The architecture of humanism; a study in the history of taste

30 THE

ARCHITECTURE

OF

HUMANISM

far such a distinction

between

construction and

design is legitimate for

architectureis

open todis-

pute.

Thequestion,whichisa

difficult

one,mustbe

examinedmorecloselyina

later chapter. Herewe

maynoticeit

merelyasaconfirmation

ofourstate-

ment, that it was not

from any new constructive

interest that the impulse

of the Renaissance style

was derived, or its progress defined.

On the con-

trary, it is frequently objected that the decorative

use of the Orders

so conspicuous in Renaissance;!

architecture did not express structure, that

it was

contrarytoconstruction,and,forthatreason,vicious^

Lastly,architecturaldesignwasnotdictated*except

toaslightdegree,bythematerialsemployed. This

physical explanation of

style

is much favoured by

modern critics, but it is singularly inapplicable to

theperiodweareconsidering. Italyisrichinevery

kindofbuildingmaterial,andthearchitectcouldsuit

'

hisheeds. Nodoubtthegreatblocksofstonewhicbf;

could bequarriedat Fiesoleassistedthebuildersof

the Pitti Palace, as it had assisted the Etruscans^

beforethem. Probablytheinspirationlayratherin

the Etruscan tradition than in the material itselfsi

Still,hadthe

Florentinebuildersrestedcontentwith

the Etruscan masonry, it might

be said, without

essential untruth, that
their materials determine^

theirstyle. But
the Florentinesbrought
to

perfec-

tionhotonlythemostmassiveof
Italianstyles,but