THE NEW SCHAFF-HERZOG
Spiers, The Orders of Architecture, Greek, Roman, Italian, London, 1893: A. I). F. Hamlin, History of Architecture, New York, IstHi; A Choisy, Histoirc de V architecture, 2 vols Paris, 1899; J. C. Ayer, Rise and Development of Christian Arcnwology, .Milwaukee, 1902; W. Durandus, Symbolism ol Churches and Church Ornaments, notes by J. M. Neale and B. Webb, London, 1906.
Architecture in various lands; Great Britain, England. G. A. Poole. History of Architecture in England, London, 1S4S; J. F. Hunnewell, England s Chronicle %n Stone, London, 1S87: Cathedrals, Abbeys and Churches of England and Wales, 2 vols., London, 1891; J. A. Gotch and W. T. Brown, Architecture of the Renaissance in England, 2 vols., London, 1891-94 (accurate, deals with the period 1560- 1630); W. J. Loftie, Inigo Jones and Wren; the Rise and Decline of Modern Architecture in England, London, 1893; M. G. van Rensselaer, English Cathedrals, New York, 1893; T. S. Robertson, Progress of Art in English Church Architecture, London, 189S; R. Blom field, Renaissance Architecture in England, London, 1901; Cathedral Churches of England, New York, 1901; H. Muthesius, Die neuere kirchliche Baukunsl in England, Berlin, 1901; E. S. Prior, Gothic Art in England, London, 1900; idem, Cathedral Builders in England, ib. 1905; F. Bond, English Cathedrals, ib. 1903; idem, Gothic Architecture in England, ib. 1906.
Scotland: T). MacGibbon and T. Ross, Ecclesiastical Architecture of Scotland . . to the Seventeenth Century, 3 vols., New York, 1896-97; M. E. L. Addis, Cathedrals and Abbeys of Presbyterian Scotland, Philadelphia, 1901.
Ireland: G. Petrie, Ecclesiastical Architecture in Ireland Anterior to the Norman Invasion, Dublin, 1845 (rich in illustrations); R. R. Bras, Ecclesiastical Architecture of Ireland, Dublin, 1874; M. Stokes, Early Christian Architecture in Ireland, London, 1878.
France: E. E. Viollet-le-Uuc, Dictionnaire raisonne de I' architecture francaise, ut sup.; H. A. Revoil, Architecture romane du midi de la France, 3 vols., Paris, 1873; J. F. Hunnewell. Historical Monuments of France, Boston, 1884; C. Enlart, Monuments religieux de V architecture romane el de transition dans la region picarde, Paris, 1895; A. St. Paul, Histoire monumentale de la France, Pans. 1895; F. Miltoun, Cathedrals of France, 2 vols., Boston, 1903-04.
Germany: W. Liibke, Ecclesiastical Art in Germany, Edinburgh, 1870; H. Otto, H andbuch der kirchlichen Kunstarchitektur des deutschen Mittelalters, 2 vols., Leipsic, 1883- S5; Th. Kutschmann, Romanesque Architecture and Ornamentik m Germany, New York, 1901.
Italy: Waring and McQuoid, Examples of Architectural Art in Italy and Spain, London, 1850; E. A. Freeman, Historical and Architectural Sketches, London, 1876, chiefly on Italy; O. Nothes, Die Baukunst des Mittelalters in Italien, Jena, 1884; J. Ruskin. Examples of the Architecture of Venice, London, 1887 and often; W. J. Anderson, Architecture of the Renaissance in Italy, New York 1901; C. A. Cummings, History of Architecture in Italy from Constantme to the Renaissance, Boston, 1901; C
Salvatore, Italian Architecture During the Fourteenth to the Sixteenth Century, Boston, 1904; C. H. Moore, Character of Renaissance Architecture, London, 1905.
Other lands: Owen Jones, Plans . of the Alhambra,
2 vols., London, 1842-45, 100 plates; C. Rudy, The Cathedrals of Northern Spam, London, 1906; A. F Calvert, Alhambra: Mohammedan Architecture, ib. 1906; A. Heales, Churches o) Gottland, London, 1890; idem, Architecture of the Churches of Denmark, ib. 1892; M. Schuyler, American Architecture, New York, 1892.
Gothic architecture: J. K. Colling, Details of Gothic Architecture, 2 vols., London, 1852-56, republished New York, 1900 (from measurements of twelfth to fourteenth century examples, 190 lithographs); Gothic Ornament, 3 vols.. London, 1855; G. E. Street, Gothic Architecture in Spam and in Italy, 2 vols., London, 1869-74; M. H. Bloxam, Principles ol Gothic Ecclesiastical Architecture, i , ii., London, 1882; L. Gonse, L Art gothique, Paris, 1890; E. Corroyer, V Architecture gothique, Paris, 1892, Eng. transl., London, 1893; C. Englart, Origines frangaises de I' architecture gothique en Italic, Paris, 1894; C. H. Moore, Development and Character of Gothic Architecture, London 1899.
ARCHITECTURE, HEBREW: Before David and Solomon the Israelites had no architecture
The present village of Siloah (Silwdn) on the Mount of Olives furnishes a type of their oldest houses and towns; it lies on the steep hillside, and the houses are not detached but half caves, the slope of the land making it possible to utilize the natural rock for one or more walls. Because their subjects did not know how to build houses David and Solomon had to import Phenician workmen for their palaces. This was probably the beginning of Hebrew architecture. It is not probable that a Jeroboam II. did not adorn his capital with a palace and temple. In Jerusalem, however, Solomon's structures seem to have been the first and last of any size (but cf. Jer. xxii. 14), and his operations were too great for the financial resources of his land (I Kings ix. 10- 23). The prophet Amos (v. 11) looks upon the building of houses of hewn stone by the rich of Israel as something new and reprehensible (cf. Isa. ix. 10). After the Exile the Temple was rebuilt with help from Phenicia (Ezra iii. 7), but the new structure fell far short of Solomon's in splendor and impressiveness. The community was too poor for great secular buildings. Not until the days of Hellenism was there any building activity, and then the Greco-Roman style dominated. It is therefore correct to say that architecture as an art never existed among the Hebrews; whenever their building was more than a mere mechanical trade they had foreign help.
Accordingly it is impossible to speak of a Hebrew architectural style or school. Nevertheless, Hebrew building had certain characteristics, imposed first of all by natural conditions. Wood in Palestine was and is scarce and expensive (the beams for Solomon's temple had to be imported from Lebanon, I Kings v. 6-10), and the most available material was the easily worked limestone in the mountains, and clay in the lowlands. The house, developed from the cave, consisted generally of but one room; it was low and had few windows or doors. The clay houses were roofed by means of a few unhewn tree trunks, branches, and brush, over which a layer of earth was placed and the whole covered with a mixture of clay and straw. The stone houses had domed roofs; the earliest were made by placing stones on the corners and others upon these until the space was covered. But the Hebrews early learned to construct arches, probably from the Babylonians or Phenicians.
Solomon's temple was a stone building, wood being used only for decoration and the roof. Its massive walls, the absence of pillars (the two columns at the entrance bore no weight), and the use of great squared stones (I Kings v. 17-18; vii. 9-12) are characteristic, and show that wooden structures did not furnish the pattern. The Syrians and Phenicians attained great skill in building with squared stones; a noteworthy feature is a smoothly chiseled or sunken border from two to four inches wide about the outer face of each stone. In Solomon's palaces wood was more freely used; the " house of the forest of Lebanon " (I Kings vii. 2-5) has its name from the fact. Here foreign models were evidently followed, which are naturally to be sought in the land from which the wood was brought. I. Benzinger.