WARNING
On this fertilized Edition.
The good reception that the Public has kindly given to this work, obliges me not to neglect anything to make it less defectious. I have not experienced the kind of disfavor he has met with the multitude. The fetish-rejfe of the material, the novelty of the principles y The boldiejfe of the critics, everything makes me fear for the fort of a written> or fans other weapons than those of a RAI-fonfevere, I otimes fight ufages received j & of the prejudices dominans.
The apprehension of a bad fucces, the challenge even to see opiner my judges with complete freedom > first determined me to laijj'er ignore the author 3 whose name does not dey ILO add anything to the Me~
a iij
VJ warning. rite of the work y & aur ILO could give rise against him of the prejudices disavanta-geufesi had the happiness to hide me af fe\ long-time, so that the fortune of this product ha fardŽfefoit found establishey before Von aitpžjavoir to whom lJcn should Vattribuer. I expect cenfures Quon aurait PII do fans mŽnagement; & J was bien rŽfolu d'en prof ter. I run in search of all my periodical writings to recognize the faults ; I have found only lenient writers who have forgiven everything to the purity of my intentions.
Only recently has fai been aware of a work entitled Y Examen d'uneflai fur L'archice‰ure y in which Von undertakes to prove that fai spoke of an Art of which I have no knowledge ; {Ø quef has established only as a principle & to regulate my bifarre tastes > my aversions.
i
WARNING. viJ
This ejl exam preceded by a foreword written differently from the rejle of V work, & which I suspect to be from a better hand. There is no strong cavalry. Oji tells me fans way a lot of insults that I do not take offense. I am perhaps less indifferent to the follies of the raifons than we can see.-
3 that to the impu-it genius * de-mi-favant, writer obfcur 8c unknown 3 & in fajlueux respects that claims to have majeunejje > a honune who has not read my extract batifaire, & who should have printed the Fien. I think he should use less resources to get the audience back from the il-lufon, which they say I gave him.
I am reproached for the boldness of My Line 3 & fur all the Dec ijif tone of what is called my stops. These defectsj have very-large, I agree y but after
a iiij
poferoit to my principles gasping fart gropes
VIIJ warning.
all these accidental imperfections do not change anything at the bottom of the chofe. He ejl quefion favor Fi fai met jvfle j or fi I ran astray, the author of the foreword was not responsible for remaking this problem. He was content to lend his pen to the be-Hain of a friend, who wanted to speak ill of me with a strong spirit.
I am talking about the one who provided the funds & materials for a work where your examines at length * although in a very thorough way where my Effai fur L'architeure. I have read it with all the interest of which an author J forefathers of FA reputation j & a philofophe friend of truth, can be ffceptiblcs. I recognized aifement quej'avois to do to a man of the trade j which increased my attention to a the Hure of which I efpŽ-Kings draw great lights, fai found that your moppofoit fans cefje prati-
Warning. Ç
I would like to thank the rapporteur for his excellent report. The architect who tried to convince me of ignorance, proved very well that I condemned ujite chofes among all the Masters of U Art, & I confessed. 'But he omitted the ejjentiel, which was to respond to the raifons, & to destroy the principles as what my criticisefond. It was of little use to make a big book to say that I lack ref-peflaux Palladio, Scamomi, Fignole, Blondel. Pavois fi bien
ffl [ ª a c¡nf / fonfur this article, that the Public has not taken the change, & na-sees no need to warn him of my temerity in this regard. A page or two of good raifonnemens against my theory, Aur better sliced the diffi-Cul / e, that this multitude of boring gemijj'emensfur clouds dontj obfcuras the glory of the greatest Artijles,
XVERTISSEMæNT.
The author of the review penfe humiliate me a lot by repeating incefj'am-ment, that I only copy M. De Cordemoi, who ejl the father of all my ideas. It is quite obvious from what I have said in my preface J & by the manner in which I quote it at any occasion, that I did not want to be unaware of the U-fage I have made of this author by preference to all the others, which I have nevertheless read very well. His Treatise On Architecture - (lure contains onefunds of theory, which one does not meet elsewhere. His leElure contributed a lot to the development of my ideas. But even though F aye took advantage of fis lumires, I believe to be other choje than Fon copijle; & Il ejl aifŽ to recognize in the manner in which one attacks me, that one mejured guilty of some choje deplus than to have been the blind difciple of M*
of CordemoL
My ‚enfeur talks about everything
Warning, xj
my despicable 3 & my blunders grojjieres. T may have read it & meditate / I N could learn how they conjijlenr. One of the chofes that holds him most in the heart, cejl the war objlinŽe that I declared to the pilaflres & arcades. He did not regret the fact that he had decided to profcribe them. M. I Abbot Le Blanc, in fesju-rieufes Ob-Jervations as the paintings,or he gives me praises, which I do not deserve, Fe complains of my prevention against a pleasant or-nementji. Many other mont testified that this rigor their paroijjbit excejjive. I myself foresaw that there was no such retrenchment of fans in murmuring; for this reason only the empire of habit , & the form of prejudice. However I believe I have established principles that we can not admit, fans conclurepar nŽcefjitŽau retranchement Des pilajlr'es & Des arcades. Cejl
xij warning.
these principles must be combated.
He Author of the review extends a lot as the pila[lres] & fujets do not say a single word that enjujlife the ufage. LorJ~ that to refute what I said that nature does nothing Square, he oppofe me fojfiles & rough stones > that do in quarries ; I N have other chofe to answer him, finon quil ma not heard,. It efl unfortunate that this answer fois the natural folution that FE prefente to most of Jes difficulties against places he reliefans favoir & fans say why. It agrees that ifolŽ pilajlre must be profer it J & ilfer oit bien en peine d'en renderer une raifon folide, ˆ moins de recourse aux principes que fai Žtabli. But enfnfi lepilafire ifolŽ must be Prof crit 3 where does the pilafire engaged will it do thanks ? I don't understand anything about these 3 inconveniences and I challenge that we can reconcile such cppojitions.
Warning. xiij
The experience, it is said, & an ancient aufifi experience that univerfelle, guarantees the good effect of the pilajlre engaged. With this principle, there is no abuse 1U on nejujlijie. Because the arabesque charisma of the whole of Europe has been popular for many years, do they make it less reprehensible ? Because the extravagances of the Knight Bor-romini had the Juffrage of all Rome, & are still copied there with affe‰”adon, tnjont they more tolerable ? It is important to the fucces of the Arts not to rienfuffrir qui ne_ crazy founded in principle finon, there is more other settled that the whim a lawful Artifle will only have to imagine all strong defingularities bifiar-res; we will condemn them, he will play that they make a good effect, he will quote a thousand people to whom they please. No matter how much one claims against the established settlements, he will doubt that they are legitimate.
XIV AVER TI S SOW.
he will reject them as arbitrary laws which have taken their oven what in a blind routine * there is only one way to repress this innovator, cejl oppo-fer him a fixed principle which he must agree, † whose confequence goes directly to the condemnation of these capricious ideas*
V architect adoring pilajlres deyoit therefore before all chofes go back to a certain principle > d3 where he could draw J logically this conclusion: so the p•lajlre EFL legitimate. It seems to me that smart readers have recognized in my Ejfai as architecture > that such was my way of proceeding ; & that all that j3 called beauties, licenses> defects, I have concluded D3A principle simple J clear & confessed to everyone. My Adverfaire must not wish to profcribe my method, as long as he limits himself to claiming Vufage, Uexperien-
warning, xv
this, the practice of skillful people. The least of them will be able to throw him in the embarras, begging him to please make stiff of what he Pro-nunces. Will he condemn you to say the pilaf reifoU, & roll you to admit the pilaf re engaged. But why one over the other ? You quote us already * but how many ages should be abused ? V experience, but crazy * wind it s eft found fawn; practice j but has how many to * irregularities has not been fujette? How to force from this defied j that by this trait of ordinary charlatanery ? I tell you, you have to believe those who tell you otherwise are ignorant. There is more progress to be made in the Arts if all is limited to imitating the ehofes made; criticism that they need to be perfected can take place, as long as there are well-founded rules J not for what cjlj but Jur what must be.
xvj warning.
I admire that an Archite puts the pilaflre among the [ungodly ornamens. This decijion efl though little reflected. Does he not know that what is called an ornament, such as an accidental adornment that can be made uffage, & that can be removed, fans that already from the order of arch-‰ure in fouffre. The grooves & other richfles whose cifeau of the fculptor charges the various members, make real ornamens, because one can admit them or suppress them fans alter the fund of the chofe. Is the pilaflre efl in the case ? isn't it obviously an essential part of the Architecture order, making a whole with entablature ? F had we cut off fans corrupt the cara‰lere of the compofition ? This only reflexes by abuse that the pilaflre efl fubflocated to the column that it represents very-infidelement. The pilafl re n was imagined only to avoid the dependence of the columns, & in con-
ferver
Warning, xvij
however, the idea; but an imitation Fi defeauenfe does not confuse the abjence of an original Fi bd. Far all where one puts pilajbes it is necessary columns; & by all where one can not put columns, it is not necessary order of Architecture.
I would like to convey to everyone a truth which I believe to be very certain ; that the parts of an order of Archkeyure J have the very parts of the edifice. They must therefore be used in a non-felicitous way to decorate the building > but to conjure it. It is necessary that the exifi tence of the building depends so much on their union, that we do not pttijfe remove aefeide of these parts, fans that the building collapses. If we engrave well before in Jon efprit this principle also raifon-mble & bright, we will return aifŽ ~ ment of a host of errors drawn from a practice that s oh fine to Jewish E the prin-
XVIIJ warning. cive contrary. We will no longer look like a true Architecture all these vilajlres, all these entablemens clad against maffifs, who do Ji well for the feule decoration, that can destroy all the Architecture with blows CI-feau, J years that the building loses other chofe to an ornament. On the contrary, ifoliated columns that carry their entablature in flowerbed, will never leave doubt as the truth of Thejpe‰acle of Architecture which prefer ; because one Jent although one nepoui must touch 2 none of these parts ,fans damage & ruin the building.
All that we advance in favor of twisted columns, niches, pedefi rates, efi avjfi unfounded, & asks only a general reference to the examination of my principles made with more maturity & reflection. It is a great crime for me to have seen pedejlaux at the portico of
Warning, xix
the Hotel Soubife, where it is said that there was a > d where it is concluded gallantly, that I do not fai not even the difference dunjode has unpiŽdeftaL 11 me femble as c e/t pouffer the mauyaife mood a bit far, that of the m attribute r such ignorance. I can clearly see that I have to deal with a man so efclave routines of iattelier that he sees no pedef. tal que la where (e find baje, de & cor-niche. I confess that I do not run away all-a-jattji fcrupulous fur the terms. A l example of many others, I call pie de fl al unfocle Square fans corniche 6*
J ans baje, mainly lorfquil fur carries a firstfocle J who feul deserves to retain this name.
L author of the examination Trout my theory by should rationne, mens J oppofe him practical difficulties in which he by ILO much verje. Objects of this kind (have the
bij
XX WARNING.^
Jeules quiniayent appeared to be of confequen* ce. They ask me for an answer that I will try to make satisfied] ante. It is first of all about the two works of columns that must be / lost, felon me, only by an / ungodly architrave. We oppoje to this, two cho I es: the first, that the little Žpaijjeur of Varchitrave laijferoit the arch stones dŽpourviis force nŽcefaire for fe foutemr : The fertilized , the baje of the column fuperieure overflow ilo bankrupt as the architrave, where it rŽfulteroit an overhang of more shocking.
I am running away from aife that my Cenfeur jaffe me of such difficulties. They will give me the opportunity to further develop my ideas. I think I said that any portico that efi to a first floor requires a balujlrade of support. The architect who wants to find me at fault, yet do not have to neglect this
Warning, xxj
obfervation. Thus, by placing two orders of Architecture One after the other3jŽ-leve always the columns of the floor Ju-fŽrieur J•ir a focus of the height born-cejfaire to the balujlrade, as they do to the spans of the chapel of Vzrfailles. From then on, most of the incon-venians who after fe found themselves made. When it would be true that the thickness of an fmple architrave would not be sufficient for the Vextrados of the keys to have the width & ' Con-Jectly the necessary force ; the addition of the balufrade adds a new liaifon in the entre collonnemens which ajjiire the folidity. This addition further prevents that the eye can not be offenje have the entrecollonnemens filled by a aujf thin object that lafm > pie architrave. The confufion itself 61 the Galimatias claimed that one Fe figure in the meeting of the lower capital-
b iij
XXIJ warning.
laughing of T architrave & de hafe J”ipŽrieuf ri has more place.
He rejects only the difficulty of the cantilevered caufed by the spurt of the bafe, & to. stronger rai/on of the focus beyond the larchitrave. Two chofes will remedy this failure v•cieufe, 1 if the columns of Uetage JupŽrieur do as they must be of a much less modulus than those at the bottom. laugh. If we add some mouldings to the architrave to erase this failure even more. I have proposed some> some of which my Adverfaire finds the pro -. FL unportable. It is necessary to examine the judgment and make sure that he believes it; & in this case he riy would have that in JubJli " kill a better teacher to the one we disapprove. It is necessary to look for others, means to make pass out a difficulty which is not at all invincible > & m I refute to make ufage of ientable-
Warning, xxiij
that it would be well proven that it is important to get away with it. Then this imperfection shall become a licence excujable by the necessity of resorting to it. Jufqu to prejent this nejfity nejl nothing less than demonstrated.
My AdverJaire looks very carefully at the new e-glive plan I have given. This is the place where he speaks exaflement, & where he forgets insults. It attacks my idea by the default of prettiness, & it enters this fu-jet in details where I will stain it.
The first drawback that FE prefers to him y C'ejl that at the four angles of the cross there would be only a feule column, support obviously too weak, to carry the burden of the vaults. This disadvantage I have foreseen myself \ & here is how I remedy it. At the four corners beyond croifee I conflruis qua-
b iv
xxiv warning
tre avant-corps defined to wear four large arches doubleaux > fur lefquelsf supports a road in pendants. Each of my front efl eorps. a group of four columns dijpofŽes quarrement Y C efl to * say, that to the single column QNI fe prefer already in the angle, j * mates three others ; & I find in this increase a fuffifante force to carry the vault) fans that my prescription was corompue in any way.
It is assumed that the vault of the Cross will not be able to justify the possibility of placing buttresses. Who prevents the ascent of the foothills along the wall of the low sides that reign around the cross ? Wall that Von can strong iron outwardly by maflfs able to carry the buttoned arches born this flares to reflect the poujfŽe of this vault. We add to all this proportions that I do not recognize as legitimate. If Von asks me which ones I
Warning, xxv
vcudrois give my Eglife ; here they are .¥ I set the height of the main roads to two widths & a half; I give a width of elevation to the first order iiarchitecture, another width to the fruitful order; & the half width that makes me full circle of my vault. From these general proportions I draw all the pro portions of detail¥ on the height that must have the order d* Architefture, I determine the module of my column, & this module once determined, I have all the Referans embarrassment. I give the lower sides as the nave two widths & a half of elevation; which does not give me more uncertainty, nor the way to efpace my columns, nor confectly the width of my entre-colonnemens. If anyone asks me why I'm punching the height of two and a half widths; I will answer that cejlpour have noticed that the effect of such a height ejl fingulierement majejiueux ;
xxvj warning.
jufijua prefers my choice ria other principle than this experience. Perhaps for this study & reflection I will come to the end some day to * support lafcien-CE proportions fur more stiffened & more fixed principles.
I'd rather we go at random in this matter.In a recent opening which amazes by the profusion of engravings which he decorated; it was intended to spread light as this tenebrtuje part of the Art. the author has long proved the necejfity of the proportions of which perfonne no doubt; but when he afaU lu tell us in what specifically they con-fient, he laughed that we repeat the arbitrary opinions of some elders * & give us even more arbitrarily to settle the agreements of the mufic. Whatever happens in MyWay of proceeding, the height once determined, all the rejle fie finds decided by a cal-
Warning, xxvij
ass laughing is nothing free. From this first proportion derive all the otherwithout uncertainty.
For what efl of the flat bottoms of the low sides y it will be understood that ejl poffMe to make them hollow as those of the portico of the Louvre Y Ji I remember what I laugh to say as the manner in which I place pawn fruitful order. But in the event that the difficulty seemed still too great, there would be nothing but to unite them, as was done in the great JubŽ of S. Sulpice. V the details of the means to achieve this. If he had always spoken to jjijufle he would have cleared up a lot of the chief es, Jurlefelles he afeŽlŽ to spread new darkness.
He complains that in my ffteven the lower sides do not have a width adjustment * it is true that they would laugh only that of the snacks which can never be excessive. But fi •on veuty on ejl libre d je mettre plus au large j en confrui-
XXVIIJ warning.
fant double low rated love of the Nave & the choir, fans double them around the croifee who did not need a big release unfi. My Cenfeur claims that my arch semicircular fans Attica, PA-roitroit of unefigure informe & shocking j ˆcaufe of the faillie of the entablature. I doubt very much delajujleffe con-je‰lure; & although I do not ignore that the vault of St. Peter of Rome does not takefa naijfance of 1 entablature, I am stillperjuaded that in my fijleme, where T entablature would never have a proportionJi gigantefque, the vault fans Attica rots very well rejujfr. However, if it is judged that the centre of some chofe is raised above the cornice, nothing prevents the fajfe from being raised.
It is still feared that this vault was not fujfifiantly illuminated : it could be fi I place , as it is supported * the windows of the immediate fertile floor-
Warning, XXX lies to the Dejjits of VentrŽe of the chapels. But I place them in the very middle of the Nave when I conftilled to raise from one floor the outer wall of the chapels J afn to steal the view the villainfpeftacle of the Arch s-end years -, I heard that this wall would be raised only for the decoration of the outside. I want that Belly-two j from this wall jufquˆ the Nave 9 vuide abode, & that in this efpace uncovered enclosed the buttresses & the small roofs of the lower sides & chapels. I said that this wall finished at the top by a balujlrade > would be pierced on the fupŽrieur floor of as many windows as on the floor below; fentres skirt rflu'ces to the truth, but that become necŽcessaires to the exterior decoration j & not too mafquer the days of the Nave.
He only refers to responding to Von's criticism of my portal ;
x jcx a V E R T they S E M en T.,
but what I said jufqua prŽfent reluctant and-me a rŽponfefuffifante to what these critics have defontiet Lorfque my Ad-verfairevi accufe allow the anime of fe deliver fansfcrupule to all dŽfor dr es of their imagination ; I was obliged to return to my RŽponfe general > him difant, or does my not including j held that he did not want to understand me.
Here are the difficulties of some confidence I found in fon Zi* vre. It would have been aJouhaiter it fefžt bounded always in propofer of aufji real , & quen lespropofantil had sought not to the exagerer j but to the rŽfoudrei Its Written n would have been that plusutile & more intŽreffant* The penalty quils'ejl given to repeat hundred-mannered different j than I fled as an ignorant & a dizzy , a hommefans taste & fans connoiff'year ago , was affer^ little neefaire. He feared fans doubt that the audience did not have any
Warning, xxxj
lemprejement Qu'il Jouhaite, quali-jicr my reckless as it deserves; O * he wanted to infire him to this Jiijet a heat that he did not have. I run well aife to declare him here to him & to all those of Fon Art who will want to write against me y that I answer the difficulties 3 & never insults. Lorfquil they will like to treat the material with good faith & politejffi suitable.say will always find me dif pofe to take advantage of their lights > & to mark them all the deference I owe to their decifons.
I will briefly report on the increases made in this new edition. The most confderable ef A Dictionary of terms that most of my leoleurs have seemed to unravel. I have compiled these terms in alphabetical order; I have attached some plates to facilitate understanding. In the course of the work > I added some
* XXIJ warning.
flash cijjemens in many places y foitpour refoudre Des difficultŽs que l'on mafaites >foit pour rendre plus J enfibles des articles qui avaient paru un peu obj-curs. With these new foinsf ef pere that this edition will make less unworthy than the previous one of public approval.
PREFACE
P RE FACE.
Or we have various architectural treatises, which develop with exactitude the measures and proportions, which enter into the detail of the different orders, which provide models for all the ways of building. We do not yet have a book which establishes its principles, which mamfefte the true efprit, which proposes rules to direct the talent & to fix the taste. It seems to me that in the Arts that do not;
xxxiv P re FA C E. purely mechanical, it does not matter that one is angry work, it is important fur-all that one learns to penfer. It is necessary that a puilfe Artificer fe render raifon to himself of all that he does. For this he has befoin fixed principles that determine fe s jugemens, & who juftifientfes choice ; so strong that he puilfe say that a chofe eft good or bad, not point amply by inftinŽt, but by stiffening & in man inflruit roads of the beautiful.
The connoilfances were pouf-fairies far and away in prefque all liberal Arts. A host of people at FE talent do applied to make us crack all the finelfes. We wrote a lot of poetry > painting, music. The myfteres of these ingenious Arts have been thoroughly explored > that it connects
PREFACE. xxxv'
about them few discoveries to make. We have thoughtful precepts & judicious critiques, which determine the true beauties of them. The imagination has guides who put it along the way, & brakes that hold it in the terminals. We appreciate the jufte, & the merit of FES faillies, & the disentangle of FES deviations. If we lacked good poets, good painters, or good Muficians, it would not be for lack of theory, it would lack talent.
The feuille ArchitŽlure was abandoned jufqu a prefent AU caprice Des Artiftes,which gave the precepts fans difeernement. They fixed the rules to the hafard, as the fire mlpeŽtion of the old buildings. They copied the flaws of it with as much fcrupule as beauties: man-
ICJ
xxxvj PREFACE:
as for principles to make a difference, they impose an obligation to confuse them: fervile imitators, everything that was authorized by examples, was declared legitimate: limiting all their research to confounding the fact, wrong-about they concluded the right, & their lessons were only a source of confusion.
errors.
Vitruvius has taught us only that which Fe practices for" tems; & although he escapes from the glimmers that announce a genius capable of penetrating into the true myfteras of fon Art , he does not attach himself to tearing the veil that covers them ; & always moving away from the abyss of theory, he leads us by paths of practice , which more than once lead us astray from the goal. All modern, with the exception of M. de
PREFACE. Xxxvij Cordemoi, only comment on Vitruvius, & flee him with confidence in all FES erasuremens. I say with the exception of M. De Cordemoi ; this author deeper than most others , has perceived the truth that was hidden from them. His treatise on eft Architecture extremely short; but it contains excellent principles, & extremely thoughtful views. It can, by developing them a little more, draw from them confequences which would have spread a great day as the obfcurities of fon Art, & banished the unfortunate uncertainty which makes its rules as arbitrary.
It is therefore up to fouhaiter that some great architect undertake to fauver the architecture of the oddity of opinions , discovering us the fixed & immutable laws.
xxxviij PREFACE.
Any Art, any Science has a definite object. To achieve this goal, all roads would be equally good, there is only one that leads directly to the goal ; Sc C'eft this unique road that must be known. In all chofes, there is only one way of beneficence. What is art, finon this way was * ^ blie as obvious principles, & ap* pliquŽe to the object by invariable precepts.
While waiting for someone " much more skilful than me, fe charged to unravel the cahos of the rules of Architecture, so that he did not fubfifle distorted none of which could make a folide rai-fon > I will try to carry a slight ray of light. By carefully confiding our largest & most beautiful buildings} my amc
PREFACE. xxxix has always experienced various imprints. Sometimes the charm was fi strong, that it produces in me a plaid mixed with tranfport & d'en-thoufiafme. Other times, fans being Fi vividly trained, I cleft myself busy in a satisfying manner ; it was a lesser plaifir, but yet a real plaifir. Often I remained quite infenible; mad-wind aufi” I was disgusted, shocked, revolted. I thought longtems as all these different effects. I repeated my obfervations until I sharpened myself, that the same objects always make fur me the same imprints. I confused the taste of others , & by putting them to such a test, I recognized in them all my fenfibilities more or less vivid, felon that their soul had received from nature, a degree of heat
xl PREFACE.
more or less loudly. From there I concluded, I¡. that there were in the Architecture effential beauties, independent of the habit of fens > or the convention of men. 2¡. That the compofition of a piece of Architecture was like all the works of efprit, fufceptible of coldness & vivacity, jufteffe & de-fordre. 30. That there must be for this Art as for all others, a talent that is not acquired, a mefure of genius that nature gives ; & that this talent, this genius had to be, however, to be affujettis & captivated by laws.
As I meditated more and more on the various imprints made by the different architectural compor-tions, I wanted to penetrate the caufe of their effect. I was asked my fenti-
PREFACE. xjj
lie to myself. I wanted to favor why such choie ravishes me ; such other does not fail to please me ; this one was for me fans Agre-mens; this one was unsupportable to me. This research preferred me at first only darkness & uncertainties. I have not forsaken myself ; I have founded the abyss, until I have believed that I have discovered the abyss ; I have not the power to question my soul, until it has given me a faris-faifante answer. Suddenly it gets done in my eyes on a big day. I have seen objects diftinelsj or I do not appercevois previously only mists & clouds : I have lˆifis these objects with ardor; & by making ufage of their light, I have seen little by little my uncertainties difparoiter, my difficulties s ŽvanoŸir ; & I fled jufqu'ˆ be able to demonstrate myself to myself
xlij PREFACE.
by principles & confequences, the NE-ceffity of all the effects of which I do not know the caufes.
Such eft the road I fled to satisfy myself. It seemed to me that it would not be useless to inform the Public of the success of my efforts. When I would only urge my Leeters to examine if I have not taken the change, to criticize feverishly my decisions, to frighten by themselves to penetrate further into the same abyss, the architecture would gain indnitely. I can say with truth that my main intention is to put the Public, & fur-all the artifices, in the process of doubting, Conjuring, Fe content with difficulty: too happy, if I lead them to do research that give them to find me in default, to correct my inexaelitudes including
PREFACE. xliij to bid as my raifonnemens.
It is only an effai, where I do not make properly quindiquer Les cho-fes & spawn the road, laiffant to others the hay to give my principles all their extent & all their application, with an intelligence & a fagacity of which I would not be able. I say affez to provide Architects with fixed rules of work, & infallible means of perfetion. I tried to make myself as intelligible as I could. I could not avoid using fvent terms of art. they almost all make affez known. Moreover , in the dictionary that eft at the end, we will find the explanation of all those whose common does not affez Con-noiffance. As my main deffein eft to train the taste of architects, I avoid all the details that
XLIV PREFACE.
You find elsewhere, & to make this book more inftrutive, far added to this fertilized Edition a number of fuffifant boards to put crazy the eyes of theweeter, all the objects > whose A fimple narrative had given him only an imperfect idea*
you
TABLE
TABLE
CHAPTER.
Introduction. Page ;*]
Chapter I. general principles
TEST
E S S A I
ON
ARCHITECTURE.
INTRODUCTION.
'Eftdetous Architecture
the useful Arts, the one that asks the most diftin talens-
- R - - - - - - - -, Fords, & connoiflances
more extensive; it may take as much dŽgeme, dŽfprit, & taste to make a great architect > as to form a reintre > & a Pio‘te of the first order. It is a great mistake to believe that there is only mechanics here; that everything is boundless.
a creu fer Des fond incn€ > to raise walls;
the whole, felon of the settled, whose routine iuppofe only eyes accustomed to judge*
To
5 E S S A •
from one to lead, OC of hands made to mid*
deny the trowel. , , To . ,
When we talk about the art of building;
confused piles of inconvenient rubble > huge piles of shapeless materials, a frightful sound of hammers, perilous scaffolds , a frightening game of machines, an army of ugly workers C rot es> C'eft all that FE prefects the imagination of the vulgar, C'eft the unpleasant bark of an Art, whose ingenious mifteres few people apper-us, excite the admiration of those who penetrate them. They discover inventions whose boldness makes a genius vafte OC fruitful, proportions whose fervidity announces a high precifion OC fiftematic ; ornaments whose elegance reveals a delicate and exquisite feeling. Anyone who is capable of making so many true beauties; far from confusing Aichi-teclure with the slightest Arts, will rather try to put it at the rank of the deepest Sciences. The sight of a conftruic building in all the perfe&ion of art, caufe a plaifir Oc an enchantment of which one is not master to defend. This fpeftacle Awakens in the soul noble ideas OC touching. It makes us experience this sweet emotion, OC this pleasant tranfport that excite or-
about ^Architecture. ? A true fuperiority of efpirit. A beautiful building speaks eloquently for Fon Architeete. M. Perrault in Fes Žcrits eft at most only one Savant: the colonade du Louvre decides it great man.
The Archite owes what is most perfect to the Greeks, a privileged Nation, to whom it was referred not to ignore anything in the Sciences, & to invent everything in the Arts. The Romans worthy of admiring, able to copy the excellent models that Greece gave them, wanted to add their own, & only taught the whole universe, that when the degree of perfe & iert eft reached, there is only to imitate or to fall. The barbarity of the liŽcles poftŽrieurs , after enfeveli all the fine Arts, crazy in the ruins of a feul empire that confervoic the taste & the principles,gave rise to a new fyftme of Archite&ure , where the proportions ignored, the ornemens bilˆrrement configured ™c puerillement entaflŽs, not offroient the stones on the fringe, of the formless , of the grotefque., of the exceifif. This modern Archi-TEUR has been the delight of the whole of Europe for too long. Most of our great Eglifes unfortunately fail to preserve traces of them in the pofterity of the Earth.
Aij
4 test
further back. Let's tell the truth ; with $ spots fans number, this Architecture has had beauties. Even though he reigns in fes most magnificent productions a pefanteur of efprit 6c a grof•ieretŽ of fentimenr quite shocking : can we not admire the bold elf traits, the dŽlicatefle of the cifeau, air majeftŽ ™c this release is that we note in some of the pieces > that by all these places have some chofe to de-fefpŽrant ™c inimitable. But finally happier geniuses were perceived in the ancient monuments of evidence of the univerfel bewilderment, OC of the reflburces to return. Made to taste wonders vainly expofed to all eyes since so many feasts, they meditated the reports, they imitated the artifice. By dint of researches, examinations, they revived the study of good governance, restored the Archite & ure in all the Old rights. They abandoned the ridiculous trinkets of the Gothic OC of the arabefque, to fubftitute the elegant male OC adornments of the Doric, the Ionic, The Corinthian. The Francois slow to imagine, but quick to flee from happy imaginations, envy Italy the glory of refitifcitr these magnificent creations of Greece. All eft


On the Architscture. V Plei nparmirousde monumensqui attellent J ardeur, Qu: confient Le fucclsdecette emulation de nos-peres. We had our Bramantes, our Michelangelo, our Vi
srteÓi=Ç
the middle of us
total fecon-
chiral-R J 6 Pa, fiera Pr¡juice in fact Ai> chitcaure masterpieces worthy of
time grinders. Mats at the moment we
from N Cit Ò Ffr5 as ^ batba-rte n has not lost as we all your rights
we women fallen back in the bottom OC the dice-
feduous. fout seems to threaten us finally
a complete decadence.
next 112 no.!I am committed to proposing here that my reflections be made as an Art for the future.,
edSrrU bCaUC¡up D'amour - ^R. s
the deilein that I mepropofe, I luis only I OL.eflc, m
^n^^ŽfirquejecroiLumc”

truolc. Plem deflune for our artifacts
]e 2 the "' S / ¡ nt UnS habiic:Ž recognized Õ
& mes do-^ 3 eÒr c¡muniquer mes idŽes
SS - ' - don^, ESP'iede^""
v^Òiuuiiiuucr
*d¡%?t\don} Ie prie d. rei'L-c*l:* - If jc rcleve c
to make one as d A. iij-
true abuse some ufages univetfalement rerus among them, I do not claim that s sen relate to my feule opinion., Qu J foumets de grand cÏur ˆ ieurjudeufe cr-doue. I ask feulement that they want well Fe to strip of "" groins too ordinary preventions, & always nuil
to the progress of the Arts.
That they do not difent that n is not du
trade, I would not talk about it with al e? of connoiffance; C'eft approval the most vain of difficulties. All of them could be judged from a tragedy fans have never done %
The knowledge of the rules has not yet been perfected, although execution has been given only to a few. That 1s nf m ¡ Pt slot point authorities refpeefebles fans be, surefire. This fcroit spoil everything only to judge what must be by what eft. L pffis big men Fe make mistakes that H L N'eft so no way was
1QS nonuuw ^ ^ * r'
g
those of our ArchitcftM who have a vengle zele for the perfeSion of their Art:,. "do not thank me for my good will. Us "ouv _j
on Architecture; there may have in this writing reflections that were escaped them : and if they judge them follies, they will not disdain to make ufage; C'efl: all that I ask them. Because does not see with regret that a foreign hand carries the torch of the truth in mifteres which had not yet been examined in depth : good a light that fe prŽfente, by antipathy against the fource of where it comes from : oppofer a contempt blind to the zele of an amateur who seeks to difcerner the roads that lead to the goal of those who go astray : fe paffionner against the fuccs that may have fes eflorts, in the fear of finding dŽformais of cenfeurs more attentive, judges more fŽveres : such difpofitions are only suitable for Unengineered & fenti-ment devices*
CHAPTER I.
General principles of VArchitecture.
It's All About Architecture.
the other Arts: principles are founded on nature, O C dan? the procedures of this fe find clearly marked the rules of it?. Let's confider the man in FA first Origin fans other lecours, fans other guide than natural finftinct of FES befbirrs. He needs a place to rest. On the edge of a quiet ruiffea.u > there appears a gafon; naiffanto greenery pleases the eye, Fon soft down invites him ; he comes, OC limply stretched fur. this enamelled rug, he only rushes to enjoy in peace the gifts of nature: nothing he lacks, I} delirious nothing. But soon the ardor of The Sun that burns him, forces him to seek shelter. There appears a forest that offers him the freshness of FES shadows; he coizjt fe hide in FON epaiffur, & here he is happy. However a thousand vapors high at the hafard Fe meet & Fe gather, thick clouds cover the air, a frightful rain Fe rushes like a torrent fur this £ > RCT delicieufe. The poorly covered man in the BRI Fes feuilles was no longer corner-
on Architecture. there
ment fe defend from an inconvenient moisture that penetrates it from anywhere. A cave Fe prefente, there s glilTe, & Fe finding a lec j he s applauds the discovery. But new defeats still disgust him with this day. He sees in the darkness, he breathes an unhealthy air there, he in a strong Fool u to fuppleer, by fon induftrie, inattention & neglect of nature. The man wants to fe make a housing that covers him lenfeveiir fans. A few branches in the drill are made of materials peculiar to Fon deflein. He chooses four of the strongest he raises perpendL cularly > & Qu he difpofe square. Beyond he puts four others in cross ; & as this one he raises some that bow, OC that fe reunify in point of two sides. This efpece of eft roof covered with sheets go railed so that neither the madeil, nor the rain can penetrate; & voilˆ L'homme loge. It eft true that the cold & the hot will make him feel their discomfort in fa ma-Fon open on all sides; but then he will fill the In - Between of the pillars, & fe will find guaranteed.
, Tee.11f1.eft. the walk from the fimple nature : g eft a 1 imitation of fes processes that art must fa naiffance. The small ruftic Hut qŸe I just described, eft the model fur
there try
lequelon imagined all the magnificences of the architecture.It is by fe raprochant dana execution of the fimplicity of this first model, that one avoids the effential defects, that Ion faifit the true perfections. The perpendicularly raised pieces of Wood gave us the idea of the columns. The horifontal pieces that furmontent > gave us the idea of entablemens. Finally the sloping rooms that form the roof, gave us the idea of the pediments : this is what all the Masters of Art recognized. But be careful ; never was principle more fruitful in conferences. It is easy to deform the parts that actually enter into the composition of an architectural order, from those that are introduced into it only by befoin, or that have been added to it, only by whim. This eft in the efential parts that all beauties confide; in the parts introduced by befoin confide all licenses ; in the parts added by caprice confide all defects. This requires clarification : I will stain DY spill all the pof•ible day.
Let's not lose sight of our little rudimentary Hut. I see only columns, a floor or an entablature, a roof
$ur Architecture.'IX pointed, the two ends of which form, each what we call a pediment, up to here point of Vault, even less arcade, point of pedeftals, point of attic, point of even door, point of window. So I conclude, OC I say: in any order of ArchiteCture, there is only the column, 1 entablature & the pediment that_ puff enter eflfentially in FA ccm-pofition. If each of these three parts is placed in the fituaticn N with the shape that suits it, there will be nothing to add for 1 work to be perfect. It remade us in France a very beautiful monument of the Ancients; C'eft what is called in Nifmes the Maifon-quartŽ. Connoisseurs or non-connoisseurs, everyone admires the beauty of this edilice. Why? because everything there EFT felon the true principles of F Architecture. A long square where thirty columns bring an entablature & a roof finished at both ends by a pediment; that's all it is. This assembly has a fimplicity ^ C a nobldle that strikes all eyes.
The author of the review does not agree that I want to put a relationship to the rigor of all parts of our buildings to those of the ruftic Hut. He must have developed the laws that make
it test
this vicious relationship: for if it Ell folide, 6C founded as I claim, OC AS have infinite all the Masters of Art, there is no more way to attack the settled that I establish in the articles fleivans. They all make necessary conferences of this fimple principle. If one wants to refute me, all fe reduces to this process: show that the EFT principle wrong, or that the EFT confequence wrong shot. While neither of these weapons will be used against me, they will strike useless blows. All the declamations, all the insults even will do at pure pertte. The judicious Le™leur will always return to this queftion: is the eft principle wrong ? is the eft the confequence ? The feuille raifon that we object against the relationship established between our buildings OC the ruftic Hut, C'efl: that we must be allowed to move a little away from these grofiieres OC shapeless inventions. Really we move away a lot, by the Great Taste of decoration that we have fubftjtu to the negligence of a compofkion Fi brut ; but fefientiel must connect. C'eft there FefquifTe that nature, we prefer ; art should only use fes refiources to embellish, file, polish or -, vrage, fans touch the bottom of the defiein. Let us go into the details of the Elven^ Tiel parts to an Arcliiteclure order.
about Architecture;

ARTICLE 1.
column*
I¡.T a column must be exaftement s JL-y perpendicular: because being deltinee has fupporter all the burden, C'eft perfect ion to lead that makes fa greater strength. 20. The column must be ifolated, to more naturally express Fon origin & fa deftmation. 30. The column should be round, because nature does not do anything square. 40. The column must have FA decrease from the bottom up, to imitate the nature that gives this decrease to all es plants, yo. The column must carry immediately as the pavement, as the pillars of the ruftic Hut carry immediately as the ground. All these set fe find juftified in our model, so we have to look like flaws
all that deviates fans a real born-
ceflity.
1. Default. C'eft when instead of ifolating the columns, they are held engaged in an inur. he ejt certain that the column loses infinitely De fa gr‰cey file least obflad
hi Test
in discomfort, erase the outline. I admit that very often the circumferences put, this seems, out of state to ifoler the columns. We want to live in covered places, not open halls. Then there is a need to fill in the Between-column-mens, by confessing to engage the columns. In this case the commitment of the column will not make looked like a defect ; it will make a license toutonfered by the befoin. But let us always feel that any license announces an imperfection, that it must Ufer freely, & in the feule impossibilitŽ to do better. When therefore omeft obliged to engage the columns, it is necessary to engage them the least that it eft poihble freedom & clearance that gives them so much grace. The use of engaged columns should be avoided. It is best to preserve the columns for the porticoes where they can be perfectly ifolated, & to fupprime them by all or the necefficiency forced to adoile them against a wall. Finally, even when we find ourselves affu-jected to this Licnfrance, which prevents
jsur Architecture; iJ
clear the column, to make it whole? Is it believed that the portal of S. Gervais would not be more perfect, if the columns of Doric Pordre were ifolated like those of the later orders ? Does he see any impoftible chofe in this ? The architect, who, in order to juftificate this defect, removes as soon as the part of the architrave which eft had the middle door , would have seemed too foible to carry 1 entablature & the pediment which crowns it , does not take care that instead of saving an irregularity, he raises two much more confidrable. What need to put the complete entablature, if its weight cannot be carried by the architrave ? Will he still want to argue that this first pediment eft in the settled ? When the columns of the first order would have been ifolated, the later orders would have had none the less the entire neceflar decrease, with stiffening of their modulus less strong, OC of their greater lightness.
It is only a matter of having very little human refpeft to offer a work that all the eft public used to look at as a fan€ defaultful masterpiece. By raising the imperfetlions of this building, I acquire the right to spare no other, fans
Y & Test
bleffer the self-esteem of anyone; that is why I will talk about it fans housekeeping. After what I have just said, We will no longer be furrised that connoisseurs faflent fi little case of the portal of the Egli e des Jefuites > rue S. Antoine . Without counting the other defects that make it in large numbers, these three orders of committed columns make a most unpleasant effect. It is , as M. de cor-demoi ingeniously put it, only a low-relief Architecture> of which enlightened eyes will never accommodate. I groaned madly at the fury of the architects for the Columns engaged : but I never thought he could come in the spirit of a man who slopes, to engage the columns in each other : there is no more unsupportable defect left OC more monftruous. Even novices in FArt will agree, & however this flaw fe finds repeated fur .all the facades of the inner courtyard of the Louvre. A blunder fi grofliere in a fi great work can be mife to the rank of humiliations of human Pefprit.
2. Default. This eft instead of round columns, to use Square pilafters. The pilafters make only a bad reprefen-tation of the columns i their angles announce
ON. the Ar Ch itecture. 17 cent the constraint of art > & deviate fen-ibJemerit from the fimpjicity of nature they have sharp edges & inconvenientÕ that hinder the glance. Their furfaces fans roundly give the whole order a flat air, they do not make fufceptibles of this decrease which makes one of the largest a'gfŽ-ntens of the columns. The pilalires never make neceltaires ; by all where they are folded, the columns would be used with so much advantage. We must therefore look at them as a two-pronged innovation, qm n being founded in nature in no way, & N being authorized by no befoin, could be adopted only by ignorance, & eft still tolerated only by habit. The taste of pilaf won by all: Alas! where do we find none? However to be disgusted with it , one would only have to reflect, the great effect that the columns always do; effect that FE finds infallibly dctrtnt by the pilalires. Convert the coupled columns of the portico of the Louvre into pilalires, and you will take away all the beauty from it. Compare the two sides of this luperbe I ortique with the pavilions in front body that finish it: what difference 'it does not eft jufqu' aux valets & aux ferrantes who do not ask why we did not do
B
'! $ E S S A I
pavilions as connects. This regret EFT infused by the taste of the real beautiful, natural taste to everyone. This is the same order of architecture that reigned throughout the facade: but the portico offers columns, the pavilions prefer pilaflres ; this feule diverfitŽ fufl'it to disturb all the plaillir that would have caufŽ a more uniform Assembly. Envain it is claimed that the diverfitŽ, fi precieufe in the Arts, requires that we vary the decoration of the pavilions in front-body; we must fans doubt the vary if he can : but fans deviate from the laws of nature. Otherwise who will prevent that to vary more, an Artifte does not make the round columns Oval columns " prifmes, pillars has five, a fix, has eight faces ? And what principle will we have to forbid him these bifarreries ? It eft even less raifonnable to allege here for excufe 1 im-poflibility to connect the facade of the porticoes with that which eft fur the river ; there was only to fupprimer pilafters in this fertilized facade, imagine one of a
better taste.
When entering the bays of the chapel of Verfailles, everyone was struck by the beauty of the columns, the harshness of the entre-collonnemens: but aufli-tot qu'on