Ut contra judiciorum varietates superesset regressus ad veniam, velut emendaturo LONDON: PRINTED FOR J. TAYLOR, AT THE ARCHITECTURAL LIBRARY, PREFACE. In the year 1800, were published "Anecdotes of the Arts;" in which a cursory view was given of the architecture of this country. I have been induced upon that foundation to attempt a superstructure, and sedulously to correct the errours which certain criticks were eager to impute to ignorance and partiality. My views and intention were totally mistaken by them, as nothing was so distant from my mind, as to aspire to teach. Solely from the love of architecture, I have been induced to form opinions of the works of architects. Leaving the professors of this science in undisturbed possession of their chairs, let me be allowed the privilege of a private gentleman to converse as freely on this as on any other subject. If I may be indulged in an architectural phrase, I give this hint at the portico of my building, and proceed to offer some account of my whole plan. Of the origin of what is termed Gothick, the hypotheses are so various, and perhaps unsatisfactory, that every writer on the subject has advanced his own opinion. I have conjectured, that upon the decline of Grecian and Roman architecture, after the building of the Santa Sophia at Constantinople and the San Marco at Venice; the Baptistery at Pisa, by Dioti Salvi, is the great prototype of arches, pediments, and those ornamental particles which are now confined to the Gothick style. Respecting that branch of it, which has through successive æras been practised in this country, and is, in fact, become national, I have attempted a classification; considering not merely the opposition of the pointed to the round arch, but endeavouring by other discriminations to fix peculiar styles to their respective dates. a A critick of high respectability, and who may be said to have called in the aid of metaphysicks to generalize the principles of art, has declared, that "if we ask what is meant by pure Gothick, we can receive no satisfactory answer-there are no rules, no proportions-and consequently no * Knight's Inquiry, p. 159, |