History of mediæval art . ndeserves to be considered as one of the most important monumentsof that style. The first two constructions, referable to the yearsbetween 830 and 864, and between 976 and 1008, were, it is true,basilical. It cannot be determined in how far the Lombardic struct-ures of the neighboring Friuli and of Milan were of influence upon * G. e L. Kreutz, La Basilica di S. Marco in Venezia. 1843 sq. 21 322 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMANIC EPOCH. these edifices, which may have owed quite as many of their peculiarcharacteristics to the models naturally presented by Ravenna. Theaddition
History of mediæval art . ndeserves to be considered as one of the most important monumentsof that style. The first two constructions, referable to the yearsbetween 830 and 864, and between 976 and 1008, were, it is true,basilical. It cannot be determined in how far the Lombardic struct-ures of the neighboring Friuli and of Milan were of influence upon * G. e L. Kreutz, La Basilica di S. Marco in Venezia. 1843 sq. 21 322 ARCHITECTURE OF THE ROMANIC EPOCH. these edifices, which may have owed quite as many of their peculiarcharacteristics to the models naturally presented by Ravenna. Theaddition of the transepts and the introduction of domes in the placeof horizontal wooden ceilings are probably referable to the recon-struction made between 1052 and 1071. The effects of these alter-ations upon the general arrangement are to be seen in the plan(Fig. 191), which is taken from Boitos work. It may be assumed that S. Marco was of decisive influence uponthe architecture of Venice during the Romanic epoch, although but. Fig. 191.—Plan of the Church of St. Mark in Venice. few remains have been preserved of the contemporary churches ofS. Leonardo, S. Catterina, S. Aponale, S. Secondo, and S. Croce inLuprio. The cathedrals of Grado, Torcello, and Murano, all ofwhich were rebuilt and extended during the tenth and eleventhcenturies, are of basilical arrangement, and exhibit the influencesof Ravenna. On the other hand, the cruciform and concentric planof S. Fosca in Torcello appears, from the date of its erection, ratheras a prototype than as a copy of S. Marco. In striking contrast to the Byzantine traditions of Venice, Cen-tral Italy long retained the classic architectural methods in com- ITALY. 323 parative purity. The city of Rome, especially, clung to the earlyChristian types with great persistency, and the construction andrestoration of the basilicas referable to the Romanic epoch so close-ly followed the ancient patterns that antique materials continued tobe directly emp
Size: 1703px × 1467px
Photo credit: © The Reading Room / Alamy / Afripics
License: Licensed
Model Released: No
Keywords: ., bookcentury1800, bookdecade1890, bookpublishernewyorkharperbros
