Dome: A Study in the History of Ideas (Princeton Monographs in Art and Archaeology) PDF
Preview Dome: A Study in the History of Ideas (Princeton Monographs in Art and Archaeology)
A STUDY IN THE HISTORY OF IDEAS BYE. BALDWIN SMITH DATE DUE Q726.5 S646d Smith, E. Baldwin (Earl Baldwin), 1888-1956. The dome, a study in the history of ideas. 19iO PRINCETON MONOGRAPHS IN ART AND ARCHAEOLOGY XXV BARR FERREE FOUNDATION PUBLISHED FOR THE DEPARTMENT OF ART AND ARCHAEOLOGY PRINCETON UNIVERSITY THE DOME A STUDY IN THE HISTORY OF IDEAS BY BALDWIN SMITH E. NEW PRINCETON, JERSEY PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS PUBLISHED BY PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS, 41 WILLIAM STREET, PRINCETON, NEWJERSEY 08540 INTHE UNITED KINGDOM: PRINCETON UNIVERSITY PRESS, GUILDFORD, SURREY Copyright, 1950by Princeton University Press, copyright renewed 1978 by Princeton University Press All rightsreserved FirstPrinceton Paperback printing, 1971 LCC 75-160543 ISBN 0-691-00304-1 ISBN 0-691-03875-9 (pbk.) Clothboundeditions ofPrinceton University Pressbooks areprinted on acid-free paper, and binding materials are chosenfor strength anddurability. Paperbacks, while satisfactory for personalcollections, are not usually suitablefor library rebinding. PRINTED INTHE UNITEDSTATES OFAMERICA BYPRINCETON UNIVERSITYPRESS, PRINCETON, NEWJERSEY TO THE MEMORY OF BARR FERREE Merely because this is thefirst monograph to bepublished withfunds of the Barr Ferree Foundation is not the reason that the author takes somuchpleasure indedicatingthis book to thememory ofBarrFerree. Therealincentivecomesfrom havingknown himandhisgreat interest in the history ofarchitecture. This cultivated and learned gentleman devoted much of his life to an appreciation of the artsandasystematicstudy ofthe Gothiccathe- drals which he particularly admired. Born in 1862, he graduated in 1884 from the University of Pennsylvania where for some years he served as a special lecturer on architectural subjects in its new School of Architecture. Before entering business he became known as a lecturer and, as a result of his addresses delivered at the Brooklyn Institute of Arts and Sciences} he was made President of its depart- ment of Architecture and the Fine Arts. In the course of years his articles and interest in cataloguing "the buildings of architectural merit everywhere in the world" resulted in his being the first Amer- ican writer to be elected to honorary membership in the Royal Insti- tute of British Architects. All his life, even after he became a successful businessman, he con- tinued to study the arts and compiled an extensive catalogue of the French cathedrals. At the same time he gathered a fine and rare col- lection of books on mediaeval churches and towns in France, which now forms the nucleus and chief ornament of theBarrFerreeLibrary at Princeton. During the First World War he gave eloquent expres- sion to his wrath when his beloved cathedrals were attacked and seriously injured. In New York he organized thePennsylvaniaSociety, now the largest of the state societies in the United States, and from its foundation in 1899 until his death in 1924 hewas itsSecretary and Director. Because of thepatriotic work of the Society and hispersonal efforts duringthe war, he was decorated in 1922 with the Grand Cross of the Legion ofHonor. His death, a sudden one,'occurred October 14, 1924. In accordance with his wish, however, hisestate wasconverted intoaFoundationfor thepublication ofbooks"onarchitectureandrelatedtopicsintheFine Arts." Thus, thestimulation ofintelligentcultivation oftheFineArts,, toward which the sustained effort of his life was directed, now lives on, working through the avenues whereby a University influences its students and the public. The dedication ofhis booksand property to the cause of the Fine Arts in America has become what he wanted a lasting memorial of the ultimate indestructibility of his intellectual purpose and spiritual conviction. PREFACE admission that this book falls short ofwhat itwas intended to be is merely a THEstatement of fact and not an apology. There was a time when the author opti- mistically believed that he could present the major aspects ofdomical ideology and evolution in one study. That, however, was before the rapidly expanding com- plexities of the subject and the difficulties of organizing the material in a written form where the ideas would not be reburied under a mass of accumulated evidence had become inescapable factors. Once it had become evident that the dome was not just a utilitarian form of vaulting, which had originated for structural and environ- mental reasons in some one country, but was primarily a house concept, which had acquired in numerous cultures its shape and imaginative values upon an ancestral shelter long before it was translated for ideological reasons into more permanent and monumental form by means of wood carpentry and masonry, the whole problem of the dome opened up into a comprehensible but infinitely complex chapter In the history of ideas. After the broad outlines of this evolution from the primitive house had been traced in the various ancient and retarded cultures of Europe, Asia, Africa, and the Americas there arose the disquieting question of to what extent one scholar had the time and equipment to reconstruct the whole development of domical beliefs. The matterof time was settledconclusively when Karl Lehmann's "The Dome of Heaven" showed that no one could expect to enjoy indefinitely a monopoly of domical ideas. The other question remains to be tested now that the scaffolding has been removed and The Dome in skeleton form has to stand alone. Since so many of the conclusions are contrary to prevailing opinions, a partial study of the dome, which at least pre- cipitates the majorissues, has theadvantage oftestingoutthebasicmethodofapproach before it is applied to such controversial aspects of domical evolution as the origin of the Iranian dome and the still more delicate question of whether even ancient Greece did not have its own tradition of a symbolic, wooden dome. It is difficult to imagine how certain portions of this study could have been written ifithad not been for the assistance andcooperation of Glanville Downey, whose wide knowledge of Byzantine literature and Greek architectural usage has made it possible to base much of the essential evidence on the texts. Another contributing factor of great importance, since it necessitated rewriting much of the manuscript, was the of Andre Grabar's Martynum. Had the author's indebtedness been lim- publication ited to the Martyrium the references in the text might have been an adequate ac- knowledgement. It was when Grabar read his last chapter and encouraged him to publish it, even though it advanced an explanation for the Syrian bema which was quite different from the one Grabar had published, that the author became indebted The to the man himself and came to appreciate the generosity ofhis fine scholarship. fact that A. M. Friend has listened patiently to the mutterings of a dome-obsessed mind, has read the manuscript and endeavoredto protect the author from the dangers vn PREFACE of Byzantine liturgies, does not, of course, make him responsible for the unorthodox approach to some of the problems. The author is indebted to Mrs. Estelle Brown for her help in preparing the manuscript and to Miss Rosalie Green for her scholarly care in checking the references. BALDWIN SMITH E. Princeton University April 1949
The list of books you might like
