INTRODUCTION TO THE FINE ARTS COURTS.

In order the better to appreciate the arrangement of those restorations through which we now propose to conduct the visitor, a few words explanatory of the object which they are intended to serve may prove of use. One of the most important objects of the Crystal Palace is to teach a great practical lesson in Art. Specimens of the various phases through which the arts of Architecture and Sculpture have passed, are here collected, commencing from the earliest known period down to modern times, or from the remote ages of Egyptian civilisation to the sixteenth century after Christ--a period of more than three thousand years. Perhaps no subject, with the exception of the literature of departed nations, affords more interest to the mind of man, than these visible proofs of the different states of society throughout the world’s history; and nothing better aids us in realising the people and customs of the past, than the wonderful monuments happily preserved from the destructive hand of Time, and now restored to something of their original splendour by the patient and laborious researches of modern times; and, we may add (not without some pride), by the enterprising liberality of Englishmen. Nor is it the least extraordinary fact, in this view of progress, that the building itself, which contains these valuable monuments of past ages, is essentially different from every preceding style, uniting perfect strength with aërial lightness, and as easy of erection as it is capable of endurance. Thus then, beneath one roof, may the visitor trace the course of art from centuries long anterior to Christianity, down to the very moment in which he lives, and obtain by this means an idea of the successive states of civilisation which from time to time have arisen in the world, flourishing for a greater or less period, until overturned by the aggressions of barbarians, or the no less destructive agency of a sensual and degraded luxury. Sculpture, the sister art of architecture, has also been worthily illustrated. Vainly, in any part of the world, will be sought a similar collection, by means of which the progress of that beautiful art can be regularly traced. The statues will generally be found as much as possible in or near the Architectural Courts of the periods and countries to which they belong, so that the eye may track the intellectual stream as it flows on, now rising to the highest point of beauty, and now sinking to the lowest depths of degradation. The visitor is invited to proceed with us on this world-wide tour of inspection, but he must bear in mind that our present task is to show him how to examine the Building itself, with its contents, and not to describe them, except by briefly pointing out the most remarkable objects that encounter him on his way. For detailed and valuable information the visitor is referred to the excellent Handbooks of the respective Courts, all of which describe with minuteness not only their contents, but every needful circumstance in connection with their history. The point from which we start is the Central Transept. Proceeding northwards, up the Nave, the visitor turns immediately to the left and finds himself in front of THE EGYPTIAN COURT.[5] The remains of Egyptian Architecture are the most ancient yet discovered. They possess an absorbing interest, not only on account of the connection of Egypt with Biblical history, but also of the perfect state of the remains, which enables us to judge of the high state of civilisation to which Egypt attained, and which have permitted the decipherers of the hieroglyphics, led by Dr. Young, Champollion, and Sir Gardner Wilkinson, in our own time, to give us clear insight into the manner of life--public and private--of this early and interesting nation. Egyptian architecture is characterised by simplicity of construction, gigantic proportions, and massive solidity. The buildings were almost entirely of stone, and many of them excavations and shapings of rocks. The examples of this architecture now before us are not taken from any one ruin, but are illustrations of various styles, commencing with the earliest, and terminating with the latest, so that we are enabled to follow the gradual development of the art. Little change, however, was effected during its progress. The original solidity so admirably suited to the requirements of the Egyptians continued to the end; and religion forbade a change in the conventional representations of those gods and kings which so extensively cover the temples and tombs. So that we find the same peculiar character continued in a great measure to the very last. [5] See the “Handbook to the Egyptian Court,” by Owen Jones and Samuel Sharpe; also, “The Egyptians in the Time of the Pharaohs, being a Companion to the Crystal Palace Collection,” by Sir Gardner Wilkinson, to which is added, “An Introduction to the Study of Egyptian Hieroglyphs,” by Samuel Birch. Crown 8vo., with Illustrations. [Illustration: Plan of the Egyptian Court.] Advancing up the avenue of lions, cast from a pair brought from Egypt by Lord Prudhoe (the present Duke of Northumberland), we have before us the outer walls and columns of a temple, not taken from any one particular structure, but composed from various sources, to illustrate Egyptian columns and capitals during the Ptolemaic period, somewhere about 300 years B.C. On the walls are coloured sunk-reliefs showing a king making offerings or receiving gifts from the gods. The capitals or heads of the columns are palm and lotus-leaved; some showing the papyrus in its various stages of development, from the simple bud to the full-blown flower. The representation of the palm and the papyrus occurs frequently in Egyptian architecture; the leaves of the latter, it will be remembered, were made into a kind of paper, and its flowers were specially used as offerings in the temples. We shall afterwards inspect some growing specimens of this curious plant in the fountain basin at the north end of the Nave, as well as of the lotus, when these restorations may be remembered with interest. On the frieze above the columns is a hieroglyphic inscription stating that “in the seventeenth year of the reign of Victoria, the ruler of the waves, this Palace was erected and furnished with a thousand statues, a thousand plants, &c., like as a book for the use of the men of all countries.” This inscription is repeated, with some slight additions, on the frieze of the interior of the Court. On the cornice of both the inside and outside of the Court, are the names of her Majesty and the Prince Consort, engraved in hieroglyphic characters, and also winged globes, the symbolic protecting deity of doorways. Entering by the central doorway, on the lintels and sides of which are inserted the different titles of King Ptolemy, in hieroglyphics, we find ourselves in the exterior court of a temple in which the multitude assembled; the decorations of the walls are similar to those we saw outside, and it must be borne in mind that the colouring is taken from actual remains in Egypt. On the wall to the left is a large picture copied from the great Temple of Rameses III. or Rameses Mai Amun, at Medinet Haboo, near Thebes, showing the counting of the hands of the slain--three thousand as we are informed by the hieroglyphics engraved over the heads of the scribes--before the king who is in his chariot; on the right-hand side of the Court is a representation of a battle-scene, with the Egyptians storming a fortress. Turning to the left, after examining the eight gigantic figures of Rameses the Great, forming the façade of another temple, we enter the Court of Amunothph, a colonnade of an early period, its date being about 1300 B.C. The columns represent eight stems and buds of the papyrus bound together, and are cast from a black granite column bearing the name of Amunothph, now in the British Museum. [Illustration: First order of Egyptian Column.] Passing on we find ourselves in a dark tomb copied from one at Beni Hassan. It is the earliest piece of architecture in the Crystal Palace, its date being about 1660 B.C. The original tomb is cut in the solid chain of rocks that forms a boundary on the east of the Nile, separating the sandy desert from the fertile valley of the river. Although architectural remains exist in Egypt of a much earlier date than this tomb, it still possesses great value to us, for it may be considered as exhibiting the first _order_ of Egyptian columns, which was employed in constructing buildings at as remote a period as two thousand years before Christ; this fluted column in another respect claims our attention, for there can be but little doubt that it supplied the Greeks with the model of their early Doric. The original tomb has but one instead of four entrances as here represented, and is accordingly more gloomy and impressive. What is lost in sombre effect, however, is made up to the visitor in convenience. Passing out, we behold, in front of us, a beautiful colonnade, or portico, from the Island of Philöe, and of the same period as the Egyptian wall which we first saw fronting the Nave. Within this we cannot fail to remark the scattered statues, especially the Egyptian Antinous, executed during the Roman rule, the life-like development of whose limbs, representing, as it no doubt does, the Egyptian type, is sufficient to convince us that when Egyptian art was not tied down by the hierarchical yoke, it was capable of producing works of truth and merit. Another work of art, executed when the country was under the Greek yoke, is the remarkable bas-relief portrait of Alexander the Great, inscribed in hieroglyphics and Greek characters. The Greek name is spelt wrongly--a sufficient proof that the work of art is from the hand of an Egyptian artist. Amidst the statues will be found two circular-headed stones--copies of the celebrated Rosetta stone (so called from having been found at the little town of Rosetta, near Alexandria) from which Dr. Young and Champollion obtained a key to the deciphering of hieroglyphics. The stone is engraved in three characters: Hieroglyphic, Enchorial--the writing of the country--and Greek; the inscription is an address from the priests to the Greek King of Egypt, Ptolemy V., in which the sovereign’s praises are set forth, and orders are given to set up a statue of the king, together with the address, in every temple. The date of this interesting remnant of Egyptian manners and customs is about 200 years before the Christian era. Further on to the right, as we face the west--in a recess--is the model of the Temple of Aboo Simbel, cut in the side of a rock, in Nubia. The sitting figures which, in the original, are of the size of the gigantic figures which we shall afterwards see in the Northern Transept, represent Rameses the Great, and the smaller ones around, his mother, wife, and daughter. The original tomb is ten times as large as the present model. It should be remembered that nearly all the models here introduced are very much below the size of the architectural remains which they represent. For example: the majority of the columns in the Temple of Karnak are 47 feet high, and some are 62 feet. Turning from this recess, and after looking at the beautiful lotus columns to the left, surmounted by the cow-eared Goddess of Love of the Egyptians, and having examined the two large pictures on the walls of the temple--one of which represents a king slaying his enemies with the aid of the god Ammon Ra, and the other a feat of arms of the same king--we direct our attention to the columns before us, which are reduced models of a portion of the celebrated Temple of Karnak at Thebes. This temple was, perhaps, one of the largest and most interesting in Egypt; the principal portions are said to have been erected by Rameses II. about 1170 B.C. It seems to have been a fashion with the Theban kings to make additions to this temple during their respective reigns; and, as each monarch was anxious to outvie his predecessor, the size of the fabric threatened to become unbounded. Temples and tombs were the grand extravagances of the Egyptian kings. The sums that modern rulers devote to palaces which add to their splendour whilst living, were given by the remote princes of whom we speak, and who regarded life as only a fleet passage towards eternity, for the construction of enduring homes when life should have passed away. Inasmuch as, if the career of an Egyptian king proved irreligious or oppressive, the priests and people could deny him sepulture in his own tomb, it is not unlikely that many Egyptian kings lavished large sums upon temples, in order to conciliate the priestly favour, and to secure for their embalmed bodies the much-prized sanctuary. It is to be observed, however, with respect to the names and inscriptions found on Egyptian monuments, that they are by no means always to be taken as an authentic account of the remains within. Some of the Egyptian kings have been proved guilty of erasing from tombs the names of their predecessors, and of substituting their own; an unwarrantable and startling deception that has proved very awkward and embarrassing to Egyptian antiquaries. [Illustration: Column from Karnak.] The portion of Karnak here modelled is taken from the Hall of Columns, commenced by Osirei the First, and completed by his son, Rameses the Great, a most illustrious monarch, whose deeds are frequently recorded, and whose statue is found in many parts of Egypt, and who flourished during the twelfth century before Christ. Before entering the temple, we stay to notice the representations of animals and birds on the frieze above the columns, which is the dedication of the temple to the gods. Entering between the columns, on the lower part of which is the name of Rameses the Great, and, in the middle, a representation of the three principal divinities of Thebes receiving offerings from King Osirei; and, after thoroughly examining this interesting restoration, we return again into the outer court. The visitor who wishes to realise to himself the actual condition of the principal Egyptian temples and wall-sculptures of Karnak and Kalabshee, can do so by inspecting the splendid collection of French photographs of these ancient works of art in the Gallery immediately over this court, or by consulting the works of Champollion and Sir Gardner Wilkinson in the Reading Room of the Library. Regaining the Nave, a few steps, directed to the left, bring us to [Illustration: TOMB OF BENI HASSAN.] THE GREEK COURT.[6] Architecture and sculpture have here made a stride. We have noted even in Egypt the advance from early rude effort to a consistent gigantic system of art, which grew under the shadow of a stern hierarchical religion. We step at once from the gloom into the sunshine of Greek art. The overwhelming grandeur of Egypt, with its austere conventionalities, is exchanged for true simplicity, great beauty, and ideality. Just proportions, truth, grace of form, and appropriate ornament, characterised Greek architecture. The fundamental principles of construction, as will readily be seen, were the same in Greece as in Egypt, but improved, added to, and perfected. The architecture of both countries was columnar; but, compare the Greek columns before us with those which we just now saw in Egypt, taken from the tomb of Beni Hassan: the latter are simple, rude, ill-proportioned, and with slight pretension to beauty, whilst, in the former, the simplicity still prevailing, the rudeness and heaviness have departed, the pillars taper gracefully, and are finely proportioned and elegant, though of great strength. The specimen of Greek architecture before us is from the later period of the first order, namely, the Doric; and the court is taken, in part, from the Temple of Jupiter at Nemea, which was built about 400 years B.C., still within the verge of the highest period of Greek Art. Passing along the front, we notice on the frieze above the columns the names of the principal Greek cities and colonies. [6] See “Handbook to the Greek Court,” by George Scharf, jun.; also, “An Apology for the Colouring of the Greek Court,” by Owen Jones. [Illustration: Plan of the Greek Court.] We enter the court through the central opening. This portion represents part of a Greek _agora_, or forum, which was used as a market, and also for public festivals, for political and other assemblies. Around the frieze in this central division are the names of the poets, artists, and philosophers of Greece, and of their most celebrated patrons, the list commencing immediately above the place of entrance with old blind Homer, and finishing with Anthemius, the architect of Saint Sophia at Constantinople. The names, it will be remarked, are inserted in the Greek characters of the period at which the various persons lived. The monograms within the chaplets on the frieze are formed of the initial letters of the Muses, the Graces, the Good and the Wise. The colouring of this court, with its blue, red, and yellow surfaces, blazoned with gold, produces an excellent effect. It is the object of the decorators to give to the whole of the architectural specimens in the Crystal Palace those colours which there is reason to know, or to believe they originally possessed; to restore them, in fact, as far as possible, to their pristine state, in order that the imagination of the spectator may be safely conducted back in contemplation to the artistic characteristics of distant and distinctive ages. In this court are arranged sculptures and models of temples. Amongst the former will be recognised many of the finest statues and groups of the Greek school, the Laocoon (16); the Farnese Juno (6); the Dione (3); the Genius of Death (24); the well-known Discobolus (4) from the Vatican; the Ariadne, also from the Vatican (27); the Sleeping or Barberini Faun (19); and, in the centre, the unrivalled Venus of Milo, which affords perhaps the most perfect combination of grandeur and beauty in the female form (1). We make our way round this court, beginning at the right hand. After examining the collection, we pass between the columns into the small side court (next to Egypt), answering to a stoa of the Agora. Around the frieze are found the names of the great men of the Greek colonies, arranged in chronological order. The visitor has here an opportunity of contrasting the architecture and sculpture of the Egyptians with those of the Greeks. On one side of him is an Egyptian wall inclining inwards, with its angular pictorial decorations, and the passive colossal figures guarding the entrances. On the other side are the beautiful columns and bold cornice of the Greek Doric, surrounded by statues characterised by beauty of form and refined idealised expression. In this division will also be found the busts of the Greek Poets, arranged in chronological order, commencing on the right-hand side from the Nave: these form a portion and the commencement of the Portrait Gallery of the Crystal Palace. Making our way through the opening in the back, opposite the Nave, we enter a covered atrium, commonly attached to the portion of the agora here reproduced. The massive _antæ_, or square pillars, and the panelled ceiling--the form of the latter adapted from the Temple of Apollo at Bassæ in Arcadia--give the visitor another specimen of Greek architecture. We proceed, to the right, down this atrium, occasionally stepping out to examine the sculpture arranged in the gallery, and the restored and coloured frieze of the Parthenon of Athens, which extends its length along the wall. The coloured portion has been executed under the direction of Mr. Owen Jones, the golden hair being founded on authentic examples which still exist on analogous remains of ancient Greek art.[7] The tints on the different figures are put forth rather as suggestions than restorations. We really know nothing certain of the manner in which these celebrated relievos were coloured. Acknowledging this fact, Mr. Jones, in thus boldly supplying pigment, has proceeded upon the known principle of the Greeks--using the tints so as to enhance the effect of the sculpture. This frieze represents the Panathenaic procession to the temple of Athene Polias, which formed part of the display at this greatest of the Athenian festivals, and took place every fourth year. Dividing the frieze, is one of the most interesting objects in the Crystal Palace, a model of the western front of the Parthenon itself, about one-fourth the size of the original structure. This is the largest model that has ever been constructed of this beautiful temple, and possesses the great charm of a veritable copy. The scale is sufficiently large to give a complete idea of the original. This admirable model is due to the intelligent and successful researches prosecuted in Athens by Mr. Penrose, whose labours have thrown so much new light upon the refinements practised by the Greeks in architecture. Mr. Penrose has himself directed the construction of the model. In this gallery are ranged statues and groups, including the celebrated Niobe group, from Florence (187 to 187 L, inclusive). This subject of the punishment of Niobe’s family by the gods was frequently treated by Greek artists; and certainly the group before us is one of the most beautiful examples of Greek sculptural art. It is supposed that the portion of the group at Florence occupied the pediment of the temple of Apollo Sosianus at Rome. The Niobe group belongs to one of the brightest periods. Casts from those most beautiful and wonderful remains of ancient art, the colossal figures from the pediment of the Parthenon at Athens, are also here (185 to 186 B). The originals, brought over to England by Lord Elgin in 1801-2, are in the British Museum, and the nation is indebted for the acquisition to the painter Haydon, who was the first British artist to recognise the value, and appreciate the beauty, of these mutilated but inimitable monuments of art at the highest period of its glory. They belong to the Phidian school, and are characterised by simple grandeur, great repose in the attitudes, and a deep study of nature in their forms. The Theseus more particularly displays a marvellous study and appreciation of nature, and the figures of the Fates (185 B), headless though they be, are the most awfully grand impersonations the world has ever seen. In connection with the Parthenon will also be seen a cast from a part of one of the actual columns, also in the British Museum (150). Here also is the wonderful Belvedere Torso, from the Vatican (67); the far-famed Venus de’ Medici (198), from Florence, and the exquisite Psyche (199), from the Museum at Naples. The visitor will not fail to be astonished, no less by the number than by the charming effect of these works which have come down to our time, and which will descend to the latest posterity as models of excellence. Proceeding until we arrive at the junction of the Greek and Roman Courts, we turn into the right-hand division of the outer court; round the frieze of which are the names of the statesmen and warriors of Athens, the Peloponnesus, and Attica. The busts ranged on either side are portraits of the Greek philosophers, orators, generals, and statesmen, arranged in chronological order, commencing at the entrance from the Nave. [Illustration] [7] The remainder of the frieze is erected in the gallery above the Courts. We walk through this court until we reach the Nave; then turning to the left, find ourselves facing THE ROMAN COURT[8] On approaching this Court, the visitor will at once notice a new architectural element--as useful as it is beautiful--namely, the ARCH, a feature that has been found susceptible of the greatest variety of treatment. Until within the last few years the credit of the first use of the arch as an _architectural principle_ has been given to the Greek architect under Roman rule, but discoveries in Egypt, and more recently in Assyria by Mr. Layard and M. Botta, have shown that constructed and ornamented arches were frequently employed in architecture many hundred years before the Christian era. It is to be observed that architecture and sculpture had no original growth at Rome, and were not indigenous to the soil. Roman structures were modifications from the Greek, adapted to suit the requirements and tastes of the people; and thus it happened that the simple severity, purity, and ideality of early Greek art degenerated, under the Roman empire, into the wanton luxuriousness that characterised its latest period. In comparing the Greek and Roman statues, we remark a grandeur of conception, a delicacy of sentiment, a poetical refinement of thought in the former, indicative of the highest artistic development with which we are acquainted. When Greece became merely a Roman province, that high excellence was already on the decline, and the dispersion of her artists, on the final subjugation of the country by Mummius, the Roman general, B.C. 146, hastened the descent. A large number of Grecian artists settled at Rome, where the sentiment of servitude, and the love of their masters for display, produced works which by degrees fell further and further from their glorious models, until richness of material, manual cunning, and a more than feminine weakness characterised their principal productions; and the sculptor’s art became degraded into a trade, in which all feeling for the ancient Greek excellence was for ever lost. Thus, in the transplanted art of Greece, serving its Roman masters, a material and sensual feeling more or less prevails, appealing to the passions rather than to the intellects and high imaginations of men. The cumbrous dresses and armour which mark the properly Roman style, hide the graceful and powerful forms of nature under the symbols of station and office, creating a species of political sculpture. It is very curious and instructive to notice at a glance the high intellectual expression of the great men of Greece whose busts adorn the Greek Court, and to contrast their noble countenances with the material and sensual aspect of their conquerors, the Romans, who range peacefully close by: much of the past can be gleaned from such a comparison. [8] See “Handbook to the Roman Court,” by George Scharf, jun. [Illustration: Plan of the Roman Court.] In the wall now before us we have a model of a portion of the outer wall of the Coliseum at Rome, pierced with arches and ornamented with Tuscan columns. The Coliseum is one of the most wonderful structures in the world, and the Pyramids of Egypt alone can be compared with it in point of size. It is elliptical in form, and consisted outwardly of four stories. In the centre of the interior was the _arena_ or scene of action, around which the seats for spectators rose, tier above tier. The enormous range was capable of seating 87,000 persons. Vespasian and Titus erected this amphitheatre, and the work commenced about A.D. 79. In this vast and splendidly decorated building, the ancient Romans assembled to witness chariot-races, naval engagements, combats of wild animals, and other exciting sports. A very beautiful and highly finished model of the Coliseum restored will be found in the Court, which it will be interesting to compare with the present state of the ruin as seen in the model of the Roman Forum close by. A model also of the Pantheon will be found here. These were all executed at Rome under the superintendence of the late Dr. Emil Braun. Entering the Roman Court through the central archway, we come into an apartment whose walls are coloured in imitation of the porphyry, malachite, and rare marbles with which the Roman people loved to adorn their houses. This style of decoration appears to have been introduced a little before the Christian era; and so lavish were the Romans in supplying ornament for their homes, that the Emperor Augustus, dreading the result of the extravagance, endeavoured by his personal moderation to put a stop to the reckless expenditure: although it is recorded that the lofty exemplar was set up for imitation in vain. Following the same plan as in the Greek Court, we proceed round from the right to the left, examining the sculptures and models. Amongst the former will be noticed the statue of Drusus from Naples (222); the beautiful Venus Aphrodite from the Capitol, Rome (226); the Venus Genitrix from the Louvre (228); the fine statue of a musician, or female performer on the lyre, from the Louvre (230); the Genius Suppliant (232); the Marine Venus (233); the Venus Aphrodite from Florence (236); the Venus of Arles (237); the Venus Callipygos from Naples (238); and the Bacchus from the Louvre (241). Around the Court are placed the portrait-busts of the most celebrated kings and emperors of Rome, arranged chronologically, commencing, on the right-hand side of the entrance, with Numa Pompilius (34), and terminating with Constantius Chlorus (73). Having completed our survey, we enter the arched vestibule at the back adjoining the Greek Court. This vestibule, and the three others adjacent, are founded, in respect of their decorations and paintings, on examples still extant in the ancient baths of Rome. The bath, as is well known, was indispensable to the Romans, and in the days of their “decadence,” when they had sunk from glorious conquerors and mighty generals into the mere indolent slaves of luxury, the warm bath was used to excess. It is said that it was resorted to as often as seven or eight times a day, and even used immediately after a meal, to assist the digestive organs, and to enable the bather to enjoy, with as little delay as possible, another luxurious repast. We proceed through these vestibules, as in the Greek Court, studying the objects of art, and occasionally stepping out to notice the continuation of the Parthenon frieze on the wall at the back, and the sculptures ranged around. In the centre of the first vestibule is the Venus Victorious (243); and in the third, the Diana with the deer (261),--two chefs-d’œuvre of sculpture, that give an idea of the highest state of art under Roman rule. We soon arrive at the sides of the Alhambra, when, turning to the right, we find ourselves in a Roman side court, which is surrounded by the busts of the most renowned Roman Generals, of Empresses and other women. Passing through this compartment, we once more make our way to the Nave, and bring ourselves face to face with the gorgeous magnificence of THE ALHAMBRA COURT.[9] The architectural sequence is now interrupted. We have arrived at one of those offshoots from a parent stem which flourished for a time, and then entirely disappeared: leaving examples of their art which either compel our wonder by the extraordinary novelty of the details, as in the case of Nineveh, or, as in the court now before us, excite our admiration to the highest pitch, by the splendour and richness of the decorations. The Saracenic or Moresque architecture sprang from the Byzantine, the common parent of all subsequent styles, and the legitimate successor to the Roman system. We shall immediately have occasion to speak more particularly of the parent root when we cross the Nave and enter the Byzantine Court. Of the Moorish architecture which branched out from it, it will be sufficient to say here, that the solid external structure was of plain, simple masonry; whilst the inside was literally covered, from end to end, with rich arabesque work in coloured stucco, and adorned with mosaic pavements, marble fountains, and sweet-smelling flowers. [9] See “Handbook to the Alhambra Court,” by Owen Jones. [Illustration: Entrance to Alhambra Court.] [Illustration: Ground Plan of the Alhambra Court.] The vast fortress-palace of the Alhambra,[10] of a portion of which this court is a reproduction, was built about the middle of the thirteenth century. It rises on a hill above the city of Granada (in the south of Spain), the capital of the Moorish kingdom of that name, which, for two hundred and fifty years, withstood the repeated attacks of the Christians, and was not finally reduced until 1492, by Ferdinand and Isabella. The Alhambra, under Moorish rule, was the scene of the luxurious pleasures of the monarch, and the stage upon which many fearful crimes were enacted. Within its brilliant courts, the king fell by the hand of the aspiring chief, who, in his turn, was cut down by an equally ambitious rival. Few spots can boast a more intimate association with the romantic than the Alhambra, until the Christians ejected the Moors from their splendid home, and the palace of the unbeliever became a Christian fortress. [10] “The Red,” probably so called either from the colour of the soil, or from the deep red brick of which it is built. The part here reproduced is the far-famed Court of Lions, the Tribunal of Justice, and the Hall of the Abencerrages and the Divan. The outside of these courts is covered with diaper work, consisting of inscriptions in Arabic character, of conventional representation of flowers and of flowing decoration, over which the eye wanders, delighted with the harmony of the colouring and the variety of the ornament. Entering through the central archway, we see before us the fountain, supported by the lions that give name to the court; and, through the archway opposite, the splendid fringe of the stalactite roof of the Hall of the Abencerrages, composed in the original of five thousand separate pieces, which key into and support each other. The Court of Lions here is 75 feet long, just two-thirds the length of the original; the columns are the same height and size as the columns of which they are restorations, and the arches that spring from them are also of the actual size of the original arches. Over the columns is inscribed in Cufic characters, “_And there is no Conqueror but God._” Round the basin of the fountain is an Arabic poem, from which we take two specimens:-- “Oh thou who beholdest these Lions crouching--fear not! Life is wanting to enable them to show their fury!” Less, we must think, a needless caution to the intruder, than the poet’s allowed flattery to his brother artist. In the verse of Greece and modern Italy, we find the same heightened expression of admiration for the almost animating art of sculpture. The following passage is oriental in every letter:-- “Seest thou not how the water flows on the surface, notwithstanding the current strives to oppose its progress. Like a lover whose eyelids are pregnant with tears, and who suppresses them for fear of a tale-bearer.” Through this brilliant court, the visitor will proceed or linger as his spirit directs. There are no statues to examine, for the religion of the Moors forbade the representation of living objects; in truth, the exquisitely wrought tracery on every side, upon which the Moorish mind was thus forced to concentrate all its artistic power and skill, is in itself sufficient exclusively to arrest and to enchain the attention. A curious infringement, however, of the Mahommedan law just now mentioned, which proscribes the representation of natural objects, is observable in the lions supporting the fountain, and in three paintings, which occupy a portion of the original ceilings in the Tribunal of Justice and the two alcoves adjoining. It is also to be remarked that, although the followers of Mahommed scrupulously avoid stepping upon a piece of paper, lest the name of God should be written thereon, yet that name is found repeatedly upon the floor of the same tribunal. However, during the State visit of the Princes of Oude to the Crystal Palace in 1858, while they were inspecting this Court it was noticed that they, and many of their attendants, avoided as much as possible stepping upon the inscribed pavement. From these circumstances it would seem that the Mahommedans of the West were more lax in their observances than their brethren of the East, having in all probability imbibed some of the ideas and feelings of the Spanish Christians with whom they came in contact. Passing through the archway opposite to that at which we entered, we find ourselves in a vestibule which in the Alhambra itself leads from the Court of Lions to the Tribunal of Justice. This is, however, only a portion of the original passage. The arches opening from the central to the right and left divisions of the vestibule are of the size of the originals, the patterns on the Avails and ceilings being taken from other portions of the Alhambra. It should also be remembered that the different apartments here brought together do not stand in the same relation to each other as in the Moorish Palace, the object of the architect in the Crystal Palace being to give the best examples of this style of architecture in the smallest possible space. The visitor may now proceed through the left-hand arch into the division next the Roman Court. On the right of this division he will find a small room devoted to models, and specimens of the original casts of ornaments of the Alhambra, brought by Mr. Owen Jones from Spain, from which this Court has been constructed. Returning to the central division, he sees on his left the Hall of the Abencerrages, with its beautiful stalactite roof, already spoken of. All the Courts on this side of the building, up to this point, were erected under the superintendence of Mr. Owen Jones. Proceeding onward, we quit the Alhambra, and emerge into the north transept. The visitor passing into the Tropical division now crosses the Transept, immediately in front of the colossal sitting figures, which he will be able to examine with more effect when he commences a tour through the nave, which we propose that he shall shortly make. Passing these figures then for a moment, he directs his attention to [Illustration: Pillar from the arcade of the Court.] THE ASSYRIAN COURT,[11] which faces him. This Court is larger than any other appropriated to the illustration of one phase of art. It is 120 feet long, 50 feet wide, and has an elevation of 40 feet from the floor line. Its chief interest, however, consists in the fact of its illustrating a style of art of which no specimen has hitherto been presented in Europe, and which, indeed, until the last few years, lay unknown even in the country where its remains have been unexpectedly brought to light. It is little more than ten years ago that M. Botta, the French Consul at Mossul, first discovered the existence of sculptural remains of the old Assyrian empire at Khorsabad: and since that time the palace, now known to have been erected about the year 720 B.C. by Sargon, the successor of Shalmaneser, has been mainly explored, as well as the palace of his son Sennacherib at Koyunjik, and that of Esarhaddon and Sardanapalus, at Nimroud, besides other older palaces in the last-named locality. In addition to the explorations that have been made on these sites, extensive excavations and examinations also within the last few years have been made into the ruins of the palaces of Nebuchadnezzar at Babylon, and of Darius and Xerxes at Susa. [11] See “Handbook to the Nineveh Court,” by Austen Henry Layard. It is from the immense mass of new materials, so suddenly revealed, that Mr. James Fergusson, assisted by Mr. Layard, has erected the court before which the visitor now stands--an architectural illustration which, without pretending to be a literal copy of any one building, most certainly represents generally the architecture of the extinct but once mighty kingdoms of Mesopotamia, during the two centuries that elapsed between the reign of Sennacherib and that of Xerxes, viz., from about B.C. 700 to B.C. 500. The oldest form of architecture in these Eastern parts was probably that which existed in Babylon: but the absence of stone in that country reduced the inhabitants to the necessity of using bricks only, and for the most part bricks burnt by the sun, though sometimes fire-burnt brickwork is also found. The face of the walls so constructed was ornamented with paintings, either on plaster or enamelled on the bricks, whilst the constructive portions and roofs were of wood. All this perishable material has of course disappeared, and nothing now remains even of the Babylon built by Nebuchadnezzar but formless mounds of brickwork. In the more northern kingdom of Assyria, the existence of stone and marble secured a wainscoting of sculptured slabs for the palace walls, whilst great winged bulls and giant figures, also in stone, adorned the portals and façades. The pillars, however, which supported the roofs, and the roofs themselves, were all of wood, generally of cedar, and these having been destroyed by fire or by the lapse of ages, nothing remains to tell of their actual size and form. Yet we are not left entirely to conjecture in respect of them. Susa and Persepolis in Persia--the followers and imitators of Nineveh--arose in districts where stone was abundant, and we find that the structures in these cities had not only stone pillars to support the roof, but also stone jambs in the doorways, thus affording an unmistakeable clue to the nature of such portions of building as are wanting to complete our knowledge of the architecture of the Assyrian people. As now laid bare to us, the Assyrian style of architecture differs essentially from any other with which we have hitherto been made acquainted. Its main characteristics are enormously thick mud-brick walls, covered with painted bas-reliefs, and roofs supported internally by slight but elegant wooden columns, ornamented with volutes (spiral mouldings), and the elegant honeysuckle ornament which was afterwards introduced through Ionia into Greece--this Assyrian style being, according to some, the parent of the Ionic order, as the Egyptian was of the Doric order, of Greece. The very greatest interest attaches to these architectural remains, and to the records cut in enduring stone, which they have handed down to us, inasmuch as they corroborate, in a most remarkable manner, certain statements in the Bible connected with Jewish History. There can be little doubt that the Assyrians and Jews sprang from the same stock; and no one can fail to remark that the physiognomy of the Assyrians, as pourtrayed in these sculptures, bears a strong resemblance to the Israelitish visage. As far as we can judge from descriptions, the architecture of ancient Jerusalem was almost identical with that of Assyria. [Illustration: Entrance to the Nineveh Court.] The whole of the lower portion of the exterior front and sides of this Court is taken from the palace at Khorsabad, the great winged bulls, the giants strangling the lions (supposed to represent the Assyrian Hercules), and the other features, being casts from the objects sent from the site of the palace, to the Louvre, and arranged, as far as circumstances admit, in the relative position of the original objects as they were discovered. The dwarf columns on the walls, with the double bull capitals, are modelled from details found at Persepolis and Susa, whilst the cornice and battlements above have been copied from representations found in one of the bas-reliefs at Khorsabad. The painting of the cornice is in strict accordance with the recent discoveries of that place. [Illustration: Plan of the Assyrian Court.] Entering through the opening in the side, guarded by colossal bulls, the visitor finds himself in a large hall, in the centre of which stand four great columns copied literally from columns found at Susa and Persepolis. The walls of the hall are covered with sculpture, cast from originals brought to this country by Mr. Layard from his excavations at Nimroud, and deposited in the British Museum. Upon the sculptures are engraved the arrow-headed inscriptions which have been so recently, and in so remarkable a manner, deciphered by Colonel Rawlinson and Dr. Hincks. Above these is a painting of animals and trees, copied from one found at Khorsabad. The roof crowning the hall represents the form of ceiling usual in that part of Asia, but is rather a vehicle for the display of the various coloured patterns of Assyrian art than a direct copy of anything found in the Assyrian palaces. In the centre of the great hall the visitor will notice a decorated archway at the back of the Court. The very recent discovery of this highly ornamented arch at Khorsabad, and also of a pointed example, proves--somewhat unexpectedly--that the Assyrian people were far from ignorant of the value of these beautiful features of architecture. A complete detailed account of this interesting department will be found in Mr. Layard’s valuable Handbook to the Nineveh Court. Having completed his survey of the interior of this Court, the visitor may at once quit the Court by the central entrance, and turning to the left cross the north end of the Nave, stopping for one moment on his passage to look from end to end of the magnificent structure within which he stands, and to glance at the exterior of the Court he has just quitted, the bright colouring of which, the bold ornaments, the gigantic bulls, and colossal features, present as novel and striking an architectural and decorative display as the mind can imagine. Having crossed the building, past the avenue of Sphinxes, without stopping at the colossal Egyptian figures to be noticed hereafter, the visitor will continue the architectural illustrations with THE BYZANTINE AND ROMANESQUE COURT.[12] Before the visitor is conducted through the architectural Courts on this side of the Nave, which have all been erected by Mr. Digby Wyatt, it is necessary he should understand that they differ considerably in arrangement and treatment from those on the opposite side, which have already been described. In the Egyptian, Greek, and other Courts through which he has passed, the forms or characteristics of some one distinctive structure have, to a greater or less extent, been given; but the Courts into which we are now about to penetrate are not architectural restorations, but rather so many collections of ornamental details stamped with unmistakeable individuality, and enabling us at a glance to recognise and distinguish the several styles that have existed and succeeded each other, from the beginning of the 6th down to the 16th century. In each Court will be found important details, ornament, and even entire portions, taken from the most remarkable or beautiful edifices of the periods they illustrate. Thus the palaces and Christian temples of Italy, the castles and churches of Germany, the hôtels-de-ville and châteaux of Belgium and France, and the cathedrals and mansions in our own country, have all been laid under contribution, so that here, for the first time in the history of architecture, we have the opportunity of acquiring a perceptive and practical knowledge of the beautiful art during the period of its later progress. [12] See “Handbook to the Byzantine Court,” by M. Digby Wyatt and J. B. Waring. [Illustration: Byzantine Court (entrance from North Transept).] The regular architectural sequence on the other side of the Nave finds its termination in the Roman Court, and we now resume the order of history with the “Byzantine” Court. Art, as we have already indicated, declined during the Roman Empire; but the general adoption of Christianity gave the blow that finally overthrew it; for the