Ajalugu Podcastid

Lüsikratese koraagiline monument

Lüsikratese koraagiline monument


J. Paul Getty muuseum

Ringikujuline monument, mille väliskülge ääristavad korintose sambad. Monumendil on ümmargune katus ja see asub ruudukujulisel poodiumil. Monument on osaliselt välja kaevatud ja maapinnal on väikesed killustikuhunnikud. Monumendi taga on paar kivikatusega maja.

See teave avaldatakse muuseumi kogude andmebaasist. Uurimis- ja pilditegevustest tulenevad uuendused ja täiendused jätkuvad, igal nädalal lisatakse uut sisu. Aidake meil oma andmeid parandada, jagades oma parandusi või soovitusi.

Pange tähele, et see andmebaas võib sisaldada pilte ja originaalkeelt, mida peetakse halvustavaks, solvavaks või graafiliseks, ning see ei pruugi sobida kõigile vaatajatele. Pildid, pealkirjad ja pealdised on oma aja ja looja vaatenurga tooted ning need esitatakse siin dokumentatsioonina, mitte Getty väärtuste peegeldusena. Keel ja ühiskondlikud normid muutuvad ning kogumiku kataloogimine on pidev töö. Soovitame teie panust meie kollektsiooni paremaks mõistmiseks.

Teoste ja nende kujutiste õiguste staatust on püütud täpselt kindlaks teha. Palun võtke ühendust muuseumi õiguste ja reprodutseerimisega, kui teil on lisateavet teose õiguste seisundi kohta, mis on vastupidine või lisaks meie dokumentides olevale teabele.

/> Selle lehe tekst on litsentsitud Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 rahvusvahelise litsentsi alusel, kui pole märgitud teisiti. Pildid ja muu meedia on välistatud.

Selle lehe sisu on saadaval vastavalt rahvusvahelise pildikoostalitlusraamistiku (IIIF) spetsifikatsioonidele. Saate seda objekti vaadata Miradoris-IIIF-iga ühilduvas vaatajas-klõpsates põhipildi all oleval IIIF-i ikoonil või lohistades ikooni avatud IIIF-vaataja aknasse.


Lüsikratese koraagiline monument

Vaata kõiki fotosid

Vana -Kreekas korraldasid iga -aastased teatrivõistlused koreograafia, rikkaid näitekunsti patroone, peeti Dionysose teatris. Võiduetendust sponsoreerinud koorid said auhinna, suure trofee pronksistatiivi näol. Aastal 334 eKr sai Lysicrates esimese sellise auhinna ja tellis oma trofee jaoks monumendi.

Monument asub Tripidoni tänaval (kolmjalgade tänaval), iidsel teel, mis viis linna sissepääsust teatrisse ja oli kunagi vooderdatud koraalimälestistega. Ülejäänud vundamendid avastati 1980ndatel, kuid Lysicratese monument on ainus, mis jääb puutumatuks.

Monumendil on kuubiline marmorist alus ja rotund, millel on korintose stiilis poolsambad, mis toetavad arhitektuuri. Arhitektuuri kohal on entablature, mis sisaldab friise, mis kujutavad stseene Lysicratese võidukäigust. Neis on näha, kuidas kreeka lavajumal Dionysos alistas piraate, muutes need delfiinideks. Algselt toetas entablatuur kuplit, mis nüüd puudub, mis oli aluseks kolmele rullile, millel oli statiivikujuline trofee.

Aastal 1658 asutati sellele kohale Prantsuse kaputsiinide klooster ja hiljem õnnestus see monument osta. Mungad kasutasid monumenti raamatukoguna ja see püsis aastate jooksul osaliselt tänu sellele. Kloostril endal on veel paar väidet kuulsuse kohta. Luuletaja Lord Byron jäi sinna 1810. aastal Kreeka visiidile ja kirjutas oma kuulsa luuletuse “Ateena teenija”. Ja 1818. aastal istutas munk kloostriaedades Lysicratese monumendi kõrvale Kreekas esimesed tomatitaimed.

Koraagiline monument sai kahjustada ja maeti osaliselt rusude alla 1824. aastal Kreeka Vabadussõja ajal, kui klooster hävitati. See taastati Prantsuse valitsuse abiga ja seisab nüüd uhkelt oma nimekaimul.


Lysicratese koraagilise monumendi taassünd Sydney kuninglikus botaanikaaias

Sydneys kuninglikus botaanikaaias asuv restaureeritud Lysicratese koraagiline monument avatakse 16. oktoobril.

148-aastane monument oli aastate jooksul langenud meeleheitesse. Kuid tänu Johnile ja Patricia Azariasele, kes võtsid ette kaheaastase missiooni rahvusliku aarde taastamiseks, on monumendil olnud 600 000 dollari suurune näo tõstmine era- ja valitsuse rahastamisest.

Paar oli aedu külastanud 2014. aastal, kui nende tähelepanu alla sattus mahajäetud monument.

“Inimesed panevad üles monumente ja me arvame, et need jäävad nende kaudu meelde ja siis inimesed ei näe neid enam, muutudes läbipaistvaks. Ja see juhtus selle monumendiga, ütles hr Azarias neoskosmos.com -ile.

Azarias selgitas, et nad suutsid meelitada ligi doonoreid igasugusest taustast.

“Kreeka kogukond oli esimene, kes vastas ja doonorid on tulnud väga erinevast taustast-Aafrika, anglokeldi, hiina, kreeka, india, itaalia, kristlane, juut, moslem-järjekordne tunnistus elavusest ja mitmekesisusest sellest vapustavast linnast. ”

Kuid seal on midagi enamat kui lihtsalt monument, mis on kogukonnale taastatud, kuna härra ja proua Azarias asutasid ka Lüsikratese fondi, mis on inspireeritud Ateena monumendist, mille püstitasid 334 eKr koreograafid Lysicrates tema triumfi mälestuseks teatris. Dionysose võistlus.

Sihtasutus Lysicrates kutsub igal aastal kolm näitekirjanikku esitama oma näidendi esimest stseeni ja võitjale antakse 12 500 dollarit, et aidata oma tööd lõpule viia.

Sisuliselt elustame Suurt Dionüüsiat, ” ütles hr Azarias neoskosmos.com. “Kõik publiku liikmed tulevad konservatooriumisse, saavad väikese keraamilise märgi ja vaatavad seejärel ühte näidendit teise järel. Kui nad lahkuvad, on kolm urnit, üks iga näitemängu kohta ja nad panevad oma märgi ühte. Urn, millel on kõige rohkem, on võitja. ”

2017. aasta Lysicratese auhinna väljavalitud näitekirjanikud kuulutatakse välja sel kuul hiljem ja neid esitatakse veebruaris Sydney muusikakonservatooriumis.


Avatakse Lysicratese taastatud koraagiline monument

John Azarias tundis alati, et ühiskond peab loovust edendama.

Tema jaoks isiklikult avanes võimalus seda teha 2014. aasta mais, pärast seikluslikku jalutuskäiku läbi Sydney kuningliku botaanikaaia, kui ta koos oma naise dr Patricia Azariasiga sattus Lysicratese koraagilise monumendi ette. originaal, püstitatud Ateenas 334. aastal eKr koreograafide Lysicratese poolt tema triumfi mälestuseks Dionysose teatri konkursil.

Tundes monumenti ja selle tähendust, ei saanud nad aidata, kuid märkasid liivakivi halba seisukorda.

“Inimesed panevad üles monumente ja me arvame, et need jäävad nende kaudu meelde ja siis inimesed ei näe neid enam, muutudes läbipaistvaks. Ja see juhtus selle monumendiga, ütles hr Azarias Neos Kosmos.

Just sel hetkel sai ta inspiratsiooni mälestusmärgi taastamiseks ja seejärel Lysicratese fondi asutamiseks.

Tegevdirektorina erinevates juhatustes ja endise diplomaadina asus härra Azarias helistama, otsides inimeste suuremeelsust. Olles osa Austraalia ajaloost, avastas ta, et inimesed on algatust väga õnnelikud.

“Kreeka kogukond oli esimene, kes vastas, ” ütleb ta, kuigi lisab, et ei tahtnud loota ainult ühele kogukonna sektorile, tunnistades seda kollektiivseks Sydney projektiks.

Doonorid on tulnud väga erinevast taustast-Aafrika, anglokeldi, Hiina, Kreeka, India, Itaalia, kristlane, juut, moslem-veel üks tunnistus selle vapustava linna elavuse ja mitmekesisuse kohta. ”

Monumenti, mille esmakordselt tellis NSW kolmekordne peaminister Sir James Martin, hoiti esialgu tema kodus Potts Pointis kuni 1943. aastani, mil see viidi praegusele kohale aedades.

John koos oma naise dr Patricia Azariasiga.

Kaks aastat pärast nende jõupingutuste algust on Asariatel õnnestunud oma ülesanne taastada monumendi kunagine hiilgus osariigi valitsuse kiviprogrammide programmi kaudu, mis maksab kokku 600 000 dollarit ja on võimalik tänu era- ja valitsuse rahastamisele.

Kuid see pole ainult monument, mille nad on ellu äratanud. Austraalia teatritalentide julgustamiseks ja premeerimiseks on nad taas tutvustanud Suure Dionysia teatrimudelit Lysicratese auhinnaga.

Meenutades kolme triloogiat muistses Ateenas, kutsutakse kolm valitud draamakirjanikku esitama oma töö esimest stseeni ja erinevalt teistest selle kaliibriga võistlustest määrab võitja kontseptsiooni, mida pole kusagil kogu maailmas rakendatud. maailmas umbes 2000 aastat.

“Sisuliselt taaselustame Suure Dionysia, ” ütleb härra Azarias. “Kõik publiku liikmed tulevad konservatooriumisse, saavad väikese keraamilise märgi ja vaatavad seejärel ühte näidendit teise järel. Kui nad lahkuvad, on kolm urni, üks iga näitemängu jaoks, ja nad panevad oma žetooni ühte. Urn, millel on kõige rohkem, on võitja. ”

Näitekirjanik ei saa mitte ainult publiku heakskiitu, vaid saab ka 12 500 dollarit, et aidata kaasa kogu näidendi kirjutamisele.

2015. aasta avaauhinna andis NSW peaminister Mike Baird ja 2016. aastal föderaalne kunstiminister Mitch Fifield.

Kuid ideele võtta võim kunstniku käest ära ei vaadatud esialgu positiivselt.

“Kui me esimest korda Griffini teatri kunstilist juhti külastasime, et talle oma ideest rääkida, ütles ta, et oleme hullud, ” tunnistab Azarias.

“ Iga teatri kunstiline juht on väravavaht, igaüks läheb ja palub neil oma näidend ette võtta ning siin me läheme tema juurde ja ütleme talle, et annate oma osa publikule ära. ”

Kuigi ta on seda jätkanud ja seda teinud, ütleb ta, et sihtasutus on loonud teatriprodutsentidele ja kunstilistele juhtidele alternatiivse platvormi, et näha, kuidas publik reageerib. Tulevikus loodab ta, et üritus kestab kaks või kolm päeva ja meelitab tähelepanu kogu maailmas.

Koos mälestussamba avamisega sel kuul antakse välja ka raamat „Lüsikratese auhind 2015: inimeste valik” ning 2017. aasta Lüsikratese auhinnale kuulutatakse välja nimekirjas olevad näitekirjanikud. Etendus on plaanis järgida veebruaris Sydney muusikakonservatooriumis ning selleks, et meelitada ligi inimesi kõigist ühiskonnavaldkondadest, ei maksta osavõtumaksu.

“Me tahame, et inimesi oleks kõigist sihtnumbritest, kõigist vanuserühmadest ja mitte ainult tavalistest kahtlusalustest, kes tavaliselt teatrisse lähevad või on teatrimaastikust pärit, "ütles Azarias.

Mõne jaoks võib tunduda palju vaeva näha, et meenutada mõnda aega muistses ajaloos. Aga härra Azarias on see palju enamat.

Monument on osa meie pärandist, siin on see 148 aastat vana ja me ei tähista mitte ainult oma minevikku, vaid edendame ka Austraalia loovust.
“Meie sihtasutuse moto on see, et ühiskonna tõelised aarded on kritseldajad, munajad ja assortii munapäid, need, kes jäädvustavad meie lugusid - nemad jäävad meelde. Tulevikus ei mäleta midagi muud, mitte midagi muud. ”


Vana-kaasaegse monumendi mudel

“Pennsylvania Banki lammutamine, 1867, ja#8221 fotograaf John Morani albumiinitrüki detail. (Philadelphia raamatukogukompanii) Lüsikratese koraagiline monument, James Stuart ’s Antiikeses of Ateenas, 1762. (Smithsoniani raamatukogud)

1830ndateks oleks teil olnud mõtlesin inimesed võivad hakata väsima, nähes, kuidas iga viimane arhitekt tõlgib oma linna kreeka keelde. Ja nemad võiks on olnud, kui poleks olnud William Stricklandi võimalust ühendada väga vana ja väga uus. See kõige loomingulisem arhitektide/inseneride kodupõlvkonnast ei kartnud mängu mõne astme võrra edasi viia. Strickland tõmbas välja oma Stuarti koopia Ateena muistised, raamat, mis oli olemas juba seitsekümmend aastat ja mida arhitektid, sealhulgas Benjamin Henry Latrobe, John Haviland ja Strickland ise, olid pikka aega allikana kasutanud.

Kuid panused olid nüüd kõrgemad. Strickland seisis silmitsi väljakutsega arhitektuurselt mõtestada väga silmapaistval ja veidra kujuga ehituskrundil, mille on määratlenud Dock, Walnut ja Third Streets. Ja ta leidis end töötamas oma mentori meistriteose Pennsylvania Bank varjus. See karm sait nõudis käskivat ja uuenduslikku lahendust. Ristkülikukujulise Kreeka templi pressimine kolmnurksele ehituskrundile lihtsalt ei teeks seda. Stricklandil oli vaja leida disainilahendusi, mis oleksid veelgi julgemad, kuid ka hoolikamalt kaalutud.

Ja nii ta tegi. Strickland asetas selle kiilu kitsasse otsa ülestõstetud poolringikujulise portiksi, muutes selle idapoolse fassaadi välja nagu suure sissekäigu kodanikuväljakul. (Tegelikkuses on see hoone ümmargune tagakülg. Strickland muutis kolmanda tänava kasutajasõbralikuks sissepääsuks.)

Dock and Walnut Streets'i vana börsi perspektiiv, 24. märts 1915. (PhillyHistory.org)

Siin, Philadelphias, mõne kvartali kaugusel linna jõeäärest, hommikupäikese poole (sama, mis valgustas iidset Ateenat), seisis Stricklandi meistriteos. Erinevalt teistest Kreeka taaselustamise hoonetest ei olnud see lehe koopia Ateena muistised. Siin oli siin ja praegu Philadelphiat teenindav 3D-stend Kreeka funktsioonidest.

Kupli jaoks, mis kogu projekti kokku tõmbas, leidis Strickland inspiratsiooni Stuarti illustratsioonist 334 eKr monumendi kohta, mis seisab endiselt Ateena tänavatel. Lüsikratese koraagiline monument oli enese õnnitleja, 21-meetrine pjedestaal etenduskunstide konkursil võidetud kooripreemia eest, mis oli osa samast festivalist, kus toodeti Aischylose, Sophoklese ja Euripidese suuri draamasid. Stuart ja William Henry Playfair kavandasid sõna otseses mõttes koopiaid Staffordshire'is ja Edinburghis. Siin Philadelphias võttis Strickland disainiga suuri vabadusi ja saavutas väga Ameerika tulemusi.

Ta nihutas “monumendi” tänavatasandilt katusele. Ta puhus selle kahekordselt originaalist suuremaks, moodustades hiiglasliku 40-jala kõrguse ja 14 jala läbimõõduga siluetti määratleva struktuuri. Ja selle asemel, et tõlgendada Lysicratese koraagilist monumenti kivideks läbi aegade, kujundas Strickland selle puidust, mis teadis, et see võib kesta vaid paar aastakümmet. (See asendataks umbes iga kuuekümne aasta tagant.) Nüüd, Euroopast kaugel, kajastaks see Pop-Arti mastaapne, arheoloogiliselt korrektne, lühiajaline monument minevikku. Kuid veelgi olulisem on see, et siin, Philadelphia 1830. aastate linnapildi kohal, elaks see maamärk väga palju hetkes.

Kaupmehevahetushoone ida pool, 2. november 1960. (PhillyHistory.org)

Kaupmeeste börsist ja eriti selle idaosas asuvast tornist saaks uue kõrgtehnoloogilise infovõrgu oluline element. Ammu enne 1837. aastat, kui Samuel F.B. Morse patenteeris oma telegraafi (ja tee kauem, kui keegi unistas Internetist) Eurooplastel ja ameeriklastel olid optilised telegraafid, mis on võimelised kiiresti edastama kodeeritud sõnumeid suurte vahemaade taha. Juba 1807. aastal oli USA kongress arutanud ja lõpuks hääletanud New Yorki ja New Orleansi ühendava 1200 miili pikkuse optiliste telegraafitornide rahastamise poolt - see projekt jäi kõrvale. Kuid see ei olnud kaugeleulatuv. Rohkem kui kümme aastat varem täitus Prantsusmaal Claude Chappe leiutis, „semafoorne visuaalne telegraaf” kui 143 miili pikkune ühendus Pariisi ja Lille vahel, mis kasvab üle 500 torni võrgustikuks kogu Euroopas ja ulatub 3000 miili kaugusele. 1799. aastal, kui Napoleon Bonaparte võimule tuli, nägi ta ette tehnoloogia laiendamist üle La Manche'i väina.

Kaupmeeste vahetus, vaadates ülevalt kolmandast tänavast ida poole, 3. kupli ehitamise ajal, 25.10.1964. (PhillyHistory.org)

Nii et kui Ameerika arhitekt William Thornton kavandas 1800. aastal Põhja- ja Lõuna -Ameerika ühendamist, panid võimalused tasapinnalised pead keerlema. Varsti olid Ameerika ärimeestel Bostonis ja New Yorgis oma optilised telegraafivõrgud. Kaupmehevahetuse ehitamise ajaks jälgis Bostonis asuv optiline telegraaf laevandust, kaubandust ja investeeringuid reaalajas.

"Aeg ja vahemaa on hävitatud," sai populaarseks kuulutuseks, 1830. aastate mantraks.

Pole siis üllatav, et kaupmehebörsi kuppel kõrgel doki ja pähklitänava kohal mängis kolmekordseid ülesandeid: ametnike ahvenana, kelle teleskoobid tuvastasid Philadelphia sadamasse ja sealt väljuvaid laevu, kohana, kust saata ja vastu võtta teateid, mis vilguvad New York New Jersey tasandikel ja kõige püsivam sõnum kõigist: Philadelphia oli lõpuks saanud omaks kui iidse Ateena tänapäeva versioon.


Lüsikratese koraagiline monument - ajalugu

Sirvi

Kuraatori märkus

See on Choragic Monumendi väga ebatavaline variant. Fouquet ei ole oma mudeli rekonstrueerimisel lähtunud Ateena originaali kujutamisest, mis oli mälestussammas, choregos või teatri sponsor Lysicrates. Draama, mille ta oli korraldanud ja mille eest tasus kas aastal 335 või 334 eKr, võitis selle jumala auks Dionysia religioossel festivalil, mis toimus Ateena Dionysose teatris, esimese auhinna. Auhinnaks oli pronksist statiiv, mis Lysicratese võidu mälestuseks püstitati tema nime kandvale väikesele ümmargusele monumendile (334 eKr). Selle asemel on Fouquet võtnud mudeli aluseks nn „Demosthenese laterna”-kõrge tornitaolise rumaluse, mille ehitas 1801. aastal Napoleon I Pariisi St Cloudi lossi parki, mille kaks ülemist osa olid põhineb lõdvalt klassikalisel monumendil. Avatud ümmargune struktuur sisaldas keisri büsti (Fouquet'i mudelis miniatuurne) ja Latern oleks valgustatud, et näidata, et Napoleon elas Château's. Algne Lüsikratese koraagiline monument oli palju lühem kui Püha Pilve torn ja keskosa moodustus õõnsa müüritünnist, millesse olid kaasatud korintose sambad. 1870. aastal hävitati Prantsuse-Preisi sõja tagajärjel Demosthenese latern St Cloudis.

See mudel koos Hadrianuse kaarega (MR74) sai II maailmasõjas tugevalt kannatada, tõenäoliselt siis, kui 15. oktoobri 1940 öösel kukkus maamiin Lincolni Inn Fieldsile, purustades nii klaaskorpuse kui ka krohvimudeli.

Purustatud krohvikolonnid võimaldavad meil näha sisemist pronksist armatuuri, mida Fouquet kasutas habras krohvi tugevdamiseks. Näib, et need pronksvardad paigutati kolonni šahtide vormidesse ja seejärel valati nende ümber vedel krohv.


Avati Lüsikratese koraagiline monument

Üks Sydney keerukamaid ajaloomälestisi on taastatud oma endises hiilguses tänu NSW valitsuse ja kivimüüjate spetsialiseeritud üksuse, Sydney filantroopide rühma ja Kuningliku botaanikaaia tööle.

Kuninglikus botaanikaaias asuv Lüsikratese koraagiline monument on 1870. aasta koopia vanast Kreeka monumendist aastast 334 eKr.

Rahandus-, teenuste- ja kinnisvaraminister Dominic Perrottet avalikustas täna monumendi, mis on osaliselt taastatud tänu 200 000 dollari suurusele investeeringule ministri kivitööprogrammi raames.

“Lysicratese monument kujutab endast rikkalikku kultuurilugu ja pärandit, mis on kujundanud meie linna, meie riiki ja rahvast, ning me peame selle ajaloo lihtsalt tulevastele põlvedele säilitama, "ütles Perrottet.

Selle aasta alguses eraldas valitsus täiendavat 2 miljoni dollari suurust rahastust meie kivimüüridele meie pärandikoonide taastamiseks ja säilitamiseks ning mul oli hea meel, et sain selle monumendi säilitamise programmi osaks lisada. ”

Kivimüüjad Yellowblockis tööl.

Lisaks sidemetele Vana -Kreekaga on Sydney monumendil märkimisväärne kohalik ajalooline tähendus. Selle tellis 1868. aastal peaminister James Martin (kelle järgi sai Martin Place nime) ja see on nikerdatud Sydney ja#8217 -de ikoonilisest Yellowblocki liivakivist.

Algselt Martin ’s Potts Pointi aias asuv monument päästeti 1943. aastal lammutamisest ja toonane peaminister William McKell paigutas selle kuninglikku botaanikaaeda pärast Sydney Morning Heraldi ajakirjaniku Fritz Burnelli kampaaniat.

2014. aastal märkas rühm Sydney filantroope, et vihm ja tuuled on mälestusmärgi pehmet kuldset liivakivi õõnestanud. Rühmitus moodustas sihtasutuse Lysicrates, mis on teinud monumendi taastamiseks tihedat koostööd ministri kivitööprogrammi ja kuningliku botaanikaaiaga.

Monumendi pidevat hooldust toetavad sihtasutus Lysicrates ja kuninglik botaanikaaed. Sihtasutus Lysicrates asutas oma töö raames Austraalia etendus- ja kujutava kunsti edendamiseks ka iga -aastase näidendikirjutamise võistluse Kreeka teatritraditsioonis.


Konserveerimine (ehitatud) ja#8211 koreograafiline monument

Lüsikratese koreograafiline monument asub kuninglikus botaanikaaias Farm Cove'i mereseina lähedal. Monument on koopia originaalist, mis püstitati Ateenasse 334 eKr. Projekt hõlmas uuringuid, seisundi hindamist, magestamist, uuesti nikerdamist ja pinna stabiliseerimist. Selle projekti suur osa oli kogukonna õhutamine ja kaasamine.

Koreograafiline monument on märkimisväärne oma vormi, materjali, käsitöö ja ajalooliste ühenduste poolest. Monument on kantud riiklikku usaldusregistrisse, Sydney linna LEP -sse ja see on kaitsealal asuv objekt. Algset monumenti Kreekas peetakse Korintose ordu esimeseks väliseks kasutamiseks ja see on lisatud arhitektuuriajaloo raamatutesse, et näidata Korintose pealinna koosseisu. Sydney 1870. aastast pärinev koopia võimaldab teadlastel, üliõpilastel ja kogukonnal tutvuda ja nautida ustavalt proportsionaalset koopiat.

Monument demonstreerib kiviraidur Walter McGilli kvaliteetseid koobastamis- ja kopeerimisoskusi, kes on tuntud ka Austraalia muuseumi kuulsate Korintose pealinnade nikerdamise poolest. Monument on märkimisväärne selle seose tõttu NSW endise peaministri Sir James Martiniga nagu Martin Place, kes tellis 1870. aastal Potts Pointi aia ehitustööd. Monument viidi 1943. aastal ümber kuninglikku botaanikaaeda.

Projekti õhutamine:
2014. aastal täheldasid eraisikud Patricia ja John Azarias Sydney kuninglikus botaanikaaias jalutades, et Choragic Monument vajab hoolt. Nad lõid sihtasutuse Lysicrates, et koguda raha eraannetajatelt ja osariigi valitsuse ministritöö kiviprogramm (MSP) sobitas raha dollari ja dollari vahel. See on esimene eraõiguslik/avalik partnerlus, mille mereala ruumiline planeering on ette võtnud. Projekti kogumaksumus oli 450 000 dollarit.

Kaitsemeetod:
Doonorite eraviisilise rahastamisega kaasnesid eelarvamused „restaureerimisest” ja ootused, et mälestussammas näib puhas ja paranenud. Mereala ruumilise planeerimise meeskond tegi tihedat koostööd rahastajatega, et pakkuda raamistikku mälestise kaitseotsuste tegemiseks, tuginedes Burra harta juhtpõhimõtetele. Selle projekti suur väljakutse oli kivi asendamise taseme üle otsustamine, arvestades olemasolevat olukorda ja pidevat kokkupuudet karmide keskkonnatingimustega. Vormil põhinevaid olulisi küsimusi (Korintose järjekord) hinnati põhjalikult.

Monumendi oluliste elementide hierarhias on friis väga oluline, kuna nikerdused räägivad loo kreeka jumalast Dionysosest, kes võitleb piraatide vastu, kes muutuvad vette visates delfiinideks. Friis on ehitatud kolmest kivist, millest igaüks räägib kolmandiku loost. Meeskond otsustas oma kolmest kivist (edela poole) uuesti nikerdada, kuna see on lagunenud. Selle kivi pind oli kaotanud kõik äratuntavad detailid, nagu on näidatud lisatud fotodel. Kuigi ülejäänud kaks kivi on suhteliselt ilmastikutingimustes, on halvenemise kiirust aeglustanud magestamine ja ülemiste alade ümbersuunamine, et vältida vee sissepääsu. Projekti esmane eesmärk oli säilitada võimalikult palju esialgset liivakivi, samal ajal stabiliseerides ja kaitstes mälestist tervikuna, et tagada eseme tähtsus järgmise põlvkonna jaoks.

Uuringud ja dokumentatsioon:
Valmistati mõõdetud joonised, mis kaardistasid kivi seisukorda, et anda rekord tulevikku ja võrrelda seisundit kiviprogrammiga 20 aastat tagasi koostatud rekorditega. Arhiivprofessionaalne fotograafia telliti monumendi jäädvustamiseks enne töid, nende ajal ja pärast neid. Uuesti nikerdamise protsess nõudis kiviraiduritelt esialgse monumendi ja Sydney versiooni vahelise skaala ja stiililiste erinevuste uurimist. Põhidokumendis, millele viidati ühe friisikivi uuesti nikerdamiseks, mõõdeti 1748 Stuarti ja Revetti „Ateena antiigi” originaali joonised.

Projekti kaasamine ja pärand:
Kokkuvõtteks võib öelda, et ükski teine ​​NSW avalik monument ei jõua kogukonna huvide mitmekesisuse poole. Konserveerimistööd on olnud katalüsaatoriks paljudele toredatele ja kestvatele kogukonnaüritustele ja loomingulistele ettevõtmistele, peamiselt tänu kirglikkusele projektide algatajate Patricia ja John Ararias vastu.

Sihtasutus Lysicrates ning dr Patricia Azarias ja John Azarius said Lysicratesi fondist inspiratsiooni, et koguda erarahasid, et aidata kaasa koreograafilise monumendi säilitamisele. Kui see oli saavutatud, asutas sihtasutus koostöös Griffini teatriga Lysicratese auhinna, dramaturgide Archibaldi auhinna ekvivalendi.

Kreeka kogukond - monumendi ühenduse kaudu algse 334B.C. Koreograafiline monument Ateenas. John Azarias intervjueeriti Kreeka raadios kaitseprojekti ja Lysicratese teatripreemia kohta.

Õiguskogukond - James Martin tellis Monumendi f 1870. aastal. Monumendi säilitamine on pakkunud õiguskogukondadele huvi avaldada austust Martinile tema saavutuste eest Austraalia esimese peaministri ja peakohtunikuna. Lysicratese Fond asutas sisseastumise Martin Orationi ja andis selle au. T.F. Bathurst AC, NSW ülemkohtunik 25. novembril 2016 (mälestusvihik lisatud).

Teatrikogukond – Lysicratese auhind loodi 2015. aastal ja see on iga -aastane teatripreemia, Archibaldi näitekirjandusauhind, mis on inspireeritud 334. aastal eKr püstitatud Vana -Kreeka monumendist. aastal Ateenas, et tähistada sponsori Lysicratese võitu selle aasta Suure Dionüüsia teatrivõistlusel.
See Sydney üritus meelitab igal aastal Monumendi juurde vähemalt 500 inimest, kuna see annab võimaluse võitja väljakuulutamiseks. Finantsülevaate artikkel, 3. veebruar 2017 (lisatud) ja intervjuu Eastside 89.7FM raadios http://www.afr.com/lifestyle/arts-and-entertainment/theatre-and-dance/sydney-philanthropists-create-the-lysicrates -auhind-20170131-gu2c75

Byroni seltsil ja originaalmonumendil on märkimisväärne seos Lord Byroniga, kes kirjutas 1800. aastatel Ateenas viibides monumendi sees luulet. Austraalia Byroni selts korraldas Byroni sünnipäeva tähistamiseks monumendi juures botaanikaaias kogunemisi.

Kivitööde konserveerimine - ABC uudistes näidati töö konserveerimise lõpuleviimist.

Avaldatud 16. oktoobril 2016. Projekti oluliseks aspektiks oli haridus objekti ja konserveerimistööde olulisuse kohta.

Laul ‘ Martini ja Lysicratese ballaad ’ - kirjutas NSW kuberneri abikaasa proua Hurley ja laulis proua Hurley botaanikaaia kaitsetööde lõpetamise avalikul avamisel 2016. aasta oktoobris.

Töötas projekti kallal:
Minister ’s kivitöö programm, rahandus-, teenindus- ja innovatsiooniosakond

Mida kohtunikud ütlesid:

“Ministri kivitööprogrammi suurepärane töö 334 eKr Kreeka monumendi koopia jaoks botaanikaaias, mis hõlmab uurimist, magestamist, taaskasutamist ja stabiliseerimist. ”


Euroopa ja Ameerika arhitektuur (1750–1900)

See õppetund hõlmab ühte põnevamat 150-aastast arhitektuuriaega, 1750–1900. Seismilised muutused toimusid järgmistes valdkondades:

Elustiil: Nende aastate jooksul kolis palju inimesi maalt linna. Inglismaa saavutas 1850. aastate paiku tasakaalu 50/50. Ameerika tasakaal leidis aset umbes 1920ndatel. See industrialiseerimine põhjustas uute hoonetüüpide loomise.

Valitsus: Kaheksateistkümnenda sajandi lõpus koges läänemaailm kahte tohutut revolutsiooni - Ameerika revolutsiooni ja Prantsuse revolutsiooni. Monarhiate võim langes ja loodi demokraatlikud valitsused.

Patronaaž: Religioosne ja aristokraatlik patronaaž andis teed demokraatlike valitsuste ja jõukate, isetehtud isikute tellimustele.

Tehnoloogia: Edusamme tehti ehitusmaterjalide, transpordi ja masinate osas. Traditsioonilised materjalid, nagu tellis ja kivi, asendati mustmetallidega (raud ja teras) ja klaasiga.

Arhitektid ja disainerid püüdsid oma väljaõpet leevendada kaasaegse elu nõudmistega, mida tõendavad mitte ainult arhitektuur ise, vaid ka arhitektuuritekstid, sisekujundus, väljakaevamised ja linnaehitus, millest mõningaid käsitletakse käesolevas loengus. Nendes kategooriates tehtud edusammud viivad lõpuks ehituseriala pöördumatult teele kahekümnenda sajandi kaasaegse arhitektuuri poole.

Selle tunni lähtepunkt eeldab, et õpilased on teadlikud baroki ja rokokoo arhitektuuri suundumustest, kuid on mõttekas alustada ülevaatega:

Näidake oma klassile slaidi, mis sisaldab pilte baroki ja rokokoo arhitektuuri ikoonilistest töödest. Mulle meeldib kasutada Borromini San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane (Rooma, 1638–41) barokkide eeskujuna ning Germain Boffrand ja Charles-Joseph Natoire Princesse salong, Hôtel de Soubise (Pariis, 1736–9) kui rokokoo näide.

Alustage ülevaatust mõne järgneva juhisega:

  • Kirjeldage baroki ja rokokoo arhitektuuri vormilisi omadusi.
  • Kes olid patroonid?
  • Kirjeldage neid teoseid valmistanud kultuuride domineerivaid ideoloogiaid ja väärtusi.
  • Millistest allikatest nad otsisid?

Teie, üliõpilased, võite olla üllatunud, kui saate teada, et barokk- ja rokokookarhitektuuri hiilgavad omadused, mida nad õppisid varasematel loengutel ära tundma ja hindama, sattusid kaheksateistkümnenda sajandi keskpaigas tähelepanu alla nende tajutud vabaduse kuritarvitamise tõttu-kombineerides klassikalisi elemente ebatavalistel viisidel-ja leiutamine, näiteks uute pealinnade loomine. Kui vaadata neid teoseid kaheksateistkümnenda sajandi teise poole vaatenurgast, on kaks eesmärki-toimida segmendina alates viimasest loengust kuni selle loenguni ja seada ka praeguse loengu arhitektuuriline lava.

Francesco Borromini (1599–1667) San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane on üks näide barokkhoonest, mis XVIII sajandi keskpaigas arvas liiga palju leiutisi. Borromini alusplaan, mis on ehitatud Hispaania katkiste kolmainsuste ordu jaoks, näitab, et kiriku siseruum põhines geomeetril (võrdkülgsed kolmnurgad, ringid ja ovaal). Selle aluseks olev geomeetria läheb kaduma vaatajaid lummavate aspektide hulka: lainelised seinad, ebakorrapäraste vahedega sambad, sagedased seina avad ja ornament - kõik näitavad vabadust, millega Borromini kasutas ja muutis klassikalisi elemente - märkimisväärne näide on komposiitkapitalide volüüdid. , some of which curve upwards instead of the traditional down. The sculptural quality of the interior is reflected in the church’s exterior. The façade swells out and in, and areas between columns are filled with niches and sculpture.

Moving forward a hundred years to the Rococo, your students will likely be familiar with Germain Boffrand and Charles-Joseph Natoire’s Salon de la Princesse, Hôtel de Soubise. An oval room on the upper-level, this salon was used by a princess of the Rohan-Soubise dynasty for entertaining. The walls dematerialize, punctuated by windows, doors, and large mirrors. Extensive amounts of gilt ornamentation cover the walls and frames openings.

Themes to stress throughout the lecture include edusamme, building type, materjalid ja tehnoloogia.

Background Readings

Henry Flitcroft, The Temple of Apollo, Stourhead, 1765 (Wiltshire, England).

One of the best sources is Leland Roth’s Understanding Architecture: Its Elements, History, and Meaning, second edition (Westview Press, 2007). If you are looking for information on European architecture see Barry Bergdoll’s European Architecture 1750–1890 (Oxford University Press, 2000) and Sir John Summerson’s The Classical Language of Architecture, twentieth printing (MIT Press, 2001). For an explanation of materials, see Harley J. McKee’s Introduction to Early American Masonry (National Trust for Historic Preservation, 1973). This book provides an excellent overview of the tools used to prepare building materials and terminology.

For British Architecture, see Sir John Summerson’s Architecture in Britain 1530–1830, ninth edition (Yale University Press, 1993).

For American architectural history, I recommend a series of survey texts as well as sources that are more focused upon specific artists or structures. Leland Roth’s A Concise History of American Architecture (Harper & Row, Publishers, 1979) provides a standard chronological progression through North American architectural movements. Dell Upton’s Architecture in the United States (Oxford University Press, 1998) is divided into chapters that address American architecture through the lenses of community, nature, technology, money and art.

For Stourhead see their webpage on the United Kingdom’s national trust site.

For the United States Capitol building, see James D. and Georgiana W. Kornwolf’s Architecture and Town Planning in Colonial North America (Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2002)—a wonderful text about colonial and early American architecture. Also see Henry Russell Hitchcock and William Seale’s Temples of Democracy: The State Capitols of the U.S.A. (New York: Harcourt Brace Jovanovich, 1976).

For Schinkel’s Altes Museum, see Steven Moyano, “Quality vs. History: Schinkel’s Altes Museum and Prussian Arts Policy,” The Art Bulletin Kd. 72, No. 4 (December, 1990), 585–608 James J. Sheehan, Museums in the German Art World: From the End of the Old Regime to the Rise of Modernism (Oxford University Press, 2000) Karl Friedrich Schinkel, 1781–1841: The Drama of Architecture (Art Institute of Chicago, 1994).

For the Gothic Revival, I am indebted to Chris Brooks’ The Gothic Revival (Phaidon, 1999) and Michael J. Lewis’ The Gothic Revival (Thames & Hudson, 2002).

For the Grammar of Ornament see Carole A Hrvol Flores’ Owen Jones: Design, Ornament, Architecture, and Theory in an Age of Transition (Rizzoli, 2006) John Kresten Jespersen, “Originality and Jones,” The Grammar of Ornament of 1856,” Journal of Design History Kd. 21, No. 2 (Summer 2008), 143–53 and Stacey Sloboda’s “The Grammar of Ornament: Cosmopolitanism and Reform in British Design.” Journal of Design History Kd. 21, No. 3 (Autumn, 2008), 223–36.

For the Skyscraper, I recommend Sarah Bradford Landau and Carl W. Condit’s Rise of the New York Skyscraper, 1865–1913 (Yale University Press, 1996) and Winston Weisman’s “A New View of Skyscraper History” in Rise of an American Architecture. (Metropolitan Museum of Art by Praeger Publishers, 1970).

For Aesthetic Movement architecture, see Andrew Saint’s Richard Norman Shaw (Yale University Press, 2010) Jeffrey Karl Ochsner and Thomas C. Hubka, “H. H. Richardson: The Design of the William Watts Sherman House,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians, Vol. 51, No. 2 (June, 1992), 121–45 James F. O’Gorman’s “A Touch of Nash: The Williams Watts Sherman House and the Aesthetic Movement.” XIX sajand Kd. 19, No. 1 (1999), 53–9 and In Pursuit of Beauty: Americans and the Aesthetic Movement (Metropolitan Museum of Art, 1986).

For Ecole des Beaux Arts architecture see Christopher Mead, “Urban Contingency and the Problem of Representation in Second Empire Paris,” Journal of the Society of Architectural Historians Kd. 54, No. 2 (June, 1995), 138–74.

Content Suggestions

The layout of this lecture is designed to underscore the international and intercontinental spread of architectural ideas. In most instances, I give two examples to illustrate a particular stylistic movement—one European and one American. Optional works are indented underneath to supplement certain topics. I have also included asides about materials and other topics, which can be useful.

In an hour and fifteen minutes, you should be able to cover the following works of architecture:

  • Francesco Borromini, San Carlo alle Quattro Fontane (Rome, 1638–41)
  • Germain Boffrand and Chalres-Joseph Natoire, Salon de la Princesse, Hôtel de Soubise (Paris, 1736–9)

Second Half of the Eighteenth Century:

  • Marc-Antoine Laugier, Essai sur l’architecture (Paris, 1755 first edition 1753)
  • James Stuart and Nicholas Revett, The Antiquities of Athens: Measured and Delineated (London, 1762–95)
    • Choragic Monument of Lysicrates, c. 334 BCE
    • Claude Lorrain, Coast View of Delos with Aeneas (1672)
    • Henry Flitcroft, Pantheon (constructed between 1753-54)
    • Henry Flitcroft, Temple of Apollo (constructed in 1765)
    • Henry Flitcroft, King Alfred’s Tower (designed 1765, constructed between 1769–72)
    • Bristol Cross (a monument from the fifteenth–seventeenth centuries was moved in 1765 from its original Bristol location to Hoare’s park)

    XIX sajand

    • Karl Friedrich Schinkel, Altes Museum (Berlin, 1823–30)
      • William Strickland, Tennessee State Capitol (Nashville, 1845–59)
      • Richard Upjohn, Trinity Church (New York City, 1839–46)
      • William LeBaron Jenney, Home Insurance Building, (Chicago, c. 1885)
      • McKim, Mead, and White, American Safe Deposit Company Building, (New York City, 1882–4).
      • H. Richardson, William Watts Sherman House (Newport, Rhode Island, 1874–6)
      • World’s Columbian Exposition (Chicago, 1891–3)

      Begun in the second half of the eighteenth century and lasting through the early nineteenth century, the Enlightenment did much to affect the path of architecture. Though not a single unified movement, it was founded on the belief in progress and in the power of reason. Recent achievements in science encouraged the notion that, through the acquisition of knowledge and the application of reason social, intellectual, and moral reforms could be affected. The impact of the Enlightenment on the arts took various forms. Some artists paid homage to science, others studied the classical past. The later impacts architecture more acutely.

      By 1750, there was a growing discontent with the gaudy Baroque and Rococo architecture highlighted above. It came under fire for being dishonest, meaning that its sculptural, undulating walls and overzealous ornamentation deceptively hid the building’s supporting construction. Critics thought that these features placed the emphasis in the wrong places and architecture required a much needed return to its primitive origins. This viewpoint was demonstrated in the frontispiece of the second edition of Essai sur l’architecture by Jesuit priest and amateur aesthetician Marc-Antoine Laugier (1713–69).

      The engraved frontispiece of Essai sur l’architecture depicts a classical female figure as the Muse of Architecture, holding a compass, a right angle and reclining on an entablature. The image also includes the Scamozzi Ionic capital (Scamozzi Ionic capitals flare out at the corners when the two sides come together). This Muse directs an infant to a primitive hut, humanity’s first built structure that represents pure, honest architecture. Built of wood—both living trees and cut—the space was created using a limited number of elements: posts (the verticals), lintels or beams (the horizontals), and gabled roof. All of these elements are not decorated.

      This image served as a rallying point to galvanize people to return to a perceivably purer architecture. It should be stated here that Laugier and his supporters did not feel that the only structures that should be built were primitive wooden huts. Instead, they promoted the idea that if a historical source was emulated, it should be from a culture that practiced pure architecture. The older the civilization, the purer architecture they created. Using this logic, Greek architecture was superior to Roman, as Greek civilization was older.

      One publication that did the most to spread an awareness of Greek architecture was The Antiquities of Athens: Measured and Delineated by English architects and antiquarians James Stuart and Nicholas Revett. Conceived during the Enlightenment, when there was interest in ancient cultures, the work was subsidized and published by the Society of Dilettanti (an English group of men who had all partook in the Grand Tour. Sir Joshua Reynolds was a member of the group who painted several portraits of its members). This text is noteworthy for containing the first meticulously measured drawings of ancient Greek architecture, giving the Western world access to their natural architectural perfection. To make the text as accurate as possible, Stuart and Revett spent four years (1751–5) documenting architectural monuments in and around Athens before returning to England to begin the publishing process. Although it was intended to be the first text of its kind, the drawn out publishing process allowed for a Frenchman, Julien-David Le Roy to produce Les Ruines des plus beaux monuments de la Grèce (Paris, 1758) five years before the first volume of The Antiquities of Athens ilmus. Despite publication delays, and then its gradual release, The Antiquities of Athens’ influence was international and it became a manual (historian James F. O’Gorman uses the word “Bible”) for the “Greek Revival” across Europe as well as in North America, c. 1810s–1840s.

      An illustration from Volume One of the text depicts the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates. Located near the acropolis, this monument was erected around 334 BCE to commemorate an athletic or choral victory. This circular structure is thirteen feet high, made of marble, and around the exterior are six engaged Corinthian columns—some of the earliest of that type. Now lost is a tripod trophy that at one point surmounted the monument.

      A visual and ideological counterpoint to the pursuit of a more pure architectural source is the picturesque landscape garden Stourhead located in Wiltshire, England, the vision of banker Sir Henry Hoare. Designed over decades, Stourhead’s vistas were completely constructed—earth was moved, a lake was formed by damming a local river, and flora was planted. Hoare aimed to make mimic the painted landscapes found in the paintings of French Baroque painters Claude Lorrain and Nicholas Poussin. Indeed, Hoare had collected Lorrain’s Coast View of Delos with Aeneas (1672), which influenced the designs. For example, the garden included bridges and a building with a dome, imitating the Pantheon in Rome, motifs found in Lorrain’s paintings. The winding path through the garden began and ended at the house, leading one around the irregular lake that forms the garden’s centerpiece. Along the way, one was supposed to stop at certain points to admire views and pavilions constructed in differing architectural styles.

      Palladian architect Henry Flitcroft was commissioned to construct several pavilions for Stourhead: the aforementioned Pantheon (constructed between 1753–4), the Temple of Apollo (constructed in 1765), and the triangular 160-foot brick structure King Alfred’s Tower (designed 1765, constructed between 1769-72)—the top of which can be reach through an internal spiral staircase. In 1765, the Bristol Cross was moved from its original Bristol location to Hoare’s park. Over the centuries there has been debate among historians as to how the Virgilian inscriptions on the pavilions should be interpreted, and how that affects in the viewer’s experience in the garden.

      Politically, the full embodiment of Enlightenment ideals was reached during the American and French Revolutions that took place at the end of the eighteenth century and the early part of the nineteenth century. The United States Capitol (c. 1793–1828, 1851–7, and 1856–63) in Washington D.C. became a beacon to Enlightenment ideas, adhering to the Classical spirit in its architecture’s revolutionary Neoclassical style. The federal building was envisioned as a seventeen-room brick building that would house the legislative branch of government.

      The fact that the U.S. Capitol was originally envisioned as a brick building may come as a surprise for students, who by this time are used to seeing European architecture constructed of fine stone. At the turn of the nineteenth century, American architects and builders were still uncomfortable and quite untrained in using this material. The lack of confidence architects and builders had for building stone was balanced by their assurance in using brick. Brick’s flexible recipe, permanence, and skill requirement allowed it to used across American in building construction. On the eastern seaboard, it was a material that that been in use since 1618 (the first brick building was the Fourth Jamestown Church—Jamestown was founded in 1607).

      As time progressed, other functions were added to the Capitol, such as Washington’s tomb and setting aside a space for the Supreme Court. In initial submissions, American gentlemen architects/builders failed to create adequate elegant and monumental forms that would define the nation’s new building type. President Washington called them ‘dull.’ Ultimately, the chosen design was a synthesis of competition submissions, which had referenced many aspects of other state houses, namely: a portico, a dome, a central public space, and the two houses opposite one another.

      Despite having many different creators (William Thornton, B. H. Latrobe, Charles Bulfinch and Thomas U. Walter—who were a mixture of professional and gentlemen architects), the Capitol’s various parts are united in the Neoclassical style, with the focal point being Walter’s dome (1856–63), modeled after the Pantheon. Construction of the Capitol pushed American builders out of their material comfort zones. Originally proposed as a brick structure, it was decided that ashlar masonry should be used for the exterior. For the vaulting, Thomas Jefferson wanted to use wood, but Latrobe pushed for masonry. Decades later, builders were pushed to their technological limits using a new material—iron, both cast and wrought—to create the Capitol’s famous dome.

      Nineteenth century architecture is memorable for its quick succession of historical revival styles, including the Greek Revival, the Gothic Revival, and the Queen Anne Style (a.k.a. the Aesthetic Movement), as well as introducing some major architectural publications and new building types. I hope to give a sense of the complexity of the nineteenth century architectural situation by highlighting select architectural examples, architectural texts, and new building types.

      The Greek Revival

      The facade of Karl Friedrich Schinkel’s Altes Museum in Berlin is a prime example of Greek Revival architecture. The museum is a large box with eighteen fluted Ionic columns in front, surmounted by a smaller box. The building’s sheer breadth—it takes up almost the whole width of the northern end of the Lustgarten (Pleasure Garden)—and its façade, distilled to vertical and strong horizontal elements (arches are a feature synonymous with Roman architecture), are the more primitive/pure Greek architectural characteristics to which Schinkel alluded. The most direct visual source would be the Athenian stoa poikile, the ancient covered colonnade in the agora.

      This building did much to revitalize the heart of the city. First, by placing the museum at the north end of the Pleasure Garden, Schinkel inevitably elevated the art museum’s position in society because it took its place among three other important buildings: the Royal Palace, the Cathedral, and the Arsenal. Second, Schinkel carefully controlled the viewing experience of this building. Around 1830, one approached the Altes Museum from Berlin’s main boulevard Unter den Linden (“Under the Linden Trees”—the boulevard was lined with them). Down the street, the Royal Palace anchors the viewer’s vista. As one approached the palace the trees would frame a view of the Cathedral. Upon crossing the bridge and entering the southern end of the Pleasure Garden, the view of the Altes Museum would finally be visible.

      Internally, Schinkel forcefully argued for the rotunda, a space he felt would prepare visitors to experience the building and view works of art.

      Schinkel’s Altes Museum façade conveyed his understanding of the principles underlying the pure linear forms of Greek architecture. Other architects opted for a more direct quotation of Greek architecture.

      In the United States, a fine example of Greek Revival architecture is William Strickland’s Tennessee State Capitol (Nashville, 1845–9). Well-trained (Strickland was trained by B. Henry Latrobe, whom we met above with the U.S. Capitol) and well-traveled (Strickland went to Europe in 1838, traveling through England, France, Italy and Germany. Images from his European sketchbook have been made available online at the Tennessee Virtual Archive “William Strickland Sketchbook”.), Strickland demonstrated his broad working knowledge of historic architectural sources in the Tennessee State Capitol.

      In the Capitol, Strickland referenced a different order (Doric, Ionic, Corinthian) in each main section of the building. Working from the ground upwards, the Capitol had a Doric basement, Ionic porticos, and a Corinthian tower. The Erechtheum (the Acropolis, Athens, Greece) inspired the Ionic porticos, and Strickland used plates of the Choragic Monument of Lysicrates found in The Antiquities of Athens as inspiration for the lantern for his building. Strickland modified the forms of the ancient original with windows to suit modern needs.

      The Gothic Revival

      The Gothic Revival began in Britain and spread internationally and across continents. Arguably the greatest monument to the Gothic Revival is the New Palace of Westminster, better known as the Houses of Parliament (London, 1835–68).

      The Old Palace of Westminster was almost completely destroyed by fire in 1834. On August 18, 1835, a Royal Commission was issued to rebuild the Palace and debate ensued over its appropriate style. Two main camps emerged: Neoclassical versus Gothic. Those in favor of the Neoclassical style supplied evidence such as the style’s popularity and its successful track record in high profile public commissions, such as the United States Capitol. Those who felt that the Gothic would be more appropriate supported their case with the following concepts that would be best articulated by A.W.N. Pugin, in his books Contrasts (1836) and True Principles of Pointed or Christian Architecture (1841):

      • Harmony/Fitness: It was believed that there exists a connection between culture and architectural expression. The Gothic style surfaced during the medieval ages. The architecture produced was viewed as being perfectly in harmony to its needs. During the Gothic Revival, it was hoped that if buildings were constructed in that earlier style that it might resurrect some of the sentiments and the harmony perceived as missing from modern society.
      • Nationalism/Patriotism: At this time it was believed that each culture creates its own distinct style that suits its culture and climate. In the nineteenth century, Gothic architecture was perceived as being an indigenous English style, it would be only natural to draw upon England’s own architectural heritage and not an imported style from the southern European continent. Neoclassical architectural style would further be unsuited to England as it is an architecture produced for its milder Mediterranean climate and would be unsuited to the weather conditions of the north.
      • Function/Honesty: Gothic architecture was viewed as being an honest form of architecture, in which everything included contributed to its construction. Gothic ornament was judiciously placed to enrich and accent structural lines.

      In the end it was decided that architects submit designs in either the Gothic or Elizabethan style. Architect Charles Barry (1795–1860), best known for his classical and Italianate designs, submitted the winning design. Because of his more classical specialty, he employed the talents of A.W.N. Pugin, the vociferous Gothic revivalist mentioned above. The workload between the two men was neatly divided, Barry designed space and structure and Pugin designed the ornament and the interiors.

      Barry’s design was successful for multiple reasons. First, the Houses of Parliament was built on the site of the Old Palace of Westminster and successfully integrated the surviving structures (Westminster Hall and St. Stephen’s Chapel) into the new building complex. Second, Barry created a harmonious—though slightly asymmetrical picturesque—exterior by balancing the horizontal and vertical lines.

      The exterior’s recognizable sand-colored limestone came from Anston Quarry in Yorkshire. This particular stone was selected for its cost effectiveness and because it is a sedimentary rock, it could be easily manipulated. In the twentieth century, parts of the building in which the stone had eroded significantly were replaced with a honey-colored limestone from Medwells Quarry in Rutland.

      Third, Barry’s classical training strongly influenced his logical arrangement of rooms and courtyards, which he based around the classical system of repeating modules. This can best be appreciated by viewing a floorplan of the structure. Four branches of the building radiate out in the cardinal directions: north, south, east and west from a centrally located octagonal lobby. Barry placed the Throne room (located in the House of Lords), the House of Lords, and the House of Commons in line with one another, a subtle underscoring of the line of power in the English government. Pugin designs for the interiors included furniture, tiles, stained glass, and metal work. His most sumptuous decoration appears in the House of Lords, where seemingly every square inch is encrusted with medieval-inspired decoration.

      Switching to the United States, architects such as Richard Upjohn’s used Pugin’s books as a manual to design Gothic Revival buildings like Trinity Church (New York City, NY, 1839–46). Trinity Church was one of the most noteworthy commissions executed in America in the Gothic Revival style. In Trinity Church, one sees a shift occurring in American taste from the Classically inspired to the Gothic and Picturesque. Trinity Church espoused the ideals from leaders of the English Gothic Revival, and Upjohn based its design on an illustration of an “ideal church” from Pugin’s True Principles. Upjohn tweaked several aspects of Pugin’s design to accommodate American building methods and the site such as the vaulting, the pitch of the roof, and the chancel. Longitudinal in plan and made of brownstone masonry, the church was not as elaborately decorated as it could have been.

      The Grammar of Ornament

      Owen Jones’ Grammar of Ornament (London, 1856) is a design manual that has inspired countless generations of architects and designers. Conceived during era of English design reform, the Grammar of Ornament became Jones’ aesthetic treatise. The Grammar of Ornament contains Jones’ 37 propositions (principles) of design, nineteen chapters dedicated to historical types of ornament, and a single chapter dedicated to the common denominator behind all ornament—nature appeared in 100 chromolithographed plates, in which there were 1,000 cropped illustrations ornament, which removed any hint of an original context.

      The quality of the lithographic plates is one factor that made the Grammar of Ornament kuulus. The content of the Grammar of Ornament appealed to architects, designers, and reform design thinkers, as John Kresten Jespersen writes, “for a century (after its publication), almost every architect’s office had a copy of the Grammar of Ornament. ” The intent of this publication was not to give architects, ornamentalists and designers a template from which to copy in their work, rather to allow individuals to absorb lessons from the past and apply this information to the ornament that would suit modern life.

      The Skyscraper

      The skyscraper is an American invention. Created in the second half of the nineteenth century and refined throughout the rest of the nineteenth and early twentieth centuries, skyscrapers—from the very beginning—have been symbols of commerce and prestige. The skyscraper is the first instance where the architectural story begins in America and then spread overseas. Scholars agree that a skyscraper must contain three features:

      • Significant Height: (more vertical than horizontal) This building type was created to suit the need for increased building space in major urban areas, the two most important of which were New York City and Chicago. The scarcity and the cost of land in these and other urban areas forced architects to build in only one direction—upwards.
      • Passenger Elevators: As human beings are usually opposed to walk up more that five flights of stairs, the incorporation of passenger elevators were a blessing. Elevators made each and every floor just as easily accessible and rentable, enabling building to be higher.
      • Metal Frame: Iron’s popularity increased in the middle of the nineteenth century as architects discovered its potential in building construction. Iron was used two ways in architecture: cast and wrought. Cast iron was a strong metal, capable of carrying great weights by compression. Major flaws of cast iron included its brittleness in terms of ductility as well as the irregularity of its compositional makeup. Wrought iron was not as strong as cast iron, but had an advantage in that it could assume any number of shapes. The combination of cast iron posts and more extensive wrought beams revolutionized the way in which architects envisioned structure and space.

      In short, iron allowed architects to build taller and span wider distances than ever before. In other words, advancements made in skyscraper height are closely tied to advancements in building technologies that supported them. Beginning in the 1880s, the more expensive and specialized product, steel began to replace iron as the preferred structural building material (as it contained the same/or increased strength of cast iron and the ductility of wrought iron). In the 1880’s, the first architects made the switch from iron to steel.

      The earliest example of a skyscraper may surprise you. Noted authorities Weisman and Condit concur that Gilman, Kendall & Post’s Equitable Life Assurance Company Building (New York City, 1868–70 destroyed) is the first skyscraper, since it was the first building that was designed and built containing all three of the aforementioned skyscraper features. Our twenty-first-century eyes, accustomed to seeing skyscrapers as enormous structures built of a curtain of metal and glass, would likely not recognize Equitable Life Assurance Company Building as an early descendant. This lost structure (for which no plans survive) is known only through images and building records. At 130 feet in height, this building was not significantly taller than surrounding commercial buildings. Yet, the conscious incorporation of the elevator transformed commercial architecture, as it allowed all eight stories to be easily reached, and therefore easily rentable.

      Architects cloaked the Equitable’s iron skeleton in the only way they knew how: with a grey-granite masonry, arranged with tiers—separated by entablatures—and capped with a hipped roof. In images the structure has a very Second Empire appearance, a style believed to be chosen for its ability, given Haussmann’s opulent Paris, to signify stability and prosperity. From the very beginning, skyscrapers served as office buildings. Throughout the later nineteenth century architects worked to give a characteristic facade to the skyscraper. Two major trends emerged: “wild work” and the Italian Renaissance palace, which can easily be illustrated with noteworthy period examples.

      In Chicago, William LeBaron Jenney’s Home Insurance Building, c. 1885 is an example of “wild work.” “Wild work” was a descriptor used by eminent late-nineteenth century architectural critic Montgomery Schuyler to refer to facades like this one. What Schuyler found wild, or mind-boggling, about this building was the ways in which the horizontal and vertical lines were constantly interrupted. The Home Insurance Building is also noteworthy as it was the first building to use steel construction.

      In New York City, the firm of McKim, Mead, and White gravitated towards a three-part skyscraper façade, evident in the American Safe Deposit Company Building, (1882–4). This building’s three parts (basement, shaft, and third tier of space at the top) are neatly defined. Three-part façade divisions like this inspired critic Montgomery Schuyler (who we just met above) in 1899 to liken such surfaces to the three parts of a classical column: base, shaft, and capital. Over the years, Schuyler’s metaphor has been applied to, and used to explain numerous facades, and has mutated to become the accepted explanation, but is wrong. This type of façade was inspired by Italian Renaissance Palaces such as the tripartite façade of the fourteenth/fifteenth century Palazzo Davanzati, which likewise has a basement, a shaft, and a third tier of space at the top–complete with an order in the loggia. The tripartite formula became a popular pattern used by architects across the nation such as Daniel H. Burnham & Company’s Flatiron Building (New York City, 1901–3). Even two-decades after this façade pattern had been first implemented, it had yet to fall out of style.

      The Aesthetic Movement

      Aesthetic Movement architecture (which is usually called the Queen Anne Style) began in England in the 1860s and then came to America in the 1870s. It was largely used as a secular architectural style, which some critics considered to be a major flaw (since it did not transition into sacred commissions). This style was characterized by its freedom, especially in color, picturesque, and asymmetrical design, and complex ornament. One of its greatest practitioners was R. Norman Shaw and one of the most famous buildings was the New Zealand Chambers Building (London, 1871–3 destroyed), an office building. Shaw used architectural elements to break up flat surfaces and shatter the light across the exterior of this building. The tendency to create highly textured facades would become a feature associated with Aesthetic Movement architecture on both sides of the Atlantic.

      H. Richardson’s William Watts Sherman House (Newport, Rhode Island, 1874–6 and numerous additions) was one of America’s earliest Aesthetic Movement architectural works. Most Americans would be introduced to the other aspects of the Aesthetic Movement at the Centennial Exposition in 1876. The Sherman Residence was a combination of established and innovative architectural features. The established features included the asymmetry (attempting to break the box) of early nineteenth century homes. The innovative feature was a new form of space—the living hall. The Sherman House’s living hall stretched the depth of the building and contained a hearth and a massive staircase. A variety of rooms (public, private, servant quarters) radiated off this living hall which produced an irregular floorplan.

      The irregularity of the floor plan was expressed in the asymmetry of the façade’s exterior. Within the gables Richardson created the silhouette of a saltbox house. The inclusion of this profile is noteworthy as Richardson revived a distinctive aspect of American colonial architecture. Additionally, on the facade, Richardson varied surface texture, allowing light to break apart on the surface, causing a scintillating effect. Inside, a selection of decorative objects—such as art glass—further underscored the philosophy of the Aesthetic Movement.

      Second Empire Paris and Ecole des Beaux Arts Classicism

      Charles Garnier’s Paris Opera House (Paris, 1862–75) is a building about spectacle. A grand structure, it was one of many that fit into Baron Haussmann’s revitalization of urban Paris. The Opera’s spectacle begins with its location. Built on its own island, it is approachable from several streets and the major Avenue de l’Opera, terminating in its own Place (a plaza or square). Though one may be distracted from the shear amount of ornament on the façade, the exterior overlooking the Place can be distilled into a podium-like arcaded base, atop which Garnier placed a colonnade. This colonnade was a recognizable variation of the two-part façade that Bramante’s House of Raphael popularized back in the Italian Renaissance, now quite popular in Paris. Garnier proceeded to adorn this classical façade with sculptural accents for which he employed some of the finest artistic talents in Paris—such as Jean-Baptiste Carpeaux, who sculpted Tants.

      The building’s entrances were designed to accommodate the societal needs of different opera-goers, from the Emperor to the bourgeois. Once inside, the spaces Garnier created is the mark of the classical training regimen of the Ecole des Beaux Arts, the institution that taught Garnier. The spacious lobbies, wide staircases, and sumptuous veneered surfaces served as dramatic platforms and backdrops to an environment designed for people to see and be seen. Underneath these elaborate surfaces, the Opera’s structure made use of the latest advancements in iron construction. Inside and out, this building makes use of Classical sources.

      Although there were almost 200 structures built for the World’s Columbian Exposition (hereafter WCE—Chicago, 1891–3), the fair became a dialectic of two courses in American architecture, Ecole des Beaux Arts classicism (evident in the architecture of the Court of Honor) and Picturesque/Aesthetic Movement (evident in the architecture surrounding the Lagoon). In America, leading up to the WCE, picturesque traditions such as the Aesthetic Movement—with their colored, asymmetrical, and scintillating surfaces—were popular.

      For example, Louis Sullivan’s predominantly red and gold Transportation Building extended this visual tradition to the WCE. In contrast, the majority of the main fair structures were constructed in the tradition taught at the Ecole des Beaux Arts in Paris. These fair buildings were unified by their coloring (white), classically inspired architectural elements, unified cornice line (65’), and axial symmetry. Beaux Arts classicism had such an effect on fairgoers that it would become the favored architectural style in America for the next several decades.

      The differences between these two architectural vogues were further underscored in the WCE’s landscaped environments, designed by landscape architect Frederick Law Olmsted. Olmsted’s landscape architecture for the Court of Honor was a well proportioned symmetrical basin in perfect tandem with the balanced (all buildings had a 65’ cornice line) and symmetrical Ecole des Beaux Arts classicism surrounding it. For the lagoon area, Olmsted designed an irregularly shaped lagoon, in the middle of which was a wooded island with picturesque trails.