
signs of the next year. It is doubtful if Richardson or anyone else
thought it was Romanesque at the time.
It is worth mentioning that the City Hall in Springfield (no
destroyed) had been built by Leopo~ld Eidlitz in 1854-55 in a very
creditable, rather .cardboard-like South German Romantic Roman-
esu. It was one of the newest, most prominent and soundest build-
ings in the city, well built of brick with .Longmeadow cut-stone trim
and neat if uninspired detail. Yet Richardson's work of the sixties in
Springfield shows no influence either from this or from the more varied
Romanesque work of Eidlitz in New York, where he was already one
of the leading architects.
There are two probable reasons for this. On the one hand, Richard-
son, with his French training, was insulated against the achievements
of men like Eidlitz or Russell Sturgis who owed their training to
Germany and continued to draw their European inspiration from
there and not from France. Furthermore, by this date, Eidlitz, like
Sturgis, had succumbed to the opportunities offered for work in the
English Victorian Gothic and hetice his Romanesque work was no
longer a matter of current fashion. It belonged with Schulze's work
at Harvard back in the old pre-war time, which always seems dim and
old-fashioned, however sweet, after a war is over. If there is anything
Romanesque about the Agawam Bank, it is a subconscious echo of
Schulze's Boylston Hall, itself very debatably Romanesque.
The building, however, has its importance. In it Richardson ex-
perimented with boldness as he did with barrenness in the Crownin-
shield house. Furthermore, while the building might superficially
appear to belong, in the broad sense, to the American Second Empire
manner, Richardson had now really accepted the hegemony of the
English Victorian Gothic. It must have been clear to him after this
that the last traces of conventional Classicism, still present in this
design, would have to be purged from his style if he were to achieve
a consistent new integration. Finally, he had built something not un-

two storeys above ground. In a time of depression it is not surprising
that a drastic change of administration was deemed necessary.
In 18~7c a new Capitol commission was appointed, of which
Lieutenant-Governor William Dorsheimer was the most important
mebr. This new Commission appojintedan advisory architectural
board, consisting of Frederick Law Olmsted. Leopold Eidlitz and
Richardson, to give its opinion as to what should be done about com-
pleting the building. After a thorough examination the board offered
its report in the form of a wholly new project. The advisors soon found
themselves appointed Fulrsscesr, which was undoubtedly what
Dorsheimer had intended. He had employed Richardson for his own
house in 2 868 and had probably been connected with the work which
still continued on the Buffalo State Hospital, on which Olmsted had
also advised.
The new project was almost entirely the work of Eidlity_ a much
older architect than Richardson and better known at this time. In
the perspective B it appears that the alred uilt basement and first
storey of Fuller's design were to be preserved practically unchanged.
The next storey above this was not very different, although the giant
porticos were entirely omitted. But the top storey throughout and thd'
upper part of the pavilions and turrets were indubitably Romanesque,
even if rather more Victorian than Richardsonian. There were long
arcades, with colonnettes at the corners of the windows, and much
surface polychromy. The mansards were made inconspicuous between
the tall steep roofs of pavilions and towers. The culminating feature
was a great square tower rising from within the building and topped
by an octagonal lantern and dome. (Fig. 53) -
The impetus to propose such a mediaeval design came, doubtless,
from the Connecticut State Capitol. In the competition for that a few
years earlier, most of the designs were Victorian Gothic, including the
winning one by Richard M. Upjohn. The Romanesque was an old
love of Eidlitz, as we have seen. Its round arches could also be used
with less impropriety above the classical arches of Fuller's wTork.
Published in the American Architect for March Il, 1876.

Richardson's own new style apparently influenced the accepted design
very little, although he may have been responsible for the ruggedness
of the detail on the eastern approach and the central lantern.
In the next year work began under the new scheme, Richardson's
actual commission dating from February, 1876. Apparently the ex-
terior was to have been jointlty executed by Richardson and Eidlitz;
in the interior, however, there was a definite division of labor roughly
from southeast to northwest. Thus Richardson was to design h
Senate side, except for the front corner staircase which is _by Eidlitz,
and Eidlitz the Assembly side. The rear, with the great Western Stair-
case and the State Library, was to be Richardson's. Olmsted was, of
course, only a general advisor whose taste was highly esteemed.
(Fig. 54) -
But, as the change of architects took place, considerable criticism
arose in the profession and also in the legislature. While the contro-
versy continued, with committees of architects testifying before the
legislature, th up soe wr en ul t nt id a
modfie vesio ofEiditz orginl Rmansqu scem. Suddenly
the style was legislated back from Romanesque to Renaissance. Thus,
when Richardson came to build the upper storeys of the southern
facade, he was in a quandary. He eventually found a solution by using
classical detail treated in a somewhat crude manner recalling the

LProvencal Romanesque. He also provided dormers of rather clumsy
Frangois I character. (Fig. 55) .
The exterior of the Capitol, in spite of all this interference and
compromise, is not as bad as might be expected. The mere size of the
white granite mass capped by the tall red roofs which finally replaced
the mansards, is impressive. The stylized detail, whether intentionally
Renaissance or intentionally Romanesque, has a rugged character
suited to granite. There are occasional sections, such as the upper walls
inside the court, which are really excellent.
The problem was, of course, hopeless. It could no more be solved
by continuing the style of General Grant's day through the late seven-
ties and eighties--as was done in the case of the -appalling Municipal

Building in Philadelphia--than by changing to anything which could
be described in the parlance of the times as "pure" Romanesque. Even
the exterior, moreover, was not finished within Richardson's lifetime.
Quite certainly the best part of the exterior is the western facade.
This is, at least in part, the work of Isaac G. Perry, a local architect
who finally completed the Capitol in 1894, using a more Richardsonian
style than Richardson himself was permitted to apply in the seventies.
Whatever importance his work on the exterior of the Albany
Capitol had for Richardson lay in defining his own type of Roman-
esque design as distinguished from that of the older Eidlitz. He also
learned that the effect of picturesque silhouette and sturdy mass which
he sought could be obtained with a combination of stylistic reminis-
cences as unrelated as the Romanesque and the Frangois I. Mediaeval
sixteenth century features had already appeared in his work: the
dormers on the Hampden County Courthouse, for example, and
many other details on the Watts Sherman house. But these were not
combined with classical forms. On the Capitol, however, in designing
Frangois I dormers to harmonize with the Romanesque storey below,
Richardson found that he could easily make any sort of detail indi-
vidual in character. It was worth while, just as he was coming to asso-
ciate the Romanesque so closely with his personal taste, that he should
be brought to realize that there were other sources from which he
could quite as well take suggestions for his own use. Otherwise he
might shortly have become what others thought he was and what he
even sometimes claimed to be: a Romanesque revivalist merely, and
not a really great nineteenth century architect.
Inside the Capitol the pink marble wainscoting in the corridors,
with mouldings and carved bosses of grey stone, alone calls for men-
tion. This is characteristically rich and vigorous detail of the mid-
seventies. But Richardson's real achievement was to be the Senate
Chamber, just as that of Eidlitz was the Assembly Chamber.- The
Senate Chamber was not designed until 1878 and belongs definitely
in the next period of Richardson's work. So also do the Governor's
Room and the Court of Appeals. The Library and the Western Stair-

case were not begun until the end of his life and the Library has since
been burnt out. The elaborate staircase as executed is predominantly
the work of Isaac G. Perry, as is also the lush and monumental eastern
approach, an impressive "Richardsonian" feature. This work was
finished in the late eighties and nineties, but the eastern approach at
least is not without considerable individual character.
A proposed addition to the Cheney Building in Hartford was pub-
lished in the American Architect and Building News for 1877. (Fig.
56) This was not executed, but it is a rather interesting and significant
design. The structure was separate from the main building, to which
it was attached by a bridge over an alley. Only the ground storey was
of stone, with a very wide segmental arch over the bayed shop window.
Above this, the second floor had three arched windows in brick and the
third and fourth, five. The steep roof was at right angles to the street,
with a half-timbered dormer. On one corner was a tiny bay window
turret corbelled at 'thtbase and with a pointed roof.
This is Richardson's most Queen Anne project in masonry. The
delicacy of scale and the picturesqueness of the dormer, the corner
turret, and the bridge, with its twisted columns, suggest that the design
was in large part White's. In the treatment of the upper floors, how-
ever, the avoidance of unnecessarily monumental scale, and the con-
tinuity of the fenestration are excellent. The panels in the third floor
spandrels were apparently to be of carved brick like those used a year
later with such success on Sever Hall.
This building would not have been very harmonious with the
Cheney Building itself and, of course, it was not as important. But it
serves to link the developments of the mid-seventies with the brick
monuments which are so conspicuous in the work of the succeeding
five year period.
One other monument remains whose design belongs in the series
which began in 1870, previous to the opening of the period of complete
mastery in 1878.'o This is the WCZinn Memorial Library in Woburn,
1o The North Easton Library was commissioned only a few months later than
the Woburn Library, but the design definitely belongs to the next period.

the red-brown of the granite columns. The mahogany and the leather
of the furniture were the deepest notes of all.
The panels on the chimney breasts of Knoxville marble were never
carved. These features, therefore, seem unduly heavy and bare. But on
the whole there is 6 'consistent and rather Byzantine luxury such as
Richardson had only been able to imitate in paint with La Farge's help
at Trinity. The carving of the string courses and capitals is rather
fresh and Pre-Raphaelite in design. In execution the finish is not high
enough, however, and what in sandstone would be accepted as strength
and ruggedness, in marble appears crudity and even incompetence.
The pre-existing difficulties were so great in carrying out the Senate
Chamber that it is a pity Richardson did not elsewhere have as ample
resources The use of colours is -not pyrotechnic as at Woburn. The
richness of effect can be compared very favorably with the boiled-
vegetable dullness of tone in Eidlitz' Assembly Chamber, begun and
finished slightly earlier. The Assemb~ly Chamber was a much larger
room with four enormous columns in the corners. It is undoubtedly
more monumental in general design and scale than the Senate
Chamber, even now that the original stone vaulting has been replaced
with a flat beamed ceiling. But the dead neutral masonry is not suffi-
ciently enlivened by the arabesques at tiny scale that are cut in the
stones of the arches and spandrels, nor even by William M. Hunt's
painted lunettes, which are washed out in colour and quite unarchi-
tectural in conception. Eidlitz' work throughout the interior of the
Capitol remains Victorian Gothic in spirit and is quite lacking in the
suavity of Richardson's.
Richardson carried out some other work at the Capitol in the years
before 1883. In the Executive Chamber the fireplace bears the date
1880. The Court of Appeals was finished, like the Senate Chamber,
in 1881. This has now been transported bodily into a wing especially
built for it on the rear of the old State Hall. Both of these fine rooms
are less varied in colour and naturally less monumental than the Senate
Chamber. The walls are panelled in rich brown oak, not as yet to be
described as golden, with only a very little marble and onyx. Most of


A Great American Architect: Leopold Eidlitz
Eccolsiastical a~nd Domestic Work
by Montgomery Schuyler

(In The Architectural record. v.24, p.164-
179, Sept. 1908; p.277-292, Oct. 1908; P.365-
378, Nov. 1908, illus.)


Avlyterttp tera SWecotb
Vol. XXIV. SEP'KE1TBER, 1908. No. 3.

Copyright, 1908, by **Tar ARacrloruarnar. Itsonao Coursur." AhIg ~hte reserved.
Satlered My SS, 190, asr second-clagermntter, Post Omece at New Yorkr, N. Y., Act of Congress of so Marab 184,t9

Leopold Eidlitz Ji-cd in.~_;T\ Now Yrk,
March 22, 4908, having for a year and
a half, since the death of Frederick
Diaper, enjoyed, or at least held, the
melancholy distinction of the "dean"~ of
his guild in New 'York, and probably in
the United States. His active career,
from the building of St. George's, in
1848, covered almost half a century-
an active and fruitful half-century in
the history of American architecture.
He might almost have said, paraphras-
ing Grattan on the Irish Parliament,
that he had rocked the cradle of the
Gothic revival and that he had followed
its hearse.- The time when he began was
the time when the Gothic revival was
beginning to enlist most of the intellect
.and a still larger share of the enthus-
iasm of American architects, as it con-
tinued to do for many years. -Counting
in the Romanesque with the Gothic re-
vival, one may say that it lasted for a
full generation. It is a rather pathetic
proof of the desuetude, innocuous or
otherwise, -into which it has fallen, that
Professor Hamlin, enumerating, in the
Architectural Riecord the other month,
the best-deserving of American archi-
tects, quite forgot to include the name
of Upjohn, whom, just a-bout a genera-
tion ago, the "American 'Architect," then
at its beginning, acclaimedd as "the
Father of American architecture."
vixere fortes ante Agamemnona
Multi; sed omnes illacrimabiles
Urg ont ignotique longa
Let the present chronicler, far as he is
from Horace's requirement of a "vated
sacer," do what he can to rescue one of
them. At least a survey of a career so
typical ought to have its interest'
* *
Mr. Eidlitz was born in Prague,
M~iarch 29, 48_823L 'He never~forgot
his birthplace. Reminicenes of the

Mloldau kept recurring in his work .by
tleIidson. As the towers of the Dry
Dock Savings Bank and of the Clergy
House of St. George's and such lesser
erections as the "institutional" top of a
commercial building survive to attest,
he remembered, "super flumina Baby-
lonis,'',he Te picturesque "Pulverthurm"
and the picturesque bridge head of his
'native city, even though combined with
reminiscences of the Nassauerhaus in
Nuremberg.~ These things came back
to him as admissible motives in far dif-
ferent erections. His schooling, after
he had outgrown the available facili-
ties of Prague, was transferred to the
Vienna Polytechnic, but it was not yet
a. distinctly architectural education.
There is and long has been a spe-
cially close connection in Vienna be-
tween the science and the art of build-
ing, elsewhere so harshly divorced to
their mutual disadvantage: There the
"Society of Architects and Engineers"
is a single institution. Certainly no
builder of our times has striven more
earnestly and persistently than Mr. Eid-
litz to reunite the two, as they were
united in the Middle Ages, to base ar-
chitecture upon science and to infect
engineering with art. But he did
not resort to Vienna to study archi-
tecture. He was destined or had des-
tined himself to the calling of a land-
steward, within whose jurisdiction
might come the erection of sundry hum-
'ble and utilital-ian classes of buildings
called for in the administration of an
estate. It was while engaged in learning
how to do these that his imagination
took fire at the possibility opened before
him of doing worthier and larger things.
From the time when this possibility
opened upon him, he was already in in-
tention an architect. He was not yet
quite come to his majority when, in
I843, he landed in New York, and he

A Great American Architect: Leopold Eidlitz

Ecclesiasticat-and Domestic Work

Stuyvesant Square, N~ew Yorkc. Blesch & Eidlitz, Architects.


hastened to offer his draughtsmanship
to the local architect whose work most
appealed to him. Necessarily, in view
of his endowment and his equipment,
this was Richard UpT~john I
Trinity, the first and still so far from
the worst of the monuments of the
Gothic revival, was already well under
way, and the drawings for it all done,

opportunity presented itself in the new
St. G~eorge's, migrating from Beekman
Street~ to Stuyvesant Square, and the
firm ~of~ Ble~s~ch and _Eidlitz, a young Ba-
varian and a young Bohemian, was
formed, very likely "ad hoc." I think
theyr did nothing else together, and their
co-operation in this did not go beyond
the preparation of the drawings. As

Stuyvesant Square, New York. -' Blesch & Eidlitz, Architects.
but the young ~Bohemian found some to these, the junior partner long after-
;work in the office of the Anglican archi- wards declared that it was difficult to
tect. He could not in any sense be de- apportion the credit. "The exterior ~was
scribed as Upjohn's pupil. He never mnainly his, the in~te~rio~,r m.ain ly mine."
assimilated the "Auglican" architectural But thle senior partner fell ill and was
tradition. But he never, to the day of disabled almost immediately, and the
his own death, ceased to regard his first work was entirely executed under the
and only American "patron" with affec- superintendence of the junior, who was
tionate veneration. The employment the only architect of the church recog-
avas not of long duration, for~a "'Gothic" nized by its authorities andl in relation



with them. But without doubt the brief
association wyas of great advantage to
him. Blesch, a Grand Prix of Munich,
had the regular architectural training
which the junior partner lacked, but
the results of which his eager and studi-
ous mind soon absorbed. Both partners
were penetrated with enthusiasm for
the South German phase of the Gothic
or more properly the Romanesque re-

VTery likely Trinity offered the only
other specimen. But the slender crock-
eted cone of Trinity was a familiar and
well-precedented formn, compared with
these bold skeletons of stone. The rear
is quite as successful in its way as the
front, after the form so copiously pre-
cedented in the parent style, though the
immediate prototype appears to be. the
apse of Trier. (Fig- 3.) The Sides, on

Stuyvesant Square, New York. Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.

vivaL Evidently enough German the re-
sult of their labors was, and in sharp
contrast to -the Anglicanism of Trinity,
Evidently successful the result still is,
though the front has long since-lost the
open spires which were its crowning or-
nament, and which were taken down
some twenty years ago, after a fire
which had compelled the reconstruction
of the interior. (Fig. 2.) A spire of
any' kind in solid masonry was rare
enough in N~ew York six-ty years ago.

the other hand, suffer from a monotony
which seems to have been entirely avoid-
able. The simple "hallenartige" lay-out
of the interior as a large divided
room, besides being economical, may
very likely have been due to the insist-
ence of the rector that it should be
"evangelical." For Dr. Tyng was an
insistent "'evangelical," to whom a
church was primarily a meeting house,
a place in which to preach and to be
preached to, or even at. Long drawn


Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.


aisles and fretted vaults did not conduce
to this function, nor perhaps the tran-
septs which his .architect never willingly
omitted from any subsequent church.
~Moreover, they were objectionable as
savoring of Popery, .as very likely the
nave and aisles of Trinity savored in his
mind. His architect used long after-
wards to tell how he.insisted that his
'icommunion-table" should not be mis-
takable for -an "altar." "Make me a
table, do you understand, a table that I
can -cvalk around and see -under." Espe-

tuted an interior feature as novel and
startling in its way as the exterior
feature of the open spires. But these
galleries were of such importance that
they really -demanded :exterior. expres-
sion by a subdivision of those tall undi-
vided windows of the flank which entail
upon it its monotony. Evidently the
monotony would have been relieved ef-
fectively by a subdivision of the win-
dows, with a double or even a single
opening under the gallery and the un-
divided window above it. Such a di-

cially the good Evangelical had no more
use for s-ijports encumbering the floor
and obstructing vision than he had for
storied windows richly shedding a
dim religious -light, and would not have
such in his meeting house. As a result
he got, as the church was originally
built, hanging galleries supported by
bracketing anchored into the buttresses,
-though, as reconstructed after the dire,
slender posts were substituted for the
brackets (Fig. 4). As first built,
these galleries, which were of Mr.
Eidlitz's devising and design, consti-

vision would have removed the chief ar-
chitectural blemish on what is and would
be even with wore faults, one of our
most seemly and dignified New York
churches, inside and out.

The popular success of St. George's
was immediate and striking and with
that success the young architect found
himself fairly launched as a Gothic prac-
titioner. In 1850 and for years after-
wards, to be a Gothic architect was to
be a church architect. R~ich~a~d jpjohn
hidiiself, the pione~erstfGothic, when he


A1 li 1

71 TrlitIl dnlltKIC,


whereas in the former you had a build-
ing with architecture adjoined to it, "in
true Gothic, so long as you find two
stones together, you find architecture."
But in those earliest days, he found no
client to help him realize his dreams,
and -perforce did churches. -He did
some thirty of them, more, he mentioned
once, than he did houses. In those
days, indeed, hardly anybody thought of

had a secular building to do, as in the
old Trinity Building and the~ old Corn
Exchange Bank, lapsed into some mild
and discreet mode of the Renaissance.
But nobody ever accused Leopold Eidlitz
of lacking the courage of his convic-
tions. "Gothic he used to maintain,
"is adequate to evrery~exp~region," and
be strove to "make it so." I remember
Joseph Sands, of Renwick and Sands,

Leopold Eldlitz, Architct.

himself a convinced Gothicist and au-
thor of such a home of ritual as St. Al-
ban's, saying to him, "I don't believe
you could design a Corinthian capital."
The rejoinder, though but of a word,
cannot be done justice to without capi-
tals-"DESIGN!" And, in one of the
discussions with Riichardson to which I
was privileged to listen, he designated
the essential difference between classic
and mediaeval work by saying th~at

invoking an' architect for. a .city ,house.
Almost everybody was content with.a
ready-to-live-in habitation. It was only
in suburban and country houses that the
architect came in at all. It seems to me
that I have already told in these- col-
umns, without his name, how Mks. Eid-
litz once didi a house near Bridgeport
for Barnum, house long since consumed
by fire, a house for which the drawings
were ordered through an agent, in which


Brooklyn, N. Y. Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.

the architect undertook the architectural
expression of Humbug, mainly in lath
and plaster, and succeeded, as he found
on visiting the executed work long
after, beyond his wildest dreams. In
the same spirit of mischief which had
inspired the design, he rang the door-
bell, which was answered by the show-
man in person. The visitor, professing
admiration for the edifice, inquired the
-name of the architect, and was informed
that the architecture was the result of a
cosmopolitan competition, had cost the
showman $Io,ooo. "No it didn't," re-
torted the actual designer, whereto the
showman, with a presence of mind which
at once explained and justified his suc-
cess 2n humbug, softly queried, "Is your
name Eidlitz ?"
In such domestic work as he did seri-
ously and not, like the lath domes of
"Jranistan," in a spirit of hilarity or of
mockery, he took for his prototype the
Swiss chilet as the highest development
of timber construction, superposing the
timberwork on a basement of rough
stone or of half-timbered construction
with brickwork, once at least, in the
pretty cottage at E~ng~lewood combining
all three (Fig. 5) with an excellent ef-
fect. Of the half-timbered construction
illustrated in the other cottage in New
Jersey (Fig. 6) he related that he once
designed a house, I think in Springfield,
Mass., and on visiting the result long aft-
erwards found that the ingenious Yan-
kee carpenter had saved himself trouble
by building a brick house and tacking
on the timber framework by way of

applied ornament. An interesting exam-
ple of mere carpentry is the Hamiltoc
Ferry House in Brooklyn, still standing
after more than half a century, but
shorn of much of its original effect by
the removal of the more decorative fea-.
tures of the interior, and especially by
repainting the interior in equable drab,
where originally the construction had
been effectively emphasized by the ap-
plication of color. (Fig. 7.) Even in
its present partly dismantled and partly
obliterated state, the ferry house is an
effectively picturesque object with its
verl~bold timb _~~gd90k..projati ovr
~~h-~~lsl ~ ~ ~ nt o h.trn, and ity
triplet o~f gables and em~httff~mt~
on theTand-front. TIs not prassmg it
to TigryTt Ts-i~not praising it highly
enough to say that it remains the most
intretigarchitecturally, of the fery
fR~oi'~~~f l~cutso r accssrs e een
overlaid by concealing coats of shin-
gles or of sheet-metal, and tormented
into a factitious picturesqueness by the
addition of superfluous features. An-
other rather remarkable.piece of car-
pentry is the timber roof of a hundred
feet clear span, with which, ma~ny years
later, he covered Tompkins ~Market,
after two previous roofs had failed. All
these works were- expositions of the
mechanical facts of the case, as indeed
.was the case with his work in general,
whatever the material. But the skele-
tonizing facilitated by an expressive
treatment of wood, as of metal, makes
the exposition more immediately appre-
hensible than in masses of masonry.

;9~~n~.ll ~712e~n~Y;1 ;4~~11~TZS67. -r7r

While the Church of the Holy Trinity,
at Madison Avenue and Forty-second
Street, still stood, and while its organist,
Mr. Samuel P. Warren, was giving re-
citals on the excellent instrument there-
in, an unmusical auditor observed, "I
would rather hear a lecture on that

of the Union League Club, when that
decoration was new and a lion, I
remarked the treatment of the king-posts
in the ceiling of the dining room as col-
umns with capitals and bases complete,
as looking somehow wrong. The ra-
tional architect's comment was: "To ap-

Greenwich, ConD. Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.

roof," the roof being, as we shall see,
the chief feature of the interior. That
remark would have saddened or irritated
the architect, who would have thought
his work a failure if it did not "lecture
on" itself. On the other hand, going
with him once to look at the decoration

preciate the entire iniquity of the ar-
rangement, you are to bear in mind that
that member is not a compression-piece,
but a tension-piece."
* *"
But about the -church-building. The
impulse to the Gothic revival in this


country came from the Protestant Epis-
copal Church, and was necessarily "An-
glican." The Anglican tradition meant
little to a German, for whom its associa-
-tions did not exist, nor much, compara-
tively,- to a logician, who naturally and
necessarily rated its historical examples
below those of France and of the great
Gernian example which carried the logic
of Gothic to its uttermost development.
Accordingly the early churches of Eid-
litz became,r:and I find remain, rather

a country parish church, and these at-
tributes- are commonly to be found in
the works of the architect. The open
timbered ceiling of Christ Church in St.
Louis, doubtless his most successful
church,. is some 27 feet higher than the
.vaulted ceiling of Trinity in New York,
which has a much greater length. St.
Peters has been partly rebuilt since, in
consequence of a fire, though most -sym-
pathetically, .and by the architect's own
son. Otherwise, or even so, I should

Oth Avenue and 84th Street, New York. Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.
rocks of offense to the Anglicans. The be glad to show here a photograph of it.
very success of St. Geor~ge's-designated But. the Congregational Church at
its author as the architect of the Evan-- Greenwich, Conn., to which the ecclesio-
gelicals rather than of the Ecclesiasti- logical tradition does not apply, an
cals.- One of its earliest successors, St. erection of r857, I am able herewith to
Peter's, W~estchester, completed in 1853, exhibit, as it looks in the summer of
might be stipposed to be a churchlyy" 1908. (Fig. 8.) When I first saw it,
church. But the insistence upon the more than a generation ago, and had no
transeptual arrangement, and the insist- means of determining its authorship,
ence upon height, even at the expense of excepting "infallible inference," it struck
other dimensions, would -discommend it me by its indigenous and homegrown
to the Anglican, with his preference- and vernacular aspect. In spite of the
for the "long drawn aisle," especially for unmistakably academic, German acad-


emic, window traceries, the- general
treatment, even the treatment of the
open spire was, and is, so unacademic. It
seemed as if an inspired village mason,
aided, or even possibly impeded, byr a
manual of German geometric Gothic,
had piled up stone, in straightforward
pursuance of "a refined building pur-
pose." And so it strikessne again when
revisited for the purpose of this article.

ing to the surroundings, must, indeed,
have seemed more incongruous with the
Greenwich of 1857 than it seems with
the Greenwich of 1908. So large and
massive a church was a great undertak-
ing for Greenwich half a century ago.
There is, just beyond this Congregation-
al Church, a very typical and extremely
pretty Episcopal church, contemporary
with it, from the designs of one of the

St. Louis, Mo. : Leopold Efdlitz, Architect.

One .might possibly detect in the renun-
ciations of the finished work, the point
of its author's remark upon IVr. Up-
john's design of the Church- of- thie Pil-
grims, in Brooklyn, to which he himself
made a picturesque addition: "He did
it conscientiously, upon the ground that
Presbyterians were not entitled to archi-
tecture." But one prefers to think not.
It is more to the point to remark that the
design shows no intention of conform-

most accomplished of -the Anglican re--
vivalists, Mi~r.- Frank Wills, -almost the
perfection of an- English parish -church.-
The contrast is instructive. The Arigli-
can edifice nestles in the valley. T~he
Teutonic presentation of Congregation-
alism domineers from the hill, with ex-
cellent effect in its own way, which is
not at all the way of the other. Mr.
Eidlitz's work has lately been extended
by Mr. Tubby through the addition of

Madison Avenue and 42d Street, N~ew York. Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.

A t~I~raTta -Amb~EITCA AR~FTCHITECT ------ 9

any of its predecessors, was the Church
of the Holy Trinity, at Madison Avenue
and Forty-second Street, in New York.
(Fig. 11.) The rector of Holy Trinity
was the son and namesake of the rector
of St. George's, was that Stephen H.
Tyng, Jr., even "lower" than the senior
of that ilk, of whom a ribald said, the
time he resigned his charge to take an
insurance agency in Paris, that this tran-
sition from fire to life insurance was
startlingly sudden. His congregation
had for some years worshipped in a very
pretty little wooden cottage ornee by
Wrey Mould on the same site when Mr.
Eidlitz was commissioned to supplant it
with a larger and more durable audi-
torium. The demand for "auditoriums"
had infected much more churchlyy"
congregations, for it was just about then
that the elder Upjohn had taken the
Octagon of Ely as the prototype for the
new St. Thomas's upon the ground that
a congregation, or rather an audience,
could be better "accommodated" in that
form than in the long drawn aisle. Mr.
Eidlitz's solution was much more radi-
cal. He devised, as he put it, "a the-
atre with ecclesiastical details." The
ground plan of his auditorium was an
ellipse, appearing, or rather not appear-
mng, mna piece of elliptical wall on one
side, the outwardly invisible north side,
but elsewhere inscribed in the parallelo-
gram of the site, sometimes tangent to
the outer walls and sometimes marked
by screens of columns. Of course the
arrangement involved a failure of exter-
ior expression, to which the architect
found himself forced to submit. He
had once schemed a double-apsed clere-
story, such as some of the.great Rhen-
ish abbeys show, for a project for a new
Plymouth church for Beecher, project
wYhich was finally quashed by the great
preacher's saying, characteristically,
"What's the use ? After me, you'll get
nobody to fill it." Waiving the lack of
correspondence between the outside and
the inside of the Church of the Holy
Trinity, the result was an interesting
exterior and a far more interesting in-
terior. Since the curve of the auditorium
left no walls for the clerestory to stand
on, this was lighted by the tall dormers

a chapel at the rear, and in a very skill-
ful and sympathetic way. And there
are very few towns of the size of Green-
wich which have three churches so well
worth looking at inl their several kinds,
as these two, and a third designed by
Mr. Cady for the Presbyterian worship.
The old Tabernacle in Broadway was,
as to its exterior, perhaps entitled to
higher praise than that of solid dignity.
(Fig. 9.) The interior, however, before
its reconstruction by the removal of the
columns, had interest and character. In
fact, Mr. Eidlitz's interiors, especially'
his church interiors, were almost sure
to be more interesting than the outsides.
One of them never lacked some terminal
feature focus and cynosure to draw
the eye. In the case of the Tabernacle,
this was an elaborate erection in carved
oak framing and including the pulpit.
Christ Church in St. Louis, after-
wards the Episcopal Cathedral, is in
effect contemporary with these, since the
plans were drawn and accepted in 1859,
though the exigencies of a border city
in war-time did not allow of the com-
pletion of the church before 1867.
(Fig. Io.) This, you will perceive, is
of a very different inspiration from the
others, even from that other which is
of the same denomination, being pri-
marily ecclesiastical, not primarily evan-
gelical. Naturally, it gains correspond-
ingly in effect, having the cathedral
complement of nave and aisles and tran-
septs and clerestory, and the open tim-
ber ceiling excepted, being carried out
in solid masonry. The Anglicans joined
in the acclamation of this work as a bril-
liant success, including so impeccably
Anglican a critic as Charles KingsleyE
who found it "the most churchly" church
he had seen in America. When it was
built it had no superior in the country,
and no rival in the West, as it cannot
have many rivals yet. Without doubt
it is its author's masterrpiece in the
stricter kindi of church architecture-a
piece of skillful-and scholarly Gothic in
which the scholarliness by no means ex-
cludes individuality.
In quite another kind, being a rever-
sion to the evangelical "auditorium,"
and a much more radical version than


5th Avenue and 486 Street, Newr York. Leopold Eldlitz, Architect.


relate that, under a subsequent adminis-
tration, the congregation went to work
to reconstruct the interior, and even in-
vited the original architect to submit
plans for the reconstruction. He de-
clined upon the ground that none of the


arranged in the roof itself, to the com-
plication and the interest of which the
framing of them much contributed. The
roof was in fact carried from end to
end of the longer axis of the ellipse by
a great truss in timber on either side,

5th Avenue and 48d Street, New York, Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.

which rested at the ends on massive
granite piers, exhibited and decorated.
As an auditorium, the interior was, I
believe, entirely successful, while archi-
tecturally it w~as certainly impressive and
even churchlyy" in spite of the theatri-
cal sweep of the galleries. It is sad to

things they wished to do was worth
doing. Certainly none of the things
they did was worth doing. They cut
down the high windows of the apse, to
the artistic destruction of that feature.
They covered up with walnut mouldings
the exposed granite piers which so dis-


tinctly asserted their function. In short
they converted a construction full of
purpose and character into a meaning-
less and characterless sham. And all
this under the impression that they were
making the interior "more Gothic," a
pretension which the rector avowed in
the address he made upon the comple-
tion of the alterations, and which de-
noted an insufficient sense of the distine-
tion, between the Goths and the Van-
dals. It was really a relief when the
poor thing was put out of its misery by
being demolished, though it is a pity that
there is no photograph available which
represents so interesting and so sadly
misconceived an architectural achieve-
ment. The less interesting exterior ex-
pression of it is available. At once up-
on its completion the ever-ready New
York nomenclator, the same who had
dubbed Wrey Mould's Unitarian
Church in Fourth Avenue "The Church
of the Holy Zebra," or his legitimate
successor, stigmatized it as "The Church
of the Homely Oilcloth," and careless
New Y~ork in g-eneral let it go at that.
Wrey Mould and Eidlitz, by the way,
though antipodean in their respective
attitudes towards life, and in everything
else excepting their common love for
Gothic architecture, were sympathetic
even when competitive. I have just
come across, in the file of "The Crayon,"
for 1856, -an enthusiastic article by Eid-
litz upon Wirey Mould's design for the
Unitarian Church, and another,, from
the same pen, on Wrey Mould's design
for that new church of Beecher's, en-
thusiastic `artistically, though deeming
R. MI/. Hunt's design the most practical
meeting of the Plymouth Church re-
quirements. And the respectable and
responsible Bohemian -greatly:enjoyed a
compliment from the-Bohemian and ir-
responsible Anlglican which was repeat-
ed to him-: "Eidlitz is death on form;
but I'm hell -on color." "The Church
of the Oilcloth," homely or- otherwise,
was as wide of the fact as most popular
epigrams. The brick mosaic was as
mere a detail in the mind of the designer
of the later church as the striping in red
and white had been in that of the earlier.
Its novelty gave it an undue importance

in the eyes of the casual beholder. In
fact, it was entirely successful where it
was removed far enough from the eye,
as in the main tower and the apse, and
even at the top of the smaller tower.
But in the field of the side wall, by
some optical illusion which the architect
had not foreseen, the diaper of yellow,
brown and blue, in juxtaposition to the
field of the wall, produced a zig-zag
which gave the look of confusion and
weakness. This old photograph, by the
presence of the one-storied shops in the
foreground, which the irony of fate has
preserved when what was so much bet-
ter worth preserving has passed away,
recalls that the architect of the church~
made an offer to the "Vanderbilt archi-
tect," the architect of the shops, the re-
spectable but not illustrious Mr. Snook,
to design the shop fronts for nothing,
in order to bring them into some sort of
grouping \vith the church. The offer
failed, but not by reason of any reluct-
ance on the part of the other practition~-
er, only by reason of a pressure of
time under which he could not accord
the necessary "three weeks" for archi-
tecturalizing the shops and bringing
them into relations with the church. A
much more important project failed,
with results we must still find deplorable,
when, through a common friend, Mr.
Eidlitz endeavored to transmit to Mr.
Roebling, the engineer of the East River
Bridge, an offer to model, gratuitously
and out of pure interest in the great
work, the towers of that structure. The
friend declined to convey the proposal,
fearing to wound the susceptibilities of
the engineer. It was a great pity, for
the work the architect volunteered to
do was work he was pre-eminently qual-
ified, to -do. If he had done it, the tow-
ers would not now stand as disgraces
to the airy fabric that -swings between

Still more "out of line" with the usual
employment of a church architect, than
the church of the- Holy Trinity, or than
any Christian church or conventicle
whatsoever, was the Jewish synagogue
in Fifth Avenue, which is the most con-
spicuo~us and probably the most meri-

torious of the works of its author which
still stand in New York. (Fig. 12.)
The convention that the architecture of
a synagogue should be Oriental was al-
ready forty years ago fully enough es-
'tablis~hed, but it -had not resulted in
many noteworthy works. It was at any
rate, desirable that a synagogue should
be distinguished from a Christian
church,- while yet Christian architecture
contained what the architect of this
synagogue regarded -as the only avail-
able :repertory of constructions suit-
able for so elaborate a -work. The
temple is an -attempt -accordingly to
combine Gothic structure with Saracenic
decoration, including in that term carved
and moulded as well as colored orna-
ment. It was a very bold attempt, but
it was justified by the event. The at-
tempt is proclaimed in the front, the
setting of a nave of which the central
feature is a rose window of Gothic
tracery in a pointed recess between mn-
areted towers, culminating its buttresses
with minareted pinnacles, surmounting
it with an arcade that is in effect an
emphatic belt, and a hipped roof, instead
of the gable that was to be expected,
and laying stress throughout on the hori-
zontal and comparatively slurring the
vertical lines which would have denoted
it as Gothic. The emphasis is deepened
by the wide space between the nave
and its finaking towers, and by the ex-
tremely pretty flying bridges that con-
nect them with it. There is an
academic incongruity in all this, doubt-
less, but it is altogether of the letter,
not at all of the spirit. The fusion
of styles is real and complete, not
only in the exterior, but in the in-
terior where occur such technical
incompatibilities as a regular rouni
arched ;triforium amid Alhambresque
decoration, and minarets crowned with
Gothic foliated finials; The exterior is,
known to all New -Yorkers, of course,
but the interior is. even better wmorh
knowing. (Fig. 13.) Wha~twas meant
to be .its culminating feature, the light
gallery over the ark at the east end,

lighted from invisible openings at its
ends, is now marred of its original ef-
fect, being filled with organ pipes,
which also produce a pretty effect,
though by no means the effect the de-
signer intended. The color decoration,
however, which was not crude even
when the temple was opened, has been
delightfully mellowed since, by time,
and, though entirely in positive colors,
it makes the intended effect of the .result-
ant tint.."Some decorators mix colors in
the pot," the architect used to say, "and
others on the walls." Doubtless in theory
the juxtaposition of positive colors, pro-
ducing the desired "tone," has the ad-
vantage of far more vividness and fire.
George Inness once proposed to himself
to paint landscape with the three primar-
ies alone, though he was mercifully
withheld from the actual attempt. Seem-
ingly it is in a large part a question of
optics. To one eyesight the colors will
blend at a distance from which, to an-
other, they stand out in all their native
crudity. But for most spectators this
decoration in the Temple Emanu-el is
very successfully blended. On the other
han~d those who remember the ceiling of
the Assembly Chamber as it was, re-
member that the density of the design
was not sufficient to induce the blending,
and that the colors remained crude in
effect, in spite, or even in part because,
of the relief which did undoubtedly en-
hance their liveliness. In the archi-
tect's own drawing-room, on the other
hand, he made the experiment of giving
force to the color by modelling the plas-
ter in relief and here, on so much small-
er a scale, with entire success, and
with even a greater advantage to the life
of the decoration than a fabric woven
in colors has over one printed. In any
case, the interior of the temple is a beau-
tiful success, one of the most notable
interiors in New York, while exteriorly
the main entrance is one of -the -most
interesting repertoires in New York .of
decorative detail and the porch at the
rear one of the most picturesque and
sketchable "bits."
Montgomzery Schuzyler.

4~1~1. e~ujc-I;

That synagogue in Fifth Avenue, of
which we have just been talking, is
especially memorable to the present
chronicler, because it led to his per-
sonal acquaintance with the author,
about the most interesting acquaintance
he has made in the whole course of his
lIfe. I was present at the dedication 0f
the synagogue, just fortUI years ago.
And I made it the occasion of my d~but
in architectural criticism for the
"World," with which I was connected;
Manton Marble's "World," the Pre-
Pulitizerian "World," "The World Be-
fore the Deluge." "N~e pas confondre."
It was not: a very good specimen of
architectural criticism, I have to own,
having just now read it over, but I can
by no means regret it, since it led to
a meeting, and that began in an alterca-
tion which became a friendship, and on
my side a pupilage.
My obvious point of attack was the
solecism of the cruciform plan for a
synagogue, and I' workedd that for much
more than it was worth. But I am glad
to observe that the "effort" attested the
hearty admiration for other and earlier
works by the same author which the
jaunty young critic felt. For the
American Exchange Bank and the Con-
tinental Bank and the Produce Ex-
change and the Brooklyn Academy of
Music were already standing, though
they are all gone now; had been stand-
ing when he arrived from "up the State,"
prepared to be astonished and ravished
by the architectural glories of New
York, and found that for the most part
they left him cold; that it seemed to
him,: though the phrase cannot have
come in for a generation, that they were
one and all "putting up a front." Even
Trinity, which, as a youth of "Anglican"
upbringing he was prepared unreserved-
ly to admire, he found essentially in
the same class with the lonic colon-
nade of the Custom House further
down Wall Street, a harmonious assem-

blage of forms which had been har-
monized- by secular association, a form
language which was capable of being
grammaticised by the very fact of
being dead, an architecture of the
past which bore no earnest of be-
coming an architecture of the future.
But: these few exceptional works at-
tracted the novice "addicted to swear-
ing to the words of no master,"
by the fact of reality and life. They
seemed not to be historical evocations,
but solutions of the present building
problems in terms of the present, things
made out of their own elements and for
their own purposes, really bank, ex-
change or theatre, as the case might
be, works that were of no style and that
yet had style. "A thing has style," says
Viollet-le-Due, "when it has the expres-
sion appropriate to its uses." And, from
this point of view, it was much in favor
of these things that they were not "ex-
amples," like Trinity and like the Cus-
tom Houses. Be it remembered that
they antedated, sometimes by a decade,
sometimes by two decades, the few sub-
sequent successes of secular Gothic, Mr.
Wight's Academy of Design and Brook-
lyn Mercantile Library, Mr. Cady's
Brooklyn Academy of Design, and, if
you can call collegiate architecture secu-
lar,Mr.Haight's buildings for Columbia,
and for the General Theological Semin-
ary and Mr. Potter's for the Union The-
ological Seminary. For, long before the
series of his ecclesiastical works were
concluded, in fact, not very long :after it
was begun, the author of them had a
chance to try his hand. on secular build-
ings. Probably these problems were
more welcome to him than the churches,
in which, by the necessity of the case,
tradition governed, even though, as we
have seen, the prevailing Anglican tra-
dition did not govern him, and he neither-
inherited nor really assimilated it. Rea-
son was to him the guide of life, the
guide in art. He knew no other. A~nd

The Wiork of Leopold Eidlitz
II--Commercial and Public


(The fist Jireproof commercial building in New York.)
Broadway, NWew York. Leopold Eidlitz, Architect.





th~e logical shortcomings of English
Gothic, in comparison with "Continen-
tal," shortcomings which he took an un-
sparing pleasure in pointing out and

which he himself did not partake. "By
all means an architect ought to read
Ruskin," he said once; "it helps him
keep his enthusiasm." Th~at was the

James K. Wilson, Architect.

analyzing,fwould hlave prevented him
from taking that as a standard, espe-
cially from substituting for reason a
traditional anid hereditary "feeling" of

value he set on "the most analytic mind
in Europe." One sees why he should
have worked more freely upon secular
than upon ecclesiastical problems, nee-


essarily of tradition as the latter so
largely. are. His whole lifework was
devoted to what seemed to his mind the
rationalization of architecture, and it
was a remarkably clear and vigorous
mind. He would perfectly have-agreed
hvith that bold literary reformer of arch-
itecture, Viollet-le-Due, whom, charac-

might be expected from what we have
said, it is a far more important and
pregnant work. It also had the distinc-
tion of being the first fireproof building
erected for commercial purposes in New
York, unless an exception be made of
the then new and now doubly old
and demolished Times Building. The
problem of the commercial building
wras so different then and now that
the I\ we things are incommensurable.
Then the limit of ascension of the un-
assisted human leg fixed the height of
a commercial building at ~five stories.
An attical sixth, lighted from holes in
the cornices, might be added for the so-
called "accommodation" of the janitor's
family, assumed to be immune from leg-
weariness and incurious of the outer-
world. But then, as now, "the prayer
of Ajax was for light," Ajax being the
hypothetical tenant. Ajax wanted all
the light there was, and more than could
decently be afforded, compatibly with
the aspect or the reality of solidity in
the walls. His requirement can plainly
be more easily fulfilled in a steel-franIfed
building than in a building with real
walls of masonry. The problem of the
old-fashioned commercial architect, if
he happened to be an artist, was to make
his building look solid, and at the same
time to satisfy the demands of Ajax.
Nobody who saw the American Ex-
change Bank in course of demolition
but will agree that its construction was
characterized by great massiveness in
fact. Its ruins looked Roman. Nobody
who remembers its -aspect "in life" will
deny that it was characterized by great
massiveness in appearance; yet, its archi-
tect used to point out, the proportion of
avoids to solids in its facades was greater
than in the adjoining building on
Broadway, the then abode of the Mutual
Life, an effusion from the mtise' -per-
haps of Kellum, at any r-ate a perfectly
commonplace front which looked like a
pasteboard screen, whereas the bank was
an unmistakable mass of masonry.- So
far, the bank was a great success. But
it was still more a success by the ar-
rangement and the detail of its fenes-
tration, which made it an architectural
composition, and more yet by its crown-

Nassau Street, New York.
teristically, hie found "too timid," that
"we can bring the taste of this -genera-
tion to perfection by making it reason."

His first essay in secular work, the
American Exchange Bank, was contem-
poraneous, or almost so, with the Broad-
way Tabernacle, since destroyed. As


ing member, the beetling cornice in solid
stone which would have seemed exces-
sive at that time even in a sham of
sheet metal. A visible roof the architect
always insisted upon where he could get
it. But where, as in these banks, it was
clearly out of the question, he strove to
compensate its absence by the most em-
phatic cornice he could contrive. "Rich-
ardson," he exclaimed longa afterwards,

ous and sensitive pilgrim from Cincin-
nati, M~r. James Ki. Wilson, who two
years or so later reproduced its essen-
tial qualities hi a warehouse in that
city, reproduced them with improve-
ments. The cornice seems at first
sight to be identical in the two, but
that is not quite the case. It is in-
telligently modified by the light furnish-
ed from studying the prototype in actual

City Hall Park, New York.

in the collaboration of the Capitol,
'"what that cornice of yours needs is not
more height, but more projection and
~greater vigor of modeling." Projection
and vigor of modeling were certainly
:not wanting to the cornice of these two
Compared with anything that then
stood on Broadway, the American
Exchange Bank was a great advance,
It so impressed itself on an ingenu-

execution. The architect of the later
building had a larger area than the
earlier at his disposition, and employed
it effectively in giving greater. detach-
ment and relief to his corner pavilions,
while his ground floor, being that of a
warehouse and not a bank, owes nothing
to the prototy-pe, and is as original as it
is effective. Indeed, at every point he
seems to have bettered his instruction.
The later building has shared the fate


of the earlier in being demolished, or at
least altered bey-ond recognition, and
survives nowY only in this photograph
sent to the architect of the earlier as an
act of homagoe.
The Continental Bank was its author's
second essay in commercial btuild-
ing. There could be no question
that, architecturally, the second showed
a very great advance. The appearance
of 2nassiveness and solidity is common

spective kinds. The effect was as satis-
factory as it was novel and striking. It
mayi still be seen, in spite of the demolit-
tionn of the buildings in which it first ap-
peared, in the interior of Mr. Eidlitz's
addition to the Tweed court house, al-
though here the supports and frames as
well as the panels are of stonework.
Gaertner's Bavarian revival of the
Romanesque was, in some ways, the
starting point of Eidlitz's architec-

Whitehall Street, Ne~w York.

to both.` Aind indeed the reality-of those
qualities everybody will agree. Mr.
Sturgis not long ago in these pages gave
a very interesting account of the treat-
ment of the interior detail, and of -the
devices- to which trhe architect resorted
in a -task in some respects unprecedenrt-
ed.~ The outcome was a framework of
iron supports carrying ceiliugs of stone
slabs, the supports and the soffits of the
ceiling being decorated after their re-

tu~re. N\ew York contains a -tolerable
specimen of it in the Astor Library of
Alexander Saeltzer, which dates from
r850. Fergusson has criticised Gaert-i
ner's version of it, fairly enough, as
"wanting eyebrows." Nobodyl~ could~
criticise either of thesebuildings on that
ground. Contrariwise they show what
Ruskin, speaking of the Palazzo Vecchio
in Florence calls "a solemn frown of
projection." "A mere projecting shelf,"

University of Florida Home Page
© 2004 - 2010 University of Florida George A. Smathers Libraries.
All rights reserved.

Acceptable Use, Copyright, and Disclaimer Statement
Last updated October 10, 2010 - - mvs