the ofof style - storage.googleapis.com€¦ · his iron muscles were used to makeshift rustic...

The ABC of StyleThe ABC of Style

how to know and recognisearchitecture and furniture

É

M

I

L

E

B

A

Y

A

R

D

TS ABC of Style 4C.qxp 11/4/2011 5:07 PM

Author:Émile Bayard

Translation: Carol Sykes & Ross J. Noble

Layout:Baseline Co. Ltd61A-63A Vo Van Tan Street4th FloorDistrict 3, Ho Chi Minh CityVietnam

© Confidential Concepts, worldwide, USA© Parkstone Press International, New York, USA

All rights reserved. No part of this publication may be reproduced or adapted without thepermission of the copyright holder, throughout the world. Unless otherwisespecified, copyright on the works reproduced lies with the respectivephotographers, artists, heirs or estates. Despite intensive research, it hasnot always been possible to establish copyright ownership. Where this isthe case, we would appreciate notification.

ISBN: 978-1-78042-886-4


Émile Bayard

The ABC of StylesThe ABC of Styles

5


Introduction 7

Antiquity 19

The Middle Ages 41

From Renaissance to Baroque 83

From Rococo to Neo-Classiscism 133

From Directoire to Second Empire 173

Art Nouveau or “Modern Style” 209

Conclusion 227

Notes 250

Index 251

Contents

6


7


Styles constitute the aesthetic memory of the periods towhich they belong. They represent the various cults ofbeauty to which a period gave birth. A world view lies

dormant in the stones, the furniture and the words of a period.They are the witnesses to the way of life and to the aspirationsof an epoch which survive through the generations. True, thewhims of fashion are ephemeral but beauty is unchanging andeverlasting. It does not just appear from nowhere. In fact, it is themark of eternal beauty that we celebrate in styles, emerging asthey do from mankind’s efforts to purify and synthesise, from hisattempts to feel his way towards new understanding. This newunderstanding, this discovery, once made, becomes the expression,the true literature, of the people of the period. The discoverydoes not change form from one civilisation to the next. Rather,each civilisation reworks it with original ideas.

Originally, those seeking to develop styles were unaware thatthey were doing so. Styles developed not from the work of oneindividual but from the efforts of many and were gradually refinedas part of a process which eventually produced anonymousmasterpieces. Architectural styles develop in the same way thatnew species of plant and animal appear. In nature, new speciesappear through the effects of heredity and adaptation. Heredityis the process whereby the habits of the parents becomepermanent characteristics of the offspring. Adaptation changesthe organism through a relationship that is vital to its survival: therelationship with the environment that it happens to inhabit.Adaptation to one’s environment may mean developing aparticular organ by using it more frequently or allowing an organto atrophy through lack of use. In the long term, adaptation leavespermanent traces on the individual organism. This creates a newvariety or species. Hence, unexpectedly, yet logically, Darwin’stheories about the animal kingdom can be extended to the realmof ideas, specifically to styles, which are born of a historicaltradition, and are honed by adaptation to the needs, feelings andknowledge of a new society.

The historical tradition is not the least of the influences on thedevelopment of a style. Architecture (not forgetting furniture,which is a kind of auxiliary architecture) is, in fact, the traditionalart form par excellence. Painting and sculpture find their inspi-

ration, their subjects, all around them. Architecture, on the otherhand, finds only raw materials: the clay of the sculptor or thepalette of colours of the painter. Beyond man, architecture hasno subject. It borrows from nature whenever it turns sculptor orpainter to clothe limbs of stone, wood or metal with meaningfuland decorative garments. Architecture requires the involvementof a people, a race, a civilisation to bring it into existence anddevelop it. Centuries of effort produce an architectural style.Hence the essence of a style can only be appreciated manyyears later. Only time can hone and recognise the characteristicfeatures that are representative of a style. When the Sun Kingsettled into a contemporary armchair, it is unlikely that he thoughtof it as a Louis XIV chair. Today, on the other hand, we have noqualms about trumpeting the arrival of an ”art nouveau”, a claimwhich posterity may well consider an arrogant exaggeration.Therein lies the difference between a style and pretentions to astyle, between a fashion for a certain type of beauty and truebeauty. This is not to say, however, that some of today’s inter-esting efforts may not contain the seeds of a lasting expressionof our own era’s style.

The study of styles, then, must be undertaken in stagessince the object of study is composed of a series of states ofunderstanding. The delicate gradation of purity of the variousstages must also be examined. The smallest stone or mouldingfrom a bygone period has its own eloquence, its own flavour.Connoisseurs are even able to recognise certain reliefs by touch.The feel of their age-worn surfaces could not be reproduced bya counterfeiter. The study of styles is, therefore, the study of a pastteeming with lines, curves, foliage, columns and mascarons. It isa fascinatingly complex field which stimulates our curiosity andraises disconcerting questions. How satisfying to decipher arebus, date a church or to offer one’s imagination the setting ithas always hankered for, the backdrop of one’s dreams!

The study of styles begins with architecture, which is the mostobvious trace, the longest-lasting reference point that precedingcenturies have left us, insofar as stone is the material that bestresists the passage of time. Although there may be nothing butruins left, ancient incarnations of beauty seem reluctant to slip fromour memory and be forgotten. It is these ancient remains that we

Introduction

Pergamon Altar, c. 180-150 BCE.

Pergamonmuseum, Berlin.

8

TS ABC of Style 4C.qxp 11/9/2011 9:49 AM

will examine first, not with the scientific approach of the archae-

ologist but with the eye of the artist. They speak, after all, of a

civilisation, they evoke a way of life, a world view, the habits that

characterised the period. A connoisseur may be able to tell

different varieties of honey apart by taste, by recognising the

different kinds of flowers the bees visited. The product he is tasting

is honey nevertheless. Similarly, “honey” is only the essence of the

product, the concept which refers to a variety of flavours which

depend on the flowers that the bees are in the habit of visiting.

Primitive man was stocky, he did not have civilised habits and

his iron muscles were used to makeshift rustic accommodation.

Peace, leisure and the easy life that wealth brought, on the other

hand, required refinement and luxury in the home. Romantic,

primitive scenes have a certain appeal in art, a certain character,

but it is luxury that gives art wings. Art is the most useless form of

expression amongst the uncultivated and the most vital for culti-

vated thought. Only art can make the romantic, which is often

synonymous with discomfort and unhealthy conditions, more

attractive. Indeed romantic scenes are characterised by their

seductive coarseness, by the absence of beautiful objects. In

contrast, in an environment of taste and luxury, attractive ornaments

abound and the observer is intoxicated by the beauty of his

surroundings. These ornaments and this beauty are the incarnation

of the flattery of the period since, whatever their ideals or faith,

artists are obliged, whether to survive or simply to please, to

respond to the tastes and spirit of their time. Thus, their works follow

rather than leading and eventually subscribe to the ideas, the fads

and the habits which win them acclaim from their contemporaries.

The painter David did not paint in the style of his wonderful

relative Boucher because the politics of his time had changed, and

Pantheon, Rome, 118-128 CE. Trajan’s Column, Rome, 113 CE. (opposite)

9


because the beautiful cupids “fed on milk and roses”, which wereso dear to the heart of this pre-eminent painter of grace and charm,had disappeared in a cloud of face powder. They had fallenvictim to the Greco-Roman sword of savage classicism.Nevertheless, if cupids had been in favour while David waspainting and if the royal courtesans had continued to smile athim, he would undoubtedly have been content to follow inBoucher’s footsteps. Similarly, David was unforgiving towardsLouis XVI (he refused to finish his portrait and voted in favour ofthe death sentence imposed on him by the National Convention)yet his republican zeal, which was at its height during the FrenchRevolution, yielded wonderfully to the majesty of the EmperorNapoleon, who made David his principal painter.

What these anomalies show is that it is the flow of ideas thatcarries artists and their works along with it. At times the flow isinterrupted but then it is taken up by others. As a result we findmany examples of Baroque, fin de siècle or transitional styles,which are the sign of an impetus that has been repressed ordeflected for political reasons, for reasons of taste or for thepurpose of artistic or commercial flattery. One can date a workfrom a moulding which has gone unfinished. These tiny clueswhich are hidden within a style are the incarnation of acts whichhave not been carried to their conclusion, of intentions whichhave changed. They are the result of a return to a heroic pastwhich people feel the need to celebrate in the face of presentweakness, or because the ideas of the past are in line withcontemporary thinking. We will see that during the First FrenchEmpire, David, the so-called dictator of the arts mentioned above,brought back the Greek helmet and Roman sword, influencing thearchitects Percier and Fontaine. We will also see how trite andbanal styles became during the Second Empire because the origi-nality and desire to change that had triumphed under Napoleonhad given way to a bourgeois lack of individuality. Flat, uninter-esting periods have had the styles they deserved. Great events,important upheavals, noble battles, aspirations inspired by faith orideals have left their mark on the past, which registers society’severy tremor. As we have already said, those marks constitutestyles, the only traces that remain of a man’s efforts and of menthemselves. Writers are recognisable by the way they write, theway they formulate their thoughts, their style. There are as manystyles as there are writers, unless the writer lacks originality, inwhich case he will copy or adapt others’ style. Throughout theirlong evolution, styles, too, have done just that.

This brings us to the etymology of the word style. It comesfrom the Greek stylos and the Latin stylus, which referred to the

10


pointed tool used for writing on wax tablets. The word characteris sometimes used as a synonym for style. However, this is anerror which should be avoided for the following reasons. As wehave just seen, the origin of the word stylus lies in the tablets orcounting frames filled with wax or simply sand which were usedfor writing in antiquity. The stylus was the pen of antiquity andthe figures drawn on the counting frame or tablet with the styloswere called kharaktêr in Greek. The etymology of these twowords explains the vital difference between style and character.Style is a kind of extension of the hand, which obeys the will ofthe writer or artist; it is the man himself expressing his thoughts oremotional responses. As Buffon says, the style is the man himself.Character, on the other hand, is the visible mark. Style, then, isthe cause while character is the effect; style is the thought whilecharacter is the physical expression of that thought. This expla-nation of the meaning of the word style and how it differs fromthat of the word character may help to explain the dual meaningof the word style itself, which can be used with or without anadjective, that is to say in the relative or the abstract sense.

Men of the same family, region or race, possess identifyingfeatures which allow us to tell them apart but they all share theinherent characteristics of the human race. A man taken individ-ually can be coarse or cultivated, thin or fat, in short a man canalways be described or qualified. Man cannot. Man is anabstraction, an idea, the generic concept, an entity devoid ofindividuality. An individual man lives for a relatively short periodof time while man the species, the concept, will live as long asthe human race survives.

A “work of style”, which is to say a manifestation of the ideal,refers to the timeless abstract idea of style. A work done in anelegant or informal style is necessarily ephemeral and charac-terised by specific identifying features. Only simplicity canexpress the universal and the eternal, which also constitute valuesbelonging to the Magna Moralia. There can be no “work ofstyle” without simple thought and execution. This, then, is thesingular fate of the word style; it is used to refer both to the mostspiritual qualities of thought and literature and to the stylus (orpenholder). Indeed, the word has undergone the same processas style itself; through the ages its meaning has been purified bysuccessive interpretations until finally it has come to represent anabstract concept with its origins in a physical object.

In the course of this book, the reader will see that while it maybe going too far to say that nature, from which most of the worksdiscussed below took their inspiration, is purified, it is at the veryleast, always interpreted and sometimes distorted to produce

highly artistic pieces. Art is not intended to be a kind of photog-raphy, a reflection of reality, but rather a translation of that reality.

What, then, does it mean to stylise? This is the art of tastefullyconventionalising a model from nature, using natural objects withwit to make them more decorative. Take the example of theacanthus leaf, a key to styles down the ages! It has inspiredextraordinary stylised representations! The acanthus leaves thatdecorated Greek Corinthian capitals were modelled on thethorny leaves of the real plant acanthus spinosus; the Romansused (and some would say over-used) the smoother leaves of theacanthus mollis; and the broad acanthus leaf of the Renaissancethen replaced the highly stylised, simplified leaf used by theRomans. The acanthus leaf was banished during the Gothicperiod and atrophied under Louis XIII, becoming heavy and solidlike the style itself. Under Louis XIV, it became solemn and stiff andunder Louis XV it was twisted and curled, though less extrava-gantly so than had been the case under the regency whichpreceded Louis XV’s reign. Finally, under Louis XVI, the acanthusleaf was simplified and became less elegant and less bold.Another example can be found in the many metamorphoses of thepalmette. It has so many incarnations that we recognise in spiteof the divine disguise of their altered form! Assyrian, Egyptian,Greek and Roman versions, all different from one another! Thedemi-palmette used to decorate corners; the Doric palmette,which was reserved for Doric cornices and which reappearedduring the First and indeed the Second French Empires!

This is the meaning of style. It is the metamorphosis of theoriginal inspiration through today’s original reworking. It is therepresentation of the scent of the flower, which is to say, theessence of the flower. It is a cyclical return to the source sinceantiquity began where we end up. Let’s not forget that style is theessence, it represents the fruits of a whole experience, andallowing us to identify the flower from which it comes is a qualityin a perfume. The Romans, who did not have a particularly imagi-native approach to language, were indifferent to drawings thatwere too precise to move the observer. The effects of a violinist’splaying are limited if they are only felt by his bow and this is truefor any musician. It is not the instrument that is important but thesoul of the person playing it. All of these intangible aspects of awork of art are part of the style. There is no art without style andstyle cannot be pinned down. It is the mood of the thing, whichcannot be captured, it is its flavour. To stylise is to set out on a questin the realm of material things, to travel towards discovery throughthe intricacies of a riddle. What knowledge must we possess in order to unveil the mysteries of successive styles one by one?

11


12


The different types of architecture are footprints in the sand left bybygone eras. The botanist knows a tree by its leaf; the archaeol-ogist identifies a soil layer by what he finds in it; the artistdiscovers a style by analysing the characters that constitute itsbeauty. But what a long way back one must go when one wantsto analyse ruins and examine remains! Ruins and remains knowso much but determinedly say so little! Then suddenly their secretsare out! We know their age! We know who built them! Weshould not, though, exaggerate the importance of styles to thepoint where we imagine that they are completely distinct from oneanother. The branches of a tree are all branches and, similarly, allstyles are based on a tangible reality. They simply belong to alarge family where parentage is not always easy to trace andwhere mismatched partners, interbreeding and deaths abound.

Once we have looked at the different types of architecture,we shall cross the threshold of temples, abbeys, cathedrals andhomes and study the furniture. A piece of furniture is, after all, a

small architectural monument since, where decor is concerned,every expression of a period’s style is related; they share thesame feel, they seem to belong to the same family. And shouldfurniture not match the decor? Let us not make a distinctionbetween architecture and furniture, then. Indeed we shall oftenuse the study of architecture and furniture as a starting point foridentifying all kinds of objects.

The outline of our programme of work is becoming clearer. Toachieve the practical aims we have set out, we need to return tothe very source of personality. As we travel through time from thepast to the present, we shall focus on form, expression, decorationand so on, which will help us to form a judgement which is as freeas possible from damaging gaps in our knowledge. Byproceeding from one deduction to the next and ensuring we donot skip any of the links in the chain, we shall grasp what styleshave in common, how they influence one another and how theymerge while always maintaining their individual nuances.

Stonehenge, Wiltshire, c. 2900-1400 BCE.

13


Let us now look at the general aesthetic principles of style andat how they relate to constructive geometry. The Greeks had avery marked predilection for combinations of straight lines andthey considered the straight line to be the epitome of architecturedue to its perfect simplicity, unity and nobility. The Egyptiansknew only the triangle and the quadrilateral. The latter was theform taken by the main facades or their buildings and the formerwas the shape of the pediments which closed off the eaves. BothGreeks and Egyptians used the flat arch as a basic ingredient oftheir building, to the exclusion of all other methods used to spanopenings in walls or cover areas of ground. The Romans hadless refined tastes and placed greater emphasis on utility and onrich materials than on the tranquil harmony of line and shape thathad been favoured previously. They were also inclined to imitatethe Etruscans, although they developed Etruscan models consid-erably. They added the circular arch to the various straight formsused in Pagan, Egyptian and Greek art. Roman building wasmixed in the methods it used and employed both flat and circulararches. In both Byzantine and Roman styles, but particularly inByzantine architecture, the majority of wall openings, the tops ofbuildings and domes all used circular arches. They used thesemi-circular arch as their basic model and this later developedinto the pointed arch both in the West and the East. Pointedforms then became all the rage both in the West and the East.There was an apparent enjoyment of hard edges and sharppoints and these were to be found everywhere one looked.

Renaissance style enthusiastically adopted one of the lastforms created by the Gothic style: the ellipse. The ellipse wasinitially adopted as the shape which would allow the building oflarge openings such as church doorways. They were crownedwith a four centred arch, which was decorative rather thanfunctional. Although the architecture of the Renaissance acceptedthe semi-circular arch, there was a preference for the segmentalarch or even for the stilted arch for which the ellipse was thecontemporary geometrical model. The ellipse is as restful toobserve as the semi-circular arch, is more graceful and moresumptuous than the pointed arch and offers more variation andnuance than either and it seems to have become an importantpart of modern architecture.

It is from this marriage of the soul’s needs and the mind’sdesires, of the rational faculties and the aesthetic sense that archi-tectural styles are born and these, let us remember, are related tostyles in furniture. The union of the two gives rise to exclamationsof admiration as when Henry IV was moved by the intricatestone carvings on the facade of Tours cathedral to cry: “Ventre

Saint-Gris! What beautiful jewels are here! All that is missing isthe display case!”; and Vauban, overcome with admiration forthe huge octagonal tower at Coutances cathedral, exclaimed,“Which sublime madman dared to raise such a monumenttowards the heavens?”. It was Michelangelo who said of thedoors of the Baptistry of Saint John in Florence, “they are sobeautiful that they should be used as Heaven’s gates”.

Man has felt the need to establish rules governing beautysince the earliest times. The Egyptians and the Greeks hadcanons relating to the visual arts and the Greeks divided archi-tecture into aesthetically-defined types known as orders. Thehieratic, symbolic Egyptian style became formulaic after a periodof independence while the Greek style was free of all constraints(although there were widely differing canons for each of the arts)and reflected nature superbly. We shall not discuss the canonsrelating to the visual arts here as they lie outside the scope of thiswork. However, we shall deal with the orders of architecture,which have close links with their younger relatives: styles.

The orders speak the same silent language as the styles andthe age-old fascination they both hold over us links them closelyto each other. Moreover, an order often underpins a style, hencethe need to begin by carefully studying the orders. There are fiveorders, as follows: the Doric, Ionic and Corinthian (the Greekorders), the Tuscan order (which was derived from the GreekDoric order) and the Composite order (Roman). There also existRoman versions of the Doric and Ionic orders, which differedsignificantly from the Greek versions.

For the purposes of this elementary, practical introduction tostyles, the reader has only to examine the features of the orderson the illustration and to note the differences between them. It isworth remembering that every detail is important if we are not tolose the thread that we are seeking to follow. As a result, weshall be stepping back into the far distant past, though notwithout taking a pleasant stroll through conjecture and poetry ascertainties are in short supply. Certainties, however, are of noconcern to us at the moment since we are dealing with art. Wemust also immerse ourselves in the general theory of constructionout of respect for the styles which emanate from it. Then we shallundergo our initiation into the worship of the miracle of artthrough the legends that are attached to it.

In the very earliest times, menhirs, or standing stones (whetherarranged in rows or not), dolmens (stones supporting other stonesin a table-like arrangement), stone circles and trilithons (ordolmens arranged to form a door but without the side walls or thetumulus of earth that would originally have covered them) speak

14


Georges Jacob, Armchair, c. 1780.

Carved and painted beech wood.

Musée Nissim de Camondo, Paris.

15


Painted Panels, c. 1780.

Oil on canvas.

Musée des Arts décoratifs, Paris.

16


of a kind of primitive style, although they are of archaeologicalrather than artistic interest now. We shall, therefore, pass quicklyover these rudimentary forms, although not without noting theirmeanings and the ambitions that probably inspired them. Thesemeanings supplement the general aesthetic principles underlyingstyles which we discussed earlier. For example, the ancient questfor the sublime, for calm grandeur seems to be reflected in thegiant monoliths, in the simple arrangements of prehistoric stonesand in the enormous size of the Egyptian pyramids alike. They areemulating mountains; “In the Athenians’ imaginations, theAcropolis was as high up as Olympus and the home of the godsthemselves was a mountain in Thessaly.” On the other hand,although Greek temples are always located high up, they arenever very tall: “their low pediments can be seen on cliff tops orlooking out over the sea because the Greeks felt that the divinitiesin their stories had chosen to come amongst men so that menshould not have to attempt to ascend to the abode of the gods.”But the link between human imagination and man’s drive to builddoes not stop here.

The fascination with surfaces was followed by a fascinationwith depth, which is evident in Indian temples, with height,

which can be seen in Christian churches1, and with length asevidenced by Egyptian temples; “Only the Greeks retained akind of balance in their proportions (width double the heightand length double the width).” Similarly, it was the Greeks whowere to provide art with a basis and a balance. It was theywho best codified the steps that would produce beauty, whowould lay out the path to style. It would be unfair, however toignore the clear influence of Eastern and Egyptian art on Greekart. Moreover, it is worth remembering that art emerges from thesum of all ideas. At first it took the form of anonymous master-pieces which emerged from the chaos of civilisations. Then itwas taken up, interpreted, filtered, perfected by the genius ofthe Greeks, who organised it in a manner which is widelyconsidered to be highly original. Indeed their astounding,unruffled originality will continue to amaze future generations forcenturies to come. It was an originality based not on improvi-sation but on a great train of reasoning, and it is this that madeit a timeless model, insofar as a given harmony remains harmo-nious as time goes by. However, let us not get ahead ofourselves. In the next chapter we shall continue our journeythrough classical antiquity.

Nicolas Pineau, Project for a Console, c. 1735.

Pen and black ink, grey wash.

Musée des Arts décoratifs, Paris.

Germain Boffrand and Charles Joseph Natoire, Hôtel de Soubise, Parade

Room of the Princess, Paris, 1735-1739. (opposite)

17


18


19


TThhee iinniittiiaall iinnssppiirraattiioonn ffoorr ssttyylleess

It is widely accepted that the first traces of civilisation and, byextension, the first features of characteristic styles, are to be foundin Egypt. We shall bypass the early buildings attributed to thePelasgians since, as the ruins at Tiryns, Mycenae and Plataeashow, they are of scant aesthetic interest. These peoples werenomadic and they lived in the wild. Their homes were caves2 orhuts. They used the raw materials around them. They camped.Depending on the kind of terrain and the soil they found, they wentin for agriculture, hunting or fishing. Stilt houses appeared amongsedentary communities as did tents among pastoral peoples, whowere obliged to travel constantly, moving on at the end of eachseason to find the pasture they needed to feed their livestock. Therewas no real furniture. The first bed was really just bedding aspeople slept on animal skins or on piles of dry leaves. The firsttable was a flat stone propped on other stones placed upright. Thefirst seat was a block of stone. How could art make any headwayin the face of such uncomfortable, makeshift arrangements? Yet,however rudimentary it might be, the colourful, primitive nature ofthe first home could be considered a kind of style. Let us enter thecave of primitive man and examine it. It is coarse, artless, has aflavour of savagery and is full of disturbing shadows. Animal skinsand silex axes hang on the walls. These are the first ornamentaldisplays. A woman bedecked with necklaces made of shells andanimal teeth is sitting on an aurochs skull crushing grain betweentwo stones. Her nakedness is partly concealed by furs andfeathers. A disembowelled, partly butchered bear lies on the floor.Cut and twisted branches lie in the corners, their leaves adding apleasant touch of lighter colour. Freshly caught dead birds hang inbunches from the low ceiling. The colourful, primitive character ofthis dwelling in fact constitutes a style although they eye may retainonly the impression of an attractive disorder.

But let us return to Egyptian art, the art of a serene civilisation anda people of faith and ideals. Once man has met his basic needs,he rests and thinks and his mind turns eagerly to art. He examinesnature and uses it as a model. Hence, “trees are the inspiration for

columns, their fluting and fillets seem to represent a bundle of fibresand the astragal, a simplified representation of rope, mirrors thevigorous lines of plant stems”. The Egyptians adopted the bud, orthe fully open flower, of the lotus or the palm leaf to decorate theircapitals. The Greeks saw the Corinthian capital in an acanthus leaf.Whilst the Egyptians found the inspiration for their capitals in thebud or fully open flower of the lotus and the palm leaf, we owe theinspiration for the Corinthian capital to the acanthus leaf. TheRoman architect Vitruvius tells the following charming story:

A young Corinthian woman died on her wedding day and her

nursemaid placed a number of small vessels that the young

woman had been fond of on her tomb in a basket. In order to

protect the vessels she placed a tile over the basket. There

happened to be an acanthus root there and when the stems and

leaves began to grow the following spring, they surrounded the

basket. When they encountered the edges of the tile they had

to curl back forming scroll shapes. Callimachus was passing the

place one day and saw the basket. He saw that the shapes

made by the acanthus were graceful and original and used

them as a model for the capitals in Corinth. He then set out the

rules and proportions for the Corinthian order.

Still in the realm of legend, here is the story of the origin ofthe Ionic capital. One day an architect put down his plans on acolumn which did not yet have a capital. The plans were madeof hide or papyrus and due to the action of either humidity orgravity, the overhanging parts on either side of the columnwarped or rolled up into curled shapes. A flagstone that hadbeen placed on top of the column to stop the plans blowingaway did the offices of an abacus. Notwithstanding theexistence of this legend, there is no reason to doubt the theorythat rams’ horns or a popular women’s hairstyle of the periodwere the real inspiration for the form. This origin is close to theone suggested later in this work for items of furniture. It is similarto “the Indian who rests the flat arches in his building onelephants, the Persian who replaces the capitals of his columns

Antiquity

Arch of Constantine, Rome, 312-315 CE.

20


with two bulls’ heads, or the Greek who has rain water flowaway through the muzzle of a lion”.

Next it is the turn of the human body. The flexible bodies ofyoung girls suggested the caryatids who would support marblelintels and, strong male bodies would be interspersed betweencolumns as atlantes. Here is the story of the origin of the caryatidas told by Vitruvius:

The citizens of Garyae, a town in the Peloponnese, formed an

alliance with the Persians against the Greeks. They were

punished for this when their town was invaded. All the men were

put to the sword and the women were enslaved. Not content to

force the women to walk behind the triumphal procession, the

victors drew out the spectacle of their humiliation by forcing them

to wear their long matriarchs’ robes and other finery. To immor-

talise their punishment, architects thought of placing representa-

tions of them on public buildings, where they would do the office

of the columns and be condemned to groan under the weight of

the architraves. The Spartans did the same when under

Pausanias, son of Cleombrotus, they defeated the Greeks at the

battle of Plataea. They built a gallery which they called a Persian

gallery where the entablature was supported by statues of

captives dressed in their barbarian dress. This is the origin of the

practice of replacing columns with Greek statues which has

been adopted by a number of architects, who have thus

enriched art by the addition of another decorative motif.

The atlantes represented the defeated Carthaginians:supporting the cornice, holding it up with their arms andappearing to be struggling not to collapse under its weight. Theyalways wore “a brutish smile”. Indeed, if Henry Havard (Histoireet Physionomie des styles) is to be believed, the influence of thehuman body as a source of inspiration went further:

... Boots (which were necessary during the reign of Louis XIV

because the streets were dirty and muddy) made the leg look

Temple of Amun, Luxor, Thebes, c. 1408-1300 BCE.

Egypt.

255

TS ABC of Style 4C.qxp 11/7/2011 2:15 PM Page 255

SSainte-Foy abbey-church, Conques, Sainte Foy in Majesty 81

San Martín de Tours, capital and attached column, Fromista, Spain 66

Santa Maria del Lago Church, Moscufo, Italy, Throne, NNiiccooddeemmuuss ddaa GGuuaarrddiiaaggrreellee 73

Screen, KKrriieeggeerr aanndd GGeeoorrggeess--AAnnttooiinnee RRoocchheeggrroossssee 217

Secretaire (Bonheur-du-jour) of the Empress Eugénie, AAllpphhoonnssee GGiirroouuxx 200

Sideboard Chest on a Console Base, AAnnddrréé--CChhaarrlleess BBoouullllee 127

Sphinx, Giza, Egypt 22

Spirit, detail from the funerary monument of Christophe de Thou, BBaarrtthhéélléémmyy PPrriieeuurr 100

Square Plate, blue background 158

Square Plate, green background 158

St Front Cathedral, Périgueux 49

St James Church, Tower, Baptismal Font 228

St Luc, loft relief, JJeeaann GGoouujjoonn 120

St Maria im Kapitol Church, Cologne, Reliquary of the Magi, NNiiccoollaass ddee VVeerrdduunn 80

St Mark, loft relief, JJeeaann GGoouujjoonn 120

St Mark’s Basilica, Venice 46-47

St Peter’s Abbey church, cloister capital, Moissac 66

St Trophime Church’s Main Gate, Arles 56

Standing Height Cabinet, detail, Napoleon III period, GGeerrvvaaiiss DDuurraanndd 226

Standing Height Cabinet, HHeeccttoorr GGuuiimmaarrdd 216

Standing Height Cabinet, HHeennrryy DDaassssoonn 223

Stonehenge, Wiltshire 12

TTable, Louis XIV period 234

Tapestry piece from The King’s Story, adapted from CChhaarrlleess LLee BBrruunn 112

Tapestry, The Picture Exhibitor from The Italian Celebrations, FFrraannççooiiss BBoouucchheerr 149

Tassel Hotel, Brussels, VViiccttoorr HHoorrttaa 225

Temple of Amun, Karnak, Egypt 23

Temple of Amun, Luxor, Thebes, Egypt 20

Temple of Bacchus, Baalbek, Lebanon 28

Trajan’s Column, Rome 9

V / WVenus Dressing, FFrraannççooiiss BBoouucchheerr 161

Vestal Presenting a Young Woman in Front of Pan’s Altar, CCllooddiioonn 151

Vézelay Abbey 40

Villa Chiericati, Grumolo delle Abbadesse, AAnnddrreeaa PPaallllaaddiioo 86

Villa Rotonda, Vicence, AAnnddrreeaa PPaallllaaddiioo 85

Wardrobe with Pegasus design, HHaacchhee FFaammiillyy 123

Winter or The Chilly Woman, JJeeaann--AAnnttooiinnee HHoouuddoonn 170

Woodwork Panel 139

Woodwork Panel, (attributed to) JJeeaann--SSiimmééoonn RRoouusssseeaauu 244

Woodwork Panel, detail 192

Have you ever wondered why your ceiling is shaped like the arches in a Gothic cathedral? Or why your office building looks

so different from its neighbouring counterparts?

The ABC of Style invites you to explore the many different architectural and decorative interior styles from their ancient origins

to the beginning of the 20th century. Take a journey through history to see how the French aristocracy styled their palaces and

castles to the simple designs of the Dominican monastic churches during the Middle Ages.

Often, political changes implicate a stylistic transformation. Thus, the different European styles were frequently named after a

sovereign or a historical period (Renaissance style, Medieval style). Until the end of the 19th century, the stylistic mutations of the

time were generally based on the tastes of royalty. Stylistic expression was, therefore, an affirmation of power.

the ofof style - storage.googleapis.com€¦ · his iron muscles were used to makeshift rustic...

Documents