Rudolf Wittkower, Architectural Principles

in the Age of Humanism:Its Influence on the Development

and Interpretationof Modern Architecture
HENRY A. MILLON MassachusettsInstituteof Technology

Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020

ForMargotWittkower practice,at leastin England,in the I95Os.Apparentlythe
effecton the practicingarchitectwas mixed sinceReyner
THIS ESSAY will not attempt to outlinetheconsiderable Banhamjudgedit to havehada negativeeffecton architects
effectWittkower'sArchitectural Principles had on Renais- who, simple-mindedly,appliedRenaissance proportional
sancestudies.My intention,instead,isto sketchtheinfluence systemsor compositionalprinciplesto twentieth-century
it had on the developmentand interpretation of Modern buildings.Itspositiveeffect,primarilyon a groupof young
Architecture asreflectedin theoriesof modularconstruction, Englisharchitects,will be discussedlater.The widespread
theoriesof proportionandcomposition,andviews of the influenceof thebook,however,ledBanhamto sayin 1955:
internal,intrinsiccultural,orsocietalsignificance
of Modern "Theeffectof Architectural Principleshasmadeit by farthe
Architecture of thefirstfourdecadesof thiscentury.' mostimportantcontribution-forevil aswell asgood-by
Fromitspublicationasa bookin 1949Architectural Princi- any historianof the modernmovement."3The positive
pleswas,accordingto theAustralian architectRobinBoyd, contributionof Architectural will be discussed
Principles with
"required reading in mostarchitectural in
schools theperiod respect to the following, listedin increasingorderof im-
afterWorldWarII."2Itseffectwasparticularly markedon portance:(a) modularconstruction,(b) views on propor-
thosewho begana reassessment of the aimsand achieve- tionandcomposition,(c)reassessments of aimsandachieve-
mentsof the earlymodernmovement,andon architectural mentsof the 192os and'30s.

A preliminaryversion of this paperwas given in New York on 10
November 1971 at a Wittkower Memorial (t II Oct. 1971) spon-
sored by the New York Chapter of the SAH and the Institute of
Fine Arts, New York University. In a slightly altered state it was
presented to the Art Historians Dinner Club in Cambridge, Massa-
chusetts, on 15 December 1970. I am particularly grateful for criti-
cism and suggestions received at these occasions.
I. That such an assessment of the influence of ArchitecturalPrinci-
ples can be attempted is largely due to Wittkower himself, who, in
prefaces to subsequent editions of ArchitecturalPrinciples,and in later
articles on related subjects, cited the literature in which the book or
issues raised by it were discussed or criticized.
2. Robin Boyd, The Puzzle of Architecture (London and New
York, 1965), pp. 88-89, where Wittkower is credited with partial
responsibility for the revival of circles in plans of the postwar period.
ArchitecturalPrincipleswas first published as a series of three articles
in the Journal of the Warburgand CourtauldInstitutes(see fn. 5). These
were gathered and published in 1949 as volume 19 in the series
Studies of the Warburg Institute, University of London. This publi-
cation, the first edition, was rapidly exhausted (see fn. 33), and in
1952 Tiranti published a second revised and enlarged edition. Ten
years later Tiranti brought out a third thoroughly revised edition.
The third edition with a new preface was reprinted by Norton in
1971.
Modular
Construction
Modular constructionutilizing limited mass-produced
combinableunits(modules)hadbeena subjectof animated
discussionfrom the earlyyearsof the twentiethcentury.
Exigenciesof WorldWarIIgavefurtherimpetusandafter
the war a sectionof the BritishBuildingResearchStation
was devotedto modularconstructionresearch.When the
young AmericanarchitectEzraEhrenkrantz cameto Eng-
landon a FulbrightScholarship in 1953he eventuallyassoci-
atedhimselfwith the B.R.S. in the modularconstruction
sectionand developedthere his first book, The Modular
Number Pattern-FlexibilityThrough which
Standardization,
appearedin Londonin 1956.The systempresentsa three-
dimensionalmodularnumbertablethatprofessedlyallows
3. R. Banham, "The New Brutalism,"Architectural Review,118
(1955), 361. This article,in an expandedversion, with much new
additionalmaterialformed the basis for Banham'sbook with the
same title but with an addedsubtitle,"Ethic or Aesthetic?",which
appearedmore than ten yearslaterpublishedin New York, 1966.
83
 84
for a greatvarietyof coordinateddimensions.He cites,in
his referenceson proportionand modules,Alberti,Ham-
bidge,Ghyka,Kielland,andWittkower.The referenceto
Wittkower,who haddocumenteduse of the columnas a
moduleandthemoduleastheorderingunitof thebuilding
(Partsii, iii, andIv of Architectural andtheothers
Principles),
cited above may have been intendedby Ehrenkrantz to
indicatethe lengthytraditionfor the use of modulesand
therebyboth legitimizeand promotehis new expanded
modularsystems.Themodulewasnot aesthetically neutral
at that time and issuesof proportionwere also involved.
In the 1950s,merelyindicatinga traditionfor modules
wouldnot havebeenaspersuasive asdemonstrating a rela-
between the useof modules and
tionship acceptedpropor-
tionalsystems.Whileonly a few hadbegunto realizehow
Architectural would leadto a reevaluationof the
Principles
modern movement,Ehrenkrantzwas apparentlyaware
from readingWittkowerof the potentialfor culturalsig-
nificancebeyondmathematics residentin proportional sys-
temsof theRenaissance andwishedto associate hismodular
systemwith thissourceof potentialstrength.
Christopher Alexandercontinuestodayhiswidelypubli-
cizedandcontroversial searchforarationalmethodofarchi-
tecturalproblemanalysisandsolution.In 1959he published
a paperin theJournal of theRoyalInstituteof BritishArchi-
tectson modularcoordination thatbothaimedatdemolish-
ing anymysticalorsentimental viewsaboutproportionand
modulesin contemporary architecture,aswell aspresenting
a trenchantmathematical analysisof the dimensionsneces-
saryto providea desirablerangeof perceptibledimensions
importantto man.4Alexander'sarticlebeganwith an ac-
knowledgementof the reasonable useof proportionalsys-
temsin antiquityandthe Renaissance citingWittkoweras
thesourceof hisinformation.He addedthatcontemporary
views aboutproportion,however,have"neverbeendisas-
sociatedentirelyfrom mysticism,"implyingthat current
views aboutproportionin architecture were particularly
erroneousin thisregard.
Wittkower'sarticle"Systemsof Proportion"published
previouslyin 1953in the Architects'YearBookwas undoubt-
edly a source for Alexander.In the fourth paragraphof his
article Wittkower cited modern psychological discoveries
that confirm the brain'stendency to searchfor order. Alex-
ander'ssecond and thirdcolumns are similarlydevoted to a
documented and extended view of the same thesis. The re-
mainderof the first half of Alexander'sarticleis devoted to
discrediting various contemporary writers on proportion
such as Ghyka, Hambidge, and Le Corbusier. Because
4. C. Alexander, "Perception and Modular Co-ordination,"
RIBAJournal,66 (1959), 425-429.
Wittkower had presentedthe structurallink between cul-
tural beliefs and physical form and because he was spared
criticism are evidence that Architectural Principlescontrib-
uted, among other sources,to Alexander'smotivation for
preparingthe piece. Not long after Alexander'sarticle,and
perhaps partly because of it (and other similar skeptical
analyses), the literature on modular construction became
less preoccupied with proportional relations of modular
units (except for those studiesderiving from Le Corbusier's
Modulor)and Wittkower's influencewaned.
Proportion
Wittkower's views about the contemporaryvalue of pro-
Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020
portional relationshipschanged and developed from the
late I940s to the early'6os. When Architectural
Principlesfirst
appearedin 1949he saidin the prefacethat it was concerned
with "the meaning of classicaltrends of thought for those
architectsof the Renaissancewho had close ties with hu-
manist circles."The concluding paragraphof the book ac-
knowledges, however, that "the subjectis againvery much
alive in the minds of young architectstoday and they may
well evolve new and unexpected solutions to this ancient
problem."5When writing the prefaceto the thirdeditionin
1962 Wittkower said that although "the book is concerned
with purely historicalstudies of the period I45o-I58o...
it was my most satisfactoryexperienceto haveseenitsimpact
on a young generationof architects."Itsimpact on theories
of proportionwas immense.
By the time of the thirdedition, Wittkower hadexpanded
and developed in separatepapersmany of the issuesabout
proportionalrelationshipshe had raisedin sectionsofArchi-
tecturalPrinciples.From a scholarlyhistoricalreconstruction
of the significanceofproportionalstudiesto architectsof the
fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in Italy, Wittkower, by
1960,was maintainingthatthe questfor symmetry,balance,
andproportionalrelationshipswas anintegralpartofhuman
nature. This section will sketch this development in his
thought.
5. First edition, p. 135. The initial version, published as three
separatearticlesin the ournalof the Warburg andCourtauld Institutes
("Alberti'sApproachto Antiquityin Architecture,"IV [I94O-41],
1-18; "Principlesof Palladio'sArchitecture,"PartI, vii [1944], 102-
122; Part n, vm [1945], 68-1o6) containsa final paragraphas fol-
lows: "The contributionofferedin these pages, though limited in
scope,aimsat being lessspeculativethansome previouswritings,for
it is strictlybasedon one of the few certainindicationsabout pro-
portion which have come down to us from the Renaissance:Pal-
ladio's own inscribedmeasurementsof his villas and palaces."Be-
tween the time of publicationof PartInof "Paladio'sArchitecture"
in 1945 and that of Architectural Principlesin 1949, Wittkower ap-
parentlybecameawareof the effectof his articleson contemporary
architecturalthought, or of an independentgrowing interest in
mattersof proportion.

Contributingto the developmentof theoriesof formin
architecturein the latenineteenthandearlytwentiethcen-
turiesby architects
andhistorians(notablyFiedler,Wi51fflin,
Frankl,andBrinckmann)werestudiesof proportionalsys-
tems. They continueto appear.After World War II, in
Wittkower'swords,the quantityof publicationson pro-
portion "increasedto such an extent that it has become
virtuallyimpossibleto keepacheckon them."6Wittkower's
book was almostuniqueamongthesestudiesin focussing
attentionon thesocietalmeaningor significanceof propor-
tiontheoryin theRenaissance for peoplein theRenaissance
(though Frankl discussed"purposiveintention").Not sur-
prisingly,most architectsand some criticsof the modern
85
it receivedwide attentionin architectural journals.Perhaps
asa consequence of it (andto my mindalsoasa consequence
of Ackerman's"Gothic Theory of Architectureat the
Cathedralof Milan"whichappearedin 194910alongwith
Wittkower'sArchitectural Principles) theMilanTriennaleof
1951 hada sectiondevotedto proportionfromantiquityto
LeCorbusier.1l
As reportedby Wittkower,the exhibition"led to the
ideaof holdinga meetingof scholarsandartistsinterestedin
thesubject.TheresultwasthePrimoConvegno Internazionale
sulleProporzioni nelle arte..." held in Milan 26-29September
of the sameyear.12Wittkowerwas electedto preside.The
Congresswasatthetimethoughtto be of suchinterestthat

Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020

movementsawin thebookonlytheform/proportionissues anInternational Committeewasformedto planthe second
in relationto contemporary practice. meeting in New York,whichnevertook place.
Banham,for example,in speakingof the generationof Althoughpriorto thismeetingWittkowerhadnot met
Britisharchitectsincluding,amongothers,Colin Wilson, Le Corbusier,he hadmadecriticalcommentsabouthim in
PeterSmithson,andJamesStirling,saidtheyhad a reviewof anEnglisheditionof CamilloSitte'sDerStiidte-
theirinterestin classicismconfirmed by theirreadingsin LeCor- bau.13 Theymusthavemetatthe1951meeting.Wittkower,
busier,butallcameverydirectlyundertheinfluence of thebril- thereafter, oftenquoteda statementabouttheModulor that
liantrevivalof Palladian studiesin Englandin the lateforties, heheardLeCorbusiermake:"LeModulor,jem'enfiche."14
eitherdirectly through RudolfWittkower andhisbookArchitec- Subsequentto the CongressWittkowercitedthe Modulor
turalPrinciplesor throughtheteaching of his outstandingpupil asanexampleof a proportional
ColinRowe.7 systemin modernarchitec-
turethatfor the firsttime combinedanthropometric, geo-
Banhamin thisbook (thoughnot ten yearsearlierin the metric,proportional, andmodularsystems,andtheGolden
articlequotedabove with the same title) saw, therefore, Section.15Thefirstof thesecitationsappearedin the Archi-
Wittkowerasa reviverof interestin Palladianstudies,i.e., tects'YearBookin 1954in an articleentitled"Systemsof
of Italiansixteenth-century andEnglisheighteenth-century
architecture-whichisonlypartof whatRowesawin him- Modulor2 was issuedby the samepublisher,Le Corbusierpointedly
referredto the previouspublicationas "LeModulorof 1948" (initial
anddidnotapparently seetheimplicationfortheinterpreta- page).
tion of architecture of his own time. Rowe, for example, io. J. Ackerman,"GothicTheory of Architectureat the Cathedral
in in of Milan,"Art Bulletin,31 (1949), 84ff.
quite early, I950, additionto proposingperceptive i 1. For more on the exhibitionsee the catalogue,Nova Triennale
parallelsbetween sixteenth-century architectureand the di Milano,Studisulle
proporzioni(Milan,1951).For summariesof the
architectureof the modernmovementin the '20s, stated paperspresentedat the Congresssee Atti e RassegnaTechnicadella
that the architecture of Le Corbusiercouldneverbecome SocietadegliIngegnerie degliArchitettiin Torino(1952), No. 6, pp.
intellectually S19-135.The Congresswas reportedin the Neue ZiircherZeitung,I I
intelligibleuntilit acquired"objectivesignifi- October 1951.A quotationfrom the paperWittkower presentedat
canceassymbolizingthe processesof society"andthatthe the Congress (as well as a statementabout the significanceof the
aimsof Gropius"arepartlyindependentof visualjustifica- Congress)may be found in a letterby JohnVoelckerto the editorof
the RIBA Journal(February1952), p. 140. Voelcker, who was at
tion.9"8 that time a student in architecture,cited Wittkower as someone
Interestin proportionamongarchitectsandarthistorians whose researcheswere of assistanceto studentswho were engagedin
receiveda greatstimuluswith the publicationof Le Cor- the "eternalquestfor coherenceand rapportin our actions,andmore
busier'sLe Modulorin 1950.9 As the first system of its kind specificallyin our buildings."
12. BurlingtonMagazine,94 (1952), 52.
to be proposed by a protagonist of the modern movement, 13. Town PlanningReview, 19 (1946-47), 164-169. The citation
and discussionof this review in G. R. and C. C. Collins' Camillo
Sitte andtheBirthof ModernCity Planning(New York, 1965), p. 74,
6. Architectural
Principles,3rd edition (London, 1962), p. 164. was pointed out to me by my colleagueKennethKaiser.
7. R. Banham, TheNew Brutalism(New York, 1966), pp. 12-15. 14. "Reportof a Debate on the Notion 'that Systemsof Propor-
8. C. Rowe, "Mannerismand Modern Architecture,"Architec- tion make good design easier and bad design more difficult,' "
turalReview,107 (1950), 296. RIBAJournal,64 (1957), 462.
9. According to Le Corbusier,the book was finishedby the end I5. "Systemsof Proportion,"Architects'YearBook (1954), p. 18;
of 1948. Proofs were correctedby 23 September1949 (Le Modulor "The ChangingConcept of Proportion,"The VisualArts Today,G.
[Boulogne, Seine, 1950], pp. 239). Printing was not, however, Kepes, editor (Middletown,Conn., 1960), p. 216; "Le Corbusier's
completed until I March 1950 (see final page). By 1954 when Modulor,"FourGreatMasters(New York, 1963), pp. 201-203.
86
Proportion." The Modulorand Le Corbusier are cited as
supplying a preliminary answer about the effect "new
dynamicspace-timerelationships[will have on the] replace-
ment of absolute measureof space and time." Wittkower
cites the Moduloras "the first consistentsynthesissince the
break-down of the older systems... [which] testifiesto the
coherenceof our culturaltradition."
In October of the same year Ruth Olitsky and the young
British architectJohn Voelcker openly acknowledged the
importance of the book to architecturein an article in
ArchitecturalDesignentitled "Form and Mathematics."The
article treats the Modulorand Architectural Principlesand
arguesthat both are vital to practicingarchitects.It begins
(p. 306):
It is seldomthatchancetimingin the publicationof two books
hasbeenso fortunateas in the caseof Dr. Wittkower'sArchitec-
turalPrinciplesin the Age of Humanism and Le Corbusier'sLe
Modulor. Both books are concerned,broadlyspeaking,with in-
terpretationsof man's placein the physicaluniverse.The first,
explicitly,throughhistoricaldocumentation, the secondimplic-
itly, throughthe developmentof mind and idea.Eachbook il-
luminatesthe other,andthroughthemboth it becomespossible
to see the originsof many issueswhich are very much alive
amongstarchitects at the presenttime.
The remainderof the article examines each book in turn,
aswell asthe similaritiesbetween proportionalsystemsin the
Renaissance,theircosmologicalimplications,and the Modu-
lorproportionalsystems and their cosmological analogues
in theoriesabout "spaceand time with respectto man."
By the mid-I95os it seemedasif issuesofporportion were
becoming of overwhelming importanceto the architectural
professionand Wittkower was, of course,in the thick of it.
Banham's article on "New Brutalism" appearedin 1955
citing ArchitecturalPrinciplesas the book that had made by
far the most importantcontributionto English architecture
sincePioneersoftheModernMovement.16 A few yearslaterthe
intellectual climate had changed (partly due to aspects of
ArchitecturalPrinciplesthatwill be consideredbelow) andthe
numbers of people who were concernedabout proportion
declined sharply.
The debate in an RIBA meeting on 18 June 1957 over a
motion entitled "that Systems of Proportion make good
designeasierandbad design more difficult"and its defeaton
a 48-60 vote disclosedthe developing skepticismabout pro-
portional systems. Pevsner introduced discussion for the
motion; Maxwell Fry, Tatton Brown, and William Allen,
among others,alsosupportedthe motion while MishaBlack
began discussionagainstthe motion andwasjoined by Peter
Smithson. Smithsonargued,at one point, that Wittkower's
16. "The New Brutalism," ArchitecturalReview, II8 (I955), 361.
ArchitecturalPrincipleswas sucha successwhen it appeared
becauseissuesof proportionwere "importantto architects
as a matterof tooth and claw debate,in 1948and 1949."
Architects wereatthattime,accordingto Smithson,looking
at Palladianbuildingsto find "somethingto believein ...
somethingthatstoodabovewhat they were doing them-
selves."He went on to arguethatsucha concernwas, in
1957,pass&. "Therighttimefor the PalladianRevivalwas
1948."17
Wittkowerwaspresentatthedebate,eventhougha non-
member,andattemptedto countersomeof the comments
by clarifyingissues.Hepointedoutthatno onehadproposed
a universalsystemof proportion,whichhadbeenattacked
Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020
in the debate,and addedthat thereneverwere universal
systemsin the past-only peoplewho believedthey had
universal systems.Hisanswerto Smithsonunderlines Smith-
son's"pragmatic pointofview" thatWittkower feltargued
againstany individual"positionof belief."Wittkower's
view wasthatSmithsonfelt thatway becausetherewasno
broaderfoundationof universalbeliefthatwould bolster
anysearchfor a "systemof generalvalues"whichanypro-
portionalsystemwould imply. He endedhis comments
statingthathe thoughtit "veryworthyforindividualarchi-
tectsto try to recapturesomeof the obviousvalueswhich
scale,proportion,unity... bringabout.But it is no good
trying to recapturewhat one might call pre-naiveposi-
tions. ."18
Smithsonbelievedthat following Renaissance propor-
tionalsystemsin the mid-twentiethcentury,or indeedany
mereproportional system,wouldnot resultin anarchitec-
ture thathad culturalsignificance.Wittkowerappearsto
or the
haveagreedbutto haveaddedthatmerepragmatics,
searchfor a new innocence,wasfoolish.His view that there
weresome"obviousvalues"in proportionmaybe aninitial
disclosureof thepositionhe wasto reachby 1960.
Althoughthe editorof the RIBAJournaleitherhadnot
beenableto decideon whichsideWittkowerspokeorchose
not to noteit in thereport,BrunoZevi,in hisreviewof dis-
cussionon the motion,listedWittkoweras"infavor"and
saidthatin rejectingthemotion"TheEnglisharchitects had
showngreatwisdomandstrength.'"19 Inthenextparagraph,
aftercitingJohn Summerson'spaper"Casefor a Theory of
Modern Architecture"in the precedingissue of the RIBA
JournalZevi statedthathuman and socialvalueshave super-
seded proportion or formal committment and the architect
17. "Report of a Debate ...," RIBAJournal, 64 (1957), 460-461.
Smithson gratuitously added, "the present interest in America in
systems of proportion is just an academic post-mortem of our Euro-
pean post-war impulse, as also is this debate at the RIBA."
18. Ibid., p. 462.
3 (1957), 508-509.
19. Architettura,

in 1957"baseshis work on artisticinterpretation of archi-
tecturalprograms;on the shape/formof the spacesthat
expresstheseprograms. . . testingof a design [today]is
effectedwith a broaderexaminationthanthatprescribed by
traditionaltheoryof proportions;it is a moredifficulttest,
lessmechanicalandsecure."
It is not necessaryto passjudgmenton Smithson'sand
Zevi'sviews in orderto observethat thereappearsto be
muchlessconcernfor proportionin the late 195osand'6os
thanin the previousdecade.In some quarters,however,
notablythoseclosestto LeCorbusier,proportioncontinued
to be studied.As recentlyas 1965EduardSeklerandHans
Buchwaldmountedan exhibitionin Harvard's(and Le
Corbusier's) Carpenter CenterentitledProportion, aMeasure
of Order, in which some of the and
analogies pseudoscien-
tificobservations thathadbeenattackedby Alexanderand
questionedby Wittkowerpersisted.20
InWittkower'sfinalpaperdevotedto proportional issues,
"LeCorbusier's Modulor,"whichwasdeliveredin 1961,he
said,"so far as I cansee, the beliefin an order,divineand
human,derivedfromnumbersandrelationsof numberswas
alwaystiedto highercivilizations."21 Thiscommentstates
explicitlythatbeliefaboutorderwasalwaystiedto religious
conceptsandimplies,therefore,thatin a civilizationsuchas
ours,wherereligionplaysa minorrolein the arts,concepts
andbeliefsaboutorder,if theyareto exist,mustbe derived
from manhimselfandhisperceptionof the naturalworld.
Wittkowerhad alreadysketchedsomethingof what this
might be in the articleappearingin VisualArts Todayin
1960.Init hewasalsosomewhatmoreexplicitabouthisown
position.Previouslyhe hadonly madesubtlereferences and
hadscarcelycommittedto printhis beliefsaboutthe con-
temporaryvalueof proportionstudies.In thisarticlethere
is,instead,awarm,revealinglastsection(p.216) thatbegins:
"I consideredendingmy paperat thispoint,but too many
aspectsof theproblemof proportionwouldhaveremained
unmentioned." The remainderoutlinesviews heldby cur-
rentscientistsandphilosophers aboutorder"inmacrocosm
andmicrocosm," quotingWhitehead,Einstein,L.L.Whyte,
andH. Weyl on harmonyandmathematics, the searchfor
order, biological conditioning of thought processes, and
symmetry. The section ends with a statementthat, in spite
of the world today being in a state of "organic chaos," it
would only be a passing phase and that once again, since
"the quest for symmetry, balance, and proportional rela-
tionshipslies deep in human nature," man would return to
20. E. Sekler, Proportion,A Measureof Order,Catalogue of an
exhibition held at CarpenterCenter for the Visual Arts, Harvard
University, Springand Summer, 1965 (Cambridge,1965).
21. FourGreatMasters(New York, 1963), 197.
p.
87
"thatsearchfor systemsof proportionin thearts... aslong
as art remainsan endeavorof man." This statementex-
plicitlystateshis positionandbelief.
In 1957at the RIBAdebatehe arguedthatgeneralvalues
derivefrom universalbeliefsandthatthe broaderfounda-
tion (theoretical? necessaryfor the development
scientific?)
of universalbeliefswas lacking.Thislackmadethe search
for proportionmeaningless, and,by implication,construc-
tion accordingto the valuesrepresentedby proportional
systemsuseless,sincetheywerenot andcouldnot be based
on generalvalues.If Wittkowerheld anyviews aboutthe
possibleexistenceof a "broaderfoundation"or possible
universalbeliefsthey werenot mentioned.He foundit no
Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020
morethan"worthy"for individualarchitectsto try to re-
capture"someof the valuesscale,proportion,and unity
bringabout."
By 1960in thearticle"TheChangingConceptofPropor-
tion" Wittkower made, however, an explicit statement
aboutthenatureof thebroaderfoundationandtheuniversal
beliefsthey might generateas they apparentlydid in him.
He statedhis beliefthatthe searchfor symmetry,balance,
andproportional relationshipswasanintegralpartofhuman
nature,not merelyof humanintellect.Accordingto the
authorshe cited,manis partof thephysicalworldin which
boththeinanimateandtheanimatespheresappearto follow
and developaccordingto laws some of which can be ex-
pressedby mathematics. Manperceivesthe world, due to
his biologicalnatureandbiologicalprocesses,in a rational
mannerguidedand limitedby thesebiologicalfacts.The
needto understand theorderthatexistsindependent of man
is, then,accordingto Wittkower'sargument,fundamental
andintegralto humannature.The significanceof propor-
tionalsystemsof the pastis changed,therefore,frombeing
merelytheproductof individualrationalconstructsof sig-
nificanceonly to the culturethatproducedthem,to being
examplesof attemptsto searchout the essenceof the order
manifestin the relationshipbetweennatureand thinking
man.Fromthisperspective,Wittkowerwas ableto argue
thattheseattemptsto discoverproportionalsystemslegiti-
matelyclaimenduringsignificance.
Reassessment
ofModern Architecture
ofthe1920osand'30os
It may be ironical to argue that the lessening of concern
for matters of proportion was partly due to Wittkower's
Architectural Principles,but I do believe it to be so. His
on
emphasis the integral societalor culturalsignificanceof
the forms, methods, and proportions employed by archi-
tects in the Renaissancecontributed substantiallyto a new
examinationof Modern Architecturein termsof its cultural,
social, and political intent. The reexaminationgrew rapidly
in the 1950s. This section will outline some of the stagesof
88
its development and suggest a r1le Wittkower's work may
have played.
Leavingasidethe polemicalandpoetic works of the archi-
tectsthemselves,the threemost importantearlypublications
interpreting the modern movement that had a profound
effect on the development of the modern architect in the
1940sare, of course: (I) H.-R.Hitchcock's and P. Johnson's
InternationalStyle of 1932, (2) N. Pevsner'sPioneersof the
ModernMovementof 1936, and (3) S. Giedion's Space,Time
and Architecture of 1941. Wittkower's publications, obvi-
ously, had no effect on these three seminal works. He did,
however, through own writings andthose of his students
his
have aninfluenceon the developmentof thatliteraturein the
I95osthatwas written partlyin reactionto andpartlybuild-
ing upon the three volumes, and that began a serious re-
examinationof Modern Architectureof the 1920s.
Hitchcock andJohnsonset out to definea new style and to
demolish the view that mere functionalismcould be a sig-
nificantcharacteristicofit. While acknowledgingthatsocial,
economic, and political problems contribute in general
terms to architecturalform they chose to emphasizethe art
of architecturaldesign. As WilliamJordy has recognizedin
his suggestive "Symbolic Essence"article,as a consequence
the book "encouragedinterpretationsof the International
Style which are almost wholly formal."22
Pevsner also sought to define a style for the age but with
the Arts and Craftsmovement, the Art Nouveau, and nine-
teenth-centuryengineeringproviding the threeroots of the
style.23StanfordAndersonhas shown in a recent revealing
review of the expanded,revised,and otherwise alterednew
edition, with a new title, Sourcesof ModernArchitecture and
Design,that for Pevsner"Thejob of the artistis to discover
the style of the age" that must "finally submit to the im-
perativesof the age."24The imperativesare, of course, the
three roots. Anderson'sreview should be consulted for a
further elucidation of the, by now, well-known "philo-
sophical, political, and historiographical"limitations of
Pevsner'sdeterministview of Modern Architecture.There
canbe no doubt, though, thatit had a profoundinfluenceon
the rehabilitationof the Arts and Craftsmovement and the
Art Nouveau and, as well, a profound influence on the
persistence of views about the "spirit of the times" and
"forms of the times" up to the present.
Giedion'sbook beginswith severalstatementsthatsuggest
views similar to those of Pevsner. As a pupil of W6lfflin,
22. W. Jordy, "The Symbolic Essence of Modern European
Architecture of the Twenties and Its Continuing Influence," JSAH,
22 (1963), 177-187.
23. Pioneers of Modern Design, 2nd edition (New York, 1949),
p. 68.
24. S. Anderson, Art Bulletin, 53 (1971), 274-275.
Giedion wrote that he "learned to grasp the spirit of an
epoch," and only when a historianis "permeatedwith the
spiritof his own time is he preparedto detect those tractsof
the past which previous generations have overlooked."25
Pevsner,while perhapsrecognizing the kinshipof Giedion's
attitudefelt his view to be narrowly technologicalandin the
secondedition of Pioneersin 1949said,".... the one objection
to ... Giedion'sbrilliantSpace,TimeandArchitecture [isthat
it] .. . somewhat overemphasizedthe technicalasagainstthe
estheticcomponentsof the modernstyle."26The virtuesand
defectsof the book arenow well known. They were superb-
ly outlined by John Summerson in his review of the first
edition which appearedin the Architectural Reviewfor May
Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020
1942. Many successiveeditionsand impressionswere, how-
ever, reviewed ecstaticallyand it, as well as the other two
volumes, continuesto be reprinted.
These threebooks providedthe basisof the interpretations
that were so strongly questionedby Rowe, Banham,Jordy,
Frampton, Colquhoun, Eisenmann,Rykwert, and Ander-
son in the I95os and '6os. Our currentview, after the dis-
pelling of some myths, the fashioning of others, and the
placing of architecture of this period within the wider
frameworkof its own culture, shows the architectureof the
1920S (and '3os) to be more complex, more significant,and
more integral to the aspirationsand developments of the
society than these three earlierviews.
Wittkower's expositionofthe relationshipbetween archi-
tectureand society came at a time when it could serve as an
apt methodological model for a revision of views about
twentieth-century architecture.What Wittkower did to
correct Wilfflin's and Geoffrey Scott's interpretations,his
pupils and others,following the same model, were to do to
correct Hitchcock andJohnson, Pevsner,and Giedion.
Although Wittkower had earlier,in 1947,in his review of
the Sitte translation,credited Le Corbusierwith giving us
"once andfor all, a senseof the unity andindivisibilityof the
complex phenomenon of the modern town,"27 and sug-
gested that dismissalsofLe Corbusier(suchasthat by Ralph
Walker in the introductionto the Englishtranslation)were
danger signals of a reactionarynature, he did not to my
knowledge, publishanything else that eitherhad directref-
erenceto Modern Architectureor by implicationsuggested
an attitudeabout it until Architectural Principlesappearedin
I949.
All arthistorianswho reviewed the book recognizedim-
mediately its fundamental value for Renaissancestudies.
25. S. Giedion, Space, Time and Architecture,3rd edition, enlarged
(Cambridge, Mass., I959), pp. 2, 5.
26. Pevsner, Pioneers (1949), p. 140, fh. i.
27. Town Planning Review, i9 (1946-47), 164-169.

KennethClarkin 1951saidthatArchitectural would
Principles
disposeof the hedonisttheoryof Renaissance architecture
once and for all.28JamesAckermansaidthat Wittkower
wasthefirstto succeedin findinggeneralprinciplesbeneath
thesurfaceof Renaissance architecture.29JohnCoolidge,in a
succinctandincisivereview,30recognizedthe importance
not only to Renaissance studies("thebest studyof Italian
Renaissance architecturein English"andthe "mostillumi-
natingtreatment... sinceFrankl's Entwicklungsphasen")but
alsoto method("firstimportantcontributionof thetwenti-
eth centuryto the methodof studyingarchitectural his-
tory"). His final sentencepredictedthat reassessments of
other periodswould necessarilyfollow ("all other well-
knownperiods... will haveto be restudiedalongthe lines
indicatedinthislittlebook").Thatsuchreassessments would
resultwas not immediatelyrecognizedby architects,who
as in one case that follows saw the book as exceedingly
difficultwhile anothersaw the secondedition as having
primaryconsequencesonly in the area of proportional
studies.
The reviewerof the first editionin the RIBAJournal,
A. S. G. Butler,did not sharethe arthistorians'opinions.
He foundit "exhaustingto read;somepartswereunintel-
ligible,"others"almosta bore."31Butler'sreviewappeared
in December.The Februaryfollowingtherewere two let-
ters,one by AlisonandPeterSmithson,the otherby John
Voelckerwho was then a student.32 Both lettersprotested
the toneandsubstanceof theButlerreview.Voelckercited
theinterestandconcernshownby studentsfor the "eternal
questforcoherenceandrapport... in ourbuilding"thatthe
"applicationof numberilluminatesfor a fleetinginstant."
To refute Butler'sassertionthat Wittkower'ssubjectis
"specialized,"he citedLeCorbusier's Modulor andtheCon-
in
gress Milanasindicationsof a widespreadinterestin the
topic.
The Smithsons'letterdeservesto be quotedmorefully
sinceit revealshow they andthe "youngerarchitects" felt
aboutWittkowerin the winterof 1951-'52 and suggests
somethingof his wide influence.33 "Dr. Wittkoweris re-
28. "Humanism and Architecture," Architectural
Review, Io9
(1951), 65-69.
29. Review, Art Bulletin,33 (1951), 195-200.
30. Magazineof Art, December 1950, p. 317.
31. RIBAJournal,59 (i95I), 59-60.
32. RIBAJournal, 59 (1952), 140-141. The reference to Smithsons'
letter which appearedin Arena,February1966,p. 182 (where,how-
ever, it is the Marchratherthanthe Februaryissuethat is cited) was
pointed out to me by Peter Eisenman,Director of the Institutefor
Architectureand Urban Studies. Smithson in the Arenaissue also
acknowledged the influenceof Wittkower's studies on his design
entry for the Coventry CathedralCompetition.
33. MargotWittkower told me on IONovember 1971thatwhen
89
garded by the younger architectsas the only art historian
working in England capable of describing and analyzing
buildings in spatial and plastic terms, and not in terms of
derivationsand dates; and this is no insularphenomenon,"
they continued, "for Dr. Giedion at a lecture at the I.C.A.
earlierin the year stated that during 195o at seminarsboth
in Zurich and at M.I.T. the most discussedbooks of the year
were Le Modulorand the Architectural Principlesin theAge of
Humanism, both concerned with proportion."34The Smith-
sons mentioned that Wittkower was the only Britishrepre-
sentative to the Milan Congress that met "to discuss this
vital subject," and stated flatly that the book is "the most
importantwork on architecturepublishedin Englandsince
Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020
the war."
When the secondedition was reviewed in the samejournal
two yearslater,A. TrystanEdwards,himself a notable con-
tributor to theoretical writings on architecturalcomposi-
tion, was able to say that the "learnedtreatise. . . was ...
well received on its first appearancein i949."35 We have
alreadyheardin the account of the debateand in the Smith-
sons'letter that they felt theseyearsto be most importantfor
studiesof proportion in Palladianbuildings. Edwardscon-
firms this in his closing remarks: "Professor Wittkower
leaves the problem of proportion unsolved and commends
it to the attention of the younger generation... ."
It was Colin Rowe, an architectandpupil of Wittkower's
in the postwar period, who saw, as did Coolidge, the impli-
cations of Architectural Principlesfor the interpretationand
furtherdevelopmentof ModernArchitecture.In two exem-
plary articlesentitled "The Mathematicsof the IdealVilla"
(1947) and "Mannerismin Modern Architecture"(1950),36
he not only gave addedimpetus to Palladianstudiesrevived
by Wittkower's articlesand book but also offeredprovoca-
tive analysesof formal and conceptual similaritiesbetween
sixteenth-centuryarchitectureand early Modern Architec-
ture. He also emphasizedin a few significantparagraphsthat
Le Corbusiermust be seen as intending a social realistpro-
gram "within which architecture... is to acquireobjective
significanceas symbolizing the processesof society" and he
also sought to outline internallyconflicting, analogous cul-
turalsituationsbetween the sixteenthcenturyin Italyandthe
the size of the first edition was under discussionwith the publisher
who wanted to print only 500 copies for Renaissancescholars,both
she and Wittkower suggested an additionalioo copies be printed
because"some architectswill want to readthe book." The edition
was sold out in three months.
34. Giedionwas VisitingProfessorof Engineeringand Historyin
the Departmentof Architectureat MIT in the Springterm of 1950.
35. RIBAJournal,60 (1953), 418-419.
36. "The Mathematicsof the IdealVilla,"Architectural Review,IoI
(1947), 101-104; "Mannerismin Modern Architecture,"Architec-
turalReview,107 (1950), 289-299.
9o

earlytwentiethcenturyin Europe.Rowe characterized Le anonymouscollaborative attentionto structure andfunction

Corbusier's equivocalpositiontowardthe pastasa conflict is one of the mostinsidiousmythswith whichthe Modern
betweena desirethattotalindividualmeaning(i.e.,artistic Movementis saddled."The phrase"ConceptualDesign"
meaning)be residentin the form itself (an extensionof was, at that time, apparently,being usedpejoratively,as
Fiedler's view) and a that
desire theforms of architecturebe Banham said,by "routinefunctionalists" to describebuild-
additionallyinvestedwith meaningthroughevidentcon- ingsthattriedto do morethan"simplyservestructureand
temporaneoussocietalconcepts.Still furtherRowe sug- function."Buildingswithouta "conceptual" impress,how-
gested thisconflict was integralto the modern movement. ever, he argued, cannot resultin a buildingform that is
He feltthatone of thesourcesof its culturalsignificance lay "apprehensible and memorable . . which makesa good
.
in its attemptto reconcileanarchicindividualism andcom- buildinginto greatarchitecture." Banhamimpliedthatthe
munalidealism. natureof the concept(cultural/artistic) determinesthe so-
Rowealsoexaminedarchitecture in theUnitedStatesand cietal/artisticqualityof the building-a partialparallelto
his ideaswerefurtherexpressedin a scathingreviewof L. Rowe's view about the complex of ideasthat allow the
of animage."

Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020

Mumford'sRootsof Contemporary AmericanArchitecture "crystallization
wherehe assertedthatpracticalempiricism(asMumford In the next two paragraphs of the articleBanhamdis-
characterized architecturein theU.S.), "havingno essential cussedWittkower'sArchitectural Principles andits effecton
referenceto a body of ideas,ultimatelywithoutthe power whathecalledneo-Palladian studies.Banhamsuggestedthat
of abstraction, is lackingin the capacityto coordinateor the book had an evil effectbecausemanyarchitectsinter-
crystallize. He didnotthinkMumford'scharacteriza- pretedit to meanthat they shouldfollow Humanist,i.e.
...."37
tioncorrectandsaidthatMumford's view resultedin archi- sixteenth-century principlesin theirwork.The good effect
tecturein the UnitedStatesbeingseenas "no morethana was on otherarchitectswho took the book to meanthat
seriesof well-meaningintentions."Rowe, therefore,could theyshouldtakeHumanistprinciples asoutlinedin thebook
not acceptthe view that "any achievementso authentic as"anexampleof thekindof principles" theyshould"look
could have beenpromptedby origins so sentimentaland for." This group, headed by Smithson, went, accordingto
diffuse."In an articletwo yearslater on the "Chicago Banham, in the right direction and formed the New Brutal-
Frame,"38 Roweproposedthatthe Chicagoofficebuilding ist School,thehistoryof whichhewasthenwriting.At one
be seenas an authenticrationalization of businessrequire- level,Banhamwasaffectedby Wittkower'swritingto the
mentsanda socialdocument,butdeclaredit couldnot be a degreethatin hiscriticismhe wassearchingfor the societal
culturalsymbolashadperhapsbeenimpliedby Giedion.39 (conceptual) objectivesof anarchitect's actions.At another
InsteadRowe citedWrightas the outstandingcontributor level,if Banham correct, is and the Smithsons' letterto the
to architecture in the United Statesbecausehis buildings editorof theRIBAJournal andhisremarksat theRIBAde-
"crystallize the suburban image." Rowe implied as well bateseem to confirm thisview, Wittkower'sbookservedto
thattheimagemustbe seenwithinthe entiresociocultural, stimulatea groupof architectsto searchin a new direction
conceptual frameworkthataccompanies Wright'ssuburban for principlesto guidetheirwork.
houses.By themid-I95ostherefore,Rowehadsketchedone Theory andDesignintheFirstMachine Agewhichappeared
view of early ModernArchitecturein Europeand the in 1960definedBanham'sviews even moreprecisely.40 In
United Statesthat clearlyderived-explicitlyin his first his concludingchapterhe outlinedwhat he conceivedto
papers,implicitlyin succeedingones-from the method have been the reasonswhy architectsof the 1930snever
establishedin Architectural Principles,i.e., determiningso- spokeup againstthe determinist,formalistinterpretation
cietal meaning as it existed in the minds of those who theirwork was receiving.They were, he said,"outlawed
commissionedand designed the buildings. politicallyin GermanyandRussia,crippledeconomicallyin
In 1955Banham'sarticle"New Brutalism"also began to France... fighting for a toehold in politically-suspicious
move interpretationand criticism to a new level that in- FascistItaly, aesthetically-indifferentEngland and depres-
cluded societalvalues. He said, "All GreatArchitecturehas sion-stunnedAmerica." He then said, "the true aim of the
been 'conceptual', has been image-making-and the idea style had clearly been, to quote Gropius' words about the
that any great buildings ... grew unconsciously through Bauhausand its relation to the World of the Machine Age
'... to invent and createforms symbolizing that world,' and
37. "Roots,"Architectural
Review,116 (1954), 75-78.
38. "ChicagoFrame,"ArchitecturalReview, 12o (1956), 285-289.
39. Space,TimeandArchitecture
(3rd edition, Cambridge,1959), 40. TheoryandDesign in the First MachineAge (London, 1960;
"The Chicago School,"pp. 366-375. 2nd edition, New York, 1967).

itisinrespectof suchsymbolicformsthatitshistoricalj ustifi-
cationmustlie."41
ForBanham,then,the value of the worksof the 1920os
liesin the "authorityandfelicitywith whichthey give ex-
pressionto aview of menin relationto theirenviromnent."
Oncedefined,in succeedingpagesBanhamarguedthatthe
aimsof the International Stylewerenot "worthentertain-
ing," since therewas among practitioners poor technical
training,alsoformalismandillusionismandafailureto grip
fundamental problemsof buildingtechnology.42 Whether
we agreewith Banham'sconclusionsor not, his require-
mentsforanintegrationof theaimsof architecture with the
highestaimsandachievements of the societyparalleledand
derivedfromthestandards setby Wittkower'sdiscussion of
Renaissance architecture.
Jordy,in his "SymbolicEssence"article,acknowledged
Banham'saccomplishment in TheoryandDesignbut dis-
agreedwith his conclusionssayingthat "In Short,Ban-
ham does not label the architectureof the revolutionary
decadea machinestyle;buthefinallysinksit on thisbasis."43
Banhamarguedthatworksof ModemArchitecture would
haveto bejudgedon the"authorityandfelicitywithwhich
they give expressionto a view of men in relationto their
environment."The weaknessof this positionlies in Ban-
ham'sbeing the one to determinethe natureof the early
environment(with the help of Buck-
twentieth-century
minsterFuller)ratherthansearchingwithinthesocietyand
its expressedaspirations,as Wittkowerhad done, to find
thosewho definedthe natureof its intellectualand social
environment.HadBanhamconductedsucha searchinstead
of statingwhatshouldbe found,he mightthenhavelegiti-
matelytestedtheexpression of aview forits"authority" and
seenif it was"felicitous"in relationto theaspirations of the
society.
Jordy'sarticlesearchedfortheculturalaimof architecture
of the 192oswhichhe foundto be "SymbolicObjectivity"
(a phrasereminiscentof the quotationcited above from
Rowe's "Mannerismand Modem Architecture"). "Sym-
bolic Objectivity"forJordyembracedthe gulf from "fact
to inmostessence."InarrivingatthisviewJordycitedwhat
Wittkower'sbook meantto him:
Not until 1949,when RudolfWittkoweremphasizedthe sym- another subject that is, indeed, a remarkableaccomplish-
bolicimportanceof Renaissance Principles ment.
formsin hisArchitectural
41. Ibid., p. 321.
42. Ibid., p. 326.
43. Jordy, "SymbolicEssence,"p. 178.
91
intheAgeofHumanism wasit definitely
reaffirmed
thatthegreater
of
intensity Alberti's
forms overthoseof McKim,Mead&White
derivedfromtheiroriginalurgencyof meaningas
substantially
of a particular
visiblemanifestations cultural
andcosmicpointof
view.
In definingwhathe felt to be theparticular societalpointof
view of theInternational Style,Jordy once againmanifested
the influenceof Wittkower's"littlebook."
From this date onwards,the reassessment of Modem
in broaderculturaltermshasgrownrapidly-
Architecture
too rapidlyto discusshere-and perhapswith lessdebtto
Wittkower'sepoch-makingwork. It would be essential,
though,if thissketchwereto be filledout, to mentionthe
writingsof otherpupilswho studiedunderhimin England,
Downloaded from http://online.ucpress.edu/jsah/article-pdf/31/2/83/173689/988682.pdf by guest on 29 July 2020
JosephRykwertandAlanColquhoun,and his studentsat
Columbia,amongthem StanfordAnderson,aswell as the
secondgenerationwho had no directcontactwith Witt-
kower, suchas Colin Wilson,PeterEisenmann,Kenneth
Frampton,andotherswho learnedfrom Rowe'swritings.
All arecontributing todayto theunfoldingandincreasingly
richview of the architecture of the firstseveraldecadesof
thiscentury.
Wittkowersaidonce aboutArchitectural "The
Principles,
influencea book hasuponits readersis to a certainextent
intangibleandimpossibleto measureprecisely..."-which
is probablyso.44We haveseen,however,someevidenceof
the impactit hadon architecture in the I95Os.Insummary,
Wittkower'sbookslightlyinfluencedthoughtaboutmodu-
larconstruction for a shortwhile.Fora bit longerhe wasa
major influence on thoughtaboutproportionandpropor-
tionalsystems,both in the abstractandin builtform. In a
stillmorefundamental wayheinfluencedthoughtaboutthe
of societalvaluesto architecture whichhelped
relationship
to bringaboutreassessment of theInternational Style.
Of the many who are writing about ModernArchi-
tecturetodaya few wouldadmitfreelythe examplesetby
theirteacher,othersopenlyacknowledgethedebttheyhave
to his method,whilethe remainderwould, I think,at least
recognizethatthosewho wrotethe articlesandbooksthat
beganto interprettheInternational Stylein a way thatthey
found fruitfulwere indebtedto Wittkower'sArchitectural
Principlesin theAge of Humanism. For one little book on
Principles(3rdedition, London, 1962), Preface.
44. Architectural