Abstract
Italian masons were famed for their techniques of construction. In no other country had tradition been so well refined, particularly in the building of domes and vaults. Why, then, should anyone question experience? The old models were graceful, harmonic, based on proportions which combined beauty and strength. Everyone firmly believed that the arch was the most stable of architectural figures; what needed refinement were the technical methods—scaffolding and centers which would simplify the masons’ work, improved drafting to eliminate errors in perimeters and profiles. Why should anyone suggest new rules for the dimensions of such structures, perfected as they had been by a secular tradition?
This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.
Access this chapter
Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout
Purchases are for personal use only
Preview
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
References
See G.B. Nelli, “Del fabbricarsi i ponti ne’ fiumi della Toscana,” in G.B. Nelli, Discorsi di architettura (Florence, 1753) (hereafter cited as Nelli, Discorsi), p. 34.
See G.B.C. Nelli, “Vita del senatore Giovan Battista Nelli, patrizio fiorentino,” in Nelli, Discorsi, pp. 7–24.
G.B. Nelli, “Ragionamento sopra la maniera di voltar le cupole senza ado-perarvi le centine,” in Nelli, Discorsi,p. 72.
A. Cecchini, “Due discorsi sopra la cupola di S. Maria del Fiore,” in Nelli, Discorsi, pp. 77–103.
Archivio Vaticano, Archivio della reverenda fabbrica di S. Pietro, la P., Arm. III, n. 3, fasc. 6; see also R. Di Stefano, La cupola di S. Pietro (Naples, 1980), p. 15.
G. Poleni, Memorie istoriche della gran cupola del Tempio Vaticano (Padua, 1748), p. 121.
C. Fontana, Il tempio Vaticano e sua origine (Rome, 1694), p. 325.
T. le Seur, F. Jacquier and R.G. Boscovich, op. cit, p. 25.
See, for example B.P.E. Clapeyron, “Mémoire sur le travail des forces élastiques dans un corps solide élastique déformé par l’action des forces extérieures,” Comptes rendus, Vol. 46 (1858), pp. 208–212.
F.P.G. Favre, “Sentimenti d’un filosofo sopra le cause, e rimedi de’ danni della cupula di S. Pietro, e sopra il parere dato su tale argomento da’ tre matematici al fine del 1742,” in Scritture, pp. 59–184.
G. Poleni, Memorie istoriche della gran cupola del tempio Vaticano e de’ danni di essa, e de’ ristoramenti loro (Padua, 1748) (hereafter cited as Poleni, Memorie istoriche).
J. Bernoulli, “De motu musculorum, meditationes mathematicae,” Acta eruditorum (Leipzig), 1694, pp. 201–205.
G. Poleni, “Ad abbatem D. Guidonem Grandum epistola; qua proferuntur nonnulla de causa motus musculorum,” in G. Poleni, Epistolarum mathemati-citrum fasciculus (Padua, 1729), p. G-114.
See “Scritture di matematici e architetti the presero parte nella costruzione della gran guglia del duomo di Milano,” in A. Nava, Relazione dei restauri intrapresi alla gran guglia del duomo (Milan, 1844) p. 39.
Author information
Authors and Affiliations
Rights and permissions
Copyright information
© 1991 Springer-Verlag New York Inc.
About this chapter
Cite this chapter
Benvenuto, E. (1991). Architectonic Debates. In: An Introduction to the History of Structural Mechanics. Springer, New York, NY. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2994-0_3
Download citation
DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-1-4612-2994-0_3
Publisher Name: Springer, New York, NY
Print ISBN: 978-1-4612-7751-4
Online ISBN: 978-1-4612-2994-0
eBook Packages: Springer Book Archive