S

LETTER IX.

HORT as this series of gossiping letters yet is, parts of it, my dear Sorillah, have been

written in widely different places, and under

very varied circumstances. I begin the present communication tied by a disaster to a sofa, and sighing for a little exercise and fresh air. To be kept from motion, even for a fortnight,-to lose "the bloom and ravishment of spring" for that period, is not a trifle. Like all things, however, it has its good. It is under such circumstances that one discovers the kindness of friends and the value of books. Books,-the wonderful gateway, if I may so speak, by which you get admittance to the past, -the means by which you obtain a knowledge of the great ones of all time, travel to all nations, and become, so to speak, omnipresent. Books will take you from the unpleasant present; sooth, teach, elevate; will bring back what has gone by, and show the way to a glorious future. However, it is not either to lament or to apostrophize that I now take the pen in my hand, but to continue our brief review of the History that has been written by succeeding

nations in Brick and Stone. The pyramids of Egypt, the temples of Greece, the forum and triumphal arches of Rome, the sky-pointing spires of the Middle Ages, the palaces of the Revival, represent and illustrate the mind and manners of the people by whom they were erected, with unquestionable truth and force. Let us, however, continue the journey step by step.

There was one important class of buildings in ancient Rome which I did not mention in my general view of the principal edifices in that city: I mean the Basilica, which are particularly interesting to us, because many of them were converted into Christian churches in the reign of Constantine, and became the model for the earliest edifices that were afterwards expressly built for Christian worshippers. The term basilica, indeed, lost its original signification, and came to mean a church.

The ancient Roman basilica served as a court of law, and an exchange for men of business: it afforded, too, ample space for a fashionable promenade, of which the Romans were fond; but whether or not the Roman ladies ever used it as a place to show their new bonnets, and nod to their friends, as ours do at the " Horticultural," seems uncertain. The term probably came from Greece; but there is not a vestige in that country now of any edifice of the sort. The Greeks called their

second archon, or magistrate, Archon Basileus (basileus was their term for king), and his court was the "basilica." The first basilica in Rome was built by Cato, 184 years B.C. Twenty others were afterwards erected. The ground plan of all these buildings was rectangular; and this area was mostly divided into three parts, consisting of a nave and two side-aisles, each separated from the centre by a single row of columns. Sometimes there was a double row on each side. At one end was the tribunal for the judge, either square or circular, and sometimes this projected from the end as an apsis.

Fig. 20.

You doubtless remember the basilica at Pompeii. Fig. 20 is the plan of such a building; and you will see at once how closely the type has been followed in our churches. The side-aisles, which in the earliest basilicæ were merely open porticoes, were sometimes in two stories, and the upper gallery thus formed served to receive crowds of loiterers. The Basilica Ulpia, or Basilica of Trajan, had two aisles on each side, was roofed with bronze, and was one of the most important works in Rome.

Some scholars deny that the Roman basilica had

its name from Greece; and one, Zestermann, shows that the adjective basilicus was used in Rome as synonymous with eximius and magnificus, and that Cato, in conferring this name on his new building, merely meant to say that it was the royal edifice,— the unparalleled one. I have given an undue space to this class of buildings, but its connection with the structures that followed will serve as a reason.

You must observe, that the Romans introduced a new element into architectural composition, which led to very important results; namely, the ARCH. By means of this they were enabled to span larger openings than they could by placing horizontal stones from column to column, and with very ordinary materials to roof in large areas, and produce very surprising effects. It was long maintained that neither the Egyptians nor the Greeks were acquainted with the properties of the arch. Instances of its use in Egypt, at a very remote period, however, exist.

Sir G. Wilkinson thinks brick arches were used in the tombs as early as 1540 B.C. At Saqqara there is a stone arch ascribed to the year 600 B.C. Perring mentions an arch in the portico of a pyramid at Meroe, which he believes as old as 700 B.C. In the Assyrian marbles of earlier date, now in the British Museum, the arched form will be observed, and there is on one of the slabs even what would seem to be a bridge with arches, as I have already mentioned.

HISTORY OF THE ARCH.

117

Let this be as it may, it is clear that the Egyptians did not make general use of the arch, and the same may be said of the Greeks up to the time of Alexander. The Treasury of Atreus, before alluded to, one of the earliest buildings in Greece, was at first sight supposed to present a perfect example of a vault; but, on minute examination, it was found to be covered by stones lapping one over another, the underside of which had been afterwards cut into a domical shape. Fig. 21 will explain this to you. In

Etruria there is a tomb supposed to date 600 years before our era, which is covered in the same way. In Ireland there are some very early subterranean chambers similarly constructed; for example, New Grange, near Drogheda, which I visited recently, and will describe to you if an opportunity occur. This arrangement of a vault is not of itself a proof that the nations using it were ignorant of the principle of a real arch. The simple fact that Sir Christopher Wren used over-lapping stones in preference