DOI Seite / Zitierlink:
https://doi.org/10.11588/diglit.29898#0026
( xxii )
NOTE.
Altliough every possible care has heen taken in selecting the hest authorities
for the statements in the text of the work, as well as the subjects for illustration,
still no one acquainted with the state of the literature of architecture will need
to be tohl that in many branches few materials exist for a correct description
of the style, and that the drawings which are available are frequently so inexact,
and with scales so carelessly applied, that it is impossible at times to avoid error.
The plans throughout the book are on too small a scale to render any minute errors
apparent, but being drawn to a uniform scale of 100 feet to 1 inch, or of the real
size, they are quite sufficient as a means of comparison, even when not mathema-
tically correct. They suffice to enahie the reader to judge of the relative size of two
buildings by a mere inspection of the plans, as correctly as lie could by seeing
tlie buiklings themselves, without actually measuring them in all their details.
As a general rule, the sections or elevations of buildings, throughout the boob,
are drawn to a scale double that of the plans, viz., 50 feet to 1 inch, or of the
real dimensions; but, owing to the great size of many of them, it has been found
impossible to carry out this in all instances; where it has not been effected
the departure from the rule is always noted, either below the woodcut or in
the text.
No lineal dimensions are quoted in the text except such as it is helieved can be
relied upon, and in all instances these are reduced to English feet. The superficial
measures also in the text, like the plans, are quite sufficient for comparison, though
not to be relied upon as absolutely correct. One great source of uncertainty as
regards them is the difficulty of knowing at times what should be included in the
building referred to. Should, for instance, the Lady Chapel at Ely be considered an
integral part of the Catheclral, or the Chapter-house at Wells ? Should the sacristies
attached to Continental cathedrals he considered as part of tlie church ? or such
semi-detached towers as the south-western one at Bourges ? What constitutes the
temple at Karnac, and how much of this helongs to the Hypostyle Hall ? These
and fifty other questions occur in almost every instance which may lead two
persons to very different conclusions regarding the superficial dimensions of a
building, even without the errors inherent in imperfect materials.
When either the drawing from which the woodcut is taken was without a
scale, or the scale given could not be depended upon, “ No scale ” has been put
under the woodcut, to warn the reader of the fact. When the woodcut was either
too large for the page, or too small to be distinct if reduced to the usual scale, a
scale of feet has been added under it, to show that it is an exception to the rule.
Capitals, windows, and details which are meant to illustrate forms or con-
struction, and not particular buildings, are drawn to any scale that seemed best
to express the purpose for which they are inserted; when they are remarkable for
size, or as individual examples, a scale has been added; but this is the exception,
not the rule.
Every pains has heen taken to secure tlie greatest possible amount of accuracy,
and in all instances the sources from which the woodcirts have been taken are
indicated. Many of the illustrations are from original drawings, and of buildings
never before published.
NOTE.
Altliough every possible care has heen taken in selecting the hest authorities
for the statements in the text of the work, as well as the subjects for illustration,
still no one acquainted with the state of the literature of architecture will need
to be tohl that in many branches few materials exist for a correct description
of the style, and that the drawings which are available are frequently so inexact,
and with scales so carelessly applied, that it is impossible at times to avoid error.
The plans throughout the book are on too small a scale to render any minute errors
apparent, but being drawn to a uniform scale of 100 feet to 1 inch, or of the real
size, they are quite sufficient as a means of comparison, even when not mathema-
tically correct. They suffice to enahie the reader to judge of the relative size of two
buildings by a mere inspection of the plans, as correctly as lie could by seeing
tlie buiklings themselves, without actually measuring them in all their details.
As a general rule, the sections or elevations of buildings, throughout the boob,
are drawn to a scale double that of the plans, viz., 50 feet to 1 inch, or of the
real dimensions; but, owing to the great size of many of them, it has been found
impossible to carry out this in all instances; where it has not been effected
the departure from the rule is always noted, either below the woodcut or in
the text.
No lineal dimensions are quoted in the text except such as it is helieved can be
relied upon, and in all instances these are reduced to English feet. The superficial
measures also in the text, like the plans, are quite sufficient for comparison, though
not to be relied upon as absolutely correct. One great source of uncertainty as
regards them is the difficulty of knowing at times what should be included in the
building referred to. Should, for instance, the Lady Chapel at Ely be considered an
integral part of the Catheclral, or the Chapter-house at Wells ? Should the sacristies
attached to Continental cathedrals he considered as part of tlie church ? or such
semi-detached towers as the south-western one at Bourges ? What constitutes the
temple at Karnac, and how much of this helongs to the Hypostyle Hall ? These
and fifty other questions occur in almost every instance which may lead two
persons to very different conclusions regarding the superficial dimensions of a
building, even without the errors inherent in imperfect materials.
When either the drawing from which the woodcut is taken was without a
scale, or the scale given could not be depended upon, “ No scale ” has been put
under the woodcut, to warn the reader of the fact. When the woodcut was either
too large for the page, or too small to be distinct if reduced to the usual scale, a
scale of feet has been added under it, to show that it is an exception to the rule.
Capitals, windows, and details which are meant to illustrate forms or con-
struction, and not particular buildings, are drawn to any scale that seemed best
to express the purpose for which they are inserted; when they are remarkable for
size, or as individual examples, a scale has been added; but this is the exception,
not the rule.
Every pains has heen taken to secure tlie greatest possible amount of accuracy,
and in all instances the sources from which the woodcirts have been taken are
indicated. Many of the illustrations are from original drawings, and of buildings
never before published.