I T A
52
IT A
pies of all the mosques and cloisters of the Dervises, andeverywhere at present in the East, and of all others the mostgeometrical,) is composed of hemispheres and their sectionsonly ; where, as a sphere may be cut in all manner of ways,and that still into circles, it may be accommodated to liej in all positions of the pillars. Let abcd be a cupola,
I or hemisphere, resting upon four pillars, from whence arisethe four vertical arches ; to which the sections, being semi-circles, must join on all sides, whether a b be equal to b c ornot : cut the hemisphere again horizontally, the section willbe an entire circle, touching in the keys of the arches,and G-, h, k, l will be the spandrels, resting upon thepillars, yet still are parts of the hemisphere ; and if the hori-zontal circle be taken away, you may build upon that circlean upright wall, which may bear a cupola again above, as isdone in St. Sophia and St. Peter’s, and in all the churches inRome. I question not but those at Constantinople had it fromthe Greeks before them. It is so natural, and is yet foundin the present seraglio, which was the episcopal palace of old;
| the imperial palace, whose ruins still appear, being farthereastward. Now, because I have, for just reasons, followedthis way of vaulting of the church of St. Paul’s, I think itproper to show that it is the lightest manner, and requiresless hutment than the cross-vaulting, as well as it is of anagreeable view.”
We shall now proceed with the description of the otherparts of this edifice.
It appears that these domes are of considerable antiquity,and, from the reasons here given from the Parentalia, thatSir Christopher Wren was justified in hi3 choice in theiradoption ; their form is beautiful; and, when investigated,it is truly geometrical. Each wing forms a flat dome, sup-ported by four spandrels ; a rich wreath of foliage encirclesthe base, while the centre and the spandrels afford spaceswell adapted, and probably intended, to receive onamental, paintings. The western transept is a beautiful part of thebuilding : here insulated columns and screens of iron-railingi separate from the aisles, on either side, the morning-prayer; chapel, and the consistory.
| In the progress of examination, we come to the intersectionj of the nave and the transept; and here, instead of four open-! ings, eight are produced, which afford striking and picturesqueviews in various directions ; and, in this respect, St. Paul’sdiffers from every church with which we are acquainted, thecathedral of Ely only excepted. On the other hand, thejunction of the aisles with the central area presented difficul-ties, which have caused various defects and mutilations in thearchitecture. The central area, as before observed, is an octa-gon, supported by eight piers, with as many apertures ; fourof which, terminating the middle aisles, are forty feet wide,while the others are only twenty-eight feet; but this dispa-rity only exists as high as the first order of pilasters ; atwhich height the smaller openings are expanded so as to makethe main arches all equal. Spandrels between the archesform the area into a circle, which is crowned by a large can-tiliver cornice, partly supporting, by its projection, the whis-pering-gallery. At this level commences the interior tam-bour of the dome, consisting of a high pedestal and an orderof pilasters, the intervals of which are occupied by twenty-four windows and eight niches, corresponding with the inter-columniations and piers of the exterior. All this part isinclined forward, so as to form the frustum of a cone. Froma double plinth above the cornice of the pilasters, springs theinterior dome.
The choir is of the same form and architectural style asthe body of the church, and is terminated by a semicircularapsis. The stalls, an enclosure, though not remarkable for
elegance of design, are valuable for their ornamental carving,which is by the masterly hand of Gibbons.
In surveying the decorative parts of the interior of St. 1Paul’s, it must be acknowledged that the general impressionis that of simplicity bordering upon meanness and nudity, a idefect which implies no censure on the great architect, whohas left his work in that state to receive the ornament ofpainting and sculpture, which the frugality of following jtimes have withheld.
The few ornaments which exist are, in general, well exe-cuted, and disposed with judgment : The soffits of the jgrand arches, under the cupola, are in the best style ofsimple and appropriate decoration. The dome is painted by ;Sir James Thornhill , who has deformed this beautiful vaultwith an absurd, heavy, and fictitious architecture, serving as ja frame to eight pictures, representing so many actions of ithe patron saint. It is to be lamented, that instead of ! ■placing historical paintings in a situation where the spec- j ;tator can distinguish nothing but the most obvious and j ,general effect, some other system of decoration had not been i !adopted. j
The design of the cathedral of St. Paul has been charged |with various defects, the chief of which are the following : !
A want of proportion between the cupola and the body otthe building ; the division of the exterior into two stories,of orders of columns and pilasters nearly equal ; and thecoupling of the columns in the western front:
In the interior, the omission of the architrave and friezeof the order, in the spaces between the great pilasters of thenave, for the purpose of raising the summits of the archesabove the level of the architrave ; the circumstance of the :tambour of the dome being inclined forward out of the per-pendicular ; and, lastly, the awkward junction of the side iaisles and mutilated arches. i
With respect to the general division of the body of the jbuilding into two orders of architecture, we have the autho- jrity of the architect himself, as expressed in the Parentalia , j jand exhibited in his favourite model, in favour of the singleorder ; but, with regard to this, he was obliged to yield tocircumstances, as the Portland quarries could not afford ;stones of the required dimensions; this necessity led to janother, viz. the coupling of the order. j (
On an inspection of the ground plan of the building, it will be j iseen, that the exterior pilasters are placed at intervals corres- jponding to the interior piers, an arrangement which could not be ;deviated from. As to the omission of the architrave of the order, jabove the arches of the interior, we are in formed in the Parenta - iHa, that,in this respect, Sir Christopher Wren “always insisted) jthat he had the ancients on his side ; and that, in the Temple j jof Peace, in the great halls of the Baths, and in all the great jstructures of three aisles, this is done, and for this reason, that , :in these wide intercolumniations, the architrave is not supposed jto lie from one column to another ; but, from the column to the jwall of the aisle, so that the end of it only will appear upon the jpillar of the inside of the great navis.” This is a sufficient ;answer to those rigorous critics, who would subject the coni' 'position of a cathedral to the strict rules which limited theGrecian temples ; and it shows that the architect had studiedthose antique models, which, if not in the purest taste it*point of ornament, were yet the most analogous, in genera 1form, to the edifice he had to construct. But, though tin 3was the ostensible excuse, it was not the real reason ; f° r ’