I may, however, describe it most characteristically by quoting the words of that able and enthusiastic Antiquary: "In this figure, executed about B.C. 350, we have probably the most ancient example of Greek portrait statuary which has as yet been discovered. Nor is its merit as a work of art inferior to its interest as an historical monument; for whether we regard the grandeur and simplicity of the conception, the admirable composition of the drapery, or the skilful combination of the ideal with the individual in the treatment of the features, it is equally deserving of the admiration of every student of sculpture." To this description I have to add only that it bears too evident signs of having been painted. It is probable that these colossal statues were placed in or about the cella, or the small temple under the pyramid; which cella seems to have served as a kind of chapel. It was, according to Messrs. Newton and Smith, about 63 feet long by 41 wide, and constructed of polished marble. The Knights of St. John do not appear to have respected either the monument or its ruins; for they actually resorted to it as a quarry, and employed the materials in building their temporary stronghold. In some instances this was a fortunate spoilation, for they turned the sculptured faces of the friezes inwards, and so protected them from the weather and the destructive hands of the Turks; but the whole proceeding does little honour either to the taste or to the education of those military monks. I have stated that besides the remains of the sepulchre of Mausolus, a large collection of interesting antiquities was found in the excavations, and has been safely transported to England. The best account of these reliques is contained in the very valuable memorandum describing them, drawn up by Mr. Hawkins, Keeper of the Antiquities in the British Museum, as a Report addressed to the Trustees, and laid before both Houses of Parliament by command of Her Majesty. In that paper the collection is stated to comprise Four principal classes of Antiquities, consisting of:-1. Remains of the Sculptures which formerly decorated the Tomb of Mausolus. 2. A miscellaneous assortment of Architectural Fragments, no doubt belonging to the same celebrated edifice. 3. A number of Fragments, bearing Greek Inscriptions and Names, for the most part the handles of diotæ for containing wine. 4. Portions of several Mosaic Pavements, procured from the sites of villas in the neighbourhood of the Mausoleum, and nearly all of Roman times. To the lovers of art, and the investigators of antiquity, the first impression which these reliques convey is that of indignant regret, that time and wanton destruction have left us so little of so stately and interesting an edifice; as that feeling is expressed in the impassioned verses of Byron. "There is a temple in ruin stands, But these remains contain within them other lessons also; and, if they are read aright, they will teach us that man's greatest works are all perishable; that Words are often more durable than Things; that peoples and empires pass away without "leaving even a wrack behind;" that wealth, civilisation, and political grandeur at one period, are no guarantee of even national existence at others; and that the merits of kings or rulers cannot uphold nations which are themselves devoid of moral worth. May we take these lessons to ourselves! and let us hope, that when the imagined New Zealander may come here to seek, in the cradle of his race, for Antiquities wherewith to adorn the Museums of the Southern Hemisphere, to be erected Two Thousand Years hence, he may find not only traces as noble and as beautiful of the best private affections amongst our Rulers, as those observable in the Marbles of Budrum, but also that which has not been hitherto discovered in Greece, Asia-Minor, or Egypt (with the exception of the buried cities in Italy) traces of the individual worth, energy, and moral power, of the private citizens of our land! Sooner or later the Empire must pass away from us; and it seems to me, whilst musing on the fate of this Mausoleum, that it behoves us seriously to enquire whether we as a nation are leaving our impress on the records of Time for Good-or for Evil. * We regret that our limits compel us to compress somewhat this important Paper. Mr. WESTMACOTT, R.A. Visitor, described the colossal statue of Mausolus, which had been broken into no less than 67 fragments, as a very extraordinary work in an artistic point of view, especially in the treatment of the drapery, which was also excellent in the female figure. Mr. Hawkins had expressed an opinion that these sculptures were originally painted; but after looking carefully into the matter he could not find any decided traces that such was the case. There was a red tint on the under part of one of the horses, but that might be produced by oxide of iron, or from some other cause. He had tried hard to discover whether any blue had been used in the ground of the bassi-rilievi (as he believed was the case in the Parthenon), but he could not trace any, and there was no sufficient body of colour in any part to support the view that the marbles had been painted. In equestrian statues generally, the Greek sculptors, who invariably acted on principle and not from caprice, represented their horses in action; and the principle was a sound one, because the body of a horse with a man upon it was in the whole a heavy and cumbrous mass, and to place two such masses upon four straight columns would evince great poverty of invention. A horse should never be made to look like a biped, as it must if represented at rest, when viewed in certain positions. The Greeks therefore carefully introduced a great variety of lines in their equestrian statues. Among the remains brought from Halicarnassus were portions of the trunks of two horses, to which the Trustees of the British Museum had requested him to put legs; in doing this he found from the anatomical construction of the trunks that one, if not both, of the horses was certainly in a standing posture, and considering the peculiar nature of the monument on which this quadriga was placed, a departure from the ordinary practice might in this case be fully justified. Mr. COCKERELL, Fellow, said he could have wished that Mr. Tite had expressed a more decided opinion on the different competitive restorations, or submitted a design of his own. The essay of Mr. Newton, to which Mr. Tite had referred, was illustrated by a small sketch made by himself, and he believed that solely by the line and the two-foot rule he could show some authority for the whole of his restoration. In the first place, as the diameter of the column was fixed, the height of it was determined, as well as the proportions of the architrave, the frieze and the cornice. The cornice was also found, and the divisions between the lions' heads on it determined the intercolumns; so that unless it was to be taken as one diameter more, the intercolumniation was fixed as he had adopted it; these were important data which they could not disregard. Thirteen fragments of lions had been discovered, but all so disintegrated in parts that it was evident they must have been placed in some very exposed position. With regard to the steps, he thought Mr. Newton had been misled by the passages which had been quoted; he apprehended that the steps formed a steep incline from the attic order over the entablature up to the platform on which the quadriga and horses stood, and were so arranged in order that the horses' feet might be seen from below. With regard to the Pelasgic arch, with horizontal courses, as a mode of spanning the space of 22 feet between the single row of columns and the cella shewn on Mr. Newton's plan and section, he believed that scheme to be altogether impossible. Though Mr. Newton stated that no traces of a second row of columns could be found, such a grove of them was well calculated to sustain the pyramidal structure, and to allow the introduction of stairs leading to the summit, as shewn in his, Mr. Cockerell's, restoration of the Mausoleum.* The fragments now on their way to England would undoubtedly supply much additional information, and he would therefore reserve any further remarks till they arrived. Mr. VAUX, Visitor, was of opinion that the monument had been ruined by an earthquake about the second or third century. It appeared from the account of Mr. Newton and others, that the principal relics of the colossal horse, and some of the larger specimens, must have been buried at a very early period, and that they had been hidden from view by the silt or washings from the mountain. He also thought that the materials which the knights removed to build their castle were nothing more than the solid parts of the structure on which the quadriga stood. Mr. TITE said that the knights fortunately placed most of the sculptured faces of the friezeș inside, when they used the materials of the tomb in building the castle; but some were built into the walls with the sculptures exposed, and it was the discovery of these friezes which, (after they had been obtained, in 1845) ultimately led to the English government sending Mr. Newton to bring the Budrum marbles to this country. The REV. R. BURGESS, Hon. Member, mentioned some further particulars respecting the life and avaricious conduct of Mausolus. Mr. M. D. WYATT, Hon. Sec., agreed with Mr. Westmacott that this monument had not been painted; as he had sought in vain in the hollow parts and corners of the mouldings, in which traces of colour, or at least of the mordaunts employed, would most likely be found. He thought there was much beauty as well as artistic propriety in the quiet attitude of the horses. That they were not shewn in action was further proved by the drapery of the portrait statues of Mausolus and Artemisia, which was arranged in straight lines; whereas, if the horses had been seen as in rapid progression, the drapery of the figures in the car would also have been arranged in moving lines. He considered the statue of Mausolus one of the most dignified portrait statues he had ever seen, Mr. ASHPITEL, Fellow, made several objections to Mr. Newton's restoration, which he contended was not in accordance with the description of Pliny, nor structurally substantial. He regretted that an architect and a sculptor had not been sent to conduct the explorations. A Vote of Thanks to Mr. TITE, was carried by acclamation, and the meeting adjourned. * In Mr. Cockerell's plan, the Mausoleum is arranged as a dipteral temple, viz.: with two rows of isolated columns all round the cella, there being thirty-six columns in all; six in each row in the front and rear, and seven in those on the two flanks, with a narrow cella opposite to the two middle columns in the front and rear, and to the three middle columns in the flank elevations. SOME REMARKS ON THE CONTENTS OF THE ALBUM OF VILLARD DE HONNECOURT. By H. B. GARLING, Fellow. Read at the Royal Institute of British Architects, Nov. 15, 1858. If anything might be expected to prove interesting and instructive to architects of the Nineteenth Century, occupied constantly in the attempt to instil new vigour into their art, by investigating the principles by which it was regulated at a period when it was practised under healthier and happier influences; it must be some document which should throw light on the professional character, the method and objects of study, the feelings and the habits of thought of those artists who fixed those principles and decided their expression, but of whom individually we know nothing beyond that which is afforded by the reflection of their mind exhibited in their works. Such a document is the Album of Villard de Honnecourt, the contents of which I propose to sketch briefly this evening, and which, although they may not satisfy all the curiosity we feel, nor convey much instruction to those before whom information must be laid in its most obviously practical and tangible form, will yet be found replete with interest, and suggestive of abundant matter for speculation. The history of the manuscript is told in a few words: It was originally discovered in the Library of St. Germain des Près, and subsequently transferred, on the confiscation of ecclesiastical property, to the National Library. It consists of thirty-three sheets of parchment, about three-fifths of the original manuscript, which consisted of fifty-two. As, however, some interesting particulars of its condition and general character appeared in the "Builder" of last week, from the able pen of Mr. Burges, I need not dwell further on this part of the subject. The manuscript was first noticed by Willemin in his Monuments Français inédits. Later, in 1849, Mons? Jules Quicherat, Professor of Archæology, published a notice of the author, with a few of the sketches. It was however reserved for the industry and enthusiasm of M. Lassus to present it to us in its entirety in fac-simile, illustrated with all the skill of an accomplished artist, and all the learning of an experienced archæologist. Of the author, Villard de Honnecourt, we gather incidentally a few particulars from a careful analysis of the legends, and a comparison of the dates of historical events with those mentioned in the book. He appears to have been born at Honnecourt, on the Scheldt, near Cambray, and he writes in the Picard patois. There is great reason for believing that he was the architect of the Choir of Cambray Cathedral, now unfortunately destroyed. He tells us that he travelled much; he visited Laon, Chartres, Lausanne, and Rheims, the latter place undoubtedly during the progress of the works at the Cathedral; we get, therefore, an approximate date, somewhere between 1230 and 1250. He was then sent for into Hungary, where he stopped many days. Now we find that in 1242, Strigonia, then the capital of Hungary, was destroyed in an irruption of the Tartars, and that on their being driven back the next year, Bela, the King of Hungary, commenced rebuilding the City and the Cathedral dedicated to the Virgin; and we may presume that Villard de Honnecourt, then a man of great reputation, was sent for to design and execute these works. It is alleged by the editor, M. Lassus, that there are various churches in that neighbourhood which exhibit evidences of French influence. All these dates and circumstances compared, give us some data for fixing the identity of the artist. The contents of the book may be arranged under the following heads, viz.:-1. Mechanical Contrivances. 2. Geometry and Practical Trigonometry. 3. Cutting of Stones and Masonry. 4. Carpentry. 5. Design in Architecture. 6. Design in Ornament. 7. Drawing of the Figure. 8. Furniture and Utensils. 9. A variety of Drawings, sketches from natural objects or from paintings, either mural or on glass, for application to various decorative features in architecture. We therefore see that it embraces every department of an architect's studies. Many of the sketches have legends attached, describing them with more or less minuteness. On the page, originally the first, is a legend forming a sort of introduction and proving, I think, beyond all doubt, that the Album was not a mere memorandum book for the author's own use, but that it was intended for the instruction of others, and that it contains a general sketch of the art practised in that day, as illustrated by the author's own experience. The legend reads as follows: "Villars de Honnecourt salutes you, and prays all those who work in the various kinds of work contained in this book to pray for his soul, and to remember him; for in this book one may find great assistance in learning the principles of masonry and construction in carpentry; you will also find in it, the method of drawing the figure as geometry commands and enjoins." Under the first head, Mechanical Contrivances, we have a saw-mill moved by water power, a machine for cutting piles under water, a screw jack resembling that now in use, the method of forcing back into the perpendicular timber buildings that have bulged, military engines, mechanical toys, and a curious scheme for perpetual motion, with several other matters. Under the second head, Geometry and Trigonometry, a variety of problems more or less useful, some for setting out, or proving the truths of the setting out of work; for a variety of purposes connected with the practical application of geometrical lines and figures in architecture; for ascertaining the measurements, dimensions, and distances of inaccessible objects; for striking a variety of curves and other things of minor importance. Under the third head, Cutting of Stone, numerous problems and methods for setting out the lines of the more difficult and complicated parts of construction, the voussoirs of arches and vaulting in various positions, voussoirs of arches circular on plan, moulds for cutting the stones for spires, the best methods of bonding piers so as to conceal the joints, or to break joint, lines for constructing pendant arches, for corbelling from angular towers, and a variety of other matters of more or less interest. Under the head of Carpentry, designs for three roofs and for a timber bridge. A portion of this division of the work has been lost. In Architecture, we find internal and external elevations of one entire bay of the nave of Rheims Cathedral, and of the chapels of the choir, sections of the flying buttresses, and details of the mouldings and plans of the piers, with the bond marked; plans of the Churches of Cambray and Vaucelles, now destroyed, and of the Tower of Laon, with an elevation and sketches of the rose windows at Chartres and at Lausanne; the latter from memory, and very incorrect. The sketches of Rheims appear to have been taken from the working drawings, for they shew precisely the sort of variation likely to occur between the original design and the work when executed. In Ornament, we have sketches of foliage, animals, grotesque and natural, and a variety of similar objects scattered through the book. In Furniture, designs for stall work, for a maison d'orologe, as he calls it, for a lectern and a monumental cross, and one or two other matters. Under the last head there are a variety of subjects, either for mural painting, for stained glass, or for sculpture; some are particularly beautiful, as that of Christ on plate 20, and again that on plate 31; there are also some very good sketches, of which the subject is not very intelligible, but which are well worth attention; a Descent from the Cross; The Twelve Apostles; figures and compositions emblematical of various sacred subjects, suitable as decoration in various ways in ecclesiastical buildings: the figures are generally very well draped. There are also sketches from nature, academic studies, with one or two evidently from classic subjects, as one of a sepulchral monument, and some apparently of bas-reliefs representing the Games of the Circus. It may be alleged by some that but little information of practical use can be gleaned from the |