incongruous conceptions: owen jones’s plans, elevations
TRANSCRIPT
University of South FloridaScholar Commons
Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School
3-9-2016
Incongruous Conceptions: Owen Jones’s Plans,Elevations, Sections and Details of the Alhambra andBritish Views of SpainAndrea Marie JohnsonUniversity of South Florida
Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd
Part of the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons
This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GraduateTheses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].
Scholar Commons CitationJohnson, Andrea Marie, "Incongruous Conceptions: Owen Jones’s Plans, Elevations, Sections and Details of the Alhambra and BritishViews of Spain" (2016). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/6101
IncongruousConceptions:OwenJones’s
Plans,Elevations,SectionsandDetailsoftheAlhambra
andBritishViewsofSpainby
AndreaM.Johnson
Athesissubmittedinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthedegreeof
MasterofArtsDepartmentofArtandArtHistory
CollegeoftheArtsUniversityofSouthFlorida
MajorProfessor:ElisabethFraser,Ph.D.EsraAkin-Kivanc,Ph.D.AllisonMoore,Ph.D.
DateofApproval:March9,2016
Keywords:Orientalism,Romanticism,NineteenthCentury,GranadaSpain,BritishTravel,JulesGoury,PascualdeGayangos
Copyright©2016,AndreaM.Johnson
i
TABLEOFCONTENTSListofFigures .............................................................................................................................................................iiAbstract ......................................................................................................................................................................... vIntroduction ................................................................................................................................................................1Nineteenth-CenturyBritishPerspectivesonSpain ...................................................................................7 ExploringtheDualOthernessofJones’sAlhambra................................................................................. 23 ExploringtheFluidHistoricCharacterofJones’sAlhambra............................................................... 35Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................. 44Figures ........................................................................................................................................................................ 48AppendixI ................................................................................................................................................................. 73References................................................................................................................................................................. 76
ii
LISTOFFIGURES
Figure1: OwenJones.PlateXXXIVfromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.2.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida. ................................ 48
Figure2: OwenJones.PlateIII,“PlanoftheRoyalArabianPalaceintheAncient
FortressoftheAlhambra”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ColoredLithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida. ........................... 49
Figure3: OwenJones.PlateV,“TransverseSectionoftheCourtoftheFishpond,
LookingTowardsthePalaceofCharlestheFifth”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouth
Florida................................................................................................................................................... 50
Figure4: OwenJones.PlateIV,“ViewoftheCourtoftheFish-PondfromtheHallof
theBark”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,Tampa
Library,UniversityofSouthFlorida. ....................................................................................... 51
Figure5: OwenJones.PlateIX,“Divan,CourtoftheFish-Pond”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,
UniversityofSouthFlorida.......................................................................................................... 52
Figure6: OwenJones.PlateXXIX,“DetailofanArch.Portico,CourtoftheLions.”
fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,
TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida......................................................................... 53
Figure7: OwenJones.PlateXXXV,“CapitalofaColumnfromtheHallofthe
Ambassadors,andFourSmallEngagedShaftsfromtheHalloftheTwo
Sisters”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,
TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida......................................................................... 54
iii
Figure8: OwenJones.PlateXXIII,“CourtoftheMosque”fromPlans,Elevations,
Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida.......................................................................................................... 55
Figure9: OwenJones.PlateXIX,“ViewintheHalloftheTwoSisters”fromPlans,
Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida.......................................................................................................... 56
Figure10:OwenJones.PlateXIII,“EntrancetotheCourtoftheLions(Restored)”
fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida ........................................................................................ 57
Figure11:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePlateXIIIfromPlans,Elevations,
Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintonPaper.Cooper-Hewitt,NationalDesignMuseumLibrary’sRareBooks,SmithsonianInstitutionLibraries.............................................................................. 58
Figure12:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePlateLIfromPlans,Elevations,
Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintonPaper.Cooper-Hewitt,NationalDesignMuseumLibrary’sRareBooks,SmithsonianInstitutionLibraries.............................................................................. 59
Figure13:JamesCavanahMurphy.“TheRoyalPalaceandFortressofAlhamba.At
Granada”fromArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,1813.WoodblockPrintonPaper.GettyResearchInstitute.. ..................................................................................................60
Figure14:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePlateIfromPlans,Elevations,
Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida...................................................................................................................................... 61
Figure15:Tiled‘PlusUltra’muraldatingfromthereignofCharlesV.Photocourtesy
ofLauraEveEggleton .................................................................................................................... 62Figure16:OwenJones.PlateX,“DetailsoftheGreatArches.HalloftheBark”from
Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida ........................................................................................ 63
Figure17:OwenJones.DescriptivePlateX(frontandback)fromPlans,Elevations,
Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.Woodblock
iv
PrintsonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida ................................................................................................................................ 64
Figure18:JohnFrederickLewis,CourtyardofAlhambra,1832-1833.Watercolor
drawingonpaper.TheFitzwilliamMuseum. ...................................................................... 65Figure19:JoseBecquer.RichardFordasaMajo,1832.WatercoloronPaper... ........................ 66Figure20:JohnFrederickLewis.AndthePrayeroftheFaithshallsavetheSick,1872.
OilonCanvas.YaleCenterforBritishArt.............................................................................. 67Figure21:DavidRoberts.“TowerofComares”fromTheTouristinSpain.Granada.
1835.LithographonPaper.NewYorkPublicLibrary..................................................... 68Figure22:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePageI“TowerofComares” fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.
1836-1842.WoodblockPrintsonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida......................................................................... 69
Figure23:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePageIfromPlans,Elevations,
Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintsonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida...... .......................................................................................................................... 70
Figure24:OwenJones.PlateXXVII,“DetailsofanArchintheHallofJustice”from
Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida....... ................................................................................. 71
Figure25:DavidRoberts.“HallofJustice”fromTheTouristinSpain.Granada,1835.
LithographonPaper.NewYorkPublicLibrary.................................................................. 72
v
ABSTRACT
ThisthesisanalyzesPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra(1836-
1842)byBritishArchitectOwenJonesinrelationtoBritishconceptionsofSpaininthe
nineteenthcentury.AlthoughmodernscholarsoftenviewJones’sworkasanaccurate
visualaccountoftheAlhambra,Iarguethathisworkisnotonlyinterestedinaccuracy,but
itisalsoare-presentationofthefourteen-centurymonumentbasedonJones’sideologies
andcreativefaculties.InsteadofviewingtheAlhambrathroughaculturallysensitive,
historicallens,JonestreateditasanImaginaryGeography,asEdwardSaidcalledit,
throughwhichhecouldpromotehisinterestsandperspectives.
AlthoughthereweremanyBritishviewsofSpaininnineteenth-century,thisthesis
willfocusontwosetsofseeminglycontradictoryconceptionsofSpainthatwereespecially
importanttoJones’svisualandideologicalprograminAlhambra:Spain’sstatusasboththe
CatholicandIslamicOther,anditsfrequentinterpretationsthroughbothromanticand
reform-orientedlenses.ThroughacloserlookatArabianAntiquitiesofSpainbyJames
CavanahMurphyandtheillustrationsfromTheTouristinSpain:GranadabyDavidRoberts,
Ishowtheprevalenceofthesemindsetsinnineteenth-centuryreconstructionsofthe
Alhambra.Then,IcompareportionsoftheseworkstoplatesfromJones’sAlhambrato
illustrateJones’ssimilaradaptationoftheseperspectivesdespitethevisualpeculiarityof
hisworkasawhole.
1
INTRODUCTION
ModernscholarsheraldPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra
(1836-1842)byarchitectOwenJones(1809-1874)asascholarlytreatiseontheAlhambra
inanerawhenmostrepresentationsofthemonumenttransformeditaccordingto
Europeanperspectives.Scholarsarguethatwhilehiscontemporarieswerere-imagining
theAlhambrabasedonnineteenth-centuryprinciples,Joneswascreatingacomprehensive
two-volumebookthattranscendedthevaluesofhistime.1Indeed,Jonesandhispartner,
FrencharchitectJulesGoury(1803-1834)tookgreatcaretofaithfullyreconstructthe
medievalmonumentinprint.In1834,JonesandGourytraveledtogethertoSpain,residing
intheAlhambraforsixmonthstostudyitsarchitecturalornamentatgreatlength.2These
menproduceddetaileddrawings,maderubbings,andevenstudiedtracesofpaintfoundin
thesurvivingornamentalschemestocreatethemostcomprehensivevisualandtextual
surveyofthemonumentpossible.InhisAlhambra,Jonesillustratedforhisreaders
ornamentalandarchitecturalthemesfromallovertheAlhambrapalace.Heincluded
comprehensivetranslationsofArabicinscriptionsanddetaileddescriptionsofhisimages
togivereadersabroadunderstandingofthearchitecturalprogramofthemedieval
monument.Tofurtherextendhisstudy,Jonescreatedasecondvolumeinwhichhevisually
elaborated,toanevengreaterdegree,upontheornamentationoftheAlhambra(seefigure
1SeeCarolA.HrvolFlores,"FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory:OwenJones'sStudyofthe
Alhambra,"StudiesinVictorianArchitectureandDesign1,(2008):18-29.2JoneswouldreturntotheAlhambrain1837toreexamineseveralfeaturesoftheAlhambrafor
forthcomingplates.
2
1).Whencompiled,Jones’splatesanddescriptionsfilltwovolumes.Hisworkiswrittenin
bothEnglishandFrenchandcontainsonehundredandthreeplates,fifty-sevenpagesof
descriptionandArabictranslations,andatwenty-pagehistoryofGranada,Spain.
DespitethebreadthandmeticulousnessofJones’sAlhambra,hisworkisnotonly
interestedinaccuracy,butitisalsoaproductofhisideologiesandcreativefaculties.3
ScholarswhoviewJones’sAlhambraasapreciseaccountdivorcedfromnineteenth-
centuryBritishattitudestowardSpainunderratetherelationshipbetweenJones’s
Alhambraandtheworksofhiscontemporaries.Further,theycreateasharpdivideinhis
career.Whileseveralofhislaterendeavors,includingtheGrammarofOrnament(1856),
areregardedasintimatelyconnectedtocontemporaryideologies,theworkofhisearlier
careeristhoughttoriseabovethepreconceptionsofhispeers.4Themajorproductionsof
hisearlyandlatercareerarealmostneverdiscussedinconcertatgreatlengthbecauseof
thisdiscrepancy.InanefforttoextrapolatedeepermeaningfromJones’sAlhambra,and
createmorecongruitybetweenhisearlyandlatecareer,Iarguethatthisbookwasnotan
objectivereportonthemonument,butaninterpretationoftheAlhambrabasedon
multifariousBritishconceptionsofSpain’sOthernessandhistoricstatus.5
3Jones’sattemptataccuracyshouldnotbeconfusedwithitsrealization.Tocreateanentirely“accurate”reconstructionofamonumentwouldbeimpossibleas“reconstruction”inherentlyimpliestheuseofimaginative,creativefaculties.4SeeCatherineLanford,"ImperialismandtheParlor:OwenJones's'TheGrammarofOrnament',"TheWordsworthCircle,38(2001).SeealsoPhilipCrang,andSoniaAshmore,"Thetransnationalspacesofthings:SouthAsiantextilesinBritainandTheGrammarofOrnament,"EuropeanReviewOfHistory16,no.5(October2009):655-678.BotharticlesdescribeJones’sGrammarofOrnamentasintimatelytiedtoBritishOrientalismandImperialism.5TheimpulsetorejectthenotionofJones’sobjectivitycomesfromanacceptanceofpostmodernphilosophyasameanstounderstandthecreationofartandliterature.IfIacceptthatJonescouldcreateanobjectivereportoftheAlhambra,becausehesomehowunderstoodthemonumentmorecompletelythanhispeers,Iamindangeroflegitimizingmetanarratives.FormoreonthedelegitimizationofmetanarrativesseeJean-FrançoisLyotard,ThePostmodernCondition:AReport
3
ScholarsbegantocharacterizeJones’sAlhambraaslessvalue-ladenthan
contemporaneousworksintheearliesteraofscholarshiponJones.Indoingso,they
createdadichotomybetweentheappearanceofaccuracyandtheembodimentof
ideologieswithinhiswork.Takentoitsfullestconclusion,thisinterpretationnegatesthe
possibilitythatperspectivesthatarenotcompletelycongruouscouldexistinhis
productionsimultaneously.
ArthistorianMichaelDarbyproducedthefirstbroadoverviewofJones’slifeand
workinhis1976dissertation,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal.”6Darby’sworkis
invaluabletothefieldbecauseitemphasizestheimportanceofJones’scontributionto
nineteenth-centurydesign,architecture,andespeciallycolortheoryinawaythatno
scholarshiphadbefore.Inhisproject,DarbybegantocontextualizeJonesbystressingthe
importanceofhiscircleofcolleagues,buthealwaysemphasizedJones’sinfluenceoverthe
restofthegroupandhisuniquenessamongthem.ThisperspectiveonJonesfirmlyplanted
himwithinthecanonofnineteenth-centuryarchitects,butitdidnotthoroughlyinvestigate
ofhisideologies.ThethirteenpagesdiscussingJones’sAlhambra,inwhichDarbyexplains
thegeneraloutlineofJones’svolumes,andconnectsthemtocolortheory,arealsotoobrief
tounpackallofitsimaginativeaspects.7
ArchitecturalscholarCarolFlores’scollectiveworksonJonesdiscusshisAlhambra
atgreaterlengththanDarby’sEasternIdeal,buttheypaintJonesinaverysimilarlight.In
herdissertation,“OwenJones:Architect”(1996),FloresbuildsuponDarby’sgroundwork
tofocusmorecloselyonJones’sarchitecturaltheoryandothercontributionstothefield,asonKnowledge,trans.GeoffBenningtonandBrianMassumi(Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesota,1984).6MichaelDarby,"OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal."(Dr.,TheUniversityofReading,1974).7SeeDarby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”42-55.
4
wellashisimpactonlaterarchitectsandtheorists.8ShediscussesJones’sAlhambrain
moredepththanDarby,butshecreatesadichotomybetweenJones’sworkand
contemporaryculturalconstructsstatingthat,“AnexaminationofJones'stext[inthe
Alhambra]affirmshisanalyticalapproachtohissubject.Hereplacestheemotivehyperbole
andfigurativedescriptionsofhiscontemporarieswithexplicitandperceptiveanalysis.”9
Inalaterarticleentitled“FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory:OwenJones’sstudy
oftheAlhambra,”FloreselaboratesJones’sAlhambramorefully,stressingitsimportance
asateachingtool.10Thispublicationelaboratesthediscussioninherdissertation,butshe
reaffirmsoncemorethecontrastbetweenJones’sapproachandtheimaginative
constructionsofhispeers.
Severalauthors,examiningJones’sAlhambralessspecifically,provideamore
comprehensivecontextforhiswork.SaraSearightstandsoutwithinthisgroup.Her2006
article,“OwenJones:TravelandVisionoftheOrient,”elaboratesuponthescholarsand
artistsJonesmayhaveencounteredinhistravelsEast.11Byexaminingtheviewpointsof
theseothermen,SearightinformsherreaderofthecomplexunderstandingoftheEastern
OtherthatwasprevalentinJones’sera.AlthoughsheemphasizesJones’sinterestincolor,
Searight’smorespecificcontextualizationofJoneshasbeenusefultothisstudy.Claudia
HopkinsneeHeideplacesJones’sAlhambrafirmlywithinhiscontextinherarticle,"The
AlhambrainBritain:BetweenForeignizationandDomestication.”12Inthiswork,Heide
8CarolFlores,“OwenJones,Architect."(Ph.D.,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,1996).9Flores,“OwenJones,Architect,”50.10Flores,“FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory.”11SarahSearight,"OwenJones:TravelandVisionoftheOrient."Alif:JournalOfComparativePoeticsno.26(2006):128-146.12ClaudiaHeide,"TheAlhambrainBritain:betweenForeignizationandDomestication,"ArtinTranslation2,no.2(2010):201-222.
5
discussesthevariousrepresentationsoftheAlhambrathatalternatelymadeitmore
orientalincharacter,ortriedtomakeitmorefamiliartoBritishaudiences.However,Heide
doesnotfindastrongconnectionbetweenJones’sAlhambraandtheseartistictactics,
statingthatJones“favoredscholarshipoverRomanticsentiment.”13LauraEggleton’s2011
dissertation,“Re-envisioningtheAlhambra:Readingsofarchitectureandornamentfrom
medievaltomodern,”alsobearsmentionhere.14AlthoughshefocusesonJones’sAlhambra
CourtattheCrystalPalace(1854)insteadofhisAlhambrapublication,Eggletongoesinto
greatdetailaboutnineteenth-centuryperspectivesontheAlhambra,andhowJones
contributedtotheseunderstandings.SheascribestoJonesan“analytical”approachnot
commonamonghispeers,butiscarefultoemphasizethathisapproachtotheAlhambrain
hislatercareerre-envisagedthemonumentinaccordancewithpopularopinionandhis
personalperspective.
ExpandinguponthefoundationlaidbyEggleton,Heide,andSearight,thisstudy
constitutesamorecomprehensivelookatJones’sAlhambraasanimaginative
reconstructionoftheAlhambramonument.Myargumentwillrevolvearoundthe
seeminglycontradictorywaysthatBritishscholarsunderstoodSpaininthisera,andhow
Jones’sinterpretationoftheAlhambramanifeststheseunderstandings.Jonesadopted
theseperspectivesformanyuniquereasons,butthewaysinwhichtheyaremanifestedin
hisbookarereminiscentoftheworksofhispeers.Jones’sprimarilyIslamicrepresentation
oftheAlhambracriticizedthemodernCatholicreligiousandarchitecturalpresenceatthe
monument,reiteratingthepopularviewthatboththeMuslimandCatholicinhabitantsof
13Heide,“TheAlhambrainBritain:betweenForeignizationandDomestication,”210.14LaraEveEggleton,"Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra:ReadingsofArchitectureandOrnamentfromMedievaltoModern."(Ph.D.thesis,UniversityofLeeds,2011).
6
theAlhambraweretheOther.Additionally,Jonesincludedromanticdepictionsalongside
hishighlydetailedreconstructionsofarchitecturalandornamentalschemestoappealto
wideaudienceswhilepromotinghisdesignreforms.Scholarshavenotfullyunderstoodthe
connectionbetweenJonesandtheseseeminglycontradictorypremisesbecauseitseems
thatJoneswasprimarilyinterestedinIslamicarchitectureanddesignreform.However,a
closerreadingofhistextandimagesshowsthattheseotherconcerns,soprevalentwithin
theworksofJones’speers,broadenedthescopeofhispublicationaswell.Inwhatfollows,I
willcloselyexaminetheseinconsistentnineteenth-centuryviewsofSpainandtheir
manifestationinJones’sAlhambra.15
15AllconclusionsIdrawarebasedonmyobservationsofPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra(OCoLC02803628)heldintheUniversityofSouthFloridaSpecialCollections,unlessotherwisespecified.
7
NINETEENTH-CENTURYBRITISHPERSPECTIVESONSPAIN
TheAlhambrathatstandsinGranada,Spaintodayisprimarilyafourteenth-century
Nasridconstruction.However,modernscholarsbelievethataJewishvizierwasthefirstto
buildontheAlhambrasiteduringtheeleventh-centuryBerberruleinSpain.TheNasrid
Dynasty,oncesovereignovermuchofthesouthernIberianPeninsula,wassubsequently
sequesteredtoGranadaduringFerdinandIII’sSpanishinvasionin1248.Threeofitsrulers,
IsmacilI(r.1314–25),YusufI(r.1333–54),andMuhammadV(r.1354–59,1362–91),were
theprimaryconstructorsofthepalace-fortress,whichwasfrequentlyrenovatedandbuilt
uponforthenexttwocenturies.16Fromitsinception,theAlhambrawasafluidmonument,
undergoingmultipleadditionsandrenovations,andoftenservingasahometo
heterogeneousgroups.
Inthenineteenthcentury,historianshadadifferentunderstandingofthe
monument’sspecifichistory,butwereveryinterestedinhighlightingitsfluidcharacter.
Historiansweredividedinthiseraaboutthefirstgrouptolaythefoundationsofthe
Alhambrasite.SomecreditedtheRomans,whileothersfavoredthePhoenicians.Most
agreedthatrebelMuslimIbnu’l-ahmartookpossessionofGranadaandneighboringJaen
fromtheAlhomadesaround1232,allowingeitherhimorhissuccessorMohammedIIto
16DepartmentofIslamicArt."TheArtoftheNasridPeriod(1232–1492)".InHeilbrunnTimelineofArtHistory.(NewYork:TheMetropolitanMuseumofArt,2000–).http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/nasr/hd_nasr.htm(October2002).
8
buildtheAlhambraastheyknewitintheirera.17However,thefluidcharacterofSpainand
theAlhambra,asperceivedbytheartistsandscholarsdiscussedbelow,heldmuchmore
importthanthehistoricaldetailsreconstructedbytheirpeers.
ItwastheinstabilityandmutabilityofSpain’scharacteristicsandattributesinthe
nineteenth-centuryEuropeanmind,notitshistoricalbackground,thatallowedforthe
proliferationofmultipleseeminglyincompatibleviewsofitsmonuments.AsClaudia
HopkinsneeHeidesuccinctlysummarizes,theAlhambrawas,amongotherSpanish
monuments,especiallysusceptibletovariableinterpretations:
Firmlylocatedinthepast,theAlhambraofferednoresistancetoitspowerfultranslators.Likeaplaything,itwasdismantled,brokendownintopieces,puttogetheragaininlinewiththelatesttaste,intellectualconcerns,demandsofthemarket,andultimatelyconsumerism.18
Thismutablespacewithacharacterthatis,inpart,fabricatedbyitsWesternviewersis
whatEdwardSaidcallsan“ImaginaryGeography.”Thiskindofgeography,Saidargues,
reflectstheEuropeancreationoftheOrientbasedonEurocentricpreconceptions.This
fabricatedOtherhasnovoiceofitsownbecauseitonlyexistsasaproductofEuropean
thoughtsaboutit.19InsteadofunderstandingtheOtherthroughaculturallysensitive
historicallens,scholarsoftheEastcreatedImaginaryGeographieswhichtheyimbuedwith
theirownpreconceivednotionsaboutEasternculturalcharacter,evolutionaryinferiority,
andcolorfulheritage.TheseimaginativereconstructionsoftheEastwerewildlypopularin
17HistoricalNoticebyPascualdeGayangos,precedingPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambrabyOwenJones.PopularscholarlyopinionbeforedeGayangosheldthatIbnu’l-ahmar,nothissuccessor,beganconstructionoftheAlhambra.DeGayangoschallengedthisperspectiveintheprefacetoJones’sbook.18ClaudiaHeide,"TheAlhambrainBritain,”219.19EdwardWSaid,Orientalism.(NewYork:VintageBooks,1994),55-57.Said’sconstructionofawhollypassiveotherisnarrowinitsvision.However,intryingtounderstandhowJones’sowncultureimpactedhim,itisnotexpedientheretoexpounduponthewaysthattheOtherrespondedtoandreshapedtheImaginaryGeographycreatedbytheBritish.
9
Jones’stimeandwerereiteratedsofrequentlywithintheOrientalistdiscoursethatthey
wereconsideredobjectivefact.
AlthoughSpainisnotpartofthegeographic“Orient,”itssimilarlymutablecharacter
andhistoricconnectiontotheEastmadeitsusceptibletothisformofinterpretation.The
SpanishImaginaryGeography,ascreatedbytheBritish,allowedfortheheterogeneous
perspectivesontheAlhambrathatexistedinJones’stime,butscholarsdeemphasizethe
waysinwhichJonestreatedtheAlhambra,insomeways,asanideologicallyloaded
ImaginaryGeography.HisrepresentationsofthephysicalaspectsoftheAlhambraare
generallyaccuratebecauseofhiscarefulresearch,butthechoiceshemaderegardingwhat
toincludewithinhisbookandregardingthemodesofrepresentationheemployedreflect
theBritishImaginaryGeography.AlthoughJoneswassuccessfulinformallyappreciating
thematerialremainsoftheAlhambra,hisunderstandingofthestructuredidnotalignwith
localizedexperiencesoftheAlhambrainitsnativeculture.Previousscholars,whofocus
moreonJones’sformalaccuracythanhisideologicalcontext,havesimplifiedJones’s
complexrelationshiptothismonument.
Inthenineteenth-centuryBritishcontext,dualperspectivesonSpainwerenot
uncommon.Atthistime,Britishcitizenswerebeginningtotraveltomoreremoteand
exoticlocationsthaneverbefore.Spain,asadestinationthatwasforeign,buteasily
accessible,wascomingintovogueasatouristdestination.20Becauseofitsincreased
popularity,Britishacademics,novelists,andtravelwritersbegantowriteaboutSpanish
Iberiamoreoften.Bothscholarlyandpopularpublicationswereproducedinlarge
20GrahamMowlandMichaelBarke,"ChangingVisitorPerceptionsofMalaga(Spain)anditsDevelopmentasaWinterHealthResortintheNineteenthCentury,"StudiesinTravelWriting18,no.3(07,2014),234.
10
quantity,informingreadersaboutmanyaspectsoftheSpanishcharacter,includingits
culturalcustoms,beliefs,ideologies,anditspeople.Withinthiscontext,Britonswereable
tosimultaneouslyadoptseeminglyincompatibleviewsofSpainwithoutquestioningtheir
veracity.ThetwomostprominentdichotomousperspectivesonSpaininJones’sworkare
itspositionasbothIslamicandCatholic,anditsstatusasbothstaticandactive.Inthis
section,Iwillexpounduponthemanifestationoftheseperspectivesinvariouspublications
asawaytointroduceJones’sAlhambraanditsideologicalrelationshiptotheworkofhis
peers.
ThefirstsetofseeminglycontradictoryconceptionsaroseasBritonsconsidered
Spain’salterity.AsapartofSouthernEurope,SpainwassusceptibletoOtheringby
NorthernEuropeans.Intheforum“Europe’sSouthernQuestion:TheOtherWithin”in
Nineteenth-CenturyContexts,JosephA.ButtigiegexplorestheissueofNorthernprejudice
againstSoutherncountriesinnineteenth-centuryEurope.21Buttigieghighlightshow
Montesquieu’stheoriesofclimatologyledtoawidespreadperceptionthatthewarmer
climatesofSouthernEuropeadverselyaffectedthemoralcharacterofSouthern
Europeans.22Lessmoral,andlesscapableoftechnologicalandculturaladvancement,the
countriesofSouthernEuropewereconsiderednaturallyinferiortotheirNorthern
Europeancounterparts.
Nineteenth-centuryBritons,persuadedinpartbytheoriesofclimatology,were
acutelyawareofthedissimilaritybetweenSpainandBritain.However,severalkey
elementsoftheSpanishcharacterwerehighlightedasthemainmanifestationofSpain’s
21JosephA.Buttigieg,introductionto"Forum—Europe'sSouthernQuestion:TheOtherwithin."
Nineteenth-CenturyContexts26,no.4(12/01;2014/11,2004):311-314.22Buttigieg,introductionto“Forum—Europe’sSouthernQuestion,”333.
11
“Otherness”.Forsome,SpainwastheCatholicOtherthatdestroyedthewonderful
civilizationoftheMoorsandcorruptedthenationthroughitsrelianceonthepharisaical,
superstitiouspriesthood.23DespitethisCatholicdominanceintheregion,andthefinal
expulsionoftheMoorsin1609,SpainalsomaintainedanIslamiccharacterinthemindsof
manynineteenth-centuryEuropeans.24EvencontemporarySpaniards,whoboreno
relationtothemedievalMusliminhabitantsofSpain,werethoughttobemore“Oriental”
thanEuropean.25ThisalternateconceptionofSpain’sreligiouscharacterledtodepictions
ofSpainthatemphasizedtheexotic,themysterious,andtheEasternflavorofthenation.In
somecases,theCatholicandIslamicnaturesofSpainwerewoventogetherwithinasingle
artisticproductionleadingtoacomplexreinventionofitsmonuments.
IrishAntiquarianJamesCavanahMurphy’s(1760-1814)ArabianAntiquitiesof
Spain,publishedposthumouslyin1816,wasonesuchproduction.Itwasthemost
importantbookofillustrationsofSpaininitstime,anditwasstillwidelyregardedwhen
JonespublishedhisAlhambra.26Joneshadacopyofthispublicationinhislibrary,
suggestingitsimportanceinthecreationofhismonumentalproduction.27PartIof
Murphy’sbookwascomposedofninelithographicillustrationsofCordova—primarily
focusingonthearchitectureofthemosqueprecinct.Themoresubstantialsecondpart
describedandillustrated“antiquities”(mainlyarchitectural)fromGranada.Ofthese
23“Moor”wasatermusedinthenineteenth-centurytodescribetheIslamicpeoplesofal-Andalus,
howevertheterm“Moorish”oftenreferredtostylisticqualitiesfrommanydifferentgeographical
regionsintheMuslimworld.(SeeMcSweeny,47).24ClaudiaHeide,"ADreamoftheSouth:IslamicSpain."inTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,editedbyBaker,Christopher,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton.(Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009),65.25Heide,“ADreamoftheSouth,”65.26DiegoSaglia,PoeticCastlesinSpain:BritishRomanticismandFigurationsofIberia,(Amsterdam;Atlanta:Rodopi,2000),261.27CarolFlores,“OwenJones,Architect."(Ph.D.,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,1996),40.
12
ninety-sevenplates,seventy-sevendepictsomeportionoftheAlhambra,illustratingthe
monument’searlyimpactonBritisharchitectsandtravelers.Murphy’sworkis
characterizedbyromanticdescriptions,emphasizingthesublime,anddetailed
reproductionsshowinghisimmensetechnicalcuriosity.Murphy’sendorsementofthe
publicationofTheHistoryoftheMahometanEmpireinSpain,tobereadasanintroduction
tobook,illustrateshisinterestineducatinghisaudience,whilemanyofhisplatesindicate
thathewantedtoenchantthem.28
Thetitleofhisbook,ArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,revealstheimplicitconnection
MurphysawbetweenSpainandIslam.Arabianantiquitiesweresuchanimportantpartof
theSpanishcharacterthattheymeritedtheirownbook.Theinclusionofsomanyplatesof
theAlhambrawithinthisvolumeshowstheenduringIslamiccharacterofitslayout,
architecture,andornament.MurphyalsotiedtheAlhambratoIslamthroughmythical
storiesandanecdotesfromthelivesofMuslimrulersofGranada.29
DespiteMurphy’spurportedfocusonArabianantiquities,healsohighlightedthe
presenceoftheSpanishCatholicclergythroughouthisbook.Manyofhisplatesdepict
monasticfiguresinanegativelight(discussedinmoredepthbelow),andseveralofhis
descriptionshighlightwhatMurphycallsthe“furiousbigotryoftheSpaniards.”30Inhis
descriptionforPlateXI,MurphycriticizestheimpositionofthepalaceofCharlesVwithin
28JamesCavanahMurphyandThomasHartwellHorne.TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain.(London:Cadell&Davies,1815),7.Subtitled“containingageneralhistoryoftheArabs,theirinstitutions,conquests,literature,arts,sciences,andmanners,totheexpulsionoftheMoors,”TheHistoryoftheMahometanEmpireinSpainwaswrittenbylinguistJohnShakespearandProtestanttheologianandlibrarianThomasHartwellHorneasanintroductiontoArabianAntiquitiesofSpain.29SeeMurphy,TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,descriptionsforPlatesXI,XV,XXIX,XLIIinwhichMurphydiscussesMoorishtreasure,theKeyofGod,thelastMoorishSultana,andMoorishdisregardforKoranicmandates. 30Murphy,ArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,12.
13
theAlhambracomplex,andprovideshismostscathingreviewoftheCatholicMonarchsof
SpainandtheirunscrupuloustreatmentoftheMoors:
…Inanyothersituationbutthis,thepalaceofCharlesV.wouldjustlyexciteadmiration:buthereitismisplaced,andproducesonlydisgust,especiallywhenitisrecollectedthatitsexpensewasdefrayedbypartofthemoneyobtainedunderafalsepretencefromtheunhappyMoors.ThatoppressedpeoplehadpresentedtheEmperorwith80,000ducats(accordingtoPedraza,butM.Peyronsays1,600,000ducats),asaboonfornotdeprivingthemoftheArabiclanguage.Theartfulmonarch,receivedtheirmoney,anddeludedthemwithpromisesthatwereneverfulfilled,andwhichdidnotevenputastoptotheinfamoussystemofpersecutingandransomingthem,undertheinsidiouspretenceofeffectingtheirconversion.31
MurphyadmitstoadmiringthepalaceofCharlesVforitsformalqualities.However,the
king’smaliciouspracticesinSpaininthenameofCatholicismtaintedMurphy’sperception
ofthestructurewithinthecontextoftheAlhambra.Murphy’soutrageattheimpositionof
CatholicismuponIslamwithintheAlhambraindicateshowthecoexistenceofboth
religiousOtherswasacentralaspectoftheSpanishcharacterinhismind.
AnothersetofseeminglyinconsistentviewpointsemergedasBritonsconsidered
whethertheAlhambrawasastaticmonumentfromthepastthatshouldbeviewedthrough
anostalgiclens,orwhetheritwasanactive,livingmonumentthatcouldshape
contemporaryideologies.RomanticartistsandwritersweredrawntoSpainbecauseofits
popularityamongtouristsandarmchairtravelers.However,therewasalsointerestin
Spainasacatalystforintellectualdiscovery.ThroughstudiesofSpain,Britishtravelersand
audiencesnotonlygrewtounderstandmoreaboutthehistoryoftheregion,theyalso
attemptedtounderstandandshapenineteenth-centuryculture.Individualspromotedtheir
ideologiesandtheoriesaboutmanydifferentfacetsofhistoricalandcontemporarysociety
throughtheirpublishedperspectivesonSpanish.TreatingSpainasaplatformfortheir31Ibid,8.
14
ideas,politicaltheoristspromotedprogressivism,socialactivistsventuredtounderstand
theimplicationsofslavery,andfemaleauthorstriedtopromotewomen’srights.32Ifan
idea,policy,orpracticewasunpopularinBritain,perhapsitsmeritscouldbejustified
throughrelatedphenomenainSpainanditwouldgainacceptance.Whilethismayseem
inconsistentwiththewhimsical,nostalgiccharacterofSpainpromotedbytheRomantics,
manyauthorsandartistsvisualizedtheAlhambraasbothperpetuallynostalgicand
imminentlyrelevanttocontemporarydiscourses.
ScottishartistandRoyalAcademicianDavidRoberts(1796-1864)representedthis
dualperspectiveoftheAlhambra.HeillustratedtheimportantTheTouristinSpain:
Granada,byThomasRoscoe,in1835tocapitalizeoncontemporaryinterestinromantic
reconstructionsofSpainandtheAlhambra.33Thisvolumebecameoneofthemostpopular
iterationsofJennings’LandscapeAnnualseries,whichallowedtheBritishmiddle-classto
cheaplycollectfineartastheyfantasizedabouttraveltootherlocales.34Theentireseries
ofSpanishAnnuals(1835-1838;Granada,Andalusia,BiscayandtheCastiles,Spainand
Morocco)wasverylucrativeforJennings,anditwasoneoftheformativeproductionsin
Roberts’sartisticcareer.35ThomasRoscoeintroduceshisworkasbothfactualand
romantic,basedonhispersonalnostalgiaandthewhimsicalnarrativesthroughouthistext.
Roberts’sillustrationsandtheaccompanyingdescriptionscomplementRoscoe’s
32JuanL.Sanchez,"Spain,Politics,andtheBritishRomanticImagination."(Ph.D.,UniversityofNotreDame,2007),68;DavidHowarth,TheInventionofSpain:CulturalRelationsbetweenBritainandSpain,1770-1870,(Manchester,UK;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress;DistributedexclusivelyintheUSAbyPalgrave,2007),23;John-DavidLopez,"TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain"(Ph.D.,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles),11-12.33Heide,“AlhambrainBritain,”206.34DiegoSaglia,"Imag(in)ingIberia:LandscapeAnnualsandMultimediaNarrativesoftheSpanishJourneyinBritishRomanticism."JournalofIberian&LatinAmericanStudies12,no.2(08,2006),126.35Saglia,“Imag(in)ingIberia,”128.
15
purposes—alternatingbetweenthehistoricalandtheromanticallyanecdotal.Roberts’s
descriptionofthevignetteonthetitlepageillustrateshisromanticsentiments:
Theaspectoftheentireregionisnowwildanddesolate,butstill,inspots,retains
marksofitsformercultivation.Althoughalmosttotallyneglected,thesoilissorich,
thatthetouristhasthegreatestdifficultyinkeepinghishorsefromsinkingoverthe
kneesinthethickalluvialsoil.36
Thisstyleofdescriptionnicelycomplementshisillustrations,discussedbelow,which
interprettheAlhambraalmostexclusivelythrougharomanticlens.
WhileRobertsconformedtotheromanticpurposesofthepublicationasawhole,he
alsousedhisillustrationstopromotehistheoriesabouttheconnectionbetweenGothicand
Islamicarchitecture.37Roberts,amongothersinthenineteenthcentury,believedthat
IslamicarchitecturegaverisetotheGothicstyleinEurope.38Hewasabletogarnerfavor
forthisidea,whichwaspreviouslyunpopular,throughhisrepresentationsofthe
Alhambra.39ForRoberts,thenostalgic,historiccharacterofthemonumentdidnot
invalidateitsimpactoncontemporarytheory.Rather,inproductionslikeRoberts’s,thereis
asubtleandintricatebalancebetweentheromanticizationoftheAlhambraandthe
applicationofitsprinciplestonineteenth-centurydebates.
Thesubtlebalanceofwhatmodernscholarsmightconsiderconflictingideologies,
foundintheworksofbothMurphyandRoberts,arefoundtoanequaldegreeinOwen
Jones’sPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra.Thisbook,publishedserially
from1836to1842,standsapartfromtheworksofMurphyandRobertsbecauseofits
36ThomasRoscoe,TheTouristInSpain:Granada.(London:R.JenningsandCo.,1835),x.37 ToniaRaquejo,"The'ArabCathedrals':MoorishArchitectureasseenbyBritishTravellers."TheBurlingtonMagazine128,no.1001(August,1986),560.38Thisistheviewstillheldtodaybymanyscholars.
39Raquejo,“The‘ArabCathedrals’”,555-563.
16
breadthanditsattemptatvisualandhistoricalaccuracy.40However,Jones’sperspectiveon
theAlhambraissimilarlycomplexandequallyevidentthroughhisvisualandliterary
programs.LikeMurphy,JonesrespondstoSpainasanunfavorablyCatholic,but
perpetuallyIslamiclocale.LikeRoberts,hisworkappealstohisviewersasromanticand
nostalgicwhileitsdetailspromotehisarchitecturaltheories.
Jones’suseofcolor,oftenstudiedbyscholars,isoneofthemainindicatorsofJones’s
distinctlynineteenth-centuryperspectiveontheAlhambra.Chromolithography,Jones
found,wasmuchmorecomplicatedthanstandardlithographicpractice,butitwastheonly
processthatcouldfaithfullyreproducetheboldcolorsofhisAlhambra.Afterinitiallyhiring
DayandHaghetocreatehiscolorfulplates,Jonesboughthisownlithographicpresswhich
hesetupat11JohnStreet,Adelphi.41Atthispoint,Jonesbecamedeeplyinvolvedinthe
printingprocesshimself,hiringagroupofprinters“after[his]ownheart,”whowouldhelp
himproduceasuperiorproduct.42Jonestooksuchpainstoperfectthelithographyinhis
Alhambrabecausepromotingpolychromyinornamentationwasanimportantpartofhis
comprehensiveprogram.Whileheeducatedandexcitedhisaudiencewithhisdepictions
anddescriptionsoftheAlhambra,hewantedapprovalofthepolychromaticsystemsof
ornamentationheproducedforGreatBritain.
TheunclearorganizationofJones’sbookalsoindicateshisgoalsandperspectives
beyondscholarship.Inthefirstvolume,Jones’splatesareorganizedneitherbyimagekind
orrelativegeography.Forresearchandexplanationpurposes,IhavecategorizedJones’s
40WhenhewasunabletoobtainsponsorshipfromtheFrenchgovernment,Jonesfundedmuchof
theAlhambraprojecthimself,receivingremunerationfromhis163subscribers.KathrynFerry,“OwenJonesandChromolithography,”ArchitecturalHistory,46(2003),176-177.41 Darby,"OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”45.JonesemployedtheVizetellyBrothersandCo.toprinthiswoodblocksandtext,andGaywood&Longwarthtoprinthisengravings.42Ferry,“OwenJonesandChromolithography,”180.LetterfromJonestoBonomi,17June1836.
17
imagesintosixdifferentgroups:plans,views,sections,details,elevations,areas,and
pieces.Plans,elevations,andsectionsaresimilarlyschematicinnature(seefigures2and
3),whileareasandviewsgivetheviewerabettersenseofhowregionsoftheAlhambra
functioninrelationtooneanother(seefigures4and5).Detailsandpiecesareboth
decontextualizedportionsoftheAlhambra—rangingfromornamentationandcolumn
capitalstodoors(seefigures6and7).Piecesareseparatedfromdetails,however,inthat
detailsalwaysnecessarilydepictornamentationfromthesamepartoftheAlhambra,while
piecesdepicteithersimilarornamentsfromdifferentlocations,orspecificelementslike
doorsandwindows.AlthoughalloftheplansfallatthebeginningofJones’sAlhambra,and
mostofthepiecesfallattheend,thereisnoimmediatelycomprehensibleorganizational
strategybasedonimagetypeinthemainbodyofthebook.
Jones’sfirstfewplatesdepictthePuertadePrincipalódeJustica,theCasaReal,the
PatiodelaAlberca,andtheSaladelosEmbaxadores,fromsouthernmosttonorthernmost
region,leadingthereadertobelievethatJonesorganizedhisbookgeographicallyinstead.
However,thisinitialprogressiongiveswaytoseeminglyrandomjumpsfromplacetoplace
withintheAlhambracomplex.TwoseriesofplatesXIII-XXIandXXVII-XXXIhoveraround
theCourtoftheLions,buttheplatesbeforeandafterthesesectionsdonothaveaunifying
geography.Thisun-systematicapproachisfurthercomplicatedbytheserialnatureofthis
production.Plateswerenotreleasedinnumericalorder,andthereisnoindicationthat
theirreleasewasdeterminedbygeographyorplatetype.43Thiscontrastssharplywith
othersimilarcataloguesfromthenineteenthcentury,likeDescriptiondel’Egypt(1809-
1822).The894platesofDescriptiondel’Egyptaredividedintothreesections:Antiquities,
43SeeFerry,“OwenJonesandChromolithography,”178.
18
theModernState,andNaturalHistory.TheAntiquitiessectionofthework,which
correspondsmostcloselytoJones’sAlhambra,isfurtherdividedusinganinherentlogic.
DifferentEgyptianstructuresarepicturedfirstthroughanaerialmap,thenthrougha
landscapeview,thenthroughelevationsandsections,whicharesubsequentlybroken
downtotheirornamentalandarchitecturaldetails.Oneasobsessedwithaccuracyas
modernscholarsportrayJonesmighthavemethodicallyreconstructedhischosen
monumentwithadiscernableorganizationalschemesimilartotheonefoundin
Descriptiondel’Egypt.PerhapsJones’sinattentiontoorganizationshows,instead,his
variedimaginativeaimsandobjectives,whichdidnotrequirehimtopresentacompletely
legiblerecreationofthemonument’sorganization.
WhileJones’sdisorganizationshowsthathehadconcernsbeyondaccurate
reporting,otheraspectsofJones’sAlhambramanifestspecificideologiesmore
prominently.Jones’sunderstandingoftheAlhambraasapartoftheEastisunequivocalin
hiscategorizationandfragmentarytreatmentofdifferentaspectsoftheAlhambra,andin
hisattentiontothetranslationofArabicinscriptions.Jones’sAlhambraisfilledwith
decontextualizedplatesdepictingveryspecificareasofthemonument.Hisdepictionsare
furtherclassifiedaseither,asthetitlestates,plans,elevations,sections,ordetails.
Classificationandfragmentationwerepopulartoolsusedbynineteenth-centuryscholarsof
OrientallanguagestohelptheirreadersbetterunderstandtheEast.InOrientalism,Edward
SaidstatesthatOrientalismhad“aproclivitytodivide,subdivide,andre-divideitssubject
matter.”44ThiswasacalculateddecisiononthepartofOrientalistscholarslikeFrench
linguistAntoinedeSacy,whodevelopedatheoryoffragmentsthatwouldallowhimto
44Said,Orientalism,98.
19
presentisolatedexcerptsofArabictextstohisEuropeanreaders.45Theisolationof
excerpts,alongwithallowingdeSacytohighlighthiscommentaryonthetextshe
translated,wasdesignedtomakehismaterialmoremanageableforhisreaders.Similarly,
Jones’sisolationofelementsoftheAlhambramayhavehelpedhisreadersmoreclearly
comprehendtheunfamiliarIslamicarchitecture.Individingthecomplexornamental
schemesintosmallersections,Jonesallowedhisviewerstobuildtheirknowledgeof
Islamicarchitecturewithoutbecomingoverwhelmed.Arabictranslationwasanothermajor
taskoftheOrientaliststowhichJonespaidspecialattention.ByincludingSpanishArabist
PasqualdeGayangosintheproject,JonesaffirmedhisinterestintheAlhambraasa
monumentcloselytiedtotheEastanditslanguages.
InafurtherefforttogivehisreadersthemostcomprehensivepictureoftheEastern
characterofthefourteenth-centuryAlhambra,andtopromotehisdesigntheories,Jones
extensivelyreconstructedwhatwas,inhistime,alreadyadilapidatedmonument.
ThroughouthisAlhambra,hisreconstructiveeffortsrangefromfillinginarchitecturalgaps,
torecreatingcolorschemes,toeliminatingCatholicinterventionsinthepalatialcomplex.46
Jones’sdescriptiveplatesalsoexplainandevaluaterestorationeffortsandlater
interventionsintheAlhambra.OftencriticalofCatholicdestruction,orattempted
restoration,ofthe“Moorish”ornamentation,Jonestakeseveryopportunitytoexplain
detailsoftheAlhambrathatdonotcoincidewiththedecorativeschemeheis
reconstructing.AlthoughJonesistransparentaboutwherereconstructionsoccur,he
arguesthatportionsoftheAlhambrathatdonotcorrespondtohisdesigntheoriesarethe
45Ibid,128.46SeeFigure8.UponJones’svisittotheAlhambra,thefaçadeoftheCourtoftheMosquewas
disfiguredbylaterinterventions,butitwasrestoredinitsentiretyinPlateXXIII.
20
resultofamisunderstandingofthespace,oroflaterinterventions.Inaccordancewiththis
argument,Jonesfrequentlyexplainshisreconstructedcolorswithindescriptiveplates.
AlthoughJones’sAlhambradepictsprimarilyarchitecturalandornamentaldetails,
hisinclusionoffiguresinsomeillustrationsshedslightonhisperceptionsofSpainandthe
Alhambra.AllthreeofJones’s“Views”containfigures(figures4,9,and10),asdotenoutof
elevenvignettesfromthedescriptivepages(seefigure11).“Views”contextualizethe
ornamentsandspacesdiscussedelsewhereinJones’sAlhambrabyshowingtheir
connectiontooneanotherandthroughtheuseofthesefigures.WhileJones’sviewercan
seethewaymuqarnasvaultingandarabesquepatterninginteractinsitu,shecanalsogeta
senseofhowpeoplerelatetotheirarchitecturalsurroundings.Usedtoconveyasenseof
scale,thetypesoffiguresJonesincludeshelpconstructthepastandpresentcultural
contextofthemonument.Jones’swoodcutvignettesonlyoccuronsevendescriptivepages
inthelengthyfirstvolume,andtheyarealmostneverreferredtointhetext(seefigure12).
However,thesevignettesappearmorewhimsicalandromanticthanhislithographed
plates,emphasizingthegrandeuranddecayoftheAlhambra.
Incontrasttohisromanticvignettes,Jones’sdescriptivetextsareinformation-rich.
ManyofhisdescriptivepagescontainEnglishandFrenchtranslationsofArabic
inscriptions,explanationsofthetechniquesusedtofabricatedifferentsectionsofthe
Alhambra,andevenspecificmeasurementsofthedifferentareasofthepalace.
Additionally,inthesepages,JonestriestosituatethearchitecturalschemeoftheAlhambra
withinthebroadercontextofIslamicarchitecture.Despiteexpressingelsewherethatthe
ornamentoftheAlhambrasurpassesanyotherornamentintheMuslimworld,Jonesmay
includethesecomparisonstohelphisreaderscomprehendtheunfamiliarornamentation
21
oftheAlhambra.47Onafewoccasions(DescriptivePlatesXVII,XX,XXI,andLI)Jonesuses
romanticlanguagetodescribetheAlhambra,buthemoreoftenengageswithOrientalist
scholarsthanwiththeRomanticsinhisdescriptivetext.48
AsnotedbyartandculturalhistorianGülruNecipoğluinTheTopkapıScroll:
GeometryandOrnamentinIslamicArchitecture,thesecondvolumeofJones’sAlhambraisof
anentirelydifferentcharacterthanthefirst.49Thevolume,containingfiftyplateswith
eighty-sevenimages,doesnotcontainthedescriptive,contextualmaterialcharacteristicof
Jones’sfirstvolume.Onlynineoftheplates,allofwhichappearnearthefrontofthe
volume,arestandardlithographs.Theremainingforty-oneplatesarechromolithographs
depictingdetailsfromvariousregionsoftheAlhambra.Twelveoftheseplatescorrespond
tonineplatesfromJones’sfirstvolume.50Thesehighlightorexpandparticulardetailsfrom
Volume1togivethereadermorevisualinformation.However,thethirty-eightotherbold,
decontextualizedplatesappearlikepagesinapatternbook.Patternbooks,popularinthe
nineteenthcentury,werecreatedtoprovidedecorativemotifsforinteriordesignersand
architectstoincorporateintotheirdesigns.51MuchlikeJones’ssecondvolume,thesebooks
containedconsecutivepagesillustratingdifferentornamentalelementswithlittletono
descriptivetext.ThedrasticdifferencebetweenthethoroughcontextualizationofJones’s
47SeeOwenJones,TheGrammarofOrnament.(London:DayandSon,1856),MoresqueOrnament.48HisengagementwithscholarsisevidencedbyhisfrequentcitationofOrientalisttranslator
EdwardWilliamLane’sMannersandCustomsoftheModernEgyptiansof1836(seeforexamplePlateXXVI),andofSpanishlinguistPabloLozanoyCasela’sAntiguedadesArabesdeEspañaof1780(seePlateXXII),amongothers.
49 GulruNecipoglu,TheTopkapıScroll:GeometryandOrnamentinIslamicArchitecture:TopkapıPalaceMuseumLibraryMSH.1956.(SantaMonica,CA:GettyCenterfortheHistoryofArtandtheHumanities,1995),63.
50JonesAlhambra,Volume2,PlatesXII,XIV,XV,XVIII,XIX,XXIV,XXVII,XXXI,XXXIV,XXXVI,XXXVII,XXXVIII.
51Jones’sExamplesofChineseornamentselectedfromobjectsintheSouthKensingtonmuseumandothercollectionsof1867isanexampleofapatternbook.
22
firstvolume,andthedecontextualizationofhighlylegibledetailsinhissecondvolume
supportsNecipoğlu’sclaimthatJonespurposefullyformattedhissecondvolumeaspattern
book.52AlthoughmanyhavenotedJones’soverarchingeducationalgoals,viewinghis
secondvolumeasapatternbookaddsaninterestingcomplexitytoJones’sproduction.
AlthoughscholarshavestudiedJones’sAlhambrainthepast,thissectionhas
providedafoundationforexploringhisworkinadifferentway.Ihaveshownthatthedeep
culturalconstructsthatinformtheworksofhiscontemporariescanalsobeseeninthe
generalformatofJones’sbook.IwillfurtherelaborateitscomplexitiesbelowasIcompare
Jones’simaginativereconstructionsoftheAlhambramorecloselywithspecificdepictions
byhiscontemporaries.
52Necipoglu,TheTopkapıScroll,63.
23
EXPLORINGTHEDUALOTHERNESSOFJONES’SALHAMBRA
AshistorianDavidHowarthstatesinTheInventionofSpain,“Catholicismwasthe
mostcharacteristicthingaboutSpaininthemindsoftheBritish.”53Thisbeingthecase,it
seemsonlynaturalthatIbegintodelvedeeperintomyreevaluationofJones’sAlhambra
withthisconsiderationinmind.Catholicisminthebroadestsensewasunpopularamong
theBritishpublicandpolicymakersdespitethepassageoftheCatholicEmancipationAct
inAprilof1829.54BritishProtestanttheologiansinthisperiodconsideredtheCatholic
faithuniversallyheretical.‘Popery’wascondemnedwhereveritexistedbecauseitwas
thoughttoseparateworshippersfromanunmediatedrelationshipwithGod.However,
theologianspitiedresidentsofothercountriesforbeingsubjecttoCatholicreligious
systems,whiletheyviewedSpanishCatholicsasalmostuniversallyfanatical.This
fanaticismwastypifiedbythecrueltyofSpanishInquisitorsduringthecrusades,andwas
consideredanenduringqualityofSpanishclergyandlaypeoplethroughthenineteenth
century.55BritonsalsoviewedthepoliticalramificationsofCatholicisminSpainina
negativelight.TheCatholicgovernmentofSpain,byexpellingthelastoftheethnic‘Moors’
in1609,wasthoughttohaveretardedtheprogressofSpanisheconomics,subsequently
requiringBritishinterventioninthepeninsula.56ThesenegativeviewsofSpanish
53Howarth,TheInventionofSpain,64.54Ibid,61.55 Stevens,MichaelS."SpanishOrientalism:WashingtonIrvingandtheRomanceoftheMoors."(Ph.D.Dissertation,GeorgiaStateUniversity,2007),2.56Stevens,“SpanishOrientalism”,35;Heide,“ADreamoftheSouth,”65.
24
CatholicismwereperpetuatedamongsttheBritishpublicthroughanti-Spanishpropaganda
pamphletsthatdenigratednearlyeveryaspectofSpanishlife.57
JamesCavanahMurphy’sinterpretationoftheAlhambraemphasizesthe
superstitious,unscrupulousnatureofSpanishCatholicismanditsclergy.Thetenthplateof
TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,depictingthefaçadeoftheAlhambrafromadistance,
exemplifiesMurphy’snegativeperspective(figure13).Murphy’simagehastwodistinct
focalpoints.ThefirstistheloomingTorredeComares,andthesecondistheprominently
foregroundedsceneofaSpanishCatholicclergyman,across,andanartist.InMurphy’s
scene,Catholicismhasbecome,veryliterally,thefrontmatter.WeseetheCatholicpriest
performingaChristianblessingonacross,erectedneartheIslamicstructure,ashis
personalartistsitsbyrecordingtheevent.58
AshistorianMichaelStevensnotesinSpanishOrientalism,theartistinthisscenecan
alerttheviewertothenegativeconnotationofthepriest’spresenceattheAlhambra.59This
artist,commissionedtorecordthepriest’sreclamationofandblessingovertheregion,
makestheCatholicendeavorseemunspiritualandostentatious.Bybringinganartistto
whatcouldbesacredevent,thispriestseemsmoreinterestedinreceiving
acknowledgementforhiscontributiontotheChristianizationofSpain,thaninactually
helpingthecountryoritsinhabitants.ForMurphy’sBritishviewers,thiscouldreaffirmthe
notionthatpriestshaveaheightenedsenseofself-importance,creatingbarriersbetween
CatholicworshipersandGod,andcorruptingtheChristianfaith.Fromaformalperspective,
57Lopez,“TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain,”18-21.58AlthoughthisisanimaginativecreationbyMurphy,contemporarythoughtheldthatoverlypiousinvadersaddedcrossestotheinterioroftheAlhambrato“Christianize”thespacesafteritwasconquered.59Stevens,“SpanishOrientalism,”92.
25
theartistactsasabarrierbetweenthepriestandthecross—asymbolofChrist—
highlightingthedisconnectbetweenpriestsandtruereligion.Additionally,thedistance
betweenthissceneandtheAlhambracreatesasensethatthesemendonottrulybelongin
thislocation,despitetheirpersonalsenseofimportance.ForMurphy,thissceneisnotone
ofprivatespirituality,butofareligiousfaçademaskingarrogance,pretentiousness,anda
conqueringspirit.60
JonesshowstheCatholiccharacteroftheAlhambrainamuchmoresubtleway.
InsteadofforegroundingthenegativeaspectsofCatholicisminSpaintohighlightSpanish
alterity,JonespraisestheNasridcreatorsoftheAlhambra,thusimplicitlycriticizingthe
currentCatholicrulersofSpain.Jones’svignetteheadingthedescriptionofPlateIprovides
aparalleltoMurphy’stwentiethplate(figure14).Jones’sscenedoesnothaveadefined
focalpointandhisfigures’diminutivesizeandnon-descriptSpanishdressmakethem
relativelyunimportantincomparisonwithMurphy’spriest.InascenewhereMurphymade
aconsciousdecisiontoblatantlyCatholicizetheAlhambra,Jonesmadeadifferentdecision.
Infact,JonesalmostuniversallyexcludedCatholicclergymembersfromhisdepictionsof
theAlhambra.
Inhisthirteenplatesandvignettesthatshowfigures,clergyappear,subtly,twice.It
alsoseemsthatJonesonlydepictspriestlyormonastictypesontheoutskirtsofthecentral
Alhambracomplex.InthevignetteofdescriptivePlateXXIII,theclergymanisdepicted
conversingwithaturbanedmaninthecourtofthemosque(nowCatholicchapel).Itseems
thatJones’svieweronlyseesthisCatholicfigureherebecauseheisabouttoenterintoa
Catholicspace,whichisunexploredinJones’svolumes.Amaninwhatcouldbepriestlyor60HiscollaborationwithThomasHartwellHorne,whoalsoauthoredPopery,theenemyandfalsifierofScripturein1844,providesfurtherevidenceofMurphy’smistrustofCatholicism.
26
monasticattireisalsoseenattheoutsideedgeoftheCourtoftheFishpondinPlateIV
(figure4).NeithermanisforegroundedwithintheAlhambracomplexandneitheris
activelyengagedinCatholicliturgy.
Similarly,JonesremovesalmostalltracesofCatholicarchitecturalalterationswithin
thefortress.InRe-envisioningtheAlhambra,LauraEggletonhighlightsJones’sselective
editingofCatholicornamentationwithintheAlhambra.Shecloselyexaminesthe
Alhambra’smosque-turned-chapelthatJonesomitsfromhisreconstruction.Byomitting
thisspaceentirely,JonesavoidedthetiledmuralsaddedbyCharlesVbearingcrown
emblemsandtheslogan‘PlusOultre’,whichisprominentlyvisibleinmodernphotographs
(figure15).61Despitethefactthatthemosquewaslikelythemostcharacteristically
MuslimfeatureoftheAlhambracomplex,itsmorerecentCatholicinterventions,which
Jonesviewedasarchitecturally,andthusideologically,inferiortotheoriginalMuslim
design,causeditsexclusionfromJones’svisualprogram.62
InsteadofincludingCatholicinterventionswithintheAlhambra,Jonesfocuseson
thearchitecturalprowessofitsmedievalcreators.HisPlateX,“DetailsoftheGreatArches.
HalloftheBark,”(figure16)isnotonlymasterfullyrendered,butitsdescriptionoutlines
thecomplexgeometricschemesthattheoriginalarchitectsemployedtocreatethis
intricateedifice(figure17).JonespraisestheseNasridconstructorsofthespacefortheir
appliedknowledgeofmathematicsincreatingmuqarnasvaulting.However,farfrombeing
61HeomitsthisregionfromhisvisualreconstructiondespitethefactthathementionstheCatholicalterationofthespaceonDescriptivePlateXLIII.62ForJones,architecturaldetailinreligiouscontextsflowedfromtheideologiesofthereligionthatcreatedthem.Forthisreason,Jonesgenerallybelievedthatreligiousgroupsthatweretruertotheirreligiousfaithcreatedsuperiorarchitectureandornament.FormoreofJones’sviewsonthissubject,seeOwenJones,"OntheInfluenceofReligionuponArt,"inLecturesonArchitectureandtheDecorativeArtsbyOwenJones,(London:Chadwyck-Healey,1835),3-25.
27
asignthatJonesfavoredmedievalMuslims,thismorepositiveviewofthefourteenth-
centurybuildersoftheAlhambracouldhavebeenadevicetocriticizemodernSpanish
Catholicismwithinthecomplex.
Nineteenth-centuryBritonsoftenpresentedmedievalal-Andalus,thefourteenth-
centuryGranadineregionruledbytheNasrids,asahybridutopiathatengendereda
societyofreligioustoleranceandintellectualprogress,unlikethereligiousandsocial
stricturesthatinhibitedSpanishprogressinthemodernera.63ScottishnovelistWalter
ScottillustratesthispopularviewoftheMoorsinhisnovelIvanhoe(1820).Init,Jewish
characters,RebeccaandIsaac,takerefugeinthekingdomofGranadawheretheywillbe
acceptedandprotected,astheywouldnotbeinEngland.64ItseemsthatJonescouldbe
reiteratingthisunderstandingofmedievalSpainbecausehefeltthattheCatholicruleof
SpainwaslesslegitimatethantheformerNasridrule.Thereligiousstricturesofthe
CatholicChurchanditsmonarchydestroyedthecivilizationthatproducedJones’sfavored
ornamentalschemesandbegantolettheAlhambrafalltoruin—compellingJonesto
presentitinafullreconstruction.CatholicrulersandparishionersdidnotbelonginJones’s
reconstructionofSpainbecauseoftheirdisregardfortheornamentandcustomsthat
precededthemintheregion.IndelegitimizingtheCatholicpresenceintheAlhambrainthis
way,JonesrecognizesthatCatholicismisafundamental,albeitnegative,partofthe
monument’scharacter.AlthoughJonescouldhavehadprimarilystylistic,ratherthan
religiousmotivesforthismethodofreconstruction,hisartisticpredecessorsandthe
63Howarth,TheInventionofSpain,10;Eggleton,"Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra,"218;Heide,"ADreamoftheSouth,”65.ThestateofpeacefulcoexistencebetweenChristians,Muslims,andJewswithinIberiankingdomsfromtheeighthtofourteenthcenturiesiscommonlyreferredtoas“LaConvivencia”64Stevens,SpanishOrientalism,46.
28
overarchingreligiousandpoliticalclimateinwhichheworkedlendcredencetothis
interpretation.
AsJonespraisestheAlhambra’sMuslimcreators,showinghisimplicitbiasagainst
SpanishCatholics,healsoperpetuatestheideathatSpainisOtherbecauseofitsIslamic
historyandenduringIslamiccharacter.TheIslamichistoryofSpainnaturallyresultedina
continued,wide-reaching,interestinSpainasEast.Thisisexemplifiedthroughthecareer
ofnotedSpanishArabistPascualdeGayangos.Includedasahistorianandtranslatorfor
Jones’sproject,deGayangosdedicatedhiscareertounderstandingHispano-Islamichistory
throughthestudyoftheArabiclanguage.WheneverdeGayangosdiscussedSpain,itwasin
thecontextoftheMoorsandfocusedonunderstandingthehistoricMuslimcharacterofthe
region.65Onapopularlevel,SpainwasalsotransmittedtothewiderBritishpublicasa
partoftheincreasinglypopularOrientalistfad.AsBritishaudiencesbecamemore
interestedintheEast,travelers,artists,publishers,andplaywrightscateredtothisinterest
byusingtheOrient(includingSpain)astheirsubjectswithgreaterfrequency.66
DespitethepopularityofSpainasapartoftheOrient,theAlhambrawasnot
inevitablyIslamicinnineteenth-centuryBritishdepictions.WhilebothJonesandMurphy
emphasizedtheIslamicnatureoftheAlhambra,notedOrientalistpainterJohnFrederick
Lewis(1804-1876)emphasizedthepeculiarityofSpain’sSpanishinhabitantswithinthis
space.Bythetimeofhisdeath,Lewiswasoneofthemostprominentmembersofthe
Britishartestablishment,andoneofthemostwellknownpaintersoftheEast.67His
65Heide,“TheAlhambrainBritain,”212.66Saglia,PoeticCastles,261.67 LewiswasbestowedthehonorofelectionasaRoyalAcademicianin1865.BrionyLlewellyn,“"SolitaryEagle"?:ThePublicandPrivatePersonasofJohnFrederickLewis(1804-1876)”inThe
29
matureoeuvreischaracterizedbymeticulous,ethnographicrepresentationsoftheEast,
especiallyEgyptandtheOttomanEmpire.68Theseiconicrepresentations,whichwere
createdmuchlaterthanhisSpanishworks,emphasizetheculturalalterityofhisEastern
subjects.HehighlightsthelavishsensualityoftheOrientandgiveshisviewersaninside
lookattheseductiveharemculturethatwassomysterioustoWesternviewers.However,
earlyinhiscareer,LewistraveledtoSpainandproducedabodyofworkthatdivorcedthe
countryfromitsIslamicheritage.HisSpanishworksfocusedonthepassionandsensuality
ofcontemporarySpaniardsinsteadofthemysteryofMedievalMuslims,andaremoreakin
togenrescenesthantheethnographiccatalogshewouldlaterproduce.69Givenhislater
interestindepictingtheIslamicOther,Lewis’sinterpretationofSpainhighlightsthe
consciouschoiceinvolvedinJones’sconstructionofanIslamicAlhambra.
Inhisdrawing,CourtyardoftheAlhambraof1832-33(figure18),Lewisemphasizes
theSpanishcharacteroftheAlhambraintwoways.70First,heobscuresmostoftheIslamic
ornamentationoftheAlhambra.AlthoughexteriorsurfacesoftheAlhambraareoftenun-
ornamented,theornamentationaroundthedoorwayinLewis’ssceneisverynon-descript
andalmostentirelyinshadow.Thisisespeciallystrikinggiventherelativelackofshadow
intherestoftheimage.Thehorseshoearch,thethincolumns,andtheruinedjalousiesgive
PoeticsandPoliticsofPlace:OttomanIstanbulandBritishOrientalism.editedbyReinaLewis.(Seattle:UniversityofWashingtonPress,2011),167. 68 JohnM.MacKenzie,Orientalism:History,Theory,andtheArts.(Manchester;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress,1995),48;EmilyM.Weeks,CulturesCrossed:JohnFrederickLewisandtheArtofOrientalism,(NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2014).69ClaudiaHeide,"TheSpanishPicturesque,"inTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,eds.ChristopherBaker,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton(Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009),49.
70Itisunclearwhichcourtyardthisdrawingissupposedtoreference.Someofthearchitectural
elementsarereminiscentoftheCourtoftheMosque,butLewis’sconfigurationofthespaceseems
unlikeanyofthe“courts”containedwithintheAlhambra.
30
thevieweranindicationthatthisisaMuslimstructure,butLewisdoesnotpresentthe
IslamicornamentoftheAlhambrawiththedetailofJonesorMurphy.Hisrepresentationof
vegetalornamentislooselysketchedin,thegeometricjalousiesarerelativelyindistinct
becauseofshadow,andthereisacompleteabsenceofepigraphicornamentation.Despite
itsfinerfinishedlook,thisdrawingwaslikelynotintendedtobeafinishedproduct,which
mayaccountforthelackofdetail.However,theprominentshadowswouldhaveobscured
theornamenteveninamorepolishedwork.
Second,LewisincludesonlySpanishfigureswithinthiscourtyard.Thetwomenon
theleftareiconicSpanishmuleteers.WashingtonIrvingdescribedthesemenasthemain
carriersofcommerceinSpain,asmenwholivedfrugallyandroughlytosurvive.Irvingalso
popularizedMuleteersintheEnglish-speakingworldasnaturallypoeticandtalented,and
theircaravanswereconsideredoneofthepicturesquesightsintheAndalusian
landscape.71Thewomaninthedoorway,andtheyoungerwomanonthestepsareboth
veiled—apopulartrendacrosssocio-economicclassesinthisera.Thebeardedmaninthe
hatandcapeseemstostandbetweenthemuleteersandthedoorwayontheright.Hetoois
inSpanishdress,wearingthetightpants,boots,andcapereminiscentofaSpanishmajo.72
Majoswerecharacterizedbytheirgarishcostume,andfierypassionassociatedwiththeir
lowerclass.LewissituatestheseindividualseasilywithintheAlhambraastheSpanish
Other.Despiteitshistory,ornamentation,andarchitecture,theAlhambraisnotinevitably
Islamic.ForLewis,itisSpanishatitscore.
Bycontrast,thereisalwaysaMuslimpresencewithinJones’sViews.His
woodblocksoftendepictthoseincontemporarySpanishdressalone,buthismajor71WashingtonIrving,TalesoftheAlhambra,(Philadelphia:Carey&Lea,1832)17-18.72Seefigure19depictingRichardFordinaMajocostume.
31
lithographiccompositionsarenotwithoutprominentlyIslamicfeatures.Infact,mostofhis
viewscontainMuslimfiguresexclusively.PlateIV,“ViewoftheCourtoftheFish-Pondfrom
theHalloftheBark”,inwhichfiguresincontemporarySpanishdressdominatethe
pictorialspace,istheexceptiontothisrule(figure4).However,abearded,turbanedmanis
foregroundedandplacedclosesttotheornamentaldesigns,themainsubjectofJones’s
plate.Thismanisseatedonthefloor,aposturecommonlygiventoMuslimsinnineteenth-
centuryEuropeandepictions,andissmokingwithamanincontemporarySpanishdress.
PlateXIXisamoretypicalrepresentationofpeoplewithinanarchitecturalspace.It
utilizesthreeMuslimtypesthatwouldbecomeprominentinthelaterEasternworkofJohn
FrederickLewis—theseatedtype,andtheturbanedsmokerwithhisAfricanservant
(figure10).Inthe“ViewintheHallofTwoSisters,”Jonesrecreatesalmostallofthe
Alhambra’scharacteristicfeaturesforhisviewers.Intheforeground,oneseesmanyofthe
stuccoedarabesquesandgeometricmosaicdetailsthatJonesreproducesmorecloselyin
hisfirstandsecondvolumes.Thisviewalsoincludesnichesandscallopedarchwaysinthe
fore,andmuqarnasvaultingabovethearchesinthebackground.Thecomprehensivedetail
intheforegroundcanbeexaminedtotheminutestlevelandretainitsprecision,andthe
ornamentaldetailsinthebackgroundarestillveryrecognizabledespitetheatmospheric
perspective.ThisisanimportantviewforJonestoreproducebecauseitgiveshisviewers
anideaofhowthearchitecturalelementsworktogetherwithintherealspaceofthe
Alhambra.ThisviewisalsosignificantbecauseitreinforcestheMuslimcharacterofthe
monumentthroughtheinclusionofMuslimtypes.Intheforeground,Jonesincludesa
bearded,turbanedmanwithhisyoungAfricanservantwhocarrieshispipe.The
preponderanceofpictorialrepresentationsofMuslimswithAfricanservantsseemsto
32
suggestthatitwasanespeciallypopularandintriguingrelationshiptonineteenth-century
Europeans.Thesmokingofapipeorhookahwasalsoseenasacharacteristicpartoflifein
theEast.Inthebackground,anothermaninEasterndresssits,contemplative,withserving
vesselsinfrontofhim.Despitehisaccouterments,thisindividualseemsalmost
lackadaisical.Thisseated,turbanedtypewouldalsobecomepopularinLewis’slaterwork
depictingEgyptandtheOttomanEmpire.73MoreakintoLewis’sEgyptianworksthanhis
SpanishAlhambra,Jonesadoptsamodeoffiguralrepresentationthatassociatesthe
monumentverycloselywithIslamandtheEast.Byincludingfiguretypescommonlyused
byOrientalizingartists,Jonesentered,insomeways,theOrientalistdiscourse.Whilehis
ornamentalrecreationswereoftenaccurate,hisfiguresimaginativelyreconstructedthe
peoplethathebelievedbestaccompaniedthismonument.
Despitetheaboveevidence,scholarshavetroubleunderstandingJones’sAlhambra
asbothIslamicandCatholicbecausethishybriditymanifestsitselfasprimarilyIslamic.In
Murphy’sArabianAntiquities,theIslamo-CatholiccharacteroftheAlhambraishighlighted
throughtheovertinclusionofCatholicclergymemberswithintheIslamicspacesofthe
monument.AlthoughtheAlhambrabearsexplanationandillustrationbecauseofits
“Arabian”character,MurphyhighlightshowtheCatholicOtherthathasintrudedwithinthe
space,fundamentallyalteringitscharacter.Bycontrast,JonesrespondstotheCatholic
presencewithintheIslamicAlhambrabyerasingCatholicinterventionsfromhis
reconstruction.ThisomissionofaCatholicpresencewithintheAlhambracreatesa
significantabsence.Farfrombeinginconsequential,theCatholicinvolvementinthe
Alhambrawassoprominent,andsodistasteful,thatitwarrantedwillfulomission.
73Seefigure20.
33
InexcludingtheCatholicaspectsoftheAlhambra,Jonessuccessfullyacknowledges
andcritiquestheIslamo-CatholiccharacterofSpainanditsmonuments,withouthavingto
strayfromhismedievalfocus.BecauseofhisinterestintheIslamicheritageand
ornamentationofthesite,JonescriticizesthewaytheAlhambrahasbeenCatholicizedin
hisera,inadvertentlyhighlighting,thus,thesubsequentCatholicconquestofthe
monument.IfthecontemporaryAlhambrawasnotinsomeways“Catholic”inJones’smind,
hewouldnotshowthePalaceofCharlesVinhisgeneralplanoftheAlhambraormention
otherCatholicinterventionsinthespace.Bymentioningtheseinterventionsbriefly,but
marginalizingtheminhisbroaderliteraryandpictorialprogram,Jonesstrengthenshis
critiqueofanIslamo-CatholicAlhambra.
ItseemsverylikelythatthiscritiqueisindeedofCatholicinterventions,andnotof
specificstylisticchangesbecauseofthewayJonesaddressesarchitecturalchangeswithin
histext.HeneverusesstylistictermswhencritiquinglaterchangestotheAlhambra,which
hereferstoharshly,butvaguely.AlthoughhealsodoesnotmentionthatCatholicrulers
werethosewhoundertook“repeatedrestorations”thatdefacedthepalatialornament,his
audiencemayhaveinferredthatthesewerethealterationshewasreferringto.74Thisis
especiallyprobablegiventhemoreovertcriticismundertakenbyMurphyseveralyears
earlier.TheseeminglycontradictoryreligiouscharactersoftheAlhambramaybeless
visiblymanifestedinJones’sAlhambrathaninMurphy’sArabianAntiquities,butJones’s
bookstillunderstandsthenineteenth-centuryAlhambraasIslamo-Catholic.Thevisual
absenceofCatholicclergyorCatholicarchitectureinJones’sAlhambraisasmeaningfulas
74OwenJones,Alhambra,DescriptivePlateXIII.
34
theirinclusionbyMurphy,andshowsasimilarcritiqueoftheIslamo-Catholiccharacter
thatwasforceduponthemonumentthroughCatholicinvasion.
ScholarsarealsoreluctanttoacceptJones’sworkasacommentaryontheIslamo-
CatholiccharacteroftheAlhambrabecauseoftheappearanceofaccuracywithinhis
architecturalreconstructions.SinceJonesendeavoredtoproduceafaithfulreconstruction
ofthefourteenth-centuryIslamicAlhambra,hisworkisviewedasifitwerescientific
ratherthansubjective.Somehowtheintegrityofhisornamentaldetailsisviewedas
inconsistentwithJones’scriticalcommentaryonthelayeredreligiouscharacterofthe
Alhambrainthenineteenthcentury.However,itisclearthattheseeminglyinconsistent
religiouscharactersoftheAlhambrawerebothveryimportanttonineteenth-century
Britishinterpretersofthespace.Jonescouldoffertohisreadersanaccurate
reconstructionofAlhambricornamentationasheprovidedhiscommentaryonthe
contemporaryreligiouscharacterofthemonumentwithoutcausingconfusion.75However,
ourmodernsensibilities—whichdivorceaccuratedepictionsfromvalue-laden
interpretations,andrejectdichotomy—havealteredourunderstandingofthescopeand
purposesofJones’sAlhambra.AlthoughJonesundoubtedlyattemptedtoaccurately
reconstructtheMedievalMuslimmonument,hisAlhambraalsogivesusinsightintothe
dualOtherwithintheAlhambrainthenineteenthcentury.
75Jones’swillingnesstosacrificeadepictionofthecontemporarycharacteroftheAlhambrainanefforttoreconstructhisconceptionofitsMedievalstateisreminiscentoftherelationshipbetweenEugène-EmmanuelViollet-le-DucandtheGothicarchitectureofFrance.However,itshouldbenotedthatJones’srestorativeeffortswereconfinedtohisimaginativereconstructions,ashedidnotattempttoengageinremedialarchitecture.FormoreonViollet-le-DucseeMartinBressani,ArchitectureandtheHistoricalImagination:Eugène-EmmanuelViollet-le-Duc,1814–1879,(Farnham:AshgatePublishingLtd.,2014).
35
EXPLORINGTHEFLUIDHISTORICCHARACTEROFJONES’SALHAMBRA
FormanyBritishtravelers,Spainrepresentedapre-industrializedpastthatwas
unmarredbytheconcernsofrapidurbanization.76Thesetravelerspopularizedaromantic
conceptionofSpainandtheAlhambrathatpermeatedBritishrepresentationsofthis
location.Inundatedwithromantictravelaccounts,novels,andworksofart,British
commonerswidelyviewedSpaniardsasprimitivesavageswholivedinalandscapeofpre-
modernruins.77TheseviewsofSpainledtoanostalgicconceptionofthepurityofthis
“less-advanced”society,andtodepictionsthatignoredprogressandmodernization.78
ManyfixedtheirromanticgazeonMoorishSpainandtheAlhambrabecauseits
preservationremindedtheEuropeantravelerofaradicallydifferentpastthatwasin
dangeroffadingaway.79AsopposedtotheIslamicmonumentsinthegeographic“East”
thatwerestillusedandinhabitedbynon-Europeans,theAlhambrarepresentedastatic,
historicmonumentthroughwhichtheRomanticartistscouldrecapturethepast.Romantic
depictionsofSpanishscenes,liketheworksofDavidRoberts,makeheavyuseof
atmosphericperspective,OrientalandSpanishtypes,andsignsofdecaytoemphasizethe
sublimequalitiesofthecountry,itsarchitecture,anditspeople.80AlthoughJones’s
76Lopez,“TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain,”11.77Eggleton,“Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra,”125;Howarth,TheInventionofSpain,49-50.78ClaudiaHeide,"TheSpanishPicturesque,"51.79 JohnSweetman,TheOrientalObsession:IslamicInspirationinBritishandAmericanArtandArchitecture,1500-1920.(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,1988),131.80TheSublimeembodiesnotionsofgrandeur,beauty,andhorror.Ifsomethingisconsideredsublime,itisbothwonderfulanddisconcerting.TheideaofsublimityisalsocloselyassociatedwithapicturesqueconceptionoftheEast.ClaudiaHeide,"TheAlhambrainBritain,”207.
36
lithographedarchitecturalreconstructionsaredevoidoftheseelements,manyofthe
woodcutsillustratinghisdescriptivepagesembracethemwhole-heartedly.
ThefootnoteaccompanyingJones’swoodblockondescriptivePlateLImakeshis
intentiontopresentromanticviewsonhisdescriptivepagesclear:
The‘CasadeSanchez’nolongerpossessesthepicturesqueappearanceshewninthewood-cut.In1837,thewholefrontwasrestoredandbeautified,andthepondconvertedintoagardenbyoneoftheresidentmilitaryofficersofthefortress.81
Here,Jonesstatesthatheisforsakinghispristinereconstructioninfavorofapicturesque
depictionoftheCasadeSanchezthatdoesnotreflectitscurrentstate.Beingneithera
completelypastorpresentreality,thiswoodcutanditsdescriptionareindicativeofJones’s
acceptanceofromanticandpicturesquereconstructionsoftheAlhambra.
JonesandDavidRobertslikelymetduringtheirsimultaneoustripstoSpainandthe
Alhambra,wheretheyobservedandrecordedthemonumentoverthesameperiodoftime.
TheirsubsequentromanticreconstructionsoftheAlhambra,publishedwithinayearofone
another,arestrikinglysimilar.Roberts’sfrontispieceforTheTouristinSpain:Granada
depictsascenewhosefocalpointistheAlhambra’sTowerofComares(figure21).The
towerloomsoverthefiguresintheforegroundandtheSpanishlandscape,fillingthetop
two-thirdsofthepictureplane.Inloomingassuch,thetowerevokestheforebodingnature
ofthesublime.Thediminutivesizeofthefiguresfurtheremphasizeshowtheviewer
shouldbeinaweofsuchamonumentalconstruction.Signsofdecayonthestructureare
obvious:theforemostarchitecturalelementsarestrippedoftheirouterstuccoexposing
guttersthatprotrudefromthesideofthissecondarytower.Furtherbackinthescene,
exteriorarchitectureisalsocrumblingandstructuralelementsareexposed.Theentire81Seefigure13.
37
façadeseemstoriseoutof,orperhapscrumbleinto,therockoutcroppingonwhichitis
built.ThesesignsofdecayemphasizethenostalgiaevokedbytheAlhambra,whichwas
oncethecenterofathrivingcivilization,buthasfallenintodisuseanddisrepair.
Robertsalsoutilizeslighttoaccentuatehisromanticreconstruction.Thelightofthe
settingsunfiltersthroughgapsinthearchitecture,floodingsomesectionswithlightand
obscuringothersinshadow.82Theraysoflightareclearlyseenemanatingfromtheleft
sideofthecentraltower,toemphasizetheephemeralityofthisplace,andmetaphorically
representtheAlhambra’sdeclinefromitsoriginalglory.Finally,Robertsobscuresthepath
totheAlhambratoaddtothemysticalnatureoftheromanticruin.Althoughthefiguresat
thebottomoftheillustrationareonapath,theviewercannotdiscernhowthatpath
reachestheAlhambra.Thepathreappearsbehindthetreesinthemiddleground,andin
otherlocations,butthereisnodefinitepointatwhichthepathreachesthefortress.The
Alhambra,illustratedthroughoutTheTouristinSpain:Granada,ultimatelyremains
inaccessibletothefiguresinthisprint.
Jones’swoodcutprintsonthedescriptivepagesoftheAlhambraaresimilarly
romanticintheirpresentationofthemonument.Jones’sviewoftheTowerofComareson
thebackofhisfirstdescriptivepageisnoexception(figure22).Althoughdevoidofthe
humanpresencefoundinmanyofJones’sotherwoodcuts,thisscenealsoemploysthe
romanticizingtechniquesfoundinRoberts’sfrontispiece.Jones’sTowerappearsata
greaterdistancethanRoberts’s,butitisviewedfromasimilarangle.Byforegrounding
foliage,Jones’sTowerseemstallerwithoutphysicallytakingupthemajorityofthepicture
plane.Thisfoliagealsoobscurestheviewer’saccesstothetower.Althoughthereisempty82GiventhefactthatfaçadeoftheTorredeComaresfacesnortheast,andtheraysoflightarecomingfrombehindandtotheleftofthecentraltower,onecandeducethatthisisasunsetscene.
38
spaceontheleftsideoftheimage,themaintowerofthisfaçadeseemstooovergrowntobe
reached.Itrisesstarklyfromuntamednatureasamonumentcloselyassociatedwithit.
Theassociationbetweenabuiltstructureandthewild,untamednaturalsettingmakesthe
structureseemevenmoreunrulyandimposing.SignsofdecayarealsopresentinJones’s
woodcut,althoughnotasprominentlyastheyareinRoberts’s.Theforemostsignsofdecay
areontheToweritself,withitsstuccocrumblingoff.Becauseofthetower’sdistancefrom
theviewer,muchofthisdecaymaybeobscured.83
Jones’spuzzlinguseoflightinthisprintillustratesthecomplexityofhisromantic
reconstruction.Althoughthehighcontrastbetweenlightandshadowcorrespondstoa
traditionalRomantictreatmentoflight,thewaythefaçadeofthetowerisilluminatedisnot
naturallypossible.TheviewercanseethesunsettingclearlybetweentheTowerof
Comaresandthesmallertowerontheright.However,theouterfaçadeoftheAlhambrais
bathedinlight.Theimpossibilityofthislightingservestwopurposes.Thefocalpointof
thisimageremainshighlighted;theloomingTowerofComareswithitscrumbling
architecturecanbeseenclearly.Simultaneously,thesettingsunmakeslightseemto
radiatefromwithintheAlhambra.AlthoughJonesconstructstheAlhambraasadilapidated
location,thislightcouldalludetothericheswithinthisstructure.Lightcomesfromwithin
theAlhambratotellJones’sviewersthattheformergloryoftheAlhambraisstillavailable
tothemthroughJones’sreconstruction.Curiously,Joneslabelsthiswoodcutprint“Tower
ofComares,”butlabelsnoothers.Thereasonsforthisdecisioncannotbeknownwith
certainty,butitcallstomindthewayinwhichRoberts’sfrontispieceislabeledinThe
83However,weknowthatJonesdidnottrytohidetheruinousaspectsoftheAlhambrainhisvignettesbasedonhisotherwoodblockprintfromthesamepage.Seefigure23.
39
TouristinSpain:Granada.PerhapsJonesdecidedtolabelhiswoodcuthereasareferenceto
thisRomanticmodel.
Jones’sworkissimilar,althoughnotidentical,toRoberts’sonanotherfront:both
menpromotetheirdesignandarchitecturetheoriesthroughtheAlhambra.Inthissense,
JonesandRobertstreatedtheAlhambraasanImaginaryGeographyatitsmost
fundamentallevel.BothtookthehistoricAlhambraandmadeitimminentlyrelevantinthe
contemporarydebatesinwhichtheywereengaged.InJones’scase,thedebatefocusedon
polychromyincontemporaryornament.InhisextensivetravelstotheEast,Jonesbecame
fascinatedwiththewaysinwhichpolychromaticornamentationenhancedtheoverall
effectofarchitecture.Althoughprimarycolorswereusedoftenintheornamentalschemes
Jonesstudied,theywereseldomfoundinBritishdesignleadinguptothenineteenth
century.84JonescreatedhisAlhambratocounteractthistrendbypopularizingbold
polychromaticornamentationwithintheBritishnationalstyle.Roberts,ontheotherhand,
wasengagedinadiscoursethatsoughttovalorizeGothicarchitecturethroughits
connectiontoIslamicart.RobertsbelievedthatGothicarchitecturehaditsrootsinthe
Islamicarchitectureofthepast,sohealteredhisperspectiveoftheAlhambratohighlight
theGothicizinginclinationsofitspre-Gothicarchitecture.85Byfocusingonspecificaspects
oftheAlhambra,bothmentransformedthemonumenttosupporttheirrespective
positions.Thesemenwerenotaloneinpromotingtheoriesofdesignthroughthe
Alhambra,butajuxtapositionoftheirdepictionswillfurtherclarifyJones’sinterpretive
choices.
84Darby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”29,64.85Raquejo,"The'ArabCathedrals',”560.
40
Jones’sPlateXXVII,containingdetailsoftheHallofJustice,isabold
chromolithograph,utilizinggold,black,andredforvisualimpact(figure24)86,while
Roberts’sIllustrationoftheHallofJustice,fromTheTouristinSpain(1835)isastandard
greyscalelithographthatimbuestheHallwithintrigueincompletelydifferentways
(figure25).Roberts’sillustrationisascene,inrealspacewithinteractinghumanfigures,
whileJones’sisanarchitecturaldrawingfocusingonaspecificcolorfulsectionoftheHallof
Justice.87Jones’snotationofscaleinthemiddleofthepageemphasizeshiscommitmentto
numericprecision.Bycontrast,Robertsiswillingtotakearchitecturallibertiesinhis
reconstruction.Heelongatesthearchways,makingthemslightlymorepointedthanthe
archesoftheactualstructure,andsaturatesthemwithdetail,toensurethattheyloomover
thefiguresinthescene.ThiseffectivelymakeshisHallofJusticeappearmoreGothicthan
Jones’s.ThelightinginRoberts’sworkalsoservesthispurpose:thelowerareaofthe
lithograph,filledwithpeople,islightandairy—makingthedarkerarchitecturalportion
seemevenmoredrasticandbrooding.
AlthoughJones’sdetailmaybemorearchitecturallycorrect,he,too,selectively
presentedaspectsoftheAlhambratoconstructanarrativeforthespace.WhereasRoberts
elongatedarchesandaddedaforebodingatmospheretotheHallofJustice,Jonesaddeda
colorschemethatwasnotextant.InsteadofpresentingtheAlhambraashesawit,Jones
86Otherversionsofthisplate(particularlytheoneheldattheUniversityofMinnesota)containbrightbluepigmentwherethereislightgreyintheUniversityofSouthFloridacopy.Therearetwopossibleexplanationsforthisdiscrepancy.First,thepigmentintheUSFcopymayhaveoxidized,renderingthebluesmoremuted.Second,copieswithbrighterpigmentmaybefromprintrunsconductedafterJones’sdeath.Formoreonthecolor,andtheprocessofcoloring,inJones’sworkseeFerry“OwenJonesandChromolithography.”87Interestingly,despitethedepthofJones’swork,heonlyrecreateddetails,pieces,andsectionsoftheHallofJustice.WhileViewsfromtheLion’sCourtandHallofTwoSistersareimportanttoolsforhisviewerstoconceptualizethesespaces,perspectivalscenesoftheHallofJusticearenotablyabsent.
41
reconstructedthecolorsoftheAlhambrathatconfirmedhistheoriesaboutthebeautyof
boldcolorinarchitecturaldesign.Thereislittledoubtabouttheaccuracyofhiscolor
reconstructionhere,sinceitwasbasedonpigmentscrapingsfromthesite.However,there
issomeskepticismaboutthecompleteaccuracyofallofhisreconstructions.Forexample,
JonesclaimedthatthemarblecolumnsoftheAlhambraweregilded.Hearguedthatgilded
columnswouldmakethespacevisuallymorepleasing,sotheymusthavebeengilded,
despiteliteraryevidencetothecontrary.88
WhetherornotJones’spolychromaticreconstructionswerealwayscorrect,thefact
thathechosecolor(atgreatexpensetohimself)overstandardlithographsisofimminent
importance.Jonesreconstructedadecontextualized,colorfulsectionoftheornamentation
oftheHallofJusticetoprovideapre-modernfoundationforbrightlycoloredornamentin
Britishdesign.89Insteadofutilizingastandardlithograph,heusedchromolithographyto
emphasizethebold,primarycolorschemethathethoughtcreatedrepose.90Toachievehis
designgoals,thisornamentaldetaildidnotneedtobecontextualized,orpresentedwithin
anarchitecturalspace—itneededonlytobecolorful.Jones’semphasisoncolor,asapartof
hisbroaderdesigntheory,illustratesthatthenostalgic,staticAlhambrahadcontinued
relevanceforhimselfandhispeers.
TheAlhambra’sappealasbothstaticandactivemightinitiallybemorepuzzling
thanitssimultaneousCatholicandIslamiccharacter.Ifamonumentishistoricand
nostalgic,canitalsoberelevanttocontemporaryconcerns?Aromanticlocaleis
88ForinformationonthisdiscrepancyseeDarby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”56-57.
89Darby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”29.
90“Repose”isawordlaterusedbyJonesinTheGrammarofOrnamenttodescribetheresultofornamentthatwasperfectlybalanced,needingneitheradditionsnorsubtractionstosatisfythe
viewer.IntheGrammar,JonesindicateshowcloselytheMoorsfollowedthenaturalrulesofornamentation,whichcreatedrepose.
42
foreboding,ruinous,andpicturesquebydefinition.Itisviewedwithlongingand
appreciatedforitsawfulcharacter,notforitsrelevancetocontemporaryintellectual
debates.Viewersinterestedintheromanticismofmedievalmonumentsmaynotbeequally
concernedwithcontemporarytheory.Yet,JonesandRobertsapplieddesignprinciples
fromtheromanticAlhambratodistinctlynineteenth-centuryarchitecturaldebatesin
publicationsmeantfordiverseaudiences.
ThiscanbeseenasanespeciallystrategicmoveonJones’spart.Jones’sbookneeded
tooffersomethingtothenon-architect.Whileplans,elevations,sections,anddetailswere
interestingtoasmallsubsetofthepopulation,hisdescriptionswithinlaidromantic
woodblocksintriguedawiderpublic.AsareviewerfromtheLiteraryGazettewrotein
1842,“…forwhileeverythingthatcouldcaptivatethetasteofthedilettantehasbeen
soughtforandengraved,detailsofhighimportancetothearchitect,ground-plansand
sectionsofbuildings,worthyoffrequentimitation,havebeencarefullyattendedto.”91This
viewerbelievedthatJones’sengravingscaptivatedsomeonewithamorecasualinterestin
themonumentinawaythathislithographedarchitecturalelementscouldnot.Including
somedepictionsoftheruinedstateoftheAlhambramayhavealsobolsteredhisclaims
aboutitspolychromaticornamentation.ByshowingthattheAlhambrawasnotentirelythe
monumentitusedtobe,Jonesmadehisaudiencewonderabouttheappearanceofa
pristineAlhambra.Jones’sreconstructionofthefullypolychromaticinteriorthensatisfied
hisviewers’curiosity.Jonesemphasizedtheseseeminglyincongruousunderstandingsof
theAlhambratohisbestadvantage.Thepreviousgrandeurshowninhis
91"Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra;fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin
1834bytheLateM.JulesGowry,andin1834and1837byOwenJones,"TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1333(Aug.6,1842):558.
43
chromolithographsmadetheAlhambra’ssublimequalitiesevenmoredistinct,andJones’s
romanticdepictionsmadehisreconstructionsmoreenticing.
Disinterestamongscholarsintheinterplaybetweennostalgiaandcontemporary
discourseinJones’sAlhambraisevenmorebafflingthanthepreviouslackofresearch
abouttheinteractionbetweenCatholicismandIslaminJones’sdepictions.WhileJones
deliberatelyhidestheCatholicnatureoftheAlhambrainhisreconstruction,the
romanticismofhiswoodcutsisovert.Yet,scholarsfocusonhowhisAlhambrapromotes
contemporarytheoriesandneglecthowitcoincideswithromanticsentiments.Ithinkthis
stems,onceagain,fromareluctancetobelievethatanauthorcouldconveymultiple
contradictorypremisessimultaneously.SinceJones’sinterestintheAlhambra’simpacton
contemporarycolortheoryisveryclearlymanifestedinhisvolumes,scholarsdonot
inquirefurtherintothewaysinwhichJonesmayhaveportrayedtheAlhambraasastatic
monument.ByfocusingonthenumberedplatesofJones’svolumesinsteadofhis
descriptivepages,scholarshavefurtherreinforcedthenotionthatJones’sAlhambrawasan
activemonumentunlikethenostalgicAlhambrasofhispeers.However,inrecognizingthe
complexityoftheworkofhispeers,andthefrequentconnectionbetweennostalgic
depictionsandcontemporaryissues,themultipleperspectivesofJones’sAlhambrabecome
muchmoreevidentandhisvolumesbecomeevenmoremeaningful.
44
CONCLUSION
Nineteenth-centuryinterpretersoftheAlhambra,withtheirfulladoptionof
seeminglyinconsistentviewsofthespace,inadvertentlymirroredthefascinatingly
contradictoryhistoryofthemonument.AlthoughtheAlhambraevincespowerinits
constructionanddesign,itwasbuiltbyrulerswhosepowerwasinjeopardy.Whilethere
wasrelativepeaceandsecuritythroughtreatiesandvassalshiptotheChristiankingsof
SpainduringtheconstructionoftheAlhambra,thedeathofitslastmajorpatron,
MuhammadV,in1391,usheredinaperiodofinfightingandincreasedexternalpressure,
weakeningandsubsequentlyterminatingNasridruleintheregion.92Outsideofitscontext,
thefortressandpalaceoftheAlhambramightbeviewedasevidenceofathriving,secure
nation-state.However,inthecontextofNasridruleinSpainitsignalsafinaleffortby
MuslimrulersinSpaintoasserttheirdominanceoveradwindlingdominion,andto
forestalltheinevitablecompletionoftheReconquista.Althoughnineteenth-century
scholars,writers,andartistswerelikelyunawareofthedisconnectbetweenNasrid
presentationofgrandeurandtheiractualauthorityintheregion,theirinterpretationsof
thesite’spastandpresentledtofruitfulreconstructionsofthiscomplexity.
Inmirroringthecomplexhistoryofthemonument,nineteenth-centuryartistsand
scholarsalsoemphasizedspecificdualitiesthathadgreaterhistoricalpertinencethanthey
mayhaverealized.ThetwofoldreligiouscharacteroftheAlhambra,whichwasa
prominentpartofnineteenth-centuryconceptionsofthemonument,haditsoriginsinthe92HughKennedy,MuslimSpainandPortugal.(NewYork:Longman,1996),288-292.
45
monument’screation.BeforetheCatholicinterventionsandadditionstothespace,
CatholicismwasanintegralfactorinshapingtheconstructionoftheAlhambraandthe
subsequentAndalusiancivilizationunderNasridrulers.Notonlydidtheever-present
threatofCatholicinvasionpromptacostlyshowofstrengthandfortitude,buttherealized
CatholicconquestofSpainalsodrovelargeMuslimpopulationstothelastseatofMuslim
ruleintheIberianpeninsula.Thisincreasedpopulationfacilitatedthegrowthofal-
Andalus,whichwasmaintainedpeacefullythroughacceptanceofseveralminoritygroups.
Althoughnineteenth-centuryscholarsemphasizedtheprogressivevaluesofthe“Moors”
thatfosteredgoodwillbetweenpeoplewhowereotherwisepariahs,Catholicdominancein
theregionlikelyplayeditspartinthecreationofamotleysocietywithinthewallsofthe
Alhambra.AnostalgicviewoftheAlhambra,popularinJones’sera,waslikelyalsoheldin
anearlyperiodinitshistory.Whilethemajorconstructionofthemonumentwas
completedduringthelastperiodofMuhammadV’srulefrom1362to1391,Muslimrulers
continuedthebuildonthesitethroughthe1450s.93However,in1492Granadafellto
FerdinandandIsabellaofSpain,markingthecompletionoftheReconquista.Withthequick
transitionfromactiveMuslimcultivationofthesitetocompleteCatholiccontroloverit,it
islikelythatMuslimslookedtotheAlhambraasthelastsurvivingremnantoftheirbygone
civilizationsoonafteritsconstructionwascompleted.
WithhisPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,OwenJones
contributedtothecomplexandelaboratehistoryoftheAlhambramonument.Joininghis
peersinre-presentingtheImaginaryGeographyoftheAlhambratohiscontemporaries,
Jonesemphasizedsomeofthemostfascinatingcontradictionswithinthecharacterofthe
93RobertIrwin,TheAlhambra.(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2004),vi-vii.
46
monumentthatscholarsarestillexploringtoday.Jones’sAlhambrawaspeculiaramongthe
workofhiscontemporariesbecauseheexploredthemonument’sseeminglyinconsistent
facetsthroughapurportedlyaccuratereconstructionofthefourteenth-century
architecture.However,Jones’sAlhambrawasCatholicandIslamic,staticandactive,precise
andwhimsical,anditremainsanimportanttoolforunderstandingBritishviewsofSpainin
thenineteenthcentury.
FuturescholarscouldexplorehowJones’sPlans,Elevations,SectionsandDetailsof
theAlhambraembodiedBritishconceptionsofSpaininmanyproductiveways.AlthoughI
haveprovidedabroadoverviewofthetypesofplatesinJones’swork,onecouldgointo
muchgreaterdepthabouthoweachtypeofplatefunctionswithinthewhole.Byisolating
groupsofplates,onemightuncoveranevengreatercomplexityinthewayJones
approachedtheAlhambrainrelationtocontemporarytheoriesandperceptions.Within
theseplategroups,PlatesXLVIthroughLthatdepictfiguralpaintingsontheceilingofthe
HallofJusticeseemespeciallyripeforcontextualinterpretation.Adeeperreadingof
Jones’stextshouldalsobeundertakentoassessthewaysinwhichJonesinteractedwithhis
peersonaliterarylevel.Scholarsshouldalsoconsiderotherprominentfeaturesofthe
SpanishImaginaryGeographythatJonesmayhaveincorporatedintohisAlhambra.Other
nineteenth-centurywriters,scholars,andartistsexploredeconomicpolicy,humanrights,
andsuffrageinSpaininanefforttoshapeBritishideologies,andJonescouldhavebeen
amongthem.Finally,thisstudyhasshownthatJones’sPlans,Elevations,Sections,and
DetailsoftheAlhambraisanintegralpartofawiderdiscussionaboutthefluidnatureofthe
Alhambra.Inthefuture,Jones’sAlhambrashouldbesituatedwithinthewiderscopeof
historicliteratureonthemonumentthatincludesbothWesternandnon-Westernsources.
47
FIGURES
Figure 1: Owen Jones. Plate XXXIV from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 2. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
48
Figure 2: Owen Jones. Plate III, “Plan of the Royal Arabian Palace in the Ancient Fortress of the Alhambra” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Colored Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
49
Figure 3: Owen Jones. Plate V, “Transverse Section of the Court of the Fishpond, Looking Towards the Palace of Charles the Fifth” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
50
Figure 4: Owen Jones. Plate IV, “View of the Court of the Fish-Pond from the Hall of the Bark” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
51
Figure 5: Owen Jones. Plate IX, “Divan, Court of the Fish-Pond” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
52
Figure 6: Owen Jones. Plate XXIX, “Detail of an Arch. Portico, Court of the Lions.” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
53
Figure 7: Owen Jones. Plate XXXV, “Capital of a Column from the Hall of the Ambassadors, and Four Small Engaged Shafts from the Hall of the Two Sisters” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
54
Figure 8: Owen Jones. Plate XXIII, “Court of the Mosque” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
55
Figure 9: Owen Jones. Plate XIX, “View in the Hall of the Two Sisters” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
56
Figure 10: Owen Jones. Plate XIII, “Entrance to the Court of the Lions (Restored)” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
57
Figure 11: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Plate XIII from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Print on Paper. Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum Library’s Rare Books, Smithsonian Institution Libraries.
58
Figure 12: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Plate LI from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Print on Paper. Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum Library’s Rare Books, Smithsonian Institution Libraries.
59
Figure 13: James Cavanah Murphy. “The Royal Palace and Fortress of Alhamba. At Granada” from Arabian Antiquities of Spain, 1813. Woodblock Print on Paper. Getty Research Institute.
60
Figure 14: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Plate I from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Print on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
61
Figure 15: Tiled ‘Plus Ultra’ mural dating from the reign of Charles V. Photo courtesy of Laura Eve Eggleton.
62
Figure 16: Owen Jones. Plate X, “Details of the Great Arches. Hall of the Bark” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
63
Figure 17: Owen Jones. Descriptive Plate X (front and back) from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Prints on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
64
Figure 18: John Frederick Lewis, Courtyard of Alhambra, 1832-1833. Watercolor drawing on paper. The Fitzwilliam Museum.
66
Figure 20: John Frederick Lewis. And the Prayer of the Faith shall save the Sick, 1872. Oil on Canvas. Yale Center for British Art.
67
Figure 21: David Roberts. “Tower of Comares” from The Tourist in Spain. Granada. 1835. Lithograph on Paper. New York Public Library.
68
Figure 22: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Page I “Tower of Comares” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Prints on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
69
Figure 23: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Page I from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Prints on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
70
Figure 24: Owen Jones. Plate XXVII, “Details of an Arch in the Hall of Justice” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.
71
Figure 25: David Roberts. “Hall of Justice” from The Tourist in Spain. Granada, 1835. Lithograph on Paper. New York Public Library.
72
REFERENCES
PrimarySources
"Plans,Elevations,andSectionsoftheAlhambra;withtheElaborateDetailsofthisBeautifulSpecimenofMoorishArchitecture."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1041(Dec31,1836):842-843.
"Plans,Elevations,andSectionsoftheAlhambra;withtheElaborateDetailsofthisBeautifulSpecimenofMoorishArchitecture."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1119(Jun30,1838):412.
"Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra;fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834bytheLateM.JulesGowry,andin1834and1837byOwenJones."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1333(Aug6,1842):558.
"Plans,Elevations,andSectionsoftheAlhambra."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1205(Feb22,1840):124.
Borrow,George.TheBibleinSpain;Or,theJourneys,Adventures,andImprisonmentsofanEnglishmaninanAttempttoCirculatetheScripturesinthePeninsula.London:J.M.Dent&Co.;NewYork,E.P.Dutton&Co.,1907.
Calvert,AlbertFrederick.TheAlhambra:BeingaBriefRecordoftheArabianConquestofthePeninsulawithaParticularAccountoftheMohammedanArchitectureandDecoration.London;NewYork:JohnLaneCompany,1906.
Goury,JulesandOwenJones.Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra/fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834byJulesGoury,andin1834and1837byOwenJones.withaCompleteTranslationoftheArabicInscriptions,andanHistoricalNoticeoftheKingsofGranadafromtheConquestofthatCitybytheArabstotheExpulsionoftheMoors,byPasqualDeGayangos.London:O.Jones,1842-45.([London]:VizetellyBrothersandCo.)
Irving,Washington.TalesoftheAlhambra.Philadelphia:Carey&Lea,1832.
Jones,Owen."OntheInfluenceofReligionuponArt."InLecturesonArchitectureandtheDecorativeArtsbyOwenJones,3-25.London:Chadwyck-Healey,1835.
73
———.OntheTrueandtheFalseintheDecorativeArtsLecturesDeliveredatMarlboroughHouse,June1852.London:StrangewaysandWalden,Printers,28CastleSt.LeicesterSq,1863.
———.TheGrammarofOrnament.London:DayandSon,1856.
Murphy,JamesCavanahandThomasHartwellHorne.TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain.London:Cadell&Davies,1815.
Roscoe,Thomas.TheTouristInSpain:Granada.London:R.JenningsandCo.,1835.
SecondarySources
Alcantud,JoséandAntonioGonzález."SocialMemoryofaWorldHeritageSite:TheAlhambraofGranada."InternationalSocialScienceJournal62,no.203-204(Mar,2011):179-197.
Baker,Christopher,ClaudiaHeide,DavidHowarth,andPaulStirton.TheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectors:GoyatoPicasso.Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009.
Bargebuhr,FrederickP.TheAlhambra:ACycleofStudiesontheEleventhCenturyinMoorishSpain.Berlin:DeGruyter,1968.
Bendiner,KennethPaul."ThePortrayaloftheMiddleEastinBritishPainting,1835-1860."Ph.D.,ColumbiaUniversity,1979.
Bressani,Martin.ArchitectureandtheHistoricalImagination:Eugène-EmmanuelViollet-le-Duc,1814–1879.Farnham:AshgatePublishingLtd,2014.
Buttigieg,JosephA.Introductionto "Forum—Europe'sSouthernQuestion:TheOtherwithin."Nineteenth-CenturyContexts26,no.4(12/01;2014/11,2004):311-337.
Colley,Linda.Britons:ForgingtheNation,1707-1837,rev.ed.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2009.
Crang,PhilipandSoniaAshmore."TheTransnationalSpacesofThings:SouthAsiantextilesinBritainandTheGrammarofOrnament,"EuropeanReviewOfHistory16,no.5(October2009):655-678.
Crinson,Mark."VictorianArchitectsandtheNearEast:StudiesinColonialArchitecture,ArchitecturalTheoryandOrientalism,1840-1870."Ph.D.,UniversityofPennsylvania,1989.
Daly,Gavin.TheBritishSoldierinthePeninsularWar:EncounterswithSpainandPortugal,1808-1814NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,2013.
74
Darby,Michael."OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal."Dr.,TheUniversityofReading(UnitedKingdom),1974.
Darby,MichaelandVictoriaandAlbertMuseum.TheIslamicPerspective:AnAspectofBritishArchitectureandDesigninthe19thCentury.London:LeightonHouseGallery:WorldOfIslamFestivalTrustPublication:DistributedbyScorpionCommunications,1983.
DepartmentofIslamicArt."TheArtoftheNasridPeriod(1232–1492)".InHeilbrunnTimelineofArtHistory.NewYork:TheMetropolitanMuseumofArt,2000–.http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/nasr/hd_nasr.htm(October2002).
Dodds,JerrilynnDenise.Al-Andalus:TheArtofIslamicSpain.NewYork:MetropolitanMuseumofArt:DistributedbyH.N.Abrams,1992.
Eggleton,Lara."Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra:ReadingsofArchitectureandOrnamentfromMedievaltoModern."PhDthesis,UniversityofLeeds,2011.
———."HistoryintheMaking:TheOrnamentoftheAlhambraandthePast-FacingPresent."JournalofArtHistoriographyno.6(2012):1-29.
Ferry,Kathryn."OwenJones."Crafts(0306610X)no.198(January,2006):20-21.
———."OwenJonesandtheAlhambraCourtattheCrystalPalace."InRevisitingAl-Andalus:PerspectivesontheMaterialCultureofIslamicIberiaandBeyond,editedbyGlaireD.Anderson,andMariamRosser-Owen,227-245.Boston:Brill,2007.
———."PrintingtheAlhambra:OwenJonesandChromolithography."ArchitecturalHistory46,(2003):175-188.
Flores,CarolA.Hrvol."EngagingtheMind'sEye:TheuseofInscriptionsintheArchitectureofOwenJonesandA.W.N.Pugin."JournaloftheSocietyofArchitecturalHistorians60,no.2(June,2001):158-179.
———."FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory:OwenJones'sStudyoftheAlhambra."StudiesinVictorianArchitectureandDesign1,(2008):18-29.
———."OwenJones,Architect."Ph.D.,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,1996.
Grabar,Oleg.TheAlhambra.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1978.
———.TheMediationofOrnament.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress,1992.
Heide,Claudia."ADreamoftheSouth:IslamicSpain."Chap.3,InTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,editedbyBaker,Christopher,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton,65-69.Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009.
75
———."TheSpanishPicturesque."Chap.2,InTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,editedbyBaker,Christopher,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton,47-51.Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009.
———."TheAlhambrainBritain.BetweenForeignizationandDomestication."ArtinTranslation2,no.2(2010):201-222.
Heleniak,KathrynMoore."AnEnglishGentleman'sEncounterwithIslamicArchitecture:HenrySwinburne'sTravelsthroughSpain(1779)."JournalforEighteenth-CenturyStudies28,no.2(09,2005):181.
Hertel,Patricia."DerErinnerteHalbmond:IslamUndNationalismusAufDerIberischenHalbinselIm19.Und20.Jahrhundert."München:Oldenbourg,2012.
Hitchcock,HenryRussell.EarlyVictorianArchitectureinBritain.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,1954.
Howarth,David.TheInventionofSpain:CulturalRelationsbetweenBritainandSpain,1770-1870.Manchester,UK;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress;DistributedexclusivelyintheUSAbyPalgrave,2007.
Irwin,Robert.TheAlhambra.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2004.
Jespersen,JohnKresten."OriginalityandJones''theGrammarofOrnament'of1856."JournalofDesignHistoryno.2(2008):143.
———."OwenJones's"theGrammarofOrnament"of1856:FieldTheoryinVictorianDesignattheMid-Century(Britain)."Ph.D.,BrownUniversity,1984.
Kennedy,Hugh.MuslimSpainandPortugal.NewYork:Longman,1996.
Lanford,Catherine.“ImperialismandtheParlor:OwenJones'sthe'GrammarofOrnament'.”TheWordsworthCircle,38(2001).
Llewellyn,Briony.“"SolitaryEagle"?:ThePublicandPrivatePersonasofJohnFrederickLewis(1804-1876)”inThePoeticsandPoliticsofPlace:OttomanIstanbulandBritishOrientalism,editedbyReinaLewis,167-181.Seattle:UniversityofWashingtonPress,2011.
Lopez,John-David."TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain."Ph.D.,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,2008.
Lyotard,Jean-François.ThePostmodernCondition:AReportonKnowledge,trans.GeoffBenningtonandBrianMassumi.Minneapolis:UniveristyofMinnesota,1984.
76
MacKenzie,JohnM.Orientalism:History,Theory,andtheArts.Manchester;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress;DistributedexclusivelyintheUSAandCanadabySt.Martin'sPress,1995.
McSweeney,Anna."VersionsandVisionsoftheAlhambraintheNineteenth-CenturyOttomanWorld."West86th:AJournalofDecorativeArts,DesignHistory&MaterialCulture22,no.1(Spring,2015):44.
Moser,Stephanie.DesigningAntiquity:OwenJones,AncientEgyptandtheCrystalPalace.NewHaven:PublishedforthePaulMellonCentreforStudiesinBritishArtbyYaleUniversityPress,2012.
Mowl,GrahamandMichaelBarke."ChangingVisitorPerceptionsofMalaga(Spain)anditsDevelopmentasaWinterHealthResortintheNineteenthCentury."StudiesinTravelWriting18,no.3(07,2014):233.
Necipoglu,Gulru.TheTopkapıScroll:GeometryandOrnamentinIslamicArchitecture:TopkapıPalaceMuseumLibraryMSH.1956.SantaMonica,CA:GettyCenterfortheHistoryofArtandtheHumanities,1995.
Nochlin,Linda."TheImaginaryOrient."InPoliticsofVision;EssaysonNineteenth-CenturyArtandSociety,33-59.NewYork:Harper&Row,1989.
Paquette,Gabriel."TheImageofImperialSpaininBritishPoliticalThought,1750-1800*."BulletinofSpanishStudies81,no.2(03,2004):187-214.
Pratt,MaryLouise.ImperialEyesTravelWritingandTransculturation.2nded.London;NewYork:Routledge,2008.
Raquejo,Tonia."The'ArabCathedrals':MoorishArchitectureasseenbyBritishTravellers."TheBurlingtonMagazine128,no.1001(August,1986):555-563.
Ringrose,DavidR.Spain,Europe,andthe"SpanishMiracle",1700-1900.Cambridge;NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,1996.
RosserOwen,Mariam.IslamicArtsfromSpain.London:NewYork:V&APub.;DistributedinNorthAmericabyHarryN.Abrams,2010.
Ruggles,D.F.Gardens,Landscape,andVisioninthePalacesofIslamicSpain.UniversityPark,PA:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,2003.
Said,EdwardW.Orientalism.NewYork:VintageBooks,1994.
Saglia,Diego."Imag(in)IngIberia:LandscapeAnnualsandMultimediaNarrativesoftheSpanishJourneyinBritishRomanticism."JournalofIberian&LatinAmericanStudies12,no.2(08,2006):123-146.
77
———.PoeticCastlesinSpain:BritishRomanticismandFigurationsofIberia.Amsterdam;Atlanta:Rodopi,2000.
Sanchez,JuanL."Spain,Politics,andtheBritishRomanticImagination."Ph.D.,UniversityofNotreDame,2007.
Searight,Sarah"OwenJones:TravelandVisionoftheOrient.”Alif:JournalofComparativePoeticsno.26,(2006):128-146.
Stevens,MichaelS."SpanishOrientalism:WashingtonIrvingandtheRomanceoftheMoors."Ph.D.,GeorgiaStateUniversity,2007.
Sweetman,John.TheOrientalObsession:IslamicInspirationinBritishandAmericanArtandArchitecture,1500-1920.Cambridge;NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,1988.
Thomas,Abraham,VictoriaandAlbertMuseum.OwenJones.London:V&APub,2010.
VanZanten,David.TheArchitecturalPolychromyofthe1830's.NewYork:GarlandPublishing,1977.
Vernoit,Stephen.DiscoveringIslamicArt:Scholars,CollectorsandCollections1850-1950.London:I.B.Tauris,2000.
VictoriaandAlbertMuseum.OwenJones:IslamicDesign,DiscoveryandVision.London;Sharjah:VictoriaandAlbertMuseum;SharjahMuseumsDepartment,2012.
Weeks,EmilyM.CulturesCrossed:JohnFrederickLewisandtheArtofOrientalism.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2014.
Wolffe,John.TheProtestantCrusadeinGreatBritain,1829-1860.Oxford;NewYork:ClarendonPress;OxfordUniversityPress,1991.
78
APPENDIXI
VariantCopiesConsulted
InmyresearchIwasfortunatetobeabletoexaminethreevariantcopiesofPlans,
Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra.Whileallversionscontainedthesame
basicstructureandplates,thereseemedtobegreatvarianceinprintingtechniquesand
subsequenthandling.TheUniversityofSouthFloridacopy,theprimarysourceof
informationforthisthesis,isnotableforitsmutedgray-blueinallchromolithographed
plates,andforthedestroyedfinaldescriptivepageandmissingfinalplateinthefirst
volume.Bycontrast,theUniversityofMinnesotacopyisinpristinecondition,butseemsto
beacompilationofplatesinvarioussizesfromthepressesofbothJonesandtheVizetelly
Brothers.ThelithographsaregenerallydarkerandmoredetailedthanintheSouthFlorida
copy,buttheblueshaveinconsistentsaturation.TheUniversityofMinnesotacopyisalso
notablebecauseitwasunboundandeachpagepermanentlyreboundwithinavellum
sheath.Thethirdcopy,containingonlythefirstvolume,wasdigitizedbytheSmithsonian
InstituteLibraries,andviewedelectronicallythrougharchives.org.AlthoughIcouldnot
examinethephysicalcopy,itslithographsandchromolithographsseemgenerallydarker
thantheSouthFloridacopy,butbluepigmentisalmostentirelyabsentfrommostofthe
chromolithographs.Thechromolithographsdepictingmosaictileworkaretheexceptionto
therule.Thisdigitalcopywasprimarilyusefulwithreferencetothedescriptivepages,
whichIcouldaccesswithouthavingtotraveltoaSpecialCollections.Thefollowingcatalog
entriesarederivedfrominformationfromtheholdinginstitutionsandmyown
observations.
79
UniversityofSouthFlorida
Goury,JulesandOwenJones.Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra/fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834byJulesGoury,andin1834and1837byOwenJones.
withaCompleteTranslationoftheArabicInscriptions,andanHistoricalNoticeoftheKings
ofGranadafromtheConquestofthatCitybytheArabstotheExpulsionoftheMoors,by
PasqualDeGayangos.London:O.Jones,1842-45.([London]:VizetellyBrothersandCo.)
2v.:20p.,51leavesofplates(somecolor);50leavesofplates(somecolor);60cm.
Notes:ChieflyinEnglishandFrench.Volume1hasaddedt.p.:LaAlhambrapalais...Volume2hasaddedt.p.:DetailsandornamentsfromtheAlhambra.SomeillustrationsengravedbyW.S.Wilkinson,E.Kennion,T.T.Bury,CarlRauch,lithographedbyF.FinlayafterOwenJones,JulesGoury,andEnrique.“VizetellyBrothersandCo.Printers135FleetStreet"--t.p.verso.SouthFloridaCopy:Vol.1lacksplate51,containsdescription.(OCoLC)02803628.
UniversityofMinnesota
Goury,JulesandOwenJones.Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra/fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834byJulesGoury,andin1834and1837byOwenJones.
withaCompleteTranslationoftheArabicInscriptions,andanHistoricalNoticeoftheKings
ofGranadafromtheConquestofthatCitybytheArabstotheExpulsionoftheMoors,by
PasqualDeGayangos.London:O.Jones,1842-45.([London]:VizetellyBrothersandCo.)
2volumes:illustrations(partcolor);60cm. Notes:ChieflyinEnglishandFrench.Volume1hasaddedt.p.:LaAlhambrapalais...1841."VizetellyBrothersandCo.Printers135FleetStreet"--t.p.verso.UniversityofMinnesotaCopy:Bothvol.rebound.Containssmallerplatesaffixedtolargerfolios.(OCoLC)2803628.
80
SmithsonianInstitute
Goury,JulesandOwenJones.Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra/fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834byJulesGoury,andin1834and1837byOwenJones.
withaCompleteTranslationoftheArabicInscriptions,andanHistoricalNoticeoftheKings
ofGranadafromtheConquestofthatCitybytheArabstotheExpulsionoftheMoors,by
PasqualDeGayangos.London:O.Jones,1842-45.([London]:VizetellyBrothersandCo.)
1Volume:344p.;illustrations(partcolor)Notes:ChieflyinEnglishandFrenchVol.1hasaddedt.p.:LaAlhambrapalais...1842Vol.2hasaddedt.p.:DetailsandornamentsfromtheAlhambra.1845.SmithsonianCopy:Plate49MissingfromOriginal.DigitizedbyCooper-Hewitt,NationalDesignMuseumLibrary’sRareBooks,SmithsonianInstitutionLibraries,wassupportedinpartbyfundsfromtheMetropolitanNewYorkLibraryCouncil(METRO)throughtheNewYorkStateRegionalBibliographicDatabasesProgram.(OCoLC)ocm02803628.