Survey
* Your assessment is very important for improving the workof artificial intelligence, which forms the content of this project
Download The Social Meaning of Classical Style Public Architecture in
Document related concepts
History of architecture wikipedia , lookup
Renaissance architecture wikipedia , lookup
Constructivist architecture wikipedia , lookup
Greek Revival architecture wikipedia , lookup
Italianate architecture wikipedia , lookup
Ancient Greek architecture wikipedia , lookup
Ottoman architecture wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of Bermuda wikipedia , lookup
Renaissance Revival architecture wikipedia , lookup
Sacred architecture wikipedia , lookup
Gothic secular and domestic architecture wikipedia , lookup
English Gothic architecture wikipedia , lookup
Neoclassicism wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of Norway wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of Indonesia wikipedia , lookup
Stalinist architecture wikipedia , lookup
Contemporary architecture wikipedia , lookup
Modern architecture wikipedia , lookup
Korean architecture wikipedia , lookup
Russian architecture wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of the United Kingdom wikipedia , lookup
Australian residential architectural styles wikipedia , lookup
French architecture wikipedia , lookup
Classical order wikipedia , lookup
International Style (architecture) wikipedia , lookup
Colonial architecture of Indonesia wikipedia , lookup
Neoclassical architecture wikipedia , lookup
Mathematics and architecture wikipedia , lookup
Postmodern architecture wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of Switzerland wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of Singapore wikipedia , lookup
Architecture of Italy wikipedia , lookup
Architectural theory wikipedia , lookup
Architecture wikipedia , lookup
Transcript
The social meaning of classical style public architecture in Adelaide in the 19th century HONOURS THESIS Deborah Arthur Bachelor of Archaeology Department of Archaeology School of Humanities Flinders University of South Australia October 2004 CONTENTS CONTENTS .................................................................................................................. i FIGURES ....................................................................................................................iii TABLES...................................................................................................................... vi DECLARATION........................................................................................................vii ABSTRACT ..............................................................................................................viii ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS ........................................................................................ ix CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION............................................................................... 1 CHAPTER 2 – STYLE AND SOCIAL MEANING IN ARCHAEOLOGY............... 6 Style and social meaning in historical archaeology ..................................................... 6 Classical style architecture – A background .............................................................. 11 Classical style architecture in Britain and British colonies........................................ 17 Classical style architecture in Adelaide...................................................................... 30 CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY............................................................................ 37 Study Area.................................................................................................................. 37 Fieldwork.................................................................................................................... 38 Variables for Data Collection..................................................................................... 40 Problems..................................................................................................................... 45 Bias............................................................................................................................. 47 Archival Research ...................................................................................................... 47 CHAPTER 4 – CLASSICAL STYLES IN ADELAIDE........................................... 48 Social and Functional Variables................................................................................. 48 Physical Variables ...................................................................................................... 53 CHAPTER 5 – SOCIAL MEANINGS OF CLASSICAL STYLES.......................... 65 Explicit Social Meanings............................................................................................ 66 Implicit Social Meanings............................................................................................ 77 Adelaide’s Social Meanings....................................................................................... 85 CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSIONS............................................................................... 86 REFERENCES........................................................................................................... 91 GLOSSARY OF TERMS ........................................................................................ 101 -i- APPENDIX 1 – CLASSICAL ARCHITECTURAL STYLES ............................... 109 APPENDIX 2 – CLASSICAL ARCHITECTURAL ORDERS .............................. 111 APPENDIX 3 – CLASSICAL STYLE BUILDINGS IN OTHER AUSTRALIAN COLONIES .............................................................................................................. 118 APPENDIX 4 – GOTHIC BUILDINGS IN ADELAIDE ....................................... 123 APPENDIX 5 – BUILDING RECORDING FORM ............................................... 124 APPENDIX 6 – DATABASE OF BUILDINGS RECORDED............................... 127 APPENDIX 7 – AUSTRALIAN ARCHITECTURAL STYLES............................ 129 APPENDIX 8 – HISTORY OF BUILDINGS IN ADELAIDE............................... 132 APPENDIX 9 – ARCHITECTS............................................................................... 164 - ii - FIGURES Figure 1.1 – El Capricho, residence, Barcelona, constructed 1883-1885 ................... 1 Figure 1.2 – Map of Australia, showing location of Adelaide in South Australia ...... 2 Figure 2.1 – Top-down and bottom-up approaches to the study of society .............. 10 Figure 2.2 – Claude Perrault’s representation of the five architectural orders, c. AD 1676 .................................................................................................... 12 Figure 2.3 – Colosseum, Rome, Italy ........................................................................ 13 Figure 2.4 – Temple of Fortuna Primigenia, Palestrina, Italy ................................... 16 Figure 2.5 – Theatre of Marcellus, Rome, Italy ........................................................ 16 Figure 2.6 – Cataneo’s Ideal City plan, 1567............................................................ 34 Figure 2.7 – Torrens Building, Victoria Square ........................................................ 36 Figure 3.1 – J. William’s map of Adelaide showing the town acres......................... 38 Figure 3.2 – Tuscan architectural order..................................................................... 42 Figure 3.3 – Tuscan architectural order .................................................................... 42 Figure 3.4 – Doric architectural order ....................................................................... 42 Figure 3.5 – Doric architectural order ....................................................................... 42 Figure 3.6 – Ionic architectural order ........................................................................ 42 Figure 3.7 – Ionic architectural order ....................................................................... 43 Figure 3.8 – Corinthian architectural order .............................................................. 43 Figure 3.9 – Corinthian architectural order ............................................................... 43 Figure 3.10 – Composite architectural order ............................................................ 43 Figure 3.11 – Composite architectural order ............................................................ 44 Figure 3.12 – Other architectural order .................................................................... 44 Figure 3.13 – Other architectural order ..................................................................... 44 Figure 3.14 – Other architectural order ..................................................................... 44 Figure 4.1 – Functional variables – Original purpose of buildings........................... 49 Figure 4.2 – Map of South Adelaide (city centre) and location of buildings ............ 50 Figure 4.3 – Economic conditions in Adelaide and the construction of classical style buildings ............................................................................................. 52 Figure 4.4 – Economic conditions in Adelaide and the construction of gothic style buildings ............................................................................................. 52 Figure 4.5 – Physical variables – Architectural style ................................................ 55 Figure 4.6 – Architectural styles and periods of their use......................................... 57 - iii - Figure 4.7 – Physical variables – Architectural order ............................................... 59 Figure 4.8 – Architectural orders and periods of their use ........................................ 60 Figure 4.9 – Architectural order and a building’s function ....................................... 61 Figure 4.10 – Physical variables – Symmetry of buildings....................................... 62 Figure 4.11 – Physical variables – Conventional features ........................................ 63 Figure 5.1 – King William Street in 1881, Oil on canvas by Charles Marchand...... 69 Figure 5.2 – North Terrace, Institute building and State Library, Jervois Wing....... 77 Figure A2.1 – Elements of an architectural order ................................................... 111 Figure A2.2 – Comparative Tuscan Orders by several Renaissance theorists ........ 112 Figure A2.3 – Greek Doric Order and various details............................................. 114 Figure A2.4 – Greek Ionic Order and some historical examples ............................ 115 Figure A2.5 – Greek Corinthian Order and some historical examples ................... 116 Figure A2.6 – Composite Order after Vignola........................................................ 117 Figure A3.1 – Parliament House, Melbourne.......................................................... 118 Figure A3.2 – Parliament House, Brisbane ............................................................. 118 Figure A3.3 – Treasury Building, Melbourne ......................................................... 119 Figure A3.4 – Treasury Building, Brisbane ............................................................ 119 Figure A3.5 – General Post Office, Sydney ............................................................ 120 Figure A3.6 – Town Hall, Sydney........................................................................... 120 Figure A3.7 – Law Courts, Melbourne ................................................................... 121 Figure A3.8 – Supreme Court, Hobart .................................................................... 121 Figure A3.9 – National Australian Bank, Brisbane................................................. 122 Figure A8.1 – Magistrates Court, c. 1860 ............................................................... 133 Figure A8.2 – Magistrates Court, 2004, northern façade ........................................ 133 Figure A8.3 – Institute building, c. 1864................................................................. 135 Figure A8.4 – Institute building, 2004, southern façade ......................................... 135 Figure A8.5 – Adelaide Club, 2004, northern façade.............................................. 136 Figure A8.6 – The Gallerie, c. 1903........................................................................ 137 Figure A8.7 – The Gallerie, 2004, northern façade................................................. 137 Figure A8.8 – Supreme Court, c. 1870s .................................................................. 139 Figure A8.9 – Supreme Court, 2004, northern façade ............................................ 139 Figure A8.10 – Proposed plan for General Post Office, c. 1867............................. 142 Figure A8.11 – General Post Office, 2004, southern and eastern facades .............. 142 Figure A8.12 – Town Hall, c. 1866......................................................................... 145 Figure A8.13 – Town Hall, 2004, western façade................................................... 145 - iv - Figure A8.14 – Treasury Buildings, c. 1866 (part of original 1839 single storey in right foreground)............................................................................... 147 Figure A8.15 – Treasury Building, 2004, southern façade ..................................... 147 Figure A8.16 – Botanic Hotel, c. 1880s .................................................................. 149 Figure A8.17 – Botanic Hotel, 2004, northern façade ............................................ 149 Figure A8.18 – Bank of South Australia, Royal coat of arms and carved stone work......................................................................................... 150 Figure A8.19 – Bank of South Australia, 2004, eastern façade .............................. 151 Figure A8.20 – Bank of South Australia, 2004, eastern façade .............................. 151 Figure A8.21 – Bank of Adelaide, c. 1889.............................................................. 153 Figure A8.22 – Bank of Adelaide, 2004, eastern façade......................................... 153 Figure A8.23 – Ambassadors Hotel, c.1890............................................................ 155 Figure A8.24 – Ambassadors Hotel, c 1969............................................................ 155 Figure A8.25 – Ambassadors Hotel, 2004, eastern façade...................................... 155 Figure A8.26 – Proposed plan for Torrens Building, published in Frearson’s Weekly, 25 September 1880.............................................................. 157 Figure A8.27 – Torrens Building, 2004, western façade ........................................ 157 Figure A8.28 – Newmarket Hotel, c. 1930 ............................................................. 158 Figure A8.29 – Newmarket Hotel, 2004, northern façade ...................................... 158 Figure A8.30 – Jervois Wing, detail of level 2 window.......................................... 159 Figure A8.31 – State Library, Jervois Wing, 2004, southern and eastern facades.. 160 Figure A8.32 – Parliament House on 12 November 1918 (19th century section) ... 163 Figure A8.33 – Parliament House, 2004, southern and eastern facades ................. 163 -v- TABLES Table 4.1 – Social and Functional variables.............................................................. 49 Table 4.2 – Physical variables ................................................................................... 54 Table A1.1 – Classical architectural styles over history.......................................... 110 Table A.4.1 – Gothic style public buildings, constructed in the 19th century in Adelaide – social and functional variables ....................................... 123 - vi - DECLARATION I certify that this thesis does not incorporate, without acknowledgment, any material previously submitted for a degree or diploma in any university; and that to the best of my knowledge and belief it does not contain any material previously published or written by another person except where due reference is made in the text. Signed, Deborah Arthur October 2004 - vii - ABSTRACT Adelaide (South Australia’s capital city) has a vast number of classical style public buildings in the city centre. Many of these buildings were constructed throughout the 19th century, and are still standing today. Classical style public buildings in three locations: the northern part of King William Street, North Terrace, and Victoria Square, were analysed for this study. Fieldwork recorded the physical attributes of the buildings, while historical research noted the social and functional attributes. The main aim of this study was to discuss the social meanings of classical style public architecture in Adelaide in the 19th century. Other aims were to examine the types of classical styles present in Adelaide, whether these styles were prevalent on public buildings in other Australian capitals and in other British colonies, and what the influences were for the choice of architectural style. Analysis of architectural style in Adelaide has shown that architects and other influential individuals were emulating the behaviour of British elite, and copying historical trends for classical styles. At the same time there was some resistance against the strict rules governing traditional forms of classical architecture, providing new styles and orders, which formed different social meanings. - viii - ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS I would like to thank the Directors of Thomson Rossi (Architect Firm), Marino Rossi and Simon Thomson, and the staff there: for little did they know, they indirectly got me interested in architecture through working for them in an administrative capacity for the past 7 years (4 years full-time), and I learnt a lot about architectural concepts during my time there. I would like to thank Anne Geddes (Lecturer, Classics Department, Adelaide University), Tim Owen (PhD, Flinders University), Lyn Travar (Part-time Lecturer, Architecture Department, Adelaide University), and Mathew Johnson (Professor, Archaeology Department, University of Southampton, United Kingdom) for their initial guidance and suggestions for my thesis proposal, whilst I was developing my idea of studying classical style buildings in Adelaide between October and December 2003. I would like to thank Heather Hales (Manager, The Royal Australian Institute of Architects, SA Chapter) for suggesting I contact, and for providing contact details for, Christine Garnaut (Research Fellow, Louis Laybourne Smith School of Architecture and Design, University of South Australia) and Julie Collins (Archivist, Australian Architecture Archives and History Research Group, University of South Australia). - ix - Julie Collins (Archivist, Australian Architecture Archives and History Research Group, University of South Australia) helped me locate information on 19th century buildings and architects in Adelaide, and she gave me contact details for further information. Julie’s assistance was invaluable to this study. Julie’s sister, Susan Collins, also helped me on certain occasions locate information in the archives, and her help was appreciated. Christine Garnaut (Research Fellow, Louis Laybourne Smith School of Architecture and Design, University of South Australia) directed me to some additional architectural publications and archive repositories in Adelaide, and her advice was appreciated. I would like to thank Gini Lee (Architecture Department, University of South Australia), and Anne Geddes (Lecturer, Classics Department, University of Adelaide) for their time in seeing me and providing advice on further directions for my thesis. Di Smith gave me valuable feedback on what was then my ‘History’ chapter, which was appreciated. Many of my friends were helpful in putting my thesis together; Roger Cross for the loan of his digital camera; Janine Powell for the loan of her book on colonial Adelaide; and to everyone studying Honours this year, and to others who attended the Honours seminars for their feedback on this study. Natasha Paling was particularly helpful in her discussions about my study when I was struggling to grasp key archaeological concepts. -x- I would especially like to thank Aaron Lindsay: for the loan of his digital camera; for the loan of his laptop to store a backup of my thesis; for borrowing books for me from the University of South Australia library that were helpful; for giving me the lovely and helpful gift of a scanner, printer and copier (all-in-one) for my birthday in September 2004; and mostly for being so supportive over the entire year. Thank-you! My family have been extremely supportive over this year, and I appreciate everything they have done. Mum – thank-you for yummy dinners and cups of tea. Dad – thank-you for sending an email out to all your friends early in the year to see if any of them had history books on Adelaide; and thank-you for taking the time to read the final copy of my thesis for grammatical errors. Mum and dad – thank-you very much for all your help, and for understanding the pressures this year has brought. My supervisor Heather Burke (Lecturer and Honours Co-ordinator, Archaeology Department, Flinders University) has been an outstanding asset in my Honours year. Her guidance, suggestions, knowledge in my study area, motivation, loan of some of her books and offers of references has helped me immensely. Our regular meetings meant I always had something to say, and even when I didn’t think I did, I still managed to talk about things for my allotted hour. Heather did not only discuss things in meetings, but she responded immediately with email queries, even on weekends. Thank-you for all your time and effort in supervising me this year! - xi - CHAPTER 1 – INTRODUCTION Why undertake a study on architectural style and social meaning in archaeology? Public and private architecture are a product of design, construction and use by people. Archaeologists study people and their cultures, and historical archaeologists specifically study sites from the modern period in conjunction with written records and other kinds of information (Orser and Fagan 1995:275). Architecture changes over time, and analysis of this can assist in the identification and understanding of the social context of a region or group of people (Stark 1999:25). The types of materials used to construct buildings, the size of buildings, their function, architectural style, and other factors, all change over time, and may vary from region to region. In some parts of the world there are distinctive styles of architecture, such as that by Antoni Gaudí in Barcelona, Spain (Editorial Escudo De Oro 2002). In other parts of the world greater similarities exist between the styles of architecture used in different contexts. One such similarity is in the use of classical style architecture on public buildings. Figure 1.1 – El Capricho, residence, Barcelona, constructed 1883-1885 [Source: Editorial Escudo De Oro 2002:15] -1- Classical style architecture had its origins in ancient Greece and Rome (Summerson 1963:8). There was a renewed interest in classical style architecture in the Renaissance period (15th – 18th centuries AD), specifically in relation to ancient Rome (Maitland 1984:11; Morgan and Gilbert 1969:158; Adam 1990:22). This interest also extended to other forms of material culture in the western world, such as jewellery and art, and a taste for things ‘antique’ (Maitland 1984:32; Leone and Silberman 1995:128; Summerson 1963:18; Hope 2003:161). In fact archaeology can be argued to have began with the study and collection of such things (Chilton 1999:1). This study aims to look at classical style public architecture in Adelaide in the 19th century. Adelaide is the capital city of the state of South Australia (Figure 1.2). The research question is: what is the social meaning of classical style public architecture in Adelaide in the 19th century? The sub-research questions are: what types of classical styles were present on buildings; were these classical styles used on public buildings in other Australian capitals; were these classical styles used on public buildings in other British colonies; and what were the influences in the choice of architectural style in Adelaide? Figure 1.2 – Map of Australia, showing location of Adelaide in South Australia [Source: Marsden, Stark and Sumerling 1990:17] -2- The research questions will be answered by investigations into architectural reports, books, journals, newspapers, unpublished reports and papers, and web sources, and through undertaking fieldwork on public buildings in Adelaide. Style has been studied in archaeology for over a century (Renfrew and Bahn 2000:419), and Wobst (1999:119-120) considers it to be one of the most interesting and dynamic aspects of material culture to study. Buildings are one form of material culture that usually illustrate slow changes in styles and other design aspects. Buildings are also a very public display of the tastes and social status of their owners, especially the external façade. Public buildings are constructed for public use, and are therefore a measure of a region’s influences for stylistic choice. There are both hidden and open aspects of style, and these will be analysed in relation to explicit and implicit social meanings (Wobst 1999:122). Explicit social meanings are comments or actions by contemporary observers and can be found in documentary records, such as newspapers, letters and books. In contrast, implicit social meanings are messages decoded by the observers of the material culture in a specific social context (Johnson 1993:29; Carr and Neitzel 1995B:454). An essential element in stylistic studies is a unified and integrated theoretical framework (Carr and Neitzel 1995A:4; Carr and Neitzel 1995B:454; Roe 1995:27), because archaeology does not occur within a vacuum, but co-exists next to other disciplines and can be co-ordinated with them for a better understanding of material culture. Several theoretical studies have been examined in relation to style and social meaning, however there are several readings that take these ideas further, through linking architectural style to wider issues of identity, ideology and capitalism (Wilkie -3- and Bartoy 2000:747; Revell 2000:1; Eckardt 2000:8; Fincham 2000:32; Burke 1999:ix; Matthews 1998:254). This study will only investigate one of these aspects in depth: how the classical style was used to create an identity for the city of Adelaide. Several studies have been undertaken on architectural style in Australia (Finnimore ND; Herman 1963; Morgan and Gilbert 1969; Freeland 1972; Johnson 1980; Langmead and Schenk 1983; Page and Ingpen 1985; Apperly, Irving and Reynolds 1989), however as they are not archaeological studies, they have not examined the social meanings of architectural style. A few studies have analysed both of these aspects (Burke 1999; Hope 2003), as have several studies overseas (Glassie 1975; Deetz 1977; Kelso 1992; Johnson 1993; Matthews 1998; Johnson 2002). Historical archaeologists recognise stylistic studies, and their links to capitalism and other wider concepts, as relevant to how the British Empire expanded (Mathews 1998; Burke 1999). Looking at the architectural style of public buildings can tell us how colonists in new nations saw themselves, and the social meanings can be interpreted through written and archaeological records. The style of Adelaide’s public buildings was intended to illustrate the colony’s new power, strength, control and order, both to Britain and to other Australian and British colonies. The fact that public buildings constructed in the 19th century are still standing in the 21st century is a testament to their continued use and significance, and many of their uses have not changed over time. The study of architectural style in Australia is unique, in that prior to ‘European contact’ there was no ‘architecture’ as it is defined in the western world. -4- This study is a significant addition to archaeological studies into architectural style and social meaning in Australia, and it offers a method of interpretation for one form of material culture in Adelaide. Both the ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ approaches to studying society have been employed in this study (Gamble 2001:79), allowing for various influences to be taken into consideration, both at the level of the individual and society. By necessity, other disciplines have been incorporated into this study, such as architecture and history, to give a more rounded view. Chapter 2 will provide a background to the study of style and social meaning in historical archaeology, present a background to classical style architecture, discuss the influences that affect the choice of architectural style, examine classical style architecture in Britain and other British colonies, and finally discuss classical style architecture in Adelaide. Chapter 3 will provide an explanation of the methods used for this study, such as the choice of study area, the organisation of the fieldwork component, the selection of variables, problems encountered, sources of bias, and the process of archival research undertaken. The data will then be presented in Chapter 4 as per the variables recorded. Chapter 5 will discuss the social meanings of the classical styles and other classical architectural elements found in Adelaide, and Chapter 6 will draw some conclusions from this study. Several complex terms are explained in the Glossary of Terms at the end of the thesis. -5- CHAPTER 2 – STYLE AND SOCIAL MEANING IN ARCHAEOLOGY Style and social meaning in historical archaeology It is important at this stage to explain some terms and to provide a setting for this study in the field of historical archaeology. Archaeology is a multi-disciplinary area of study associated with people in the past and all aspects of their lives, such as where they lived and worked and what they ate. Historical archaeology focuses on the study of cultural remains in conjunction with historical records and other kinds of information (Orser and Fagan 1995:275; Deetz 1977:5). The word ‘style’ is derived from the Latin word stylus, which is a writing implement (Renfrew and Bahn 2000:419). Initially style was used to describe different types of handwriting, which is an individual attribute. Now it is applied broadly to classify different types of material culture, such as architecture, ceramics and clothing, not only at an individual level, but also for an entire social group or specific region. The concept of ‘style’ has been studied by several academics in the disciplines of archaeology, history and architecture (Herman 1963; Morgan and Gilbert 1969; Baumgart 1969; Freeland 1972; Adam 1990; Janes 2000; Gamble 2001; Maitland 1984). Style is essentially used to assess the degree of visual resemblance between objects. If there are similar characteristics then this leads to a classification of types. Style is studied in the discipline of archaeology for several reasons. It gives us a way of assessing human interaction with the environment, and it aids archaeological analysis and interpretation of material culture (Conkey and Hastorf 1990:1). Studies relating to style in archaeology assist in the understanding of material culture, which -6- is a form of non-verbal communication that can be used to express individual or group identity (Wiessner 1990:108; Grahame 1998:3; Janes 2000:84). Gamble (2001:108-9) notes four approaches to the definition of style: culture history, processual, interpretive, and neo-Darwinian. The culture history approach sees style as a group of objects sharing similar characteristics (Prown 1993:4-5), while in some processual approaches style is viewed as a means of non-verbal communication to find identity (Wiessner 1990:108). Shanks and Tilley (1987:144) describe style as part of an interpretive approach through an understanding of the meaning of patterns in material culture, and the social conditions of its production. In contrast, the neoDarwinian approach sees style as denoting those forms that do not have a detectable selective value (Dunnell 1978:199). Prown (1993), Wiessner (1990), and Shanks and Tilley (1987) all agree that there are inherent social characteristics in stylistic analysis, which are linked to social identity (Gamble 2001:109-110). Drawing upon these diverse approaches to style, my definition of style is a classification given to objects with similar characteristics that can be used as a way to source social meaning. Architecture is one of the most public and direct forms of media for expressing political goals and ideologies (Adam 1990:38; Morris 1995:422). Architecture is a clear visual representation of a culture. Part of the research focus for this thesis is architectural style, which is one of several methods that can be used to classify a building (Apperly et al 1989:15). Other methods are a building’s function, the material used, or its structural systems (Canter and Tagg 1980:2; Voss and Young 1995:85). Studies into architectural style help us to imagine the type of people who designed, paid for, and used particular buildings. This allows us to understand a little more about the society in which those people lived. -7- When undertaking a study on architectural style, it is important to remember that some styles were not known at the time by the title we refer to them today. The term ‘Neoclassical’ for example, was used in the early 20th century in Canada to classify the style of architecture popular there from the early 19th century, and the French, British and Americans adopted it (Maitland 1984:10). Other authors use the terms ‘Classical Revival’ or ‘Greek Revival’ for the architecture in Canada in the early 19th century, however these terms do not describe the new ideas this style included (Maitland 1984:10). This is important from an archaeological perspective, as I am using today’s terminology to study 19th century buildings in Adelaide. An interesting study was carried out at the University of Pennsylvania to see if the layperson viewed architecture differently to the architect (Hershberger 1980:22). This is important to know as an archaeologist, particularly in terms of trying to ascertain what people thought about buildings in the past. In the Pennsylvania study, different groups of students, some with architecture backgrounds and some without, were asked their views on the meaning of architecture (Hershberger 1980:22). It was found that the education of the students had little effect on how they viewed architecture, as they all tended to view it in a similar way (Hershberger 1980:39). Exactly how the students viewed architecture unfortunately was not recorded by Hershberger (1980), but this is an interesting concept, as it is not possible to go back and ask the layperson what they thought about the classical style architecture in Adelaide. This can only be inferred from the sets of characteristics observed in public buildings, the connotations of these characteristics, and the social conditions surrounding both. -8- Although the disciplines of archaeology and architecture study style, they do not take it to mean the same thing (Burke 1999:29). In archaeology, style is analysed to source its social meaning and identity, which can be applied to discussions in areas such as capitalism, colonisation and ideology (Burke 1999:ix; Purser 2003:295, 313). In architecture, style is studied to classify buildings, and discuss their physical attributes, influences and developments over time (Adam 1990:2-46). Therefore, this study goes beyond discussions on what styles were present in Adelaide in the 19th century to an analysis of the social meanings of these styles in regards to archaeology. Carr and Neitzel (1995B:454) state the “directions that studies of style in archaeology take in the future will depend not only on the theories of social groups and culture that archaeologists assume… [but it will] also depend basically on what archaeologists explicitly or implicitly think [of] the artisan, as a human being, and the human condition to be”. Stylistic studies in archaeology need to be analysed in regards to both explicit and implicit meanings, because this gives us a better understanding of the social context in the region. Meanings are not automatically understood, rather, they are established through context by the observer (Johnson 1993:34). An individual may be taught in a certain way (i.e. through cultural norms for designing architecture), however this background will always be transformed and reinforced through their individual actions (i.e. deviations from cultural norms) (Johnson 1993:34-35). This means that an individual will have their own influences and reasons for using a certain type of architectural style, such as who they were taught by and what they were taught, but they may also be aware of what architectural styles were popular in the past and those that are currently being used in different regions. -9- Johnson (1993:31) sees culture as more than a system of signs and rules governing society. Meaning is variable and is produced by people working within a cultural system, who negotiate and transform material culture and its existing meanings to produce new meanings. New meanings may produce new types of architectural styles or variations of architectural elements within existing styles. Gamble (2001:79) discusses two approaches to the study of society, and therefore of social meaning: ‘top-down’ and ‘bottom-up’ (Figure 2.1). The top-down view is where individuals are born into a society and they inherit its culture. The bottom-up view has individuals negotiating and transforming society into existence. Certain individuals may influence society, but there are also larger influences occurring (Gamble 2001:80). Both the top-down and bottom-up approaches are relevant to this study, because each reinforces the other and gives us a wider understanding of society. Society Institutions Groups Households Individuals Figure 2.1 – Top-down and bottom-up approaches to the study of society [Source: Based on the model by Gamble (2001:79).] - 10 - Classical style architecture – A background There are many different types of classical style architecture, such as Romanesque, Renaissance, Palladian and Italianate (Appendix 1). These names are used to classify certain types of buildings that share similar characteristics. Classical style architecture originated in ancient Greece and Rome (Summerson 1963:7), and its aim “has always been to achieve a demonstrable harmony of parts” (Summerson 1963:8). Classical architectural elements were reintroduced in the Renaissance period (15th – 18th centuries AD), and the Renaissance theorists discussed classical elements in more detail and with stricter rules (Curl 1992:12). Marcus Vitruvius Pollio was a Roman architect and author whose works on architecture are the only complete set known to have survived from antiquity (Curl 1992:12). Vitruvius stated that architecture depended on ‘order, arrangement, harmony, symmetry, propriety and economy’ (Curl 1992:12), which can be said to be the ‘classical ideal’. The concept of harmony related to the proportions of a building, the order of elements, and the use of simple ratios. Classical architecture has elements that can be traced back to ancient Greece and Rome, such as the Orders (Curl 1992:13). Vitruvius provided the earliest descriptions of the Orders, which were expanded during the Renaissance period (Summerson 1963:9; Curl 1992:16). Each classical style uses a particular Order or a combination of architectural Orders. There are five such Orders: Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, and Composite (Summerson 1963:9) (Figure 2.2). The Orders refer to the design and arrangement of the column and superstructure units (entablature) of a building (Apperly et al 1989:281) (Appendix 2 – Figure A2.1). The architectural elements of each Order are described in Appendix 2. - 11 - Tuscan Doric Ionic Corinthian Composite Figure 2.2 – Claude Perrault’s representation of the five architectural orders, c. AD 1676 [Source: Summerson 1963:57] Some scholars argue that the architectural Orders have ‘personalities’. This was possibly derived from the writings of Vitruvius in the 1st century AD. Further significance was given to the personalities of the Orders by Renaissance theorists from the 15th century AD (Summerson 1963:12; Curl 1992:12). The Tuscan was said to be tough, primitive and manly (Curl 1992:34). The Doric has the “proportion, strength and grace of a man’s body” (Summerson 1963:12), and has always been - 12 - regarded as male. The Ionic has “feminine slenderness” (Summerson 1963:12), and has generally been regarded as unsexed. The Corinthian has “the slight figure of a girl” (Summerson 1963:12), and has always been regarded as female. Therefore, each Order has associated ‘personalities’ or gender attributes. Renaissance theorists discussed the uses of the Orders in more detail, such as Leon Battista Alberti in the 15th century, Sebastiano Serlio, Donato Bramante, Giacomo Barozzi da Vignola and Andrea Palladio in the 16th century, and Vincenzo Scamozzi in the 17th century (Summerson 1963:9-11). In his treatise, Quattro Libri dell’ Architecttura (The Four Books of Architecture), Palladio discussed the architectural Orders, gave examples of them, and emphasised the rules of proportion and the importance of harmony with their use (Clerk 1984:9). He affirmed the three goals of architecture as stated by Vitruvius: utility, durability, and beauty (Clerk 1984:9; Curl 1992:12). These goals are especially related to classical architecture, as they are beautiful compositions, many of which have survived for long periods of time, although their functions have sometimes changed, thus changing their social meanings. An example is the Colosseum in Rome for which construction started in AD 70 (Adam 1990:12). It was originally used as an auditorium for gladiatorial games and other social purposes, and it is now a tourist attraction, as are many other ancient classical monuments (Figure 2.3). Figure 2.3 – Colosseum, Rome, Italy [Source: Photo taken by Deborah Arthur, 24-07-02] - 13 - In the early 17th century, Serlio “called for the social rank and profession of the owners of private and public buildings to be reflected in the robustness or delicacy of the genus” (Tzonis and Lefaivre 1986:38). Basically, he advocated that people should display their social status through their choice in architectural style and order. Houses usually show the social status of their owner, as the style, material and construction methods are all a display of their personal wealth. People who construct public buildings do so with their own ideas of architectural style and its meanings, using the wealth of the proprietor. Serlio also recommended certain orders be used for specific types of buildings (Summerson 1963:12-13). He identified the Doric order as appropriate for churches dedicated to male saints (i.e. St Paul, St Peter, St George) and militant types in general. The Ionic order should be used for matronly saints, and also for men of learning. The Corinthian order should be used for virgins. The Tuscan order was suitable for fortifications and prisons, but the Composite order was not awarded any specific characteristics (Curl 1992:34). However, over time, the orders have often been used according to taste, circumstances and means (Summerson 1963:13), rather than these theoretical associations. Classical architectural elements impart to the observer a variety of messages of power, order and structure, which have been associated with classical buildings dating back to ancient Greece and Rome. Tzonis and Lefaivre (1986:273-274) discuss several meanings of classical architecture. It is linked to iconographic systems, such as ‘antiquization’, which is a similarity between “ancient regimes and contemporary political powers” (Tzonis and Lefaivre 1986:274). “Classical buildings have been mentioned as part of a movement of antiquization in the Renaissance and - 14 - as supporters of a militant culture of the same period, legitimizing the new world order of science, the market, industry, and a kind of limited democracy” (Tzonis and Lefaivre 1986:274). The political associations of large building projects and specific uses of monumental classical style architecture date back to the Roman Empire, but there are also more modern examples, such as the new government in Canada in the early 1860s (Cameron and Wright 1980:11). Many new governments want to demonstrate symbols of their strength and power, so they approved the construction of new public buildings, especially in classical styles because of their historical associations with strength and power. Palladian models were generally produced by the English government in Canada, and were therefore a symbol of political, economic, administrative, judicial and legislative presence (Clerk 1984:30). This obvious association between power, wealth and architecture is reflected in the social phenomenon of the term ‘classical’, itself related to the social order of the classici, the highest rank of the hierarchical social structure of ancient Rome (Tzonis and Lefaivre 1986:1). During the height of the Roman Empire, government and the military were all run by wealthy individuals, as they had both the power and resources necessary to coordinate them (Shotter 1994:2). The growth of the Empire led members of the governing class to amass large sums of money and material possessions, some of which was spent on major building projects (Shotter 1994:13). One such project was the Temple of Fortuna Primigenia at Palestrina, Italy (Figure 2.4), c. 80 BC, a large complex of buildings with porticos, colonnades, massive staircases, and exedras (Blagg 1983:30). At this site, the Doric order is used on the bottom level, Corinthian is used on the upper level, and Ionic elsewhere. The location of the orders on this - 15 - building was similar to other buildings, such as the Colosseum, c. AD 70, which has Doric on the ground floor, Ionic on the second floor, and Corinthian on the third floor (Summerson 1963:15), or the Theatre of Marcellus in Rome, Italy (Figure 2.5), which was the Doric order on the ground floor with the Ionic order on the second floor (Curl 1992:51). Figure 2.4 – Temple of Fortuna Primigenia, Palestrina, Italy [Source: Palestrina 2004] Figure 2.5 – Theatre of Marcellus, Rome, Italy [Source: Curl 1992:51] Western architecture in the 19th century was influenced by ideas originating from the Late Roman and Byzantine periods (Baumgart 1969:8). Roman architecture is partly derived from Greek architecture, which itself is derived from Egyptian, early Oriental and Creto-Mycenaean architecture. Over time different classical styles appeared, each taking something from their historic precedents. Some classical styles have been referred to as revivals of earlier styles (i.e. Renaissance Revival), while others have been named new styles (i.e. Palladian) (Appendix 1). Most classical - 16 - styles used during the Renaissance, and in following periods, originated in Europe, and were popular in this region for a period of time, as well as being used in other parts of the western world. Classical style architecture in Britain and British colonies Glassie (1975:114) explains that to understand the choice in architectural style and other aspects of designing a building, you need to understand its social context, such as the influences of the clients who paid for the building and the restrictions of the local environment. To explain the social context for the use of classical architectural styles between the 15th to 19th centuries in the western world, comparisons can be made to Britain and other British colonies. There were several factors that influenced the choice of architectural style in a location. They included: Historical trends of classical styles; Fashions and trends in Britain and other parts of Europe; The function of a building; Regional influences; Individual influences. There have been numerous archaeological and architectural studies undertaken on architectural style in the United Kingdom (Johnson 1992; Johnson 1993; Johnson 2002), United States of America (Glassie 1975; Deetz 1977; Kelso 1992; Matthews 1998; Bell 2002), Canada (Cameron and Wright 1980; Carter 1983; Maitland 1984; Clerk 1984), Fiji (Purser 2003) and Australia (Finnimore ND; Pickhaver 1973; Pikusa 1986; Burke 1999; Hope 2003). These studies have found similar influences - 17 - on the ways people chose architectural style and its social meanings. In the western world, many people wanted to make associations with aspects of power, wealth, order and control, which they did by connections to classical style architecture. Historical trends of classical styles The historical trends behind classical styles are evident from the similar locations throughout the western world that have classical style buildings. Classical styles of architecture are evident on public buildings in Canada, America, Australia and Britain from the 15th century through to the 19th century, and they follow similar trends to when a style was popular (Maitland 1984; Matthews 1998; Johnson 2002; Hope 2003). The Second Empire style, for example, expanded from France to Britain and then to British colonies, where it demonstrated prosperity in its rich detail (Apperly et al 1989:69). The style was only popular in Britain for a short period, mainly due to the large expense required to build in this style, and because other classical styles were becoming popular. In the 1870s and 1880s in Canada, styles such as Second Empire were popular for public buildings, which was an extension of their popularity in Britain at the same time (Cameron and Wright 1980:8). The Second Empire style also became popular in Australia around the same time, between the 1860s and 1890s (Apperly et al 1989:69). The Second Empire style in Canada was associated with historical trends in other parts of the western world, and was used to illustrate power and strength for public buildings in association with the government at the time. The British government in Canada held architectural competitions for the War Office and the Foreign Office in the late 19th century (Cameron and Wright 1980:10). Both the first and second prize - 18 - winners were Second Empire style designs. The publicity that surrounded this competition drew public attention to the Second Empire style, which enhanced its popularity at the time. The style came to symbolise the strength and power of the new central government in Canada (Cameron and Wright 1980:11). The mere physical presence of many of the classical buildings in Canada would have helped to popularise a particular style (Cameron and Wright 1980:17). “The intangible qualities embodied by these large structures, such as stability, wealth, progress, power, and so forth, were desirable associations for aspiring gentlemen” (Cameron and Wright 1980:17). According to Cameron and Wright (1980:22), the Second Empire style denoted the desired effects of conservatism, stability, respectability and opulence. Any new nation would want to show these and other symbols of strength and power, and many classical styles were able to provide these social and political meanings. Fashions and trends in Britain and other parts of Europe The fashions and trends in Britain and other parts of Europe provided several influences for choice in architectural style. Due to the availability of pattern books, architects were copying styles, and they were being adapted to local conditions. Architects and builders used pattern books to elaborate their ideas, rather than as sources for entire plans or elevations (Maitland 1984:33; Clerk 1984:12). In the British colonies, most pattern books were of British origin (i.e. Architectural Association Sketchbook 1891), although a few came from France (i.e. Rondelet 1863). Some pattern books showed entire buildings, while others showed details of orders and other classical elements (Maitland 1984:34-35). Some American pattern - 19 - books were published in the late 19th century by architects. Many building designers in Canada, as in other British colonies, relied on using pattern books and other publications as references, because architectural training was rudimentary in the 19th century (Clerk 1984:15). The usual practice in the late 18th and 19th centuries in Australia, and in other British colonies, was to “import and adapt” styles, through the use of pattern books and architectural periodicals (Apperly et al 1989:17), rather than to create new styles from scratch. Burke (1999:98, 143) studied the various styles on public and private buildings in Armidale, Australia, between 1840 and 1930. In Armidale there is no definite style being used, however there is conformity with the street grid to the world view of order and control (Burke 1999:175). Throughout the 19th century classical features are used on public buildings, such as porticoes, pilasters, columns and piers (Burke 1999:143, 145). The Georgian style is used on several public buildings in Armidale in the 19th century, as it was in other British colonies, such as India. Pattern books were no doubt influential in the choice of style, but so were other types of published architectural works. Matthews (1998:244) studied the Georgian style for houses in Annapolis, Maryland, during the 1760s and 1770s. The works of Renaissance theorists had been republished in English in Annapolis (Matthews 1998:250), thus providing a source of renewed interest in classical architecture and its meaning. Another factor in stylistic choice in America was the formation of elite groups and their architectural tastes. The ‘Rule of Taste’ group in Annapolis for example, were a group of influential individuals who used print media to propagate their desired style, derived from both the Classical and Renaissance periods - 20 - (Matthews 1998:246-249). The group was influential due to the wealth of its members and their relatively high status in society. Deetz (1977:112) considers the most important factor for the introduction of the Georgian style in America was the large number of architectural books around from the late 17th century onwards. Deetz (1977:39) calls the influence of the Renaissance in the Anglo-American world in the mid 18th century a ‘Georgian’ world view, which is the architectural style that typifies most buildings at that time. The Georgian style shares similar characteristics to other classical styles, such as a symmetrical façade, and simple yet elegant detailing around windows, doors and roof eaves. Glassie’s (1975) study of middle Virginian houses “shows that the Georgian world view manifests itself in material culture in a bilaterally symmetrical, three-part form” (Deetz 1977:43), which gives the architectural style its name. This new order and way of viewing the world has a strong emphasis on the individual and their place within their culture. Their house forms identify the people with the cultural norms of the time. Another world view has been discussed by scholars in contrast to the Georgian world view (Deetz 1977:39-40). The ‘Medieval’ world view let nature take its course, and has been related to gothic architecture in Britain. The Georgian way was for people to create and control order, which then allowed them to control the environment. It appears that in Britain and its colonies, it was important to be seen to be in control of the environment, natural and built, and to be a powerful and orderly nation. Although there is a lot of discussion about the acceptance of the Georgian world view, Palkovich (in Leone and Potter 1988:215-216) discussed the possibility of its rejection. When there are deviations from the Georgian world view, they may have been accidental or deliberate choices by architects or other influential individuals. - 21 - In Australia, there was more than one dominant classical style of architecture, and these classical styles, in combination with other classical influences on society, can be termed a ‘Classical’ world view. The Georgian style was relevant to America, because that style was highly popular there. However, in Australia there were several classical styles popular, and these styles were influenced by local conditions, which slightly changed their compositions (i.e. hot climates, types of building material available). Architects were trying to create new meanings in their new environment. Classical styles provided a way for people to control space and movement, and create an impression of order, whilst still giving architects the freedom to make changes. The design by Wakefield and the plan for Adelaide’s city layout were both based on principles of this Classical world view. In the 17th century in England, “all educated people of the times were familiar with architectural precepts of taste, proportions and the Classic Orders” (Freeland 1972:4). This means that in western society, it was important to know what was popular in regards to architecture, and it seems the upper classes in society were especially aware of classical styles and their associated meanings. In the mid 18th century in America there were developments of scientific thought and Renaissance derived forms, which were both balanced and ordered (Deetz 1977:40). These developments followed the impact of the Renaissance on material culture in England after 1650. The link between popular architectural trends in Britain and their adoption in British colonies is true for most classical styles. William Kelso’s (1992:140) study of houses in Virginia in the 17th and 18th centuries demonstrated that they were designed to maintain associations with England. Even when people living in Virginia were - 22 - primarily native-born, the buildings were still showing signs of British architectural styles, such as the influence of classical design elements. This implies that people still wanted to be associated with Britain decades after the colonies were colonised. Perhaps those in power in Virginia, both in government and commercial enterprise, wanted to maintain such links with their founders. A specific European influence was the preference for anything antique or of classical origin. Material objects in museums and libraries in Victoria, and certain individuals such as Redmond Barry in Melbourne, who purchased books on ancient cultures for the Melbourne Public Library, also contributed towards the use of Egyptian elements in architecture in Australia (Hope 2003:161). Maitland (1984:32) states that when Canada was colonised by Britain, there was an interest in all things antique and rational, such as classical architecture. Museums and curiosity cabinets stored antique items, and public lectures on different subjects from antiquity were common. This means that people were not only interested in classical styles of architecture, but also in antique items from classical periods, due to their associations with ancient Greece and Rome. People were also interested in ‘rational’ things, through their associations with science and the western understanding of the natural world. Adaptations have been shown to classical architectural orders, such as the use of palm leaf column capitals in Melbourne, Australia (Hope 2003:178). Hope (2003:168-174) looked at the influence of Egyptian designs on public buildings and other monuments in Melbourne, between 1851 and 1939. There are several examples in Melbourne of column capitals with a lotus flower or papyrus bundles (Hope 2003:174-175), and many are owned by the Freemasons, who preferred this design for their buildings (Hope 2003:168-174). Hope argued that the Egyptian elements - 23 - symbolise the power of what lies within the building. Certain proponents, whether a government, private group or individual, were strong supporters of classical styles of architecture. It does not appear the meanings of buildings would be any different for government or private groups, as they all aimed to show their wealth and power through the building’s architectural style. Certain proponents in England were trying to encourage the development of a new classical architectural order in the late 1870s (Leeds 1880:100-101). In fact, premiums were being offered for a new design, but none of the submissions were worthy. The new order had to be different to the other five, but still classically derived. Leeds (1880:104) believed that studies of the orders by architects had limited their capacity to think, as they were merely copying the ideas of others. Leeds (1880:105) encouraged architects to break away from strict classical traditions and find their own meanings: At any rate, if we have actually studied the classical Orders to any purpose, and familiarized ourselves with the gusto of the antique generally, we ought to be able now to infuse something of the spirit and temperament of that style into our own conceptions. There were of course the traditionalists who designed classical buildings to specific rules of harmony and proportion, such as in ancient Greece and Rome, but there were also proponents for change (Leeds 1880:107). Leeds (1880:115) preferred the classical style to medieval, because it was “far better adapted for general application”. The classical style was used on public buildings with a variety of functions in Britain and the British colonies, which illustrates its flexibility. - 24 - The function of a building The function of a building is also related to its architectural style, as many government and commercial buildings were designed in different classical styles (Carter 1983; Hope 2003). One of the main architectural debates in British colonies was over the preference for classical or gothic styles. In the late 18th century in England, academics argued over which was the best architectural style to use for public buildings (Freeland 1972:93). In Britain, academic debate reached a truce when gothic style focused on ecclesiastical buildings and schools, and classical style focused on government and commercial buildings (Freeland 1972:93-4, 122). Gothic styles were popular in America and Canada in the 19th century mainly for religious buildings, but also residential buildings (Maitland 1984:122; Vlach 1995:142). The classical style met the functional and visual needs of the 19th century (Adam 1990:38). Architects in the western world generally accepted that a building’s appearance had to illustrate its use and meaning. Therefore, military buildings had to look like strong and powerful buildings to symbolise the government’s and military’s control of society in the region. In her study of vernacular architecture in Canada between 1750 and 1830, Clerk (1984:5) found that a building’s function had some relation to its architectural style. The popularity of the Palladian style in Canada followed its establishment in England between 1710 and 1750 (Clerk 1984:5). The Palladian style was used more for official buildings during the late 18th and early 19th centuries. Meaning was often closely tied to function. Carter (1983:4) examined court houses in Canada constructed in the 19th century, many of which were classical designs. Court houses were predominantly built in a variety of classical styles, because they were - 25 - instruments of justice and symbols of stability (Carter 1983:4), and because their architects wanted to evoke these images. The designs for court buildings were influenced by a range of social factors, including historical trends for classical styles, international fashions and trends, building materials available, the population in an area (which would affect the size of the building), and the funds available for its construction (Carter 1983:19). Even though court houses were military buildings, a variety of architectural styles and orders were used, therefore there seem to be no direct association with the buildings having personalities, as suggested by Vitruvius. Each of the five orders and a variety of classical styles were used on public buildings in Australia in the 19th century (Freeland 1972:97, 101; Apperly et al 1989). Classical designs were deemed suitable for public buildings of a variety of functions, such as commercial (i.e. banks, hotels) and government (i.e. post offices, libraries) (Freeland 1972:95) (Appendix 3). Regional influences Regional differences in the appearance of buildings in the same classical styles appear due to aspects such as the type, quality and quantity of local building materials, climate, or the topography of the landscape. Although houses in Middle Virginia were influenced by the fashions in Britain, some aspects were not suitable for local conditions, so compromises were made, such as adding a central hallway to houses (Glassie 1975:189). Glassie (1975:6) studied folk housing in Middle Virginia in the late 18th and 19th centuries. Some residential buildings were part brick and part stone due to a lack of building materials in the region (Glassie 1975:189). Many colonists in Canada and America wanted to associate themselves with the English culture and lifestyle, and its associated meanings of order, control and power. The - 26 - fact that local conditions affected the appearance of houses is important to note, as this was similar in all regions, depending on the topography and construction materials available. Another regional influence on the choice of architectural style is evident when examining public and private architecture in Levuka, Fiji (Purser 2003:293, 311). Fiji was colonised by the British in the 19th century. Building materials from Britain were brought to Fiji to make bungalows and other structures, such as churches and halls (Purser 2003:295). As the 19th century progressed there was greater regional diversity in the British Empire (Purser 2003:296). Vernacular buildings in Fiji started to take on different forms, such as the addition of verandahs, which was common in colonies with warm climates. Unfortunately, Purser (2003) did not define known styles for this region in her study. The new public buildings were “clearly intended to define political and economical leadership of an emerging town elite” (Purser 2003:312), as they coincided with considerable boom periods in the economy where new governments wanted to show their power and define their own identity (Purser 2003:311). The new colonists wanted to define a new identity in their new environment. Individual influences Individual people can be influential in the choice of architectural style. Many architects wanted to design buildings that would be considered beautiful and practical, and the style of the building was a big part of this. Another part of this was how other people perceived the building. Many people wanted to emulate the social elite or show that their town (in relation to government and educational buildings), their company (in relation to commercial buildings), or their denomination (in - 27 - relation to religious buildings) was giving the viewer a particular set of messages often linked to concepts of order, power, control and rationality (Bell 2002:254). There are several types of people involved in a building’s design and construction. Architects are one group involved in the building process. Other groups are those who fund the building, those who construct it, and those who occupy it. The people who provide money for the building usually demand that the cost does not exceed the budget, that it should be expertly designed and built, and it should suit their taste (Apperly et al 1989:15). The architect is rarely in sole control of a project. This aspect is important to note, as one of the social aspects in this study is who had an influence over the choice of architectural style for public buildings in Adelaide. When an architect uses a particular style for a building, they do so using its known characteristics, and with the “expectation that people will react predictably to the design and that the style will express values held by the community” (Apperly et al 1989:16). New styles were established when efforts were made to break away from certain traditions and establish new directions. If adaptations were widely used, a new style may have been appointed, such as when ‘Neoclassical’ was used in the early 20th century to describe early 19th century architecture in Canada (Maitland 1984:10). John Sloane was an architect in Canada who practiced the neoclassical style, but he incorporated his own interpretation into his designs (Maitland 1984:20). Sloane recommended that the classical design only be used for religious and public architecture (Maitland 1984:23), although there were no reasons apparent for this. Some architects who came to Australia were trained in Britain, and would have brought with them British traditions and European tastes (Hope 2003:179). - 28 - Architects and other individuals from Australia, such as soldiers, visited ‘exotic’ destinations such as Egypt (Hope 2003:179). Items brought back were donated to museums or libraries, because of the desire of the general public to see things Egyptian, or of classical origins. Maitland (1984:16) also talks about young men from well-to-do backgrounds travelling to exotic places in the 20th century, such as Italy and France, to give a finishing touch to their general education in Canada. Therefore, it was not only architects who travelled and experienced different architectural tastes, but young men from wealthy families and military men. Engineers were also responsible for choice in architectural style. The Royal Engineers in Canada in the late 18th and early 19th centuries, for example, were responsible for constructing many civil and military buildings, and on occasion they assisted in the design (Clerk 1984:16). They did not receive any formal architectural training, however they did consult books on architecture and they travelled to other colonies. The Royal Engineers appeared to be aware of classical architectural styles and their associated social and political meanings. The studies of architectural style in Britain and several British colonies all have an underlying social meaning of controlling the environment. The British accomplished this through colonising new regions and bringing with them their tastes for architecture and other forms of material culture, which they imposed on their new environment. Local governments also had an effect on what style would symbolise their new era, although local effects were mostly felt in regions after a lengthy period of British rule. However, there were several adaptations to local conditions that make interesting analogies with my study of classical architecture in Adelaide. Individuals also expressed their views through their choice in architectural style, whether as the architect or the decision maker in architectural competitions, as they wanted to see - 29 - their local environment have associations with what they knew as a powerful, orderly and controlled society, related historically back to ancient Greece and Rome. Classical style architecture in Adelaide Adelaide was a British colony planned with a specific design. The proponents of the design were several wealthy businessmen in Britain who wanted to develop a new colony in Australia (Watson 1984:79). They were dissatisfied with society in Britain, which they felt was undemocratic and unjust. They wanted to design a colony without convicts, as they felt the other Australian colonies were corrupted by convicts and poorly planned. Their design for South Australia would be better. As part of this grand design the classical style of architecture was chosen for many public buildings in the new colony. Different styles of classical architecture were used to adorn the city centre with bold and impressive public structures that would make those people who lived in the city proud and those people who visited the city envious (Marsden et al 1990:31). New designs utilising classical elements were employed, and they were used to break away from certain traditions and establish specific new directions for the colony. The designers of classical style public buildings in the new colony would have been aware of their associations with the Renaissance period (15th – 18th centuries AD), and earlier classical periods in ancient Greece (5th – 1st centuries BC) and Rome (1st century BC – 3rd century AD) where many classical styles originated (Appendix 1). Classical style architecture was also used in Britain from the Renaissance period onwards, and in British colonies all over the western world (Maitland 1984:4; Johnson 2002:98; Hope 2003:168). The classical style used on public architecture in - 30 - the new colony of South Australia was going to illustrate its power, strength, control and order, to Britain, other Australian colonies, and the rest of the world. Edward Gibbon Wakefield initiated the design for the new colony in South Australia, which he wanted to be different to all other Australian colonies (Watson 1984:79; Bowe 2004B: 4). Wakefield was a wealthy and influential businessman in London, who along with several colleagues, worked out a scheme of emigration and drafted an Act of Parliament (Page and Ingpen 1985:8). The bill was swiftly passed in 1834. The Act specified that no convicts were to be allowed into South Australia, only British subjects could emigrate, the colony was to make its own laws, and it would be self-governing when the population rose to 50,000 (Page and Ingpen 1985:10). South Australia appealed to people who were “non-conformists and dissenters who felt they lacked economic, political and social opportunities in the England of the 1830s even after Parliament had been reformed” (Bonython 1968:1120). The South Australian Company was set-up on 11 October 1835 in London to deal with commercial activities in the new colony (Page and Ingpen 1985:10). Colonel William Light was appointed Surveyor General (Marsden et al 1990:17), and was given the task to find a new site for the colony. On 22 January 1836 the company despatched the first fleet of ships, and they landed in Kingscote where they established the first town (Page and Ingpen 1985:14; Warburton 1986:31). On 28 December 1836, Colonel Light landed at Holdfast Bay, and in January 1837 he selected the present site of Adelaide (Page and Ingpen 1985:12). There has been some debate as to whether it was actually Colonel Light who designed the plan of the city centre, or if it was his deputy George Strickland Kingston (Langmead 1994:viviii; Bowe 2004A:3), however by 1837 the plan was established. The majority of - 31 - history books support the view that Colonel Light founded the city of Adelaide, and that view is accepted for this study. The design for the city was in two parts, South Adelaide and North Adelaide, with surrounding park lands (Marsden et al 1990:17). Certain areas of the city were selected for specific purposes. Colonel Light intended the city to centre around Victoria Square, where town acres had been set aside for government purposes (Marsden et al 1990:18). There were discussions in England that Adelaide’s city streets should be designed in different architectural styles, however the republicans of Adelaide rejected this view as an infringement of civil liberties (Langmead and Schenk 1983:4). The people influential in the commencement of the new colony perhaps wanted to start afresh and not be entirely dictated by English rule, especially in regards to architectural freedom. The plan for the city centre, encompassing both North Adelaide and South Adelaide, was a blank canvas for the English-born architects to cover with their designs. “The proposed city of Adelaide fulfilled the dream of many [English] architects since the Italian Renaissance” (Langmead and Schenk 1983:4). English architects had a limited freedom to design public buildings in what-ever style they wanted. The outcomes of these discussions and other debates have resulted in a mixture of architectural styles visible on the public buildings in Adelaide. The grid layout selected for Adelaide’s city centre was used to control the movement of traffic and individuals, and to structure certain parts of the city into functional areas (Bowe 2004B:4). South Adelaide was selected to be the more important of the two parts of the city, and certain parts were delegated as commercial or residential - 32 - areas (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:vii, 3). For instance, the northern part of King William Street became the focus of the city in the mid 19th century for public buildings, and residential buildings were more focused on the north-west area of South Adelaide. North Adelaide was intended to be mostly residential, and was accordingly designed differently to South Adelaide (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:82). The grid layout used for South Adelaide was adopted from the co-ordinated system of buildings and precincts, initially used in the city of Miletus, Greece, in 479 BC in Greece (Bowe 2004B:4). It was subsequently perfected as a system for orderly settlements and social control by the Romans between the 1st and 5th centuries AD. After the fall of the Roman Empire the grid system was rarely used until it was rediscovered in the Renaissance period, the same time as other classical elements were becoming popular, including architecture. The Roman architect, Vitruvius, not only set out principles for architectural forms and proportions in the 1st century AD, but also functional elements of cities, such as layout, spaces and orientation. During the Renaissance period, artist, military engineer and architect Pietro Cataneo “synthesised the work of Vitruvius into his Ideal City plan”, which was later used for Adelaide (Bowe 2004B:4). Cataneo’s plan for the ideal city was based on a relationship between order, geometry, architecture and town planning (Figure 2.6). A symmetrical, orderly design was chosen for the plan of South Adelaide to match the desire for an orderly, powerful and controlled society. The plan for North Adelaide may have been skewed due to the uneven topography, or it may have just been planned to match the proposed functions (i.e. mostly residential). This may suggest that residential areas did not need to be as strictly controlled as public areas. - 33 - Figure 2.6 – Cataneo’s Ideal City plan, 1567 [Source: Bowe 2004B:4] Wakefield’s plan for the new colony was to have an orderly, powerful and controlled society, however this was not entirely a success. In the early years farming was poor and many people struggled to feed themselves (Watson 1984:79). Life was hard for many early settlers and for a while it was thought the colony would fail. Watson (1984:79) describes the ultimate outcome of Wakefield’s plan: South Australia was never the perfect place Wakefield hoped it would be. The men who established it were too greedy for that. But it continued to grow. A beautiful city was laid out. It became the leading agricultural colony – the granary of Australia. And because there had been no convicts in the early days, the people of South Australia went on believing that they were just a little bit better than those from the other colonies. There were several mining discoveries in South Australia, Victoria and New South Wales, in the 1840s and 1850s (Gibbs 1969:99; Freeland 1972:111), however few people benefited from this. Initially these discoveries triggered a mass exodus of skilled workers from South Australia, which caused businesses to suffer and resulted in a depression (Advertiser 1958:3; Gibbs 1969:101). However, gold had a long-term positive effect on the South Australian economy. The South Australian government - 34 - offered the best price for gold in the Australian colonies, and it was brought to Adelaide from Victoria under police escort (Marsden et al 1990:24). A period of renewed prosperity ensued from the mid-1860s, and the government of South Australia embarked on a large public works program, which involved the construction of many new public buildings (Marsden et al 1990:26). Extravagant government spending in the early years of the colony could have contributed to poor economic conditions, as the South Australian government was perhaps trying to emulate the stylistic architectural trends in Britain and other British colonies, but with a small group of trained architects and minimal funds. The 1860s to 1880s were boom years for Adelaide, especially for the miners and pastoralists (Page 1986:26; Watson 1984:79). The 1890s again saw a time of depression, with the failure of several banks and the liquidation of several building companies (Advertiser 1958:49). During times of depression, fewer public buildings were constructed, as both government and commercial enterprises tightened their purse strings. Adelaide’s economy did not fully recover until after 1900. Old photographs and sketches of Adelaide’s buildings (Advertiser 1958:9-105; Morgan and Gilbert 1969:11-66; Dutton 1978:140) reveal that many classical style public buildings were constructed throughout the 19th century. Unfortunately, ‘progress’ has meant that many of these buildings have been demolished to make way for new buildings, or they have been dwarfed by tall buildings constructed throughout the 20th century (Figure 2.7). Progress has meant that the National Chambers (22 King William Street) and the National Bank of Australasia (26 King William Street), for instance, which were both Renaissance style public buildings - 35 - constructed in the mid 1860s and designed by Wright and Woods, were both demolished in 1968 to make way for larger structures (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:25). Figure 2.7 – Torrens Building, Victoria Square [Source: Photo taken by Deborah Arthur, 2-10-04] - 36 - CHAPTER 3 – METHODOLOGY Study Area Due to the large number of classical style buildings in Adelaide, a limit on the geographical area studied was initially required. Historical research was undertaken to ascertain the most important areas to study. Adelaide was a planned city of two parts, North Adelaide and South Adelaide, of which South Adelaide was the more important. Both of these areas contain the majority of public buildings for the city of Adelaide, especially those constructed in the 19th century, because South Adelaide was intended to be the commercial hub of the city. The study area was initially limited to South Adelaide, which would provide a survey area with the majority of buildings, so as to be able to make generalisations about what was happening in Adelaide. Some of the most important early public buildings in Adelaide were erected in Victoria Square, the geographical centre and Colonel Light’s intended hub for the city (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:3). The focus of the city centre became the northern end of King William Street (bounded by Victoria Square and North Terrace), with other important buildings located along North Terrace. The three locations finally chosen: Victoria Square, North Terrace, and the northern part of King William Street (Figure 3.1), were due to their importance in the early years of the colony, and due to a large proportion of Classical style buildings still standing in these locations. - 37 - 3 2 1 Figure 3.1 – J. William’s map of Adelaide showing the town acres [Source: Worsnop 1988:iii] [Note: Locations of Victoria Square (1), North Terrace (2), and the northern part of King William Street (3) shown with arrows.] Fieldwork Initially, a walking survey of all streets in the northern part of the city centre was undertaken (between Wakefield Street and North Terrace) to record the addresses of all Classical style buildings. Buildings in the southern part of the city centre were surveyed by car. Only buildings with the most public context were recorded, therefore buildings not directly facing these three locations were excluded (i.e. the Palm House and Museum of Economic Botany, both in the Botanic Gardens on North Terrace), because the they could not be seen from the main roads in the 19th century and would not have had as much impact as those public buildings abutting the main roads. - 38 - Only buildings constructed in these locations and still existing are relevant to this study. As a result, buildings such as the Marine and Harbors Building were excluded, as it had its 19th century façade moved to Victoria Square in the 20th century (Marsden et al 1990:174). There is no way of knowing how representative this study is of classical style buildings constructed in the 19th century in Adelaide, as many have been demolished or altered. These aspects were further limitations to my study area. However, the fact that several 19th century classical buildings are no longer standing to be able to record, should not be a major issue in regards to understanding the influences in the choice of architectural style, or implying their social meanings. Therefore, the buildings that are still standing today are a representative sample of the classical style buildings constructed in Adelaide in the 19th century. The dates of these buildings then needed to be ascertained, which was carried out by cross referencing various publications on colonial history, such as Freeland (1972), Herman (1963), Langmead and Schenk (1983), Morgan and Gilbert (1969) and Marsden et al (1990), and by searching the State’s Heritage Register Database (Australian Heritage Places Inventory 2004). Not all buildings could be ascribed a secure date, and if they could not be assigned to the 19th century with certainty, they were excluded from this study. In addition to the approximately 50 classical style buildings recorded in South Adelaide, the addresses of gothic style public buildings in Victoria Square, North Terrace, and the northern part of King William Street were recorded for comparison. These buildings were mostly religious (i.e. Holy Trinity Church, North Terrace) (Marsden et al 1990:107) or educational (i.e. Mitchell Building, Adelaide University, North Terrace) (Mitchell Building 2004) (Appendix 4). - 39 - Fieldwork was undertaken to record specific features of the buildings. This required the construction of a recording form for buildings (Appendix 5), and a Microsoft Excel database to collate the data (Appendix 6). Another limitation of this study was that by recording and analysing only the exterior front façade of a building, the other façades and the internal layout of the building could not be studied, which may show different architectural features with a different set of social meanings. Variables for Data Collection The set of variables originally identified for data collection are (after Burke 1999:86,90,92): Social - building name, date of construction, architect, builder; Physical - building size, architectural order, architectural style, symmetrical façade, conventional features (i.e. pediment, balustrade), construction material/colour/condition; Geographical - building address, view from building; Functional - original purpose, change of purpose. These variables were selected as they would tell me ‘how classical’ a building constructed in the 19th century in Adelaide was (i.e. were they symmetrical as most classical buildings were?; did the purpose of the building match the personalities described by 15th century Renaissance theorists? etc.). The important aspects that qualify ‘how classical’ a building is, are (Adam 2003): Architectural style; Architectural order; Symmetrical façade (and plan); Conventional features (i.e. pediment, balustrade). - 40 - What makes this study interesting is the divergence from strict classical building designs and rules. Divergence from historical precedents shows a desire for individuals, or society as a whole, to break away from its English and European roots and traditional rules governing classical buildings. This has been noted in previous studies predominantly due to regional differences, such as the addition of a middle hallway on houses in Middle Virginia (Glassie 1975:189), or the use of the lotus flower for column capitals on public buildings in Melbourne (Hope 2003:174-175). The architectural style names used to classify buildings by Apperly, Irving and Reynolds (1989) have been adopted for this study, because they are specific to Australian architecture, and the simplest to follow (Appendix 7). No pre-18th century European architecture exists in Australia, therefore any use of the term ‘Revival’ would be invalid in this study, as would be the use of architectural style names assigned and used in Europe prior to the 19th century. The architectural orders described by Summerson (1963), and illustrated by Claude Perrault in c. AD 1676 are also used for this study, because Summerson is considered to be an outstanding academic in this area and his work has a clarity and simplicity others lack. Adam’s (2003) descriptions of the symmetry of a building and its conventional features have also been employed, because he clearly states what qualifies a building as classical. Summerson describes the five architectural orders: Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, and Composite (Summerson 1963:9) (Figures 3.23.11). In Adelaide in the 19th century, architects and builders also undertook various adaptations of these orders. These alternative orders have been grouped into a category called ‘Other’ (Figures 3.12 – 3.14). - 41 - Figure 3.2 – Tuscan architectural order [Source: Town Hall, capital of column and entablature of tower – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.3 – Tuscan architectural order [Source: Treasury building, level 1 capital of pilasters at middle section window – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.4 – Doric architectural order [Source: Magistrates Court, capital of column and entablature of portico – photo taken 9-03-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.5 – Doric architectural order [Source: Torrens building, level 1 capital of column and entablature – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.6 – Ionic architectural order [Source: Supreme Court, level 2 capital of balcony – photo taken 25-04-04 by Deborah Arthur] - 42 - Figure 3.7 – Ionic architectural order [Source: Treasury building, level 2 central section capital of pilaster and entablature at window – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.8 – Corinthian architectural order [Source: The Gallery, level 2 capital of partly rusticated pilaster – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.9 – Corinthian architectural order [Source: Newmarket Hotel, level 2 capital of pilaster – photo taken 2-09-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.10 – Composite architectural order [Source: Bank of South Australia, level 1 capital of column and entablature – photo taken 4-04-04 by Deborah Arthur] - 43 - Figure 3.11 – Composite architectural order [Source: Town Hall, level 3 capital of pilaster – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.12 – Other architectural order [Source: Supreme Court, level 1 capital of pier with acanthus leaf design – photo taken 2504-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.13 – Other architectural order [Source: The Gallery, level 1 capital of rusticated pilaster with iconic scroll and wreath design – photo taken 27-08-04 by Deborah Arthur] Figure 3.14 – Other architectural order [Source: General Post Office, level 2 capital of window column with acanthus leaves, iconic scroll and human head design – photo taken 21-02-04 by Deborah Arthur] - 44 - Problems Several problems were encountered when recording and analysing data. The first problem was knowing what features of a building to record. The recording form was set up to include the information detailed in the original variables (Appendix 5). Each building was recorded using this form, and initially all façades of a building were recorded. Digital photographs of each building and specific features (i.e. column capital, pediment, balustrade) were also taken. The front façade of a building is usually the most decorative, and this shows enough information to determine the building’s architectural order and style. Only physical attributes on the front façade were analysed. The only exceptions to this were buildings on corners that had their main entrance on the corner of two façades. In the case of these buildings, the front façade and the corner façade were both recorded. The second problem was finding dates for some the buildings flagged during surveys. If a building’s construction date could not be confirmed by searching colonial history books and the State’s Heritage Register Database, then that building was excluded from this study. If a building’s construction began in the 19th century but concluded in the 20th century (i.e. the National Mutual Life Association on King William Street, 1898-1901) (Marsden et al 1990:102), then that building was also excluded from this study. Further confusion arose as a result from a lack of documentation, and some conflicting documentation. This confusion is perhaps understandable as in cases where one person designed the building and a different person supervised its erection. In the case of different architect’s names and different dates published, those listed in the most reliable source, which was the source most recently published and most comprehensively referenced, were used. - 45 - The third problem occurred when starting to analyse the data. Too much information was collected to accurately and effectively compare and find patterns. Therefore, the main variables of a building were modified to cut down on the amount of detail. The modified variables for comparative analysis are (after Burke 1999:86,90,92): Social – building name, date of construction, architect(s); Physical – architectural style, architectural order (vertical supports and horizontal members), symmetrical façade, other conventional features (i.e. pediment, balustrade); Functional – purpose of building. A fourth problem that arose was how to describe the architectural style of the buildings. All exhibited the classical style, but they had different characteristics. The architectural styles described in Apperly, Irving and Reynolds (1989:41) were used. The analysis of the data caused the fifth problem in this thesis, as it was difficult to state the implicit social meanings of the architecture. Explicit meanings were easier to discuss, as there were many references to the buildings in the documentary record. It was relatively easy to find and discuss divergences from strict classical rules in the classical architectural elements on buildings in Adelaide, however stating the meaning of these differences was problematic. - 46 - Bias As the architects, builders, proprietors and other officials such as governors and bank directors were all men, there is a gender bias in this study. There is no way of knowing if women would have designed buildings differently in Adelaide in the 19th century. Those men who made the decisions on what architectural style was used in the final building or who provided the money for construction were all wealthy, so there is also a bias towards the richer end of society, and may have been well educated in classical precepts. Archival Research Initial archival research was carried out at the Australian Architecture Archives and History Research Group at the University of South Australia. Old drawings of buildings, old newspaper clippings regarding architecture, books on the history of architecture in Australia and Adelaide, Classical architecture orders, British and French pattern books, and other items were identified in this collection. Further archival research was undertaken at the State Library of South Australia. Primary sources were examined, such as The Register of South Australia and The Adelaide Observer newspapers. All 19th and early 20th century newspapers are stored on microfilm, and can be viewed on machines within the State Library. Articles published in these newspapers in the 19th century described specific design elements and the appearance of public architecture in Adelaide, as well as how those buildings were perceived by contemporary observers at the time. - 47 - CHAPTER 4 – CLASSICAL STYLES IN ADELAIDE Information recorded during fieldwork and based on the original set of variables is collated in Appendix 6. In addition to this, Appendix 8 details a brief history of each building recorded for this study, including recent photographs. The following tables and graphs summarise the modified set of variables, which will be analysed against space and time to determine if any trends exist. Social and Functional Variables The data collected for the social and functional variables is presented in Table 4.1. The buildings are noted in order of the year construction finished (marked in bold). If only one date is noted, then this is the year the building was completed. The architects noted are those who originally designed the building (Appendix 9), and therefore may not be the same architects who supervised its construction or modified its design. Building Name Date of Construction Architect(s) Original Purpose 1 Magistrates Court 1847-1850 Richard Lambeth Government 2 Institute Building 1860-1861 Edward Angas Hamilton Educational 3 Adelaide Club 1863-1864 4 The Gallerie 1865 5 Supreme Court 1866-1869 6 General Post Office 1867-1872 7 Town Hall 1863-1873 8 Treasury Building 1858-1876 Edward Angas Hamilton Government 9 Botanic Hotel 1876-1877 Michael McMullen Commercial Edward Angas Hamilton and George Ernest Hamilton Edmund Wright, Edward John Woods and Edward Angas Hamilton Robert George Thomas Edmund Wright and Edward John Woods Edmund Wright and Edward John Woods - 48 - Commercial Commercial Government Government Government 10 Bank of South Australia 1876-1877 Lloyd Tayler and Edmund Wright Commercial 11 Bank of Adelaide 1878-1880 Edmund Wright Commercial 12 Ambassadors Hotel 1880-1881 J. H. Grainger Commercial 13 Torrens Building 1879-1881 Michael Egan Government 14 Newmarket Hotel 1883 Daniel Garlick Commercial 15 State Library, Jervois Wing 1873-1884 Robert George Thomas Educational 16 Parliament House 1883-1889 Edmund Wright and Lloyd Tayler Government Table 4.1 – Social and Functional variables [Source: Full list in Appendix 8] Of the 16 classical style public buildings abutting Victoria Square, the northern part of King William Street and North Terrace, seven were commercial, seven were government, and two were educational in their original purpose. The two educational buildings were government funded and owned, however their original purpose was educational. Figure 4.1 illustrates that most of the public buildings were either commercial or government in their original purpose. There were no classical style religious buildings in any of these three locations. Original Purpose of Buildings 8 # of Buildings 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Commercial Government Educational Religious Figure 4.1 – Functional variables – Original purpose of buildings - 49 - Table 4.1 listed the buildings recorded for this study in order of the year construction finished. The same order of the buildings is applied in Figure 4.2, which shows their locations on a map of the city centre. The two educational buildings (2 and 15 on the map below) are located on the eastern part of North Terrace. This matches Colonel Light’s plan to focus Adelaide’s cultural life in one location, which was decided to be along North Terrace (Advertiser 1958:26). Figure 4.2 – Map of South Adelaide (city centre) and location of buildings [Source: Marsden et al 1990:52] [Note: Buildings marked in red are government, buildings marked in blue are educational, and buildings marked in green are commercial in their original function.] The commercial buildings are located along North Terrace and King William Street. The two banks (10 and 11 on the map above) are grouped together, along with a hotel (12), and these were all constructed within five years of one another. Other hotels were also constructed around this period (9 and 14). - 50 - The government buildings are located around Victoria Square, except Parliament House, which is located on the corner of North Terrace and King William Street. The location of government buildings corresponds with Colonel’s Light plan for the hub of the city to be Victoria Square, which is also the geographical centre of Adelaide (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:3; Advertiser 1958:102). Colonel Light set aside town acres around Victoria Square for government purposes (Marsden et al 1990:18), and on these town acres the government buildings are located. Apart from the areas put aside by Colonel Light in his city plan, there appears to be no other patterns for the location of the buildings. However, there are two hotels located on either of the far corners of North Terrace, perhaps due to the importance given to such social places in the 19th century. Adelaide experienced several boom times and depressions. The economic conditions were generalised for Adelaide from the 1840s to 1900s (Marsden et al 1990:33-34; Musgrove 1987:1289; Watson 1984:116). The final year of construction for all classical style buildings was marked with a cross (Figure 4.3). There was a definite trend for constructing public buildings during boom times in Adelaide, as there was more expenditure available by the government for building works. Commercial organisations, such as hotels and banks, also prospered during boom times, and many required new and larger premises. To ascertain if the trend was to build classical buildings during the boom times, or whether it was their function that affected this trend, Figure 4.4 illustrates the general trend of economic conditions, plotted against the final year of construction for all gothic style public buildings in the same locations. The building name, construction date, location, purpose, and architect of these buildings are listed in Appendix 4. - 51 - Figure 4.3 – Economic conditions in Adelaide and the construction of classical style buildings Figure 4.4 – Economic conditions in Adelaide and the construction of gothic style buildings - 52 - Figures 4.3 and 4.4 show that public buildings were constructed predominantly during times of economic prosperity, however it was their function rather than their architectural style that influenced when they were built. Several religious buildings were constructed during times of economic depression, therefore they seem to have been constructed out of necessity. The three churches built during the 1840s and 1850s all had later additions or modifications (Marsden et al 1990:107, 181; Morgan and Gilbert 1969:9, 20; 59). This shows that although these religious buildings were constructed during periods when funds were minimal, they were improved at later dates when more money was available, and when there was necessity for increased space due to an increase in population size. The Magistrates Court, a government building built during the late 1840s, also had additions although they were a century later (Marsden et al 1990:179). Several architects co-designed buildings, however sources are often unclear as to which person the design should be attributed to. For instance, Edward John Woods was given credit for the design of Parliament House, however it was based on the winning design by Edmund Wright and Lloyd Tayler (Marsden et al 1990:247). Several architects also came from building backgrounds, such as Daniel Garlick, who setup a business as a builder in North Adelaide (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:147) (Appendix 9), or Thomas English who constructed and designed many buildings (Marsden et al 1990:115) (Appendix 4). Physical Variables The data collected for the physical variables is presented in Table 4.2. The buildings are noted in the same order as Table 4.1, and the data has been summarised from Appendix 6. - 53 - Building Name Magistrates Court Date of Architectural Construction Style Victorian 1847-1850 Academic Classical Architectural Order Doric Symmetri Conventional cal Façade Features Pediment, Yes Colonnade and Portico Pediment, Yes Balustrade and Portico Institute Building 1860-1861 Victorian Free Classical Tuscan, Doric and Ionic Adelaide Club 1863-1864 Victorian Free Classical Tuscan 1865 Victorian Mannerist Doric, Corinthian and Yes Other Balustrade 1866-1869 Victorian Free Classical Doric, Ionic and Other Pediment, Balustrade, Colonnade and Portico Victorian Free Classical Tuscan, Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, No Composite and Other Victorian Free Classical Tuscan, Corinthian and No Composite Victorian Free Classical Victorian Free Classical Tuscan, Ionic and Other Tuscan and Corinthian Corinthian and Yes Other Yes The Gallerie Supreme Court General Post Office Town Hall Treasury Building Botanic Hotel 1867-1872 1863-1873 1858-1876 1876-1877 Bank of South Australia 1876-1877 Victorian Academic Classical Bank of Adelaide 1878-1880 Victorian Mannerist Ambassadors Hotel 1880-1881 Torrens Building 1879-1881 Newmarket 1883 Hotel State Library, 1873-1884 Jervois Wing Parliament House 1883-1889 Tuscan and Doric Doric, Victorian Corinthian and Second Empire Other Tuscan, Doric, Victorian Free Ionic and Classical Other Victorian Free Tuscan and Classical Corinthian Victorian Other Second Empire Victorian Academic Classical Yes Yes Yes No [Source: Full list in Appendix 6] - 54 - Pediment, Balustrade, Tower and Portico Pediment, Balustrade, Colonnade, Tower and Portico Pediment and Balustrade Balustrade Pediment, Balustrade, Colonnade and Portico Pediment and Balustrade Yes - Yes Pediment and Balustrade Yes Pediment No Tower and Portico Corinthian and Yes Other Table 4.2 – Physical variables Portico Colonnade and Portico The combinations of physical variables listed in Table 4.2 are a measure of how classical a building is. The buildings show four different architectural styles prevalent on Adelaide’s 19th century public buildings: Victorian Academic Classical, Victorian Free Classical, Victorian Mannerist, and Victorian Second Empire. All of the buildings display either columns, pilasters or piers in the classical architectural order. Some of these buildings have adaptations of classical orders. Twelve of the sixteen buildings recorded have a symmetrical façade. All but one building displayed at least one conventional feature. Figure 4.5 illustrates the number of buildings displaying each architectural style. These four architectural styles are explained in Appendix 7. Victorian Free Classical was a popular style for public buildings in Adelaide, as it was an expression of the growing prosperity and confidence in society at the time (Apperly et al 1989:59). This style was used on government, commercial and educational buildings between the 1860s and 1880s. # of Buildings Architectural Style 10 9 8 7 6 5 4 3 2 1 0 Victorian Academic Classical Victorian Free Classical Victorian Second Empire Figure 4.5 – Physical variables – Architectural style - 55 - Victorian Mannerist The Victorian Academic Classical style was used on two government buildings: the Magistrates Court in the 1840s (Appendix 8 – Figure A8.2) and Parliament House in the 1880s (Figure A8.32). It was also used on a commercial building, the Bank of South Australia in the 1870s (Figure A8.20). Edmund Wright and Lloyd Tayler codesigned both the Bank of South Australia and Parliament House in this style. The Corinthian architectural order is common on this style of building (Apperly et al 1989:55), and was used on both buildings designed by Wright and Tayler. All three of these buildings have a colonnade and portico, presenting a monumental front façade, which is another common feature of this style. The two buildings designed in the Victorian Second Empire style: the Ambassadors Hotel (Figure A8.25) and the State Library, Jervois Wing (Figure A8.31), were both constructed in the 1880s. This style was also popular in the 1870s and 1880s in Canada, another British colony (Cameron and Wright 1980:6). These buildings were commercial and educational, consecutively, in their functions. The two main features of this style of building are the mansard roof and pavilion massing (Cameron and Wright 1980:8). Both of these buildings have a mansard roof, although neither have pavilion massing. The two buildings constructed in the Victorian Mannerist style: the Gallerie (Figure A8.7) and the Bank of Adelaide (Figure A8.22), were both commercial in their function. Edmund Wright, Edward John Woods and Edward Angas Hamilton designed the Gallerie in the 1860s. Edmund Wright designed the Bank of Adelaide in the 1870s. Common features of this style are belted columns, layered pilasters, rustication on column shafts and wall surfaces, and exaggerated keystones (Apperly et al 1989:64, 67). Both buildings have rusticated column or pilaster shafts, and the - 56 - Gallerie has large keystones above the central window arches. Both of these buildings are two storeys with a basement, and have arched detailing over windows and doors. The Classical Revival style was deemed appropriate by architects and other influential individuals in the 1860s and 1870s for town halls, museums, art galleries, post offices, and other symbols of culture and ‘worthiness’, as it was a show of dignity (Freeland 1972:145) (Appendix 3). For such important public buildings the classical style was the only fit and proper choice. Figure 4.6 shows when the architectural styles were generally used in Adelaide throughout the 19th century. These four architectural styles are all revivals of historical classical styles. There seems to be no pattern in the use of architectural styles for certain periods, except for the short time span that the Second Empire style was popular in Australia, Canada and Britain (Apperly et al 1989:69; Cameron and Wright 1980:8). 1840s 1850s 1860s 1870s 1880s 1890s Victorian Academic Classical Victorian Free Classical Victorian Second Empire Victorian Mannerist Figure 4.6 – Architectural styles and periods of their use All of the buildings display an architectural order or several orders on different features, however some also display ‘Other’ orders (i.e. a combination of features such as acanthus leaves, scrolls, wreaths etc). The Other order illustrates architects - 57 - breaking away from the traditional uses of the orders and the strict rules governing classical buildings, assigned during the Renaissance period. These Other orders use similar classical features to the classical orders, such as an acanthus leaf design on the pier of the Supreme Court (Figure 3.12), or the acanthus leaf, iconic scroll and human head design on the window column of the General Post Office (Figure 3.14). The Other architectural order is used on all types of buildings, constructed between the 1860s and 1880s, even on Victorian Academic Classical buildings that generally use strict classical elements in their proper proportions. This is combined with other types of decoration. These adaptations to the classical architectural orders are similar to those used on certain public buildings in Melbourne (Hope 2003:178), in that they use classical elements not used on the five classical orders, but none the less classically derived (i.e. scrolls, wreaths). Adaptations of orders were not common before the Renaissance period, as an indeterminate order was used on the Colosseum in Rome (Summerson 1963:15), so it was not unknown. Adaptations show architects understanding yet rejecting the rules governing classical architecture and therefore purposely creating new designs, as was suggested by Palkovich (in Leone and Potter 1988:216). Figure 4.7 illustrates the number of buildings displaying each architectural order. The majority of buildings displaying the Tuscan order used it for window columns or pilasters, rather than columns or pilasters running the height of the building or one level of it. The only thing to distinguish the Tuscan and Doric order used for windows was the decoration, or lack of it, in the entablature (Figures 3.2 – 3.5). - 58 - Architectural Order 12 # of Buildings 10 8 6 4 2 0 Tuscan Doric Ionic Corinthian Composite Other Figure 4.7 – Physical variables – Architectural order Two of the more richly decorated buildings used the Composite order: the Town Hall and the General Post Office, as well as a variety of other orders. Both of these buildings were constructed in the early 1870s at a time of economic prosperity. The Doric order has been used in Adelaide on both the Magistrates and the Supreme Court buildings, therefore it has clear military associations as specified by Vitruvius. It has also been used on other government, commercial and educational buildings. The Ionic order has predominantly been used on government buildings, along with the Institute building (educational), which was government funded. The Institute building was a combined adult educational centre, library, art gallery, museum, and social meeting place (Marsden et al 1990:26), and therefore could be classified as a place of learning in Vitruvius’ terms. The Corinthian order was popular for commercial buildings, and it was also used on some government buildings. It was only used in times of economic prosperity, probably because buildings constructed in this order required a lot of detail and thus required sufficient funds. When architects could afford to use the Corinthian order, to symbolise opulence and luxury, they did. - 59 - Figure 4.8 shows when the architectural orders were generally used in Adelaide throughout the 19th century. There is no real pattern for the use of a specific architectural order at a certain period in time. However, the results are distorted by the fact that no classical buildings in this study were constructed between 1851-1859, and 1890-1899. It seems that the architectural orders were used in Adelaide mostly according to taste, circumstances and means, as suggested by Summerson (1963:13). 1840s 1850s 1860s 1870s 1880s 1890s Tuscan Doric Ionic Corinthian Composite Other Figure 4.8 – Architectural orders and periods of their use Figure 4.9 illustrates the use of the orders for buildings of certain functions. The Tuscan, Doric and Other orders were used on commercial, government and educational buildings, to which there seems to be no pattern, although Tuscan and Doric buildings have been associated with masculine qualities in the Renaissance period, such as strength and toughness (Summerson 1963:12; Curl 1992:34). The Ionic order is said to have a “feminine slenderness” (Summerson 1963:12) and it is often associated with educational buildings. The Ionic order was used on government and educational buildings, but not commercial buildings. The Corinthian order is said to have “the slight figure of a girl” (Summerson 1963:12) and is often associated with ‘virgins’, and it was used on commercial and government buildings. The Composite order was not awarded any specific characteristics during the Renaissance period (Curl 1992:34), and it was only used on two government buildings. - 60 - Architectural order and their functions # of buildings 6 5 Commerical 4 Government 3 Educational 2 Religious 1 th er O Co m po sit e Co rin th ia n Io ni c D or ic Tu sc an 0 Figure 4.9 – Architectural order and a building’s function It appears the orders were mostly used on buildings in Adelaide according to means (i.e. money available) and taste (i.e. architects preference), as was suggested by Summerson (1963:13), rather than specific types, such as those assigned by Serlio in the 17th century (Summerson 1963:12-13). The orders have not always been used in accordance with their original requirements however. In the Doric order, the frieze generally consists of alternating motifs (triglyph and metope) (Appendix 2) (Tzonis and Lefaivre 1986:56-57), however not all buildings in Adelaide adopted this. The frieze of the Magistrates Court is plain, the Bank of Adelaide only has triglyphs in the frieze, while the Gallerie has scroll designs along the frieze. These are new adaptations to the entablature of the original orders. The location of the orders on buildings in Adelaide has been similar to those of other monumental classical buildings, such as the Colosseum (Figure 2.3), the Temple of Fortuna Primigenia (Figure 2.4), and the Theatre of Marcellus (Figure 2.5), all in Italy (Summerson 1963:15; Blagg 1983:30; Curl 1992:51). The location of the orders is called superimposition (see Glossary of Terms). On the Gallerie in Adelaide, the - 61 - Doric order was used on the bottom level and on the outer level pilasters for the second level, while the Corinthian order was used for pilasters in the middle section of the second level. On the General Post Office in Adelaide, the Doric order was used on the ground floor, and the Corinthian and Ionic orders on the second floor, along with the Tuscan and Other orders to decorate windows on both levels and the tower. The Composite order was also incorporated into the tower. The location of the orders on some buildings in Adelaide may be a result of architects being aware of historical associations, and following the same conventions here. Another physical variable common on all classical style buildings is a symmetrical façade and plan. Only the symmetry of the external front façade was recorded for this study (Figure 4.10). Twelve out of sixteen buildings were symmetrical. Of the four buildings that were not symmetrical, they were all generally symmetrical except for several elements of the building’s design: the General Post Office and the Town Hall for example had an offset tower; the Botanic Hotel was located on a corner; and the State Library, Jervois Wing was attached to other buildings. Symmetry of Buildings 25% Symmetrical Not Symmetrical 75% Figure 4.10 – Physical variables – Symmetry of buildings - 62 - There are several conventional features for classical style buildings, and the following were chosen for comparison in this study: balustrade, pediment, portico, colonnade and tower. Domes are also common features on classical style buildings, but this feature was not present on any building in this study. Figure 4.11 illustrates what conventional features were exhibited for all buildings. Conventional Features 12 # of Buildings 10 8 6 4 2 0 Balustrade Pediment Portico Colonnade Tower Figure 4.11 – Physical variables – Conventional features Ten out of sixteen buildings have a balustrade, and others have a metal railing either on the balcony or roof, such as the Adelaide Club, Ambassadors Hotel, Newmarket Hotel, and the State Library, Jervois Wing. Ten buildings also had a pediment. Most buildings had triangular pediments, however other buildings had other forms. For example, the Bank of South Australia had a large triangular pediment over the central portico, small triangular pediment over the side windows on the ground floor, but small semicircular pediments over the middle windows on the ground floor. The Institute building has a semicircular pediment over the central window on the second floor and the side windows on the ground floor, and an open triangular pediment on the central roof area. The Newmarket Hotel has a broken semicircular pediment on the top of the central wall on the roof. - 63 - Of the sixteen buildings, nine have porticos. Some are larger than others, and some have been extended when the building was modified, such as Parliament House (Appendix 8 – Figures A8.32 and A8.33). Most buildings that have a portico also have a colonnade to support it. The buildings I noted as having a portico but not having a colonnade, did not match the description of a portico by Morgan and Gilbert (1969:160). Only five buildings have a colonnade, which would have been an expensive element in the design, especially as these five buildings were constructed of stone. Three buildings out of sixteen buildings had towers. The General Post Office (Figure A8.11) and the Town Hall (Figure A8.13) are Victorian Free Classical style, however they have a steeply pitched roof on the top of the tower, similar to the State Library, Jervois Wing (Figure A8.31), which is in the Victorian Second Empire style. The height of the tower for the General Post Office was reduced due to insufficient government funds (Marsden et al 1990:166). It was difficult to know the original appearance of the buildings in this study as many of them had changed over time, and some of these changes occurred during the 20th century. However, photographs were sourced from history books to ascertain as far as possible how the buildings looked in the 19th century (Appendix 8). - 64 - CHAPTER 5 – SOCIAL MEANINGS OF CLASSICAL STYLES To understand the social meanings of architecture, one must place the building in its social context (Glassie 1975:117). This means that buildings need to be considered both in relation to individuals (i.e. architects, builders, owners) and to society (i.e. Adelaide). To be able to discuss the social meanings of classical style public buildings in Adelaide in the 19th century, the social context of how style was used needs to be understood. Adelaide was a colony planned by a group of wealthy individuals, and designed to be an orderly, powerful and controlled society, as well as free of convicts (Watson 1984:79). The plan for the new colony included a grid layout for the city centre that controlled vehicular and pedestrian movement (Bowe 2004B:4), and that assigned certain town acres to specific functions (i.e. government buildings to be located around Victoria Square) (Marsden et al 1990:18). Unfortunately, Adelaide was not as successful as initially hoped, because farming was poor and ordinary people struggled to feed themselves, while wealthy businessmen who set-up the state lived in more opulent conditions (Watson 1984:79). This was occurring at the same time as large amounts of government spending on roads, bridges, public buildings and other public amenities, such as that ordered by Governor Gawler between 1838 and 1841 (Marsden et al 1990:21-22). In fact Governor Grey, who followed Gawler, had to reduce the debt accumulated in the early years of the colony. There seemed to be a social divide in Adelaide between the wealthy gentlemen and their families, and the ‘ordinary folk’ who worked hard to make a name for themselves and be able to - 65 - provide for their families, as evident in the use of some public buildings, such as the Adelaide Club (Appendix 8). This study aims to uncover the social meanings for using the classical style of architecture. Included in this is understanding why architects broke away from certain traditions and designed buildings with a mix of classical architectural elements. Johnson (1993:31) says that these breaks from tradition result from individuals trying to create, or unwillingly creating, new meanings. The social meanings of classical style architecture in Adelaide in the 19th century can be discussed in regards to explicit and implicit meanings, as suggested by Carr and Neitzel (1995B:454). Explicit social meanings are found in written records, such as newspapers and books. Implicit social meanings are messages decoded by the observer of the buildings. Gamble’s (2001:79) two approaches to the study of society: top-down and bottom-up, are applied here to the meanings of Adelaide’s public buildings. Explicit Social Meanings Primary and secondary sources have exposed several explicit social meanings behind Adelaide’s architecture. However, most of what was written was by people who understood the background of architecture and its meanings at the time (i.e. not ‘ordinary folk’). Not only was there written commentary, but also public and governmental debates and petitions. One of the major discussion points between architects, builders and other influential individuals was the material the buildings should be constructed from, which affected many government buildings. - 66 - In regards to the building materials for the General Post Office, controversy raged from public meetings to parliamentary debates, and it ended in a formal inquiry by a select committee (Marsden et al 1990:166). In regards to the building materials for the Town Hall, public debate was rife, and Robert Todd even went as far as to organise a petition for the front façade to be changed (Marsden et al 1990:163). Todd thought the choice of building material (concrete) was not appropriate for such a major public building, and he wanted the government to spend more money and to use cut freestone. Todd and others may have thought cut stone was a better building material to use for important public buildings, because it was used on classical buildings over history, from the early classical period to the Renaissance period and through to the 19th century, and many stone buildings last a long time and look impressive because of the natural colours of the stone. In January 1864 there was a public meeting at the Town Hall, and a further loan of £4 000 was sanctioned by the council, thus allowing the use of cut freestone for the front façade. As well as public debate, it appears that one of the architects of the Town Hall, Edmund Wright, was also concerned with the use of stucco over cut stone, and he also fought against this decision (Bagot 1958:5). It is unknown if it was Todd or Wright who were the more influential for the change of building material for the Town Hall, but perhaps it was the pressure of them both that changed the council’s minds. The Jervois Wing of the State Library included a series of delays, which included three royal commissions and government inquiries into the need for the new building, the location of the building, and the suitability of the proposed design to suit the already laid foundations (Danvers Architects 1991b:15). Parliament House also had an enormous amount of public and parliamentary debate. Between 1877 and 1879, four sites were proposed by the government for the site of the new parliament building, however no agreement could be reached (Danvers Architects 1987:19). - 67 - Eventually a motion was passed by the government in 1881 to spend £100 000 on the construction of a new building. The contract with the original contractor was broken due to arguments in 1885 and a new contractor was employed (Danvers Architects 1987:28). The debate these and other buildings encouraged shows how many people were concerned about the location and design for public buildings in Adelaide. It was important that the location and appearance of public buildings showed to people in the city and those that visited, that Adelaide was an orderly, powerful and controlled society. During the 1860s and 1870s in Australia the classical style was: … considered right and proper that town halls, museums, art galleries, post offices and other symbols of culture and worthiness should remain massively dignified. For such buildings the Classic style was the only fit and proper one, but it was solely the Classic style of Rome that could provide sufficient ornateness (Freeland 1972:142). Due to the expectations of delivering messages of power and order to its observers, classical styles were used on many buildings in Adelaide. So many buildings were designed in different classical styles, especially the Italian style, that a painting of King William Street created in 1881 (Figure 5.1) was initially considered to be an Italian town (Marsden et al 1990:37). It was not until mid 1989 when R. T. Home proved this painting was of Adelaide. This is an example of the similarities between the layout of the city and design of its buildings that allowed people to think that this painting was an exotic Italian location. - 68 - Figure 5.1 – King William Street in 1881, Oil on canvas by Charles Marchand [Source: Marsden et al 1990:37] [Note: This painting resides in the Russell-Cotes Art Gallery and Museum, Bournemouth, England.] Modifications to many original building designs were undertaken, mostly due to lack of funds. Therefore, what the architect wanted to design and what was finally built were often different, and a lot of the planned detail was not undertaken. The height of the tower and the scale of the entire building were reduced on the General Post Office for example (Marsden et al 1990:166). Edward Woods, Architect-in-Chief, changed the winning design of Michael Egan for the Torrens building, as he thought his modifications constituted improvements to the building’s appearance (Marsden et al 1990:176). Although the architects designed ornate classical buildings, much of their designs were often changed when it came to accepting their design or constructing the building. There was just not enough money available to design the buildings to the detail specified by the architects. This meant that buildings in Adelaide may have been designed in similar classical styles to elsewhere, but they were done as cheaply as possible. This almost takes away some of the powerful meanings that were desired for people viewing the buildings to take away, as they - 69 - seem more like attempts by architects and other decision makers to achieve the same results as elaborate classical buildings elsewhere, but at half the cost. The buildings are still acclaimed to be beautiful, and they appear to have achieved their purpose. As well as modifications to buildings, some were erected in two or more stages due to a lack of funds. The Institute building was built in two stages, 1860-1861 and 1900-1906 (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:15; Marsden et al 1990:261), while the Town Hall complex consists of four stages, 1863-1866, 1869 (two separate stages in this year), and 1873 (Marsden et al 1990:163-164). This means that people did not want to skimp on the appearance of the building, including its style, detail and material, and they preferred to construct a better building in several stages than use secondrate materials or poor designs. The appearance of the buildings was paramount. Other changes to the final appearance of a building occurred after the design was accepted. The contractors for the Jervois Wing of the State Library were asked to substitute brown Manoora stone for Dolomite for the columns and bands, so as to reduce the overall costs of the building (Danvers Architects 1991b:25). A lot of thought went into what building materials would be used on many government buildings, as it would reflect the colony’s pride in its own resources (Marsden et al 1990:274). People may have thought the materials available locally were of a high quality, such as bluestone, limestone and sandstone (Marsden et al 1990:35), and as they could be sourced locally, they should be used locally as much as possible. This would have had a double meaning of saving costs, rather than obtaining building material from interstate, as well as showing people living in Adelaide and visitors, what beautiful products were found in the state, as well as what talented architects there were to design such impressive structures. - 70 - The design, appearance, problems and solutions for public buildings in Adelaide were often discussed in local newspapers at the time. Two such papers were The Adelaide Observer and The South Australian Register. The various articles about Adelaide’s architecture show there was considerable public interest in how buildings looked and what public works were occurring at the time. People obviously took pride in their environment, especially their public edifices. Many public buildings were used for social purposes (i.e. the Town Hall was used for public and club meetings) (Marsden et al 1990:163). Those responsible for Adelaide’s public buildings appeared to have wanted people living or visiting the city to feel a sense of pride and achievement for their appearance, because they too took pride in choosing the right materials and designs for the buildings. Many of the public buildings were impressive structures that stood in prominent parts of the city, such as the government buildings around Victoria Square, or the hotels on both corners of North Terrace as you enter the city from the east and west. Throughout 1879 in Adelaide there was a commercial depression, but by the end of the year things were improving (The South Australian Register 1880B:5). There were an increased number of public edifices being erected in the colony that would ‘be of credit to any city in the world’. This statement by the author illustrates the pride people had in their public edifices and the city in general. This pride may be linked to how the city began, a well planned colony of free settlers, and people may have believed South Australia was better because of these beginnings. The pride people had in their city may be evident in the boasting by authors in various newspapers articles. The building design for parliament was discussed in an article in The Adelaide Observer (1889:36). The winners of first prize were announced, and the architectural style and orders were described in detail. It is - 71 - debateable how many people actually read or understood the architectural terms stated in the article. Perhaps this and other such articles were aimed at the social elite who may have been educated in such classical language, rather than ‘ordinary folk’, meaning that articles on architecture, although published in local newspapers, were only understood by a small audience. The General Post Office building was discussed in detail in The South Australian Register (1871A:5). The article must have been important enough to be republished word-for-word in the Supplement to the South Australian Register (1871:1). The author writes: The new Post-Office, although not wholly satisfactory in some of the details of its design, is undoubtedly one of the finest architectural structures in South Australia, and will not compare unfavourably with any of the public buildings in the Southern Hemisphere. The article on the proposed new General Post Office for Adelaide (The South Australian Register 1871A:5) could mean that architects in South Australia were trying to compete with those living interstate. In fact, the supervising architect of the building visited Melbourne to view the General Post Office there, and he used some of the knowledge he gained throughout the construction of the building in Adelaide. The authors of the article on the General Post Office (The South Australian Register 1871A:5) comment on how they were shown around the building by the supervising architect, Mr. R. G. Thomas, and that they gathered some facts of interest for their readers, such as how much the building will cost, what it will look like, especially details about the architectural elements. This article may have been read and understood by a small audience, however the author and editor thought it was - 72 - important to tell their readers. This means that the people controlling the print media told the public what they thought was important about Adelaide’s public architecture. In a sense society was moulded and controlled by what they read in the newspaper. Whether they read, understood or believed the article or not, it was still considered important to publish. Two to three storey buildings were being erected in 1879 in Adelaide in the place of one storey buildings (The South Australian Register 1880B:5). A ‘good example’ was set by the Directors of the Bank of South Australia with their elaborate design choice, costing around £60 000. Even though the new Bank of Adelaide building was to cost less than the Bank of South Australia, it “will be a decided ornament to the corner of King-William and Currie Streets” (The South Australian Register 1880B:5). Therefore, it seems that great expense was not needed to provide beautiful architecture, but rather well designed buildings. People seemed to be happy with well designed public buildings, rather than elaborately designed buildings. Again, this seems to be an issue of people having pride in their city and its appearance. Perhaps newspapers and magazines at the time showed buildings in parts of Europe that made people think Adelaide’s architecture was just as beautiful. People travelling to overseas locations, such as architects on holidays, may have also commented in the public arena on how beautiful the public buildings in Adelaide were, and how similar they were to buildings in Europe. To illustrate the different meanings attached to buildings by individuals, W. Bagot (1958:6), an architect in the mid 20th century, stated his approval of the design for the Bank of South Australia building, but he also commented that “most of the panel enrichment [was] superfluous and inappropriate”. This shows that it was personal - 73 - choice as to whether the detail of the building was liked. However, the general public appear to be more concerned about the construction material used and the overall appearance of the building, while architects were also concerned about the construction material used, along with the detail of the design. In contrast, another article on the same page states that the Bank of Adelaide, which cost £26 000, is “exceedingly plain”, although the effect of light and dark stone used on the building’s façade was “generally admired” (The South Australian Register 1880A:5). Perhaps a different author wrote this article, as the comments about this building seem to be contradictory to those from the other article. This article shows that people did think differently about Adelaide’s architecture. Once a building was completed, few had major modifications. Therefore, if the public or any influential individuals did not comment upon the design of the building in its initial stages, there would be no further input. What is now called the Ambassadors Hotel was discussed in an article looking at improvements in the city (The South Australian Register 1880C:5). In contrast to the expenditure on many government buildings, the design for the new hotel would be estimated at £5 000. The Licensing Board had to approve plans, so they had the power to veto any design or proposal they didn’t like. The author describes the design as having a ‘handsome façade utilising a modern style of architecture, but with traits of earlier historical periods’. The Ambassadors Hotel had Doric, Corinthian and ‘Other’ orders present, but it was the wings that broke up the façade. The ‘Other’ order and the location of the wings breaking the external facade gave the building its ‘modern’ look. What commentators called ‘modern’ in the 1880s, was actually architects breaking away from traditional approaches to classical architecture. Modern variants were derived from classical elements, but they used - 74 - them in different ways on buildings. This shows that architects were aware of changes occurring in architecture overseas, such as discussions by Leeds (1880), and new terms were designated in Australia to describe them. In 1883 there was an article complaining about the lack of building improvements along North Terrace in the area west of Morphett Street (The South Australian Register 1883:4). However, the area was revitalised by several new public buildings. Hindley Street was an important street in the north-western part of the city in the early to mid 19th century, with the eastern half containing shops and the western half containing houses of important people (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:4). Rundle Street was also an important street, especially for shopping, in the north-eastern part of the city in the mid to late 19th century. Therefore, certain parts of Adelaide rivalled each other for business. The Newmarket Inn was one of the new, luxurious and progressive buildings in the north-western area of the city. Obviously the city’s architectural developments continued to illustrate a prosperous economy and growth overall for Adelaide, and newspapers forwarded this view to their readers. The secondary sources, mostly history books written in the 20th century, also discussed several public and parliamentary debates and other matters. This shows that the appearance of public architecture was a concern, not only for the government and commercial organisations, but also for the general population, who would use many of the buildings for meetings or other social occasions. It seems the public were also concerned for the appearance of their major public buildings, as they displayed the colony’s prosperity and growth to everyone. Some newspaper articles today hint at the meanings of Adelaide’s classical architecture, such as Ellis (2001:5) who looks at the influence of ancient Greece on - 75 - architecture in Adelaide. Ellis (2001:5) quoted classicist Dr Anne Geddes who said classical architecture has been likened to baroque music: it was introduced as a theme and then it was varied. Geddes discussed the personalities of the orders, such as the Doric order being suitable for the administration of justice, such as the Magistrates Court, due to its impression of ‘strength and restraint’. The concept of the Orders having personalities was discussed mostly in the Renaissance period (15th – 18th centuries AD), but it dates back to the writings of Vitruvius (1st century AD). In Adelaide, some of the buildings show a connection to these gender attributes of personalities, however, mostly they seem to be used according to means and tastes. Several of the buildings discussed in the article by Ellis (2001:5) were constructed in the early 20th century, however they have similar influences and meanings to 19th century buildings. Geddes said the Bank of South Australia, now know as Edmund Wright House, was done in the baroque manner and is luxuriously decorated like a Hellenistic palace. There is also reference to architects varying from tradition, such as changing the appearance and the uses of columns (i.e. linking columns with arches). Geddes said “the influence of Greek architecture on Adelaide had added to the city’s distinctiveness” and is due to the careful thoughts of our predecessors and their choices (Ellis 2001:5). Some modern cities are untouched by classical architecture, therefore those that instigated it in Adelaide were in touch with historical precedents and fashions in Britain and other parts of Europe. In the late 20th and early 21st centuries, colonial buildings were seen as significant links with the past, and many are now preserved as part of our heritage (Page and Ingpen 1985:86). Progress has also meant that the use of some buildings has changed over time, such as the proposition to change the General Post Office into an “international-standard hotel and shopping complex” (Treccasi 2004:3). However, - 76 - the uses of other public buildings have remained the same, while the streetscape changes around them (Figure 5.2). These changes affect the buildings social meanings. Although these explicit social meanings can tell us what people said or thought about public architecture in Adelaide in the 19th to 21st centuries, implicit social meanings need to be assessed as well. 1 2 Figure 5.2 – North Terrace, Institute building and State Library, Jervois Wing [Source: Photo taken by Deborah Arthur, 2-10-04] [Note: Institute building (1); State Library, Jervois Wing (2)] Implicit Social Meanings Implicit social meanings are those underlying the use of specific architectural styles and orders, and building materials, by architects, builders and other influential people. They are also the messages ordinary people take away from their interactions with these buildings, which may not be written down, but these messages can be inferred from the archaeology and its social context. Implicit social meanings include mental representations of social structures, which Clive Gamble describes as a cognitivist approach in his work on the Paleolithic period (Renfrew and Bahn - 77 - 2000:215). Another is the phenomenological approach, which stresses the dynamic engagement of people with their environment and operates at the level of the individual. Different meanings exist for the different uses of classical style architecture in particular social contexts. Implicit social meanings can be analysed in terms of: Local (Adelaide); Other colony capitals (in Australia); Other British colonies; Britain and other parts of Europe. Local Regional influences provided different deviations from existing classical styles, mostly due to the local climate, topography, or type, quality and quantity of building materials. These influences, as well as those from individuals, provided new meanings for classical architecture. Roe (1995:41) discussed resource limitations as a physical influence on style. A social influence on style was the development of a local identity through the use of architectural style (Johnson 2002:177). Another local factor is the geographical location for some public buildings. Light planned for many important public buildings in Adelaide to be erected around Victoria Square (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:3). Parliament House was originally going to be constructed around Victoria Square, however after much debate, the current site on North Terrace was selected (Danvers Architects 1987:5). This means that buildings of a certain function had planned locations, even before the designs for the buildings were completed. The styles of the buildings around Victoria Square were not entirely classical, as there were some gothic buildings in the vicinity. This - 78 - is important to note, considering the discussions in England about Adelaide’s city streets being designed in certain styles (Langmead and Schenk 1983:4). Although areas were set aside for certain functions, such as the geographical centre of Adelaide’s city for important government buildings, the style for this area was not dictated. The functional location of buildings contributed to the structure and order that Wakefield and Light both wanted for Adelaide, as did the layout of the grid for South Adelaide, and the choice of classical style architecture for many public buildings. Funds available for new public buildings were another local factor, especially when comparing commercial and government buildings. The General Post Office (GPO) and the Bank of South Australia (BSA) were both constructed in the 1870s at a time of economic prosperity in South Australia. The government specified that the GPO was not to exceed £20 000, but it ended up costing £53 258 (Marsden et al 1990:166). The BSA is a considerably smaller building, and it ended up costing £63 000 (Marsden et al 1990:99). Perhaps during times of economic prosperity, commercial enterprises could put the majority of their money into its standing structures, whereas the government had to spend their money on a lot of other public structures, therefore its funds were substantially limited in regards to public buildings. This means that architects may have had more flexibility in designing some non-government buildings, as the conditions were not as strict in the tenders (i.e. wider choice of construction material, architectural order and style). At a local level, wealthy and powerful individuals or groups were often a driving force behind the choice of architectural style (Maitland 1984:16, 20; Clerk 1984:16). They wanted to give the observers of their buildings the message that they were important, because they used classical styles, historically associated with power and - 79 - order. Bremmer (1994:1) states that religion in ancient Greece was maintained through the order and control of society’s elite. In a similar way, society was ordered and controlled in Adelaide by those wealthy and influential individuals and groups. The classical style of architecture and aspects such as the city’s grid layout, dictated how the city centre would appear. One form of unintentional implicit social meaning was by individuals such as bank directors, hotel proprietors and government officials, who chose classical designs for public buildings in Adelaide in the 19th century. I am unsure if any of the entrants in competitions, which were common occurrences for public buildings, would have designed in any style other than classical. It would be interesting to see what style the 30 entries received for the General Post Office were, however this information could not be sourced. An influential individual in Adelaide was Colonial Architect, Edward Hamilton, who originally designed plans for a new parliament building in 1857, but at a later time a design competition was held (Danvers Architects 1987:5, 12). Hamilton said that the building needed to be designed with ‘good principles’, as all of its faces would be exposed to view (Danvers Architects 1987:6). This implies that people were concerned about the appearance of their public buildings, and that they should illustrate good building practices. Hamilton also said that he used the classical style rather than gothic in his design, because it was less expensive and better suited to the climate of the colony (Danvers Architects 1987:6). Perhaps Hamilton was making an analogy to the warm Mediterranean climates and the use of classical styles there, and that they would be appropriate for Adelaide, which had a similar climate. This shows that style was constrained by the local environment in the eyes of the architect. - 80 - There was a definite preference for public buildings in Adelaide to be designed in the Victorian Free Classical style, which was a reaction against the restrictions of Greek and Roman revival work (Apperly et al 1989:59). Many architects perhaps felt restricted by the strict rules governing classical buildings, and they wanted to experiment and show different classical styles with different meanings. The Victorian Free Classical style expressed society’s growing prosperity. However, other styles that were popular in other British colonies were also popular in Adelaide around the same time, such as the Second Empire style, which was popular in Canada in the 1870s and 1880s (Cameron and Wright 1980:6). In South Australia, perhaps influential individuals in the government and commercial enterprises, wanted to see Adelaide develop its own regional identity, shown partially through its public architecture with its very ‘public face’. The breaks from traditional classical architectural orders appeared on all types of public buildings in the 19th century in Adelaide. They included: the use of art deco style decoration on the arches above windows, such as for the General Post Office, Newmarket Hotel, Supreme Court, Torrens Building and the Gallerie (Appendix 6); a carved coat of arms for South Australia on several buildings, such as the Treasury building, Bank of South Australia, Supreme Court, General Post Office, Town Hall, and the Torrens building; carved faces of important individuals (i.e. governors, the Queen) on several buildings, such as Parliament House, the Town Hall, General Post Office and the Supreme Court; and the use of the ‘Other’ architectural order for many buildings. These breaks show that architects in Adelaide were defining their classical style buildings with other elements that were not always classically derived. Perhaps they were hoping to make the design more pleasant to the eye of the observer, or they just wanted a change to the designs already known and published. - 81 - Perhaps the encouragement that authors such as Leeds (1880:100) were giving to break away from traditional designs was being heard by the architects in Adelaide. Of the sixteen buildings recorded for this study, they all displayed classical architectural orders and styles. Twelve had symmetrical façades, and all but one building had at least one conventional feature. Balustrades and pediments were the most common conventional features found on buildings. These variables are a measure of how classical a building is (Adam 2003). Money was probably the main constraint governing the final design of many buildings, and some classical features may not even have been considered in the original designs due to monetary constraints. Even if there were monetary constraints, Johnson (2002:113) states that there was still a choice being made as to what style to use for a particular building. This is a limitation to archaeological interpretation and reading the meaning of the architectural style. Other colony capitals The designs of several 19th century General Post Offices (GPOs) in other Australian capital cities were similar, which Morgan and Gilbert (1969:45) argue may have been due to “inter-colonial rivalries”. As South Australia was a new colony, perhaps it felt it had to prove itself architecturally to other Australian colonies. Wakefield and his associates wanted the colony of South Australia to be well planned and better than the other Australian colonies (Watson 1984:79). Perhaps architects in Adelaide wanted to compete with architects interstate, so the buildings they designed, and in turn the architects, would get recognition in England by word-of-mouth or through architectural publications. - 82 - Architects may have had their own ideas on what style to design a building, however these ideas may have been controlled by what their client wanted. Even though a particular style was not specified in tenders for architectural competitions, the clients could still have influenced the style by choosing one type over another. The clients, as well as the architects, would have been aware of the styles of buildings interstate. They may have wanted to compete at a larger level, that of comparing the works of similar buildings (i.e. GPOs) between states, rather than comparing buildings by a certain architect or within a singular region (i.e. Victoria Square). Other British colonies The functions of buildings and their styles were similar in Britain and its colonies, as there was general agreement among architects that classical and gothic styles would be used for building with certain functions (Freeland 1972:93). This meant that most government and commercial buildings in the 19th century were classical, and most religious and educational buildings were gothic. The trend of designing religious buildings in the gothic style was occurring in other British colonies as well as Australia, such as Canada in the late 19th century (Cameron and Wright 1980:8; Maitland 1984:122). However, there were always deviations from this general acceptance, as architects either disagreed with these conventions, or thought that a different style would be better suited for the building they were designing. These deviations may be an example of resistance against the general principles of specific styles for buildings of certain functions, such as the commercial building designed by English and Soward in the gothic style in the late 19th century (Appendix 4). The use of classical style architecture for government and commercial buildings was similar in other Australian states (Appendix 3). - 83 - Historical trends for classical styles were copied in Britain and its colonies, predominantly because of their associations with the Roman Empire and the messages of power, order and structure they impart to their observers. Governments in the 19th century wanted to associate themselves with powerful and orderly societies, such as the Romans, and they did this by using classical styles for their important public buildings. There was a general trend for using classical styles for the majority of public buildings throughout the 17th to 19th centuries in Britain and its colonies. Britain and other parts of Europe Fashions and trends in Britain and other parts of Europe were copied mostly because of the availability of pattern books and other architectural publications that showed details of the various classical orders and styles. Adelaide, being a new colony, followed the architectural trends in Europe, because they wanted similar associations to power and order. Roe (1995:41) discussed copying styles from previous generations as a cultural influence on style. While some architects were copying already known styles and classical architectural elements, available in pattern books and other publications, other architects were designing different classical architectural elements, which gave public buildings in Adelaide a different appearance. Some people, such as Leeds (1880:100) were even encouraging architects to develop new Orders, or design buildings in different ways, to create new ideas and allow architects to think for themselves, rather than be dictated by what was written or by what they were taught. Therefore, there seemed to be a traditional approach by some architects, mostly copying already known designs, and more innovative architects, who were using the same classical elements in different ways. - 84 - Adelaide’s Social Meanings The use of classical style architecture for public buildings in Adelaide during the 19th century occurred for two reasons: firstly it was an extension of the historical styles used in Britain at that time and in the preceding century; and secondly it was deliberately chosen by architects and building owners who shared particular visions for Adelaide. The vision originally proposed by Wakefield was to have an orderly, powerful and controlled society, free from convicts, that was also well planned. The people who made decisions about what architectural style would be used for public buildings in Adelaide wanted to associate themselves with English traditions and trends, and wanted to illustrate the order, power and control in the new colony. Australian colonies, and other British colonies in America and Canada were taken over by the ‘Classical world view’ in the 18th and 19th centuries, specifically in relation to its architectural form. Influential people controlled the choice of architectural style, but less influential people sometimes commented upon the appearances of their public buildings. This shows people had some concern with what their city and its public buildings looked like, and they probably took pride in their well laid out and planned city. Although Adelaide was a new colony, where theoretically the architects could have designed public buildings in any style they liked, architects were still controlled by what they knew, what funds and materials were available, what was popular in other parts of the western world, and what architectural styles were approved by those people in powerful positions (i.e. bank directors, hotel proprietors, government officials). - 85 - CHAPTER 6 – CONCLUSIONS The main aim of this study was to investigate the social meanings of classical style public architecture in Adelaide in the 19th century. Other aims were to examine: the types of classical styles present on buildings; whether these classical styles were used on public buildings in other Australian capitals or in other British colonies; and what the influences were in the choice of architectural style. British colonists in Adelaide used the classical style for many public buildings to show the people living there, other Australians and the British, that Adelaide was a thriving, developing, modern town. The public buildings looked purposeful, in that they were appropriate for buildings of such importance. The Classical world view that was affecting Adelaide in regards to its architecture in the 19th century, also affected the layout of the city. It was also affecting other British colonies around the same time. The studies of architectural style in Britain and several British colonies all have underlying social meanings of controlling the environment. The British accomplished this through colonising new regions and bringing with them their tastes for architecture and other forms of material culture, which they imposed on their new environment. Different classical styles were used for public buildings of certain functions, such as government and commercial buildings, whereas the gothic style was mostly used for religious and educational buildings. Architects that chose the gothic style for commercial buildings, may have rejected the Classical world view, or they may have just preferred that style for their building. - 86 - The significance of these findings shows a worldwide pattern in the use of classical style architecture, similar to Deetz’s (1977) analogy of the Georgian world view for America. In the Renaissance period the classical style was used due to its associations with ancient Greece and Rome, and the implicit meanings of this, such as power, strength and order. Classical style architecture has been used in various regions of the western world since the Renaissance period, and a variety of styles were popular at different times. Adelaide was a colony, whose influential individuals were knowledgeable on the tastes and ideas in Europe, not only in regards to architecture, but other aspects such as city planning, and social groups, such as the men who met at the Adelaide Club (Marsden et al 1990:108). Several different implicit and explicit social meanings were discussed, showing the variety of influences on the choice of architectural style and its implications for how people understood it. Generally, the classical style was approved for public buildings, because it illustrated their importance to society. Other important matters included the location of the buildings and the materials used, all which architects, owners, and other influential individuals, saw as important for Adelaide. Style was influenced at the individual level, through the background and knowledge of the architects and others who made decisions on the design and construction of the buildings. Style was also influenced by society and its desire for a unified look, and style’s associations with historical periods. In the last two thousand years, different classical styles have been popular in western society. When a new style developed, it was usually as a result of an architect breaking away from traditions to create a style worthy of copying by other architects, such as Palladio in the 16th century (Clerk 1984:9). - 87 - Certain institutions, such as banks and hotels, used the classical style, as did the government for the majority of their public buildings. The meanings people would have associated with buildings of different functions may have been different. It was definitely the public buildings that sparked parliamentary and public debate, probably because they were the ‘public face’ of Adelaide, and the government and the general public wanted them to look impressive and to make a strong statement of prosperity for the colony’s. How much the layperson needed to know about architecture to understand it is unknown. Perhaps the layperson in Adelaide viewed architecture in a similar way to people with an architecture background, as was found in the study by Hershberger (1980:22). This means that most people thought classical style architecture was associated with power and control, because of what was known generally about the Classical and Renaissance periods (i.e. through books, poems, newspapers, movies). There appears to be a general acceptance for the use of classical styles for public buildings, due to their historical associations. This study is therefore a significant addition to archaeological studies into architectural style and social meaning in Australia, as it offers a method of interpretation of one form of material culture in Adelaide, and it presents some reasons behind the choices in regards to architectural style. New areas of research that extend from this study include enlarging the sample size to incorporate all classical style public buildings in both South Adelaide and North Adelaide. This may result in more defined trends for variables, such as architectural order and style. Another would be to analyse other variables, such as construction materials and methods, where social meanings could be compared. It would also be possible to compare Adelaide’s buildings in more detail to those in other capital - 88 - cities, or to do a similar study in another capital city, such as Melbourne or Hobart, to see if any similarities exist between the choices of architectural styles and orders. There needs to be more archaeological studies undertaken in regards to the analysis of architectural style and its social meanings in Australia, to give archaeologists a better understanding of how colonists saw themselves coming to this new land, and why they made the choices they did. What we classify today as heritage is often protected to an extent by listings such as the Australian Heritage Places Inventory (2004). However, buildings and other heritage items can just as easily come off this list as go on it. Adelaide’s ‘significant’ 19th century heritage needs to be adequately protected for future generations, so people can reflect and remember the history of their city. This study has shown there are numerous influences that affected the choice of architectural style, and these are similar to the influences in Britain and other British colonies throughout the 19th century. The architectural styles and orders appear mostly to be used according to taste and means in Adelaide, rather than historical associations of the orders with personalities (i.e. Doric = male) or function (i.e. Doric = military buildings). There are also a variety of social meanings that can be read or inferred from studying the style of public buildings in Adelaide in the 19th century. To be a successful colony, the proponents based Adelaide’s appearance on successful precedents (i.e. city grid layout), using classical style architecture as part of this plan due to its associated historical meanings (i.e. power of the Roman Empire, which was linked to their public buildings). Architects and other influential individuals wanted people living in the city or visiting it, to take away messages that it was successful, powerful, orderly and controlled. Although Adelaide had its economic - 89 - highs and lows throughout the 19th century that affected how many buildings were constructed, or even their style, many classical style public buildings still remain today, part of Adelaide’s character and heritage. - 90 - REFERENCES [Note: AAA&HRG # = Australian Architecture Archives and History Research Group catalogue number] Architectural Reports Danvers Architects 1987, Parliament House, Adelaide: Conservation Study, August, Danvers Architects, Adelaide. Danvers Architects 1991a, Edmund Wright House: Conservation Study, October, Danvers Architects, Adelaide. Danvers Architects 1991b, State Library and Museum Complex: Conservation Study, June, Danvers Architects, Adelaide. Books Adam, R. 1990, Classical Architecture: A Complete Handbook, Penguin Group, London. Advertiser 1958, The South Australian Story, Advertiser Newspaper Limited, Adelaide. Apperly, R., Irving, R. and Reynolds, P. 1989, A Pictorial Guide to Identifying Australian Architecture: Styles and Terms from 1788 to the Present, Angas and Robertson, North Ryde. Architectural Association Sketchbook 1891, Vol. 11, New Series, Parts 1, 3-12; and Vol. 12, New Series, Parts 1, 4, 6, 8-12, London, AAA&HRG # 201. Bagot, W. H. 1958, Some Nineteenth Century Adelaide Architects, The Pioneers’ Association of South Australia, Adelaide. Baumgart, F. 1969, A History of Architectural Styles, Pall Mall Press, London. Berry, D. W. and Gilbert, S. H. 1981, Pioneer Building Techniques in South Australia, Gilbert Partners, North Adelaide. - 91 - Best, B. J. 1973, Preserving Our Heritage: The Story of the Struggle to Preserve an Historic Building Written from ‘Behind the Counter’, Barbara J. Best, Adelaide. Blagg, T. 1983, ‘Architecture’, in M. Henig (ed.), A Handbook of Roman Art, Phaidon Press Limited, Oxford, pp 26-33. Bremmer, J. N. 1994, ‘Greek Religion’, in Greece and Rome, October, Vol. 41, No. 2, pp. 1-100. Burden, M. 1983, Lost Adelaide: A Photographic Record, Oxford University Press, Melbourne. Burke, H. 1999, Meaning and Ideology in Historical Archaeology: Style, Social Identity, and Capitalism in an Australian Town, Kluwer Academic/Plenum Publishers, New York. Cameron, C. and Wright, J. 1980, Second Empire Style in Canadian Architecture, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Ottawa. Canter, D. and Tagg, S. 1980, ‘The empirical classification of building aspects and their attributes’, in G. Broadbent, R. Bunt and T. Llorens (eds), Meaning and Behaviour in the Built Environment, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 119. Carr, C. and Neitzel, J. E. 1995a, ‘Integrating Approaches to Material Style in Theory and Philosophy’, in C. Carr and J. E. Neitzel (eds), Style, Society and Person: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 3-25. Carr, C. and Neitzel, J. E. 1995b, ‘Future directions for material style studies’, in C. Carr and J. E. Neitzel (eds), Style, Society and Person: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 437-459. Carter, M. 1983, Early Canadian Court Houses, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Ottawa. Chitham, R. 1985, The Classical Orders of Architecture, The Architectural Press, London. Clerk, N. 1984, Palladian Style in Canadian Architecture, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Ottawa. - 92 - Conkey, M. and Hastorf, C. 1990, The Uses of Style in Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge. Curl, J. S. 1992, Classical Architecture: An Introduction to its Vocabulary and Essentials, with a Select Glossary of Terms, B. T. Batsford Ltd, London. Deetz, J. 1977, In Small Things Forgotten: The Archaeology of American Life, Anchor Books, New York. Dutton, G. 1978, ‘Adelaide: City of Light and Shade’, in J. Ferguson (ed.), Seven Cities of Australia, John Ferguson, Sydney. Editorial Escudo De Oro 2002, Gaudí, Editorial Escudo De Oro, Barcelona, Spain. Freeland, J. M. 1972, Architecture in Australia, 2nd ed., Penguin Books, Ringwood, Victoria. Gamble, C. 2001, Archaeology: The Basics, Routledge, London. Gibbs, R. M. 1969, A History of South Australia, Balara Books, Adelaide. Glassie, H. 1975, Folk Housing in Middle Virginia, The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville. Hanks, P. and Potter, S. (eds) 1971, Encyclopedic World Dictionary, The Hamlyn Publishing Group Ltd., London. Henig, M. (ed.) 1983, A Handbook of Roman Art, Phaidon Press Limited, Oxford. Herman, M. 1963, Early Colonial Architecture, Longmans, Croydon, Victoria. Hershberger, R. G. 1980, ‘A study of meaning and architecture’, in G. Broadbent, R. Bunt and T. Llorens (eds.), Meaning and Behaviour in the Built Environment, John Wiley and Sons, Chichester, pp. 21-41. Hope, C. A. 2003, ‘Ancient Egypt in Melbourne and the States of Victoria, Australia’, in J. M. Humbert and C. Price (eds), Imhotep Today: Egyptianizing architecture, UCL Press, London, pp. 161-181. Johnson, D. L. 1980, Australian Architecture 1901-51: Sources of Modernism, Sydney University Press, Sydney. Johnson, M. 1993, Housing Culture: Traditional Architecture in an English Landscape, Smithsonian Institute Press, Washington DC. - 93 - Johnson, M. 2002, Behind the Castle Gate: From Medieval to Renaissance, Routledge, London. Kelso, W. M. 1992, ‘Big things remembered: Anglo-Virginian houses, armorial devices, and the impact of common sense’, in A. E. Yentsch and M. C. Beaudry (eds), The Art and Mystery of Historical Archaeology: Essays in Honor of James Deetz, CRC Press Inc., Raton, Florida. Langmead, D. 1994, Accidental Architect: The Life and Times of George Strickland Kingston, Crossing Press, Sydney. Langmead, D. and Schenk, J. 1983, A Photographic Guide to the Architecture of Adelaide: No. 1, City Centre, Royal Australian Institute of Architects, South Australian Chapter, Unley, South Australia. Leeds, W. H. 1880, Rudimentary Architecture for the Use of Beginners and Students: The Orders and their Aesthetic Principles, Crosby Lockwood and Co., London, AAA&HRG # 583. Leone, M. P. and Potter, P. B. Jr (eds) 1988, The Recovery of Meaning: Historical Archaeology in the Eastern United States, Smithsonian Institution Press, Washington DC. Leone, M. P. and Silberman, N. A. (eds) 1995, Invisible America: Unearthing Our Hidden History, Henry Holt and Company Inc., New York. Macklin, R. 1978, ‘Brisbane’, in J. Ferguson (ed.), Seven Cities of Australia, John Ferguson, Sydney. Maitland, L. 1984, Neo-classical Architecture in Canada, National Historic Parks and Sites Branch, Parks Canada, Ottawa. Marsden, S., Stark, P. and Sumerling, P. 1990, Heritage of the City of Adelaide: An Illustrated Guide, Corporation of the City of Adelaide, Adelaide. Matthews, C. N. 1998, ‘Part of a “Polished Society”: Style and Ideology in Annapolis’s Georgian Architecture’, in P. A. Shackel, P. R. Mullins and M. S. Warner (eds), Annapolis Pasts: Historical Archaeology in Annapolis, Maryland, The University of Tennessee Press, Knoxville, pp. 244-267. Morgan, E. J. R. and Gilbert, S. H. 1969, Early Adelaide Architecture: 1836 to 1886, Oxford University Press, Melbourne. - 94 - Morris, C. 1995, ‘Symbols to power: Styles and media in the Inka State’, in C. Carr and J. E. Neitzel (eds), Style, Society and Person: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 419-433. Musgrove, J. (ed.) 1987, A History of Architecture, 19th ed., Butterworths, London. Orser, C. E. and Fagan, B. M. 1995, Historical Archaeology, HarperCollins College Publishers, New York. Page, M. and Ingpen, R. 1985, Colonial South Australia: Its People and Buildings, J M Dent Pty Ltd, Melbourne. Page, M. 1986, Sculptors in Space: South Australian Architects 1836-1986, Royal Australian Institute of Architects, SA Chapter, Adelaide. Persse, J. N. and Rose, D. M. 1981, House Styles in Adelaide: A Pictorial History, Stock Journal Publishers, Adelaide. Pikusa, S. 1986, The Adelaide House 1836-1901: The Evolution of Principal Dwelling Types, Wakefield Press, Netley. Prown. J. D. 1993, ‘The truth of material culture: History or fiction?’, in S. Lubar and W. D. Kingery (eds), History from Things: Essays on Material Culture, Smithsonian Institution, Washington D.C., pp. 1-19. Renfew, C. and Bahn, P. 2000, Archaeology: Theories, Methods and Practice, 3rd ed., Thames and Hudson, London. Roe, P. G. 1995, ‘Style, Society, Myth, and Structure’, in C. Carr and J. E. Neitzel (eds), Style, Society and Person: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 27-76. Rondelet, P. J. 1863, Traite Theorique Et Pratique De L’Art De Batir, Dixieme Edition, Chez Firmin Didot Freres, Libraries, Imprimeurs De L’Institut De France, Paris, AAA&HRG # 77. Shanks, M. and Tilley, C. 1987, Social Theory and Archaeology, Polity, London. Shotter, D. 1994, The Fall of the Roman Republic, Routledge, London. Stark, M. T. 1999, ‘Social dimensions of technical choice in Kalinga ceramic traditions’, in E. S. Chilton (ed.), Material Things: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 24-43. - 95 - Summerson, J. 1963, The Classical Language of Architecture, The M.I.T. Press, Massachusetts. Tzonis, A. and Lefaivre, L. 1986, Classical Architecture: The Poetics of Order, The M.I.T. Press, Massachusetts. Vlach, J. M. 1995, ‘Gothic Revival Architecture’, in M. P. Leone and N. A. Silberman (eds), Invisible America: Unearthing Our Hidden History, Henry Holt and Company Inc., New York, pp. 142-143. Voss, J. A. and Young, R. L. 1995, ‘Style and the self’, in C. Carr and J. E. Neitzel (eds), Style, Society and Person: Archaeological and Ethnological Perspectives, Plenum Press, New York, pp. 77-99. Warburton, E. 1986, ‘The Emerging City’, in J. Walker (ed.), South Australia’s Heritage, State Heritage Branch, Department of Environment and Planning and Government Printing Division, Netley, South Australia, pp. 30-43. Watson, D. 1984, The Story of Australia, Thomas Nelson Australia, Melbourne. Wiessner, P. 1990, ‘Is there a unity to style?’ in M. W. Conkey and C. A. Hastorf (eds), The Uses of Style in Archaeology, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp. 105-112. Wobst, H. M. 1999, ‘Style in archaeology or archaeologists in style’, in E. S. Chilton (ed.), Material Things: Critical Approaches to the Interpretation of Material Culture, University of Utah Press, Salt Lake City, pp. 118-132. Worsnop, T. 1988, History of the City of Adelaide, 2nd ed. (1st ed. 1878), Corporation of the City of Adelaide, Adelaide. Journals Bell, A. 2002, ‘Emulation and Empowerment: Material, Social, and Economic Dynamics in Eighteenth-and Nineteenth-Century Virginia’ International Journal of Historical Archaeology, Vol. 6, No. 4, December, pp. 253-298. Bonython, J. 1968, ‘Classical Houses of South Australia’, Country Life, publisher unknown, October 31st, pp. 1120-1123. Dunnell, R. C. 1978, ‘Style and function: A fundamental dichotomy’, American Antiquity, Vol. 43, pp. 192-202. - 96 - Eckardt, H. 2000, ‘Illuminating Roman Britain’, in G. Fincham, G. Harrison, R. Holland and L Revell (eds), TRAC 99: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Durham 1999, Oxbow Books, pp. 8-21. Fincham, G. 2000, ‘Romanisation, status and the landscape: Extracting a discrepant perspective from survey data’, in G. Fincham, G. Harrison, R. Holland and L Revell (eds), TRAC 99: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Durham 1999, Oxbow Books, pp. 30-36. Grahame, M. 1998, ‘Redefining Romanization: material culture and the question of social continuity in Roman Britain’, TRAC 97: Proceedings of the Seventh Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Nottingham 1997, Oxbow Books, pp. 1-10. Janes, D. 2000, ‘Wood, masonry and the construction of identity: comparing Southern Britain and Gaul, 4th to 7th centuries’, in G. Fincham, G. Harrison, R. Holland and L. Revell (eds), TRAC 99: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Durham 1999, Oxbow Books, pp. 83-89. Johnson, M. 1992, ‘Meanings of polite architecture in sixteenth-century England’, Historical Archaeology, Vol. 26, pp. 45-46. Purser, M. 2003, ‘The view from the verandah: Levuka Bungalows and the transformation of settler identities in later colonialism’, International Journal of Historical Archaeology, Plenum Publishing Corporation, pp. 293-314. Revell, L. 2000, ‘The creation of multiple identities in Roman Italica’, in G. Fincham, G. Harrison, R. Holland and L Revell (eds), TRAC 99: Proceedings of the Ninth Annual Theoretical Roman Archaeology Conference, Durham 1999, Oxbow Books, Oxford, pp. 1-7. Wilkie, L. A. and Bartoy, K. M. 2000, ‘A Critical Archaeology Revisited’, Current Anthropology, Dec., Vol. 41, Iss. 5, pp. 747-777. - 97 - Newspapers Bowe, C. 2004A, ‘The Light myth’, The Adelaide Review, July, Adelaide, pp. 3-4. Bowe, C. 2004B, ‘A history of the Kingston plan of Adelaide’, The Adelaide Review, July, Adelaide, pp. 4-5. Ellis, D. 2001, ‘Ancient Greek influence just a step away’, Adelaidean, Vol. 10, No. 6, July, Adelaide, p. 5. The Adelaide Observer 1889, ‘The New Houses of Parliament’, Saturday 8th June 1889, p. 36. The South Australian Register 1871A, ‘The New Post Office’, Monday 12th June 1871, p. 5. The South Australian Register 1880A, ‘Adelaide’, Friday 2nd January 1880, p. 5. The South Australian Register 1880B, ‘Building Improvements During 1879’, Friday 2nd January 1880, p. 5. The South Australian Register 1880C, ‘City Improvements’, Saturday 22nd May 1880, p. 5. The South Australian Register 1883, ‘Building Improvements’, Tuesday 17th July 1883, p. 4. The Supplement to the South Australian Register 1871, ‘The New Post Office’, Saturday 17th June 1871, p. 1. Treccasi, L. 2004, ‘Luxury shape of things to come for GPO building’, The Advertiser, 14th July, Adelaide, p. 3. Unpublished Reports and Documents Finnimore, C. J. ND, Neo-classical Architecture in Adelaide: 1845-1940, Masters Thesis, Flinders University, South Australia. Medina Grand Adelaide Treasury 2004, ‘Guest Services Directory’, Medina Grand Hotel, Adelaide. Medina Grand Hotel 2004, Information board in lobby area of Hotel, Victoria Square, Adelaide. - 98 - Pickhaver, A. 1973, ‘Architecture of the 1850s: A detailed analysis of Adelaide architecture with reference to English and Australian architecture’, Honours Topic 16403; Supervisor was Senior Lecturer, Donald Leslie Johnson, in the Fine Arts Department, School of Humanities, Flinders University (AAA&HRG # S223/4/11). Web Sources Adam, R. 2003, ‘Welcome to Classical Architecture’, [accessed: 17-11-03], Building Books Trust, available at: http://www.lookingatbuildings.org.uk/default.asp?Document=1.C.1,1. Adelaide Club 2004, [accessed: 12-08-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6403. Adelaide General Post Office 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6331. Adelaide Town Hall 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6363. Ambassadors Hotel 2004, [accessed: 12-08-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE16908. Australian Heritage Places Inventory 2004, [accessed: 12-08-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/ahpi/index.html. Bank of Adelaide (former) 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6341. Botanic Hotel 2004, [accessed: 11-05-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6340. Edmund Wright House 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6333. Institute Building (former) 2004, [accessed: 11-05-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6321. Magistrates Court House 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6319. - 99 - Medina Grand Adelaide Treasury [Hotel] 2004, [accessed: 11-05-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgibin/ahpi/record.pl?SA10857 Mitchell Building 2004, [accessed: 12-08-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6369. Newmarket Hotel 2004, [accessed: 9-09-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6399. Palestrina 2004, [accessed: 9-10-04], Tourist Office, Palestrina, Italy, available at: http://www.cittadipalestrina.it/english1.html. Parliament House 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6388. Supreme Court 2004, [accessed: 24-03-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6387. Torrens Building 2004, [accessed: 11-05-04], State Heritage Authority, available at: http://www.heritage.gov.au/cgi-bin/ahpi/record.pl?RNE6327. - 100 - GLOSSARY OF TERMS Term Description Illustration Abacus A slab forming the crowning member of a capital, which appears different in each architectural order (i.e. Doric, Ionic) (Musgrove 1987:1527). Acanthus A plant whose leaves form the lower part of the Corinthian (order) capitals (Musgrove 1987:1527). Aedicule A small temple like arrangement, which became a common motif in the Classical system. Columns or pilasters carry a pedimented entablature and enframe a niche or window (Musgrove 1987:1527). Architrave The beam or lowest division of the entablature, which extends from column to column. The term is also applied to the moulded frame round a door or window (Musgrove 1987:1528). Apophyge The curve given to the top and bottom of the shaft of a column where it expands to meet the edge of the fillet above the base and beneath the astragal under the capital (Curl 1992:175). Ashlar Cut stone worked to even faces and right angled arrises, laid on horizontal courses with vertical joints (Curl 1992:175). Astragal A small moulding with a semicircular profile, a bead, sometimes a roundel or a baguette; found as a ring separating the capital from the shaft of a classical column (Curl 1992:177). Attic base The base of a classical column consisting of two torus mouldings separated by a scotia with fillets; found with all Orders except the Greek Doric and the Tuscan (Curl 1992:177). - 101 - Refer to Figure A2.2 Refer to Figure A2.2 Base The lower portion of any structure or architectural feature (i.e. column) (Musgrove 1987:1529). Balcony A projecting platform with access through windows or doors from an upper floor level and supported on pillars, posts, brackets or consoles and enclosed with a balustrade. In Australia it is often roofed (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:158). Balustrade A row of short shafts or balusters supporting a rail or coping used to fence in a balcony or as an open parapet (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:158). Basement The lowest storey or storeys of a building partly or wholly below ground level (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:158). Bead-and-reel Enrichment of an astragal resembling a string of beads and reels (Curl 1992:179). Capital The crowning feature of a column or pilaster (Musgrove 1987:1530). Caulicoli In the Corinthian capital the caulicoli, caulicolae or caulcoles are the eight stalks that spring from the upper row of the acanthus leaves (Curl 1992:181). Cavetto A hollow moulding, principally used in cornices, with as profile the quadrant of a circle (Curl 1992:181). Classical Architecture originating in ancient Greece and Rome, the rules and forms of which were largely revived in the Renaissance period (Musgrove 1987:1530). Colonnade A sequence of columns and their superstructure (Apperly, Irving and Reynolds 1989:277). - 102 - Refer to Figure A2.2 Refer to Figure A2.2 Column A vertical support generally consisting of base, circular shaft, and spreading capital (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:159. Cornice In Classical or Renaissance architecture, the crowning or upper portion of the entablature, also used for any crowning projection (Musgrove 1987:1531). Cymation The top member of a group of classical mouldings, usually the cornice; a moulding the section of which is a curve of contrary flexure (Curl 1992:186). Dentil One of a series of small rectangular or square blocks placed under a cornice (Burden 1983:218). Die A cube, or the body of a pedestal between the plinth and the cornice, also called the dado; a die is also a term used instead of abacus (Curl 1992:187). Dressing Ornamental finish, as moulding or projecting blocking around doors or windows or at corners of buildings. Also other mouldings projecting over the face of a wall. Dressings are often of dressed stone, brick or stucco (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:158). Echinus The convex or projecting moulding, resembling the shell of a sea-urchin, which supports the abacus of the Doric (order) capitals (Musgrove 1987:1533). Egg-and-dart Also called egg-and-anchor or egg-and-tongue; enrichment found on ovolo or echinus mouldings, and consists of upright egg-like motifs with the tops truncated, between which are arrow-like elements, repeated alternatively (Curl 1992:190). Entablature In classical architecture, the horizontal members carried by the columns, pilasters or walls and consisting of architrave, frieze and cornice (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:159). Exedra A semicircular or rectangular recess in a wall or colonnade; originally to accommodate seating (Henig 1983:252). - 103 - Refer to Figure A2.2 Refer to Figure A2.2 Refer to Figure A2.2 Façade The face or elevation of a building (Musgrove 1987:1533). Fascia A broad band or face used in classical architecture, often in conjunction with other moulding (Curl 1992:192). Fillet A narrow band used between moulding in order to separate and define them, found in cornices and bases; it is not always flat, but is often found cut into two or more narrow faces with sharp edges between (Curl 1992:192). Flutes Rounded, vertical channels cut into the shaft of a column. Never found in the Tuscan order and is an optional element of the others (Burden 1983:219). Frieze The middle of the three primary divisions of an entablature: a horizontal band between the architrave and the cornice. In the Doric order it is filled with triglyphs, but in the Ionic and Corinthian orders it often has figure sculpture. It is now loosely applied to almost any band of decoration below a cornice (Burden 1983:219). Geison A raked cornice, as on a pediment (Curl 1992:194). Georgian Architecture of the first four King Georges of England (1714-1830), but the term is usually applied to a very simple form of stripped classical domestic architecture featuring plain window openings with sashes, door-cases that vary from the elaborate treatment with consoles, pediments, columns, and pilasters, to plain openings with fanlights (Curl 1992:194). Gothic An architectural style used in Europe, particularly between the 12th and 16th centuries, and characterised by pointed arches, ribbed vaulting, buttresses and pinnacles (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:157). Ideology The body of doctrine, myth and symbols of a social movement, institution, class or large group; such a body of doctrine etc, with reference to some political and cultural plan as that of fascism, together with the devices for putting it into operation; the science of ideas (philosophy) (Hanks and Potter 1971:787). - 104 - Refer to Figure A2.2 Kapunda marble Stone quarried at Kapunda, a town about 100 miles north of Adelaide. It is sometimes blue-grey in colour (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:159). Keystone The highest and central stone or voussoirs of an arch; it is often carved with human heads, sometimes supporting a bust or other ornament; it is wedgeshaped (Curl 1992:199). Meander A labyrinthine fret used in bands, often on string courses and sometimes on friezes (Curl 1992:195). Metope The space between Doric triglyphs, sometimes open and sometimes filled with a carved block (Burden 1983:220). Modillion A projecting ornament like a console or embellished bracket under the corona of the Corinthian and Composite Orders, and occasionally in the Roman Ionic Order; they are placed with intervening coffers or other ornaments between them (Curl 1992:200). Mouldings Part of an Order or a building shaped in profile into various curved or angular forms; any ornament contour given to features of a building, whether projections or cavities, such as an architrave or astragal (Curl 1992:201). Mullion A vertical member dividing a window into sections (Apperly et al 1989:281). Neck Order The plain part of a Roman Doric or Tuscan column between the astragal at the top of the shaft and the fillet annulets on the capital; some Greek Ionic columns have necks, usually enriched with anthemion ornament; a neck moulding separates the capital from the shaft proper (Curl 1992:201). An order in architecture comprises a column (usually with a base, shaft and capital), supporting an entablature; there are five Orders: Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, Tuscan and Composite (Musgrove 1987:1537); Colossal Order is one with columns or pilasters rising from the ground through several storeys, and also called Giant Order (Curl 1992:203). - 105 - Refer to Figure A2.2 Palladian motif The term given by the French to the combination of arch and columns, where the arch stands over the columns and the entablatures of which are the lintels of narrower side openings (Burden 1983:220). Parapet A solid protective wall placed at the edge of a roof, platform or bridge (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160). Pedestal A substructure placed under some columns in classical architecture; it consists of a base, plinth, a dado or die, and a cornice; it may support a statue, a vase, an obelisk, or some other element; it is also found as part of a balustrade (Curl 1992:204). Pediment The triangular shape created by the sloping eaves and horizontal cornice. They are often used ornamentally as roof decorations or over doors or windows (Burden 1983:220); there are other shapes of pediments, such as semi-circular or broken. Pier A mass of masonry, as distinct from a column, from which an arch springs, in an arcade or bridge. Also applied to the wall between doors and windows (Musgrove 1987:1538). Pilaster A rectangular feature in the shape of a pillar, but projecting about 1/6th of its breadth from a wall, and of a particular architectural order (Musgrove 1987:1538). Plinth The projecting base of a wall immediately above the ground, usually chamfered or moulded at the top; the square block below the base of a column or pilaster (Curl 1992:207). Portico A porch with the roof supported on at least one side, supported by columns (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160). Quoins The corner stones at the angles of buildings and hence the angel itself, which in South Australia is often formed in brickwork arranged with an indented vertical edge allowing the corner brickwork to be toothed into walling built of limestone or bluestone (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160). Regula A band below the taenia and above the guttae in the Doric entablature (Curl 1992:209). - 106 - Rendering In South Australia, a surface of cement mortar applied to the external face of a wall (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160); the plastering with stucco, or similar, on an outside wall (Curl 1992:209). Rosette A rose shaped patera (circular ornament resembling a dish, worked in relief) ornament used to decorate strings, architraves etc. (Curl 1992:209). Rustication Rustication meant a rough way of laying stones in the Renaissance period (Summerson 1963:24); the joints of which are worked with grooves or channels to emphasise the blocks (Curl 1992:210). Scroll A convoluted or spiral ornament; a volute of an Ionic, Corinthian or Composite capital, or any moulding in the form of a volute or scroll (Curl 1992:212). Scotia A concave moulding, usually found at the base of a column or a pilaster between the fillets of the torus mouldings, or under the nosing of a stair (Curl 1992:212). Shaft The portion of a column between base and capital (Musgrove 1987:1540). Storey The vertical division of a building; the space between two floors, between two entablatures, or between any other horizontal division (Curl 1992:214). String course A moulding or a projecting course running horizontally across the face of a building (Burden 1983:221). Stucco A mortar, in South Australia usually made with lime, applied to the external face of walling and suitable for forming mouldings and other ornamentation (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160). Superimposed When the orders are used to define the storeys of a classical façade and set one above the other; they have a hierarchical order; Doric is used at the bottom, Ionic above, and Corinthian above that; in taller buildings Tuscan is used first, then Doric, Ionic, Corinthian, & finally composite (Curl 1992:215). - 107 - Refer to Figure A2.2 Symmetry Uniformity or balance of one part of a building and another; equal disposition of parts and masses on either side of a centre line, as a mirror-image (Curl 1992:216). Taenia The fillet or band at the top of a Doric architrave separating it from the frieze (Curl 1992:216). Torus A large convex moulding at the base of a column or at the top of a plinth (Curl 1992:217). Tower A tall building, or part of a building in the form of a shaft. The plan may be square, circular or polygonal (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160). Triglyph The vertical block in a Doric frieze comprising two glyphs and two half-glyphs (hence the ‘three’ glyphs), separating the metopes; triglyph blocks occur over the centre-lines of columns and spaces between columns (Curl 1992:218). Trochilus A scotia, or concave moulding (Curl 1992:219). Verandah An open gallery with a roof or canopy supported on light supports; usually placed before the windows of the principal rooms to shelter them from the sun; popular during the 19th century (Curl 1992:221). Vernacular architecture Local architecture of houses, barns, small shops etc.: as different from large residences and public buildings, which are often built with imported materials, design and technology (Persse and Rose 1981:166). Volute The scroll or spiral occurring in Ionic, Corinthian and Composite (order) capitals (Musgrove 1987:1542). West Island granite A grey granular crystalline building-stone obtained from West Island, situated in Encounter Bay about sixty minutes south of Adelaide (Morgan and Gilbert 1969:160). - 108 - - 109 -
