It is remarkable that while the Arabs were diffused so widely over the ea•th's surface. the style of architecture adopted by them remitted in every place a striking identity. It is true that differences of detail may be found in different places, as well as variety of application, yet in every country their buildings retain a very close general resemblance, This similarity is to be accounted for probably by the peculiarity of their religious creed, which, wherever it is professed, dif fuses a close uniformity of habits, manners, and opinions. Notwithstanding, however, this general resemblance, which is amply sufficient to identify all buildings of this race as belonging to the same style, it must not be understood that, as a sty le, the Moorish was at any given period exactly the same in different countries under their dominion, or in one country at different periods, or even at the same period, for such was not the case. Indeed, if we may judge from the remains of some edifices in Asia and Egypt, of apparently the same date, we shall perceive many distinctions not only in the minuthe of the ornamental and apparently character istic ornanients, hut also in their distribution. It is to be regretted that we have but little knowledge of the Asiatic and African remains of this style, for we are thereby pre vented instituting a satisfactory comparison between the example of different localities and dates. The edifices of Spain, of which we have no inconsiderable information, must suffice as a type of the style, fur which purpose they will probably serve better than those of any other country.
Various opinions as to the merits of this style lave been entertained by various writers, some speaking of it in a very disparaging manner, as fanciful and capricious, whilst others extol it as elegant and poetical. It is in truth emi nently lndfill, but this we judge to be rather to its praise than otherwise, as evidencing a lively and fertile imagination on the part of their architects their buildings are indeed the embodiment of a luxuriant finey. tempered, however, in most cases with taste and judgment. It is true that this style may not rank amongst the higher examples of the art, for it is notably deficient in constructive science; and in this feature it falls immeasurably below its rival in variety and luxuriance—the Gothic or Pointed style, In the latter the construction is paramount ; in the former it is made entirely subservient to ornamentation.
Nevertheless, although Arabian architecture does not pre sent that appearance of strength and security which is to be looked for in the perfection of the art, it never tails to gratify the eye as well as the imagination, by the richness of its picturesque and flintastic decoration ; for all its parts are perfectly symmetrical, and never degenerate into heaviness or incoherence. Neither do we mean to assert that the Arabians erected their buildings without any reference to the principles of construction, for we know that they had attained great proficiency in the mathematics, and we can scarcely suppose that they neglected to apply them to such a purpose; indeed, we have very satisfactory proof' to the contrary in the durability of their buildings. We are equally unacquainted with the rules by which they were guided. or the proportions which they observed in the art, and yet we know that they worked by well-delined rules, and that numerous treatises were written upon the subject, as we learn from the Arabian MSS. in the Escurial. Their ideas of design in this at must
have been borrowed from a great variety of sources, amongst which may be enumerated the edifices of Egypt, Syria, India, Greece, Nome, and Byzantium, and out of all these they eliminated a style which is perfectly distinct from every one of them. All these styles, diverse as they are, were blended together with such taste and skill, and the borrowed forms so moulded and adapted. as to form one harmonious and perfect whole. The style, which is eminently peculiar, would seem to have been a development of their religious creed ; it breathes the very spirit of Islamism ; it is sensnal and voluptuous, and appeals to the gratification of the rather than to the higher and nobler faculties of the mind : the Egyptian awes by its grandeur ; the Grecian elevates by its purity ; the Gothic humbles by its solemnity ; but the Moorish gratifies only by its luxury. Of all the Mohan . medans, the Turks seem to have deviated most widely from the general character of this style, by giving a preponderance to the Byzantine peculiarities by NS hich they were sur rounded in their chief city, Constantinople.
Amongst the characteristics of Moorish architecture the horseshoe arch stands conspicuous. This is sometimes called the cresmit arch, a name which may probably give US some clue to the reasons for the adoption of' this form, which is indeed that of a crescent, the peculiar symbol of the Mohammedan faith; in imitation of which, it is reasonable to suppose it was introduced in a prominent position in their buildings. We shall the more readily concur in this suggestion, when we consider that such a form could not have been dictated by any principles of construction ; against which it offends not a little. We must therefore look for some other reason, and that not a weak one, which could induce the Arabians to dis regard the ordinary and simple axioms of construction ; and we think we find a sufficient one in the idea just broached, that it was to symbolize their religious faith. The fact that it was tanned by the hammedans, the sacred arch, will tend to corroborate this statement. The shape was first int•odueed into architecture by Muavia, the first of the ()nomad dynasty, who adopted it in all the buildings he erected, and it attire arils became common in all countries into which the Moors had penetrated. The same outline is ft tund in bulbous dome, which is so peculiar a feature of the Mehammolan mesqtte ; and there can be no doubt bnt that this deltic, was suggested by the crescent arch, no more indeed than that the semicircular or segmental domes were derived from the corresponding arches. We might say th it the pro bability in the former case is the inasmuch as that fit•in of' dome is scarcely natural, and not to be accounted for by requirements of construction. The profile of the Indiums dome is precisely that of the horse-shoe arch. Another instance in which the crescent-shape appears, is the cusping or scalloping of the soffit, or sometimes of both outlines of the arch, W hiell is a common practice, and may have gin en rise to the use of cusps in Gothic architecture.