oblivion of Classic architecture) and considerably before the development of the Gothic style. It will be remembered that Byzantine architecture was characterised by the round arch springing from short, clustered columns, that the arches, as well as the basketshaped capitals of the columns, were treated with carving which was of a curiously primitive, but highly decorative character. Mosaic decoration was largely used, and the dome, not the vault, was the covering of important structures, such as Ste. Sophia in Constantinople, and St. Mark's in Venice.

It will be remembered, further, that Romanesque architecture, developing the vault system of roofing, led directly to the great Gothic style. Romanesque architecture, at its best, was by way of being a hybrid style, a transitional style, and a style never fully developed. It was a style of uneven merit, different parts of the same building often seeming architecturally meagre, ill-studied, barren and stupid, and others, at the same time, architecturally rich, intricate, colourful and interesting.

In considering the development in American architecture which has been called the "Romanesque Revival," one must accept the designation as embracing Byzantine derivations as well, and the "Revival," it is safe to say, might well have permanently and pervasively moulded the character of architectural design in this country, had not a "Renaissance Revival" supplanted it, as will be seen later.

Let us consider the status of "style" in American architecture about 1870. If "style" it could be called, we should be loth, in any event, to call it "American." The influence of the "Classic Revival" of the dawn of that century had died out even before 1836, when

"Colonnade Row" was built in New York City, and inspiration came, for the most part, from the most debased and bourgeois type of contemporary French architecture, or from misguided, unintelligent followers of Ruskin. The first inspiration created such monuments of architectural stupidity and vulgarity as the "brownstone front" type of city residence, dismally familiar to anyone who has traversed the side streets of New York, Brooklyn, or other similar Eastern cities. It created, also, those great country and suburban houses usually alluded to as "mansions"— great square boxes, with a hideously mishandled mansard roof and a "tower" or "cupola," which, with the whole horrible ensemble, was regarded as an index of wealth and social status.

The Gothic effort, as we have seen in the third chapter, produced architectural aberrations no less dismal, and even more architecturally illogical and structurally dishonest. The country was in dire need of some great architectural revelation-some great architectural light. Ruskin's "Seven Lamps of Architecture" conspicuously failed to shed even a faint glimmer of light in the Cimmerian darkness in which every hope of clear or intelligent architectural vision seemed to be plunged.

The light which appeared at this juncture came in the person of one of the greatest American architectsH. H. Richardson, great because his architectural vision was clear and intelligent, his architectural intention definite and sincere, his architectural reasoning sound and enlightened.

The great Romanesque Revival which he led became first conspicuous with the publication of his perspective drawing of the splendid tower of Trinity Church in

Boston, which appeared in "The New York Sketch Book of Architecture" in 1874. The church may be considered as the first monument of the Romanesque Revival, and it stands to-day as an expression of American architectural ability of the highest order. It is true that the decade from 1880 to 1890 witnessed the erection of a great many important buildings of architectural inconsistency, not to say architectural insanity, equalled by the structures of no other country or no other period, although the Romanesque idea held its place as a guiding light.

One architect, no matter how great, could not at once mould the architectural thought of so great a country, and the really remarkable thing is that "Richardsonian Romanesque" (as it soon came to be called) exerted such a widespread influence. Richardson demonstrated that the style might successfully be handled as a medium for the design of churches, railroad stations, business buildings, educational buildings and private houses in city and country. He had many imitators and copiers, but a far greater number of sincere and admiring followers, who welcomed the great Romanesque Revival as the dawn of a new and hopeful architectural era.

The late Montgomery Schuyler, architectural critic, writing even in 1891, saw an assimilated and "revised" Romanesque as the future "American Style" of architecture, which, indeed, it then bid fair to become. Mr. Schuyler's contentions, his analysis of the style, were admirably well founded, for he saw possibilities in a Romanesque Revival for the reason that Romanesque was never a "finished" style, in the sense that the Classic or Gothic styles were finished. Gothic architecture supplanted Romanesque architecture

before the latter had reached its complete stylistic development, so that no "perfect examples" exist to represent Romanesque architecture, as the Parthenon represents Classic, or the great French cathedrals represent Gothic. It seemed, then, as though we might take Romanesque architecture at the point where it was interrupted, and, revitalising it, develop it into a Nineteenth Century American style. Mr. Schuyler wrote (in 1891):

"It will be seen that Romanesque architecture, in the Norman, the German and the Provençal phases of it, constitutes an architectural language that is applicable to all our needs, for there is no mode of building, from the ecclesiastical to the domestic, in which we have not already successful examples to show, and in which we may not hope for still more signal successes in the future. It has not been conventionalised or formalised so as no longer to be expressive, but is still free and flexible, and it affords ample opportunity for a designer to manifest his scholarship and his individuality, if he have any. So much cannot be said of any previous style that has come so near to establishing itself. It is to be hoped that our designers may be content to develop its resources and not be tempted to abandon it, as so many promising beginnings have been abandoned in the history of modern architecture, through an unlucky or disastrous caprice."

The critic's estimate of the destiny of the Romanesque Revival in America is peculiarly interesting, and bears evidence of the futility of architectural prophecies. Mr. Schuyler did not reckon on the impact of two other, and evidently more powerful, architectural influences which made their effect apparent within so few years after this piece of writing-the great Renaissance

Revival, championed by McKim, Mead and White, and the great French-Classic influence emanating from the École des Beaux Arts in Paris.

Perhaps the greatest legacy of Richardson to American architecture was his demonstration of the fact that architectural sanity in this country lies only in a sincere, intelligent and scholarly adherence to a worthy historic style, be that style what it may. Richardson taught the architects of his time, as well as the discriminating public, that architectural precedent is safer, and more productive of desirable results, than architectural experiment.

And in doing this, he left behind him a splendid record of architectural achievement in the buildings which he designed. Conspicuous among these are Trinity Church in Boston, Sever Hall and Austin Hall in Cambridge, the Pittsburgh Court House, the Cincinnati Chamber of Commerce and a great many permanently pleasing residences and railroad stations, especially through the New England States.

While the works of many of Richardson's followers were admirably sincere and were perfectly legitimate expressions of a dominant architectural idea, the works of most of those who imitated him merely as an opportune expedient were ill-studied, and not only worthless in themselves, but tended to discredit the real and higher aims of the Romanesque Revival.

The architectural observer will recognise the buildings of this interesting period in American architecture because buildings of the Richardsonian Revival bear an unmistakable stamp. Usually of stone, their proportions are massive and often heavy. The cavernous entrances are spanned by great semi-circular arches, and the composition is usually dominated by a sturdy tower