Page:A History of Architecture in All Countries Vol 2.djvu/336

320 320 ITALIAN ARCmTECTUEE. Part IT. the character of a civic belfry than of a church tower, such as those previously mentioned. It is the highest and largest, and cor.sequently, according to the usual acceptation of the term, the finest of Italian towers. Its whole height is 396 ft., about two-thirds of which is a square ungainly mass, without either design or ornament of any im- portance. On this is placed an octagon and spire, which, though in themselves perhaps the best specitnens of their class in Italy, have too little connection either in design or dimensions with the tower on which they stand. The celebrated tower of the Ghirlandina at Modena is, perhajDS, one of the best to enable us to compare these Italian towers with the Cis-Alpine ones, since it possesses a well-proportioned spire, which is found in few of the others. From its date it belonus to the second division of the subject, having been commenced in the 13th and finished in the 14th century ; but, as before remarked, there is no line of distinction between the round-arched and pointed- arched styles in Italy, and as this campanile seems to be wholly without any ])ointed forms, we may describe it here. Its whole height is about 315 ft., of which less than 200 are taken up in the square part — which thus bears a less predominant propor- tion to the spire than any other Italian example. It is evidently meant to rival the famous German spires which had become such favorites in the age in which it was built ; and although it avoids many of the errors into which the excessive love of decoration and of tours de force led the Germans, still the result is far from satis- factory. The change from the square to the octagon is abrupt and unpleasing, and the spire itself looks too thick for the octagon. Everywhere there is a Avant of those buttresses and innnacles with which the Gothic architects knew so" well how to prepare for a transition of form, and to satisfy the mind that the composition was not only artistically but mechanically correct. The Italians never comprehended the aspiring principle of the Gothic styles, and con- sequently, though they had far more elegance of taste and used better details, their works hardly satisfy the mind to a greater extent than a modern classical church or museum. The same remarks apply to the towers of Siena, Lucca, Pistoja, and indeed to all in the north of Italy : all have some pleasing points, but none are entirely satisfactory. Xone have sufficient ornament, nor display enough design, to render them satisfactory in detail, nor have they sufficient mass to enable them to dispense with the evidence of tliought, and to impress by the simple grandeur of their dimensions.