ABSTRACT

Quatremère dierentiated between the type and the model, emphasizing that the former is an originating reason accessible to the intellect, while the latter implies direct formal resemblance that is apprehended by the senses. Types are ideas, or conceptual forms as in the Greek: eidos or the Latin: idea. Types are irreducible images which precede empirical reality; while models are fully dierentiated and composite forms, as in the Greek: morphé or the Latin: forma. Thus, in Quatremère’s understanding, Durand’s types are actually models. Similar to Platonic Forms, Quatremère’s types are imagistic universals, generative causes that explain the essentialist commonality between buildings of varied characters and styles. Buildings descending from the same type can vary widely in their formal appearance. But although the descendents are several steps removed from the type, and vary in character and style, they always embody some indissociable qualities of the type. Type concerns more than the practice of architecture based on established typologies; it is also the view of architecture as an archetypal activity, one that restores to the daily contingencies of building the vital signicance of causality. Historian C.W. Westfall extended Quatremère’s reections on type arranging in ideogrammatic fashion six, or so, building types emphasizing their

political roles in the service of the City: tholos, temple, regia, theatre, domus, taberna.4 To these, one could add the hypostyle type, or the idea of columns directly supporting a roof. It is important to note that in this conception types are presented in their undierentiated state, that is, before their multiple combinatory arrangements, e.g., San Francesco in Mantova combines the hypostyle in the crypt, as well as the templum and the tholos – although the dome was not realized. Durand’s and Quatremère’s fundamental reections on type were considerably amplied in the late nineteenth century and throughout the twentieth, especially when the rationalist approach in urban morphology and building typology served as curative alternatives to modernist forms.5