Incongruous Conceptions: Owen Jones’s Plans, Elevations

University of South FloridaScholar Commons

Graduate Theses and Dissertations Graduate School

3-9-2016

Incongruous Conceptions: Owen Jones’s Plans,Elevations, Sections and Details of the Alhambra andBritish Views of SpainAndrea Marie JohnsonUniversity of South Florida

Follow this and additional works at: http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd

Part of the History of Art, Architecture, and Archaeology Commons

This Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by the Graduate School at Scholar Commons. It has been accepted for inclusion in GraduateTheses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of Scholar Commons. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Scholar Commons CitationJohnson, Andrea Marie, "Incongruous Conceptions: Owen Jones’s Plans, Elevations, Sections and Details of the Alhambra and BritishViews of Spain" (2016). Graduate Theses and Dissertations.http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd/6101

http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://scholarcommons.usf.edu?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/grad?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://scholarcommons.usf.edu/etd?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

http://network.bepress.com/hgg/discipline/510?utm_source=scholarcommons.usf.edu%2Fetd%2F6101&utm_medium=PDF&utm_campaign=PDFCoverPages

mailto:[email protected]

IncongruousConceptions:OwenJones’s

Plans,Elevations,SectionsandDetailsoftheAlhambra

andBritishViewsofSpainby

AndreaM.Johnson

Athesissubmittedinpartialfulfillmentoftherequirementsforthedegreeof

MasterofArtsDepartmentofArtandArtHistory

CollegeoftheArtsUniversityofSouthFlorida

MajorProfessor:ElisabethFraser,Ph.D.EsraAkin-Kivanc,Ph.D.AllisonMoore,Ph.D.

DateofApproval:March9,2016

Keywords:Orientalism,Romanticism,NineteenthCentury,GranadaSpain,BritishTravel,JulesGoury,PascualdeGayangos

Copyright©2016,AndreaM.Johnson

i

TABLEOFCONTENTSListofFigures .............................................................................................................................................................iiAbstract ......................................................................................................................................................................... vIntroduction ................................................................................................................................................................1Nineteenth-CenturyBritishPerspectivesonSpain ...................................................................................7 ExploringtheDualOthernessofJones’sAlhambra................................................................................. 23 ExploringtheFluidHistoricCharacterofJones’sAlhambra............................................................... 35Conclusion................................................................................................................................................................. 44Figures ........................................................................................................................................................................ 48AppendixI ................................................................................................................................................................. 73References................................................................................................................................................................. 76

ii

LISTOFFIGURES

Figure1: OwenJones.PlateXXXIVfromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.2.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida. ................................ 48

Figure2: OwenJones.PlateIII,“PlanoftheRoyalArabianPalaceintheAncient

FortressoftheAlhambra”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ColoredLithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida. ........................... 49

Figure3: OwenJones.PlateV,“TransverseSectionoftheCourtoftheFishpond,

LookingTowardsthePalaceofCharlestheFifth”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouth

Florida................................................................................................................................................... 50

Figure4: OwenJones.PlateIV,“ViewoftheCourtoftheFish-PondfromtheHallof

theBark”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,Tampa

Library,UniversityofSouthFlorida. ....................................................................................... 51

Figure5: OwenJones.PlateIX,“Divan,CourtoftheFish-Pond”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,

UniversityofSouthFlorida.......................................................................................................... 52

Figure6: OwenJones.PlateXXIX,“DetailofanArch.Portico,CourtoftheLions.”

fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,

TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida......................................................................... 53

Figure7: OwenJones.PlateXXXV,“CapitalofaColumnfromtheHallofthe

Ambassadors,andFourSmallEngagedShaftsfromtheHalloftheTwo

Sisters”fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,

TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida......................................................................... 54

iii

Figure8: OwenJones.PlateXXIII,“CourtoftheMosque”fromPlans,Elevations,

Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida.......................................................................................................... 55

Figure9: OwenJones.PlateXIX,“ViewintheHalloftheTwoSisters”fromPlans,

Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida.......................................................................................................... 56

Figure10:OwenJones.PlateXIII,“EntrancetotheCourtoftheLions(Restored)”

fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.LithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida ........................................................................................ 57

Figure11:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePlateXIIIfromPlans,Elevations,

Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintonPaper.Cooper-Hewitt,NationalDesignMuseumLibrary’sRareBooks,SmithsonianInstitutionLibraries.............................................................................. 58

Figure12:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePlateLIfromPlans,Elevations,

Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintonPaper.Cooper-Hewitt,NationalDesignMuseumLibrary’sRareBooks,SmithsonianInstitutionLibraries.............................................................................. 59

Figure13:JamesCavanahMurphy.“TheRoyalPalaceandFortressofAlhamba.At

Granada”fromArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,1813.WoodblockPrintonPaper.GettyResearchInstitute.. ..................................................................................................60

Figure14:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePlateIfromPlans,Elevations,

Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida...................................................................................................................................... 61

Figure15:Tiled‘PlusUltra’muraldatingfromthereignofCharlesV.Photocourtesy

ofLauraEveEggleton .................................................................................................................... 62Figure16:OwenJones.PlateX,“DetailsoftheGreatArches.HalloftheBark”from

Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida ........................................................................................ 63

Figure17:OwenJones.DescriptivePlateX(frontandback)fromPlans,Elevations,

Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.Woodblock

iv

PrintsonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida ................................................................................................................................ 64

Figure18:JohnFrederickLewis,CourtyardofAlhambra,1832-1833.Watercolor

drawingonpaper.TheFitzwilliamMuseum. ...................................................................... 65Figure19:JoseBecquer.RichardFordasaMajo,1832.WatercoloronPaper... ........................ 66Figure20:JohnFrederickLewis.AndthePrayeroftheFaithshallsavetheSick,1872.

OilonCanvas.YaleCenterforBritishArt.............................................................................. 67Figure21:DavidRoberts.“TowerofComares”fromTheTouristinSpain.Granada.

1835.LithographonPaper.NewYorkPublicLibrary..................................................... 68Figure22:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePageI“TowerofComares” fromPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.

1836-1842.WoodblockPrintsonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida......................................................................... 69

Figure23:OwenJones.VignettefromDescriptivePageIfromPlans,Elevations,

Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.WoodblockPrintsonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida...... .......................................................................................................................... 70

Figure24:OwenJones.PlateXXVII,“DetailsofanArchintheHallofJustice”from

Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,Vol.1.c.1836-1842.ChromolithographonPaper.Special&DigitalCollections,TampaLibrary,UniversityofSouthFlorida....... ................................................................................. 71

Figure25:DavidRoberts.“HallofJustice”fromTheTouristinSpain.Granada,1835.

LithographonPaper.NewYorkPublicLibrary.................................................................. 72

v

ABSTRACT

ThisthesisanalyzesPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra(1836-

1842)byBritishArchitectOwenJonesinrelationtoBritishconceptionsofSpaininthe

nineteenthcentury.AlthoughmodernscholarsoftenviewJones’sworkasanaccurate

visualaccountoftheAlhambra,Iarguethathisworkisnotonlyinterestedinaccuracy,but

itisalsoare-presentationofthefourteen-centurymonumentbasedonJones’sideologies

andcreativefaculties.InsteadofviewingtheAlhambrathroughaculturallysensitive,

historicallens,JonestreateditasanImaginaryGeography,asEdwardSaidcalledit,

throughwhichhecouldpromotehisinterestsandperspectives.

AlthoughthereweremanyBritishviewsofSpaininnineteenth-century,thisthesis

willfocusontwosetsofseeminglycontradictoryconceptionsofSpainthatwereespecially

importanttoJones’svisualandideologicalprograminAlhambra:Spain’sstatusasboththe

CatholicandIslamicOther,anditsfrequentinterpretationsthroughbothromanticand

reform-orientedlenses.ThroughacloserlookatArabianAntiquitiesofSpainbyJames

CavanahMurphyandtheillustrationsfromTheTouristinSpain:GranadabyDavidRoberts,

Ishowtheprevalenceofthesemindsetsinnineteenth-centuryreconstructionsofthe

Alhambra.Then,IcompareportionsoftheseworkstoplatesfromJones’sAlhambrato

illustrateJones’ssimilaradaptationoftheseperspectivesdespitethevisualpeculiarityof

hisworkasawhole.

1

INTRODUCTION

ModernscholarsheraldPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra

(1836-1842)byarchitectOwenJones(1809-1874)asascholarlytreatiseontheAlhambra

inanerawhenmostrepresentationsofthemonumenttransformeditaccordingto

Europeanperspectives.Scholarsarguethatwhilehiscontemporarieswerere-imagining

theAlhambrabasedonnineteenth-centuryprinciples,Joneswascreatingacomprehensive

two-volumebookthattranscendedthevaluesofhistime.1Indeed,Jonesandhispartner,

FrencharchitectJulesGoury(1803-1834)tookgreatcaretofaithfullyreconstructthe

medievalmonumentinprint.In1834,JonesandGourytraveledtogethertoSpain,residing

intheAlhambraforsixmonthstostudyitsarchitecturalornamentatgreatlength.2These

menproduceddetaileddrawings,maderubbings,andevenstudiedtracesofpaintfoundin

thesurvivingornamentalschemestocreatethemostcomprehensivevisualandtextual

surveyofthemonumentpossible.InhisAlhambra,Jonesillustratedforhisreaders

ornamentalandarchitecturalthemesfromallovertheAlhambrapalace.Heincluded

comprehensivetranslationsofArabicinscriptionsanddetaileddescriptionsofhisimages

togivereadersabroadunderstandingofthearchitecturalprogramofthemedieval

monument.Tofurtherextendhisstudy,Jonescreatedasecondvolumeinwhichhevisually

elaborated,toanevengreaterdegree,upontheornamentationoftheAlhambra(seefigure

1SeeCarolA.HrvolFlores,"FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory:OwenJones'sStudyofthe

Alhambra,"StudiesinVictorianArchitectureandDesign1,(2008):18-29.2JoneswouldreturntotheAlhambrain1837toreexamineseveralfeaturesoftheAlhambrafor

forthcomingplates.

2

1).Whencompiled,Jones’splatesanddescriptionsfilltwovolumes.Hisworkiswrittenin

bothEnglishandFrenchandcontainsonehundredandthreeplates,fifty-sevenpagesof

descriptionandArabictranslations,andatwenty-pagehistoryofGranada,Spain.

DespitethebreadthandmeticulousnessofJones’sAlhambra,hisworkisnotonly

interestedinaccuracy,butitisalsoaproductofhisideologiesandcreativefaculties.3

ScholarswhoviewJones’sAlhambraasapreciseaccountdivorcedfromnineteenth-

centuryBritishattitudestowardSpainunderratetherelationshipbetweenJones’s

Alhambraandtheworksofhiscontemporaries.Further,theycreateasharpdivideinhis

career.Whileseveralofhislaterendeavors,includingtheGrammarofOrnament(1856),

areregardedasintimatelyconnectedtocontemporaryideologies,theworkofhisearlier

careeristhoughttoriseabovethepreconceptionsofhispeers.4Themajorproductionsof

hisearlyandlatercareerarealmostneverdiscussedinconcertatgreatlengthbecauseof

thisdiscrepancy.InanefforttoextrapolatedeepermeaningfromJones’sAlhambra,and

createmorecongruitybetweenhisearlyandlatecareer,Iarguethatthisbookwasnotan

objectivereportonthemonument,butaninterpretationoftheAlhambrabasedon

multifariousBritishconceptionsofSpain’sOthernessandhistoricstatus.5

3Jones’sattemptataccuracyshouldnotbeconfusedwithitsrealization.Tocreateanentirely“accurate”reconstructionofamonumentwouldbeimpossibleas“reconstruction”inherentlyimpliestheuseofimaginative,creativefaculties.4SeeCatherineLanford,"ImperialismandtheParlor:OwenJones's'TheGrammarofOrnament',"TheWordsworthCircle,38(2001).SeealsoPhilipCrang,andSoniaAshmore,"Thetransnationalspacesofthings:SouthAsiantextilesinBritainandTheGrammarofOrnament,"EuropeanReviewOfHistory16,no.5(October2009):655-678.BotharticlesdescribeJones’sGrammarofOrnamentasintimatelytiedtoBritishOrientalismandImperialism.5TheimpulsetorejectthenotionofJones’sobjectivitycomesfromanacceptanceofpostmodernphilosophyasameanstounderstandthecreationofartandliterature.IfIacceptthatJonescouldcreateanobjectivereportoftheAlhambra,becausehesomehowunderstoodthemonumentmorecompletelythanhispeers,Iamindangeroflegitimizingmetanarratives.FormoreonthedelegitimizationofmetanarrativesseeJean-FrançoisLyotard,ThePostmodernCondition:AReport

3

ScholarsbegantocharacterizeJones’sAlhambraaslessvalue-ladenthan

contemporaneousworksintheearliesteraofscholarshiponJones.Indoingso,they

createdadichotomybetweentheappearanceofaccuracyandtheembodimentof

ideologieswithinhiswork.Takentoitsfullestconclusion,thisinterpretationnegatesthe

possibilitythatperspectivesthatarenotcompletelycongruouscouldexistinhis

productionsimultaneously.

ArthistorianMichaelDarbyproducedthefirstbroadoverviewofJones’slifeand

workinhis1976dissertation,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal.”6Darby’sworkis

invaluabletothefieldbecauseitemphasizestheimportanceofJones’scontributionto

nineteenth-centurydesign,architecture,andespeciallycolortheoryinawaythatno

scholarshiphadbefore.Inhisproject,DarbybegantocontextualizeJonesbystressingthe

importanceofhiscircleofcolleagues,buthealwaysemphasizedJones’sinfluenceoverthe

restofthegroupandhisuniquenessamongthem.ThisperspectiveonJonesfirmlyplanted

himwithinthecanonofnineteenth-centuryarchitects,butitdidnotthoroughlyinvestigate

ofhisideologies.ThethirteenpagesdiscussingJones’sAlhambra,inwhichDarbyexplains

thegeneraloutlineofJones’svolumes,andconnectsthemtocolortheory,arealsotoobrief

tounpackallofitsimaginativeaspects.7

ArchitecturalscholarCarolFlores’scollectiveworksonJonesdiscusshisAlhambra

atgreaterlengththanDarby’sEasternIdeal,buttheypaintJonesinaverysimilarlight.In

herdissertation,“OwenJones:Architect”(1996),FloresbuildsuponDarby’sgroundwork

tofocusmorecloselyonJones’sarchitecturaltheoryandothercontributionstothefield,asonKnowledge,trans.GeoffBenningtonandBrianMassumi(Minneapolis:UniversityofMinnesota,1984).6MichaelDarby,"OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal."(Dr.,TheUniversityofReading,1974).7SeeDarby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”42-55.

4

wellashisimpactonlaterarchitectsandtheorists.8ShediscussesJones’sAlhambrain

moredepththanDarby,butshecreatesadichotomybetweenJones’sworkand

contemporaryculturalconstructsstatingthat,“AnexaminationofJones'stext[inthe

Alhambra]affirmshisanalyticalapproachtohissubject.Hereplacestheemotivehyperbole

andfigurativedescriptionsofhiscontemporarieswithexplicitandperceptiveanalysis.”9

Inalaterarticleentitled“FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory:OwenJones’sstudy

oftheAlhambra,”FloreselaboratesJones’sAlhambramorefully,stressingitsimportance

asateachingtool.10Thispublicationelaboratesthediscussioninherdissertation,butshe

reaffirmsoncemorethecontrastbetweenJones’sapproachandtheimaginative

constructionsofhispeers.

Severalauthors,examiningJones’sAlhambralessspecifically,provideamore

comprehensivecontextforhiswork.SaraSearightstandsoutwithinthisgroup.Her2006

article,“OwenJones:TravelandVisionoftheOrient,”elaboratesuponthescholarsand

artistsJonesmayhaveencounteredinhistravelsEast.11Byexaminingtheviewpointsof

theseothermen,SearightinformsherreaderofthecomplexunderstandingoftheEastern

OtherthatwasprevalentinJones’sera.AlthoughsheemphasizesJones’sinterestincolor,

Searight’smorespecificcontextualizationofJoneshasbeenusefultothisstudy.Claudia

HopkinsneeHeideplacesJones’sAlhambrafirmlywithinhiscontextinherarticle,"The

AlhambrainBritain:BetweenForeignizationandDomestication.”12Inthiswork,Heide

8CarolFlores,“OwenJones,Architect."(Ph.D.,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,1996).9Flores,“OwenJones,Architect,”50.10Flores,“FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory.”11SarahSearight,"OwenJones:TravelandVisionoftheOrient."Alif:JournalOfComparativePoeticsno.26(2006):128-146.12ClaudiaHeide,"TheAlhambrainBritain:betweenForeignizationandDomestication,"ArtinTranslation2,no.2(2010):201-222.

5

discussesthevariousrepresentationsoftheAlhambrathatalternatelymadeitmore

orientalincharacter,ortriedtomakeitmorefamiliartoBritishaudiences.However,Heide

doesnotfindastrongconnectionbetweenJones’sAlhambraandtheseartistictactics,

statingthatJones“favoredscholarshipoverRomanticsentiment.”13LauraEggleton’s2011

dissertation,“Re-envisioningtheAlhambra:Readingsofarchitectureandornamentfrom

medievaltomodern,”alsobearsmentionhere.14AlthoughshefocusesonJones’sAlhambra

CourtattheCrystalPalace(1854)insteadofhisAlhambrapublication,Eggletongoesinto

greatdetailaboutnineteenth-centuryperspectivesontheAlhambra,andhowJones

contributedtotheseunderstandings.SheascribestoJonesan“analytical”approachnot

commonamonghispeers,butiscarefultoemphasizethathisapproachtotheAlhambrain

hislatercareerre-envisagedthemonumentinaccordancewithpopularopinionandhis

personalperspective.

ExpandinguponthefoundationlaidbyEggleton,Heide,andSearight,thisstudy

constitutesamorecomprehensivelookatJones’sAlhambraasanimaginative

reconstructionoftheAlhambramonument.Myargumentwillrevolvearoundthe

seeminglycontradictorywaysthatBritishscholarsunderstoodSpaininthisera,andhow

Jones’sinterpretationoftheAlhambramanifeststheseunderstandings.Jonesadopted

theseperspectivesformanyuniquereasons,butthewaysinwhichtheyaremanifestedin

hisbookarereminiscentoftheworksofhispeers.Jones’sprimarilyIslamicrepresentation

oftheAlhambracriticizedthemodernCatholicreligiousandarchitecturalpresenceatthe

monument,reiteratingthepopularviewthatboththeMuslimandCatholicinhabitantsof

13Heide,“TheAlhambrainBritain:betweenForeignizationandDomestication,”210.14LaraEveEggleton,"Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra:ReadingsofArchitectureandOrnamentfromMedievaltoModern."(Ph.D.thesis,UniversityofLeeds,2011).

6

theAlhambraweretheOther.Additionally,Jonesincludedromanticdepictionsalongside

hishighlydetailedreconstructionsofarchitecturalandornamentalschemestoappealto

wideaudienceswhilepromotinghisdesignreforms.Scholarshavenotfullyunderstoodthe

connectionbetweenJonesandtheseseeminglycontradictorypremisesbecauseitseems

thatJoneswasprimarilyinterestedinIslamicarchitectureanddesignreform.However,a

closerreadingofhistextandimagesshowsthattheseotherconcerns,soprevalentwithin

theworksofJones’speers,broadenedthescopeofhispublicationaswell.Inwhatfollows,I

willcloselyexaminetheseinconsistentnineteenth-centuryviewsofSpainandtheir

manifestationinJones’sAlhambra.15

15AllconclusionsIdrawarebasedonmyobservationsofPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra(OCoLC02803628)heldintheUniversityofSouthFloridaSpecialCollections,unlessotherwisespecified.

7

NINETEENTH-CENTURYBRITISHPERSPECTIVESONSPAIN

TheAlhambrathatstandsinGranada,Spaintodayisprimarilyafourteenth-century

Nasridconstruction.However,modernscholarsbelievethataJewishvizierwasthefirstto

buildontheAlhambrasiteduringtheeleventh-centuryBerberruleinSpain.TheNasrid

Dynasty,oncesovereignovermuchofthesouthernIberianPeninsula,wassubsequently

sequesteredtoGranadaduringFerdinandIII’sSpanishinvasionin1248.Threeofitsrulers,

IsmacilI(r.1314–25),YusufI(r.1333–54),andMuhammadV(r.1354–59,1362–91),were

theprimaryconstructorsofthepalace-fortress,whichwasfrequentlyrenovatedandbuilt

uponforthenexttwocenturies.16Fromitsinception,theAlhambrawasafluidmonument,

undergoingmultipleadditionsandrenovations,andoftenservingasahometo

heterogeneousgroups.

Inthenineteenthcentury,historianshadadifferentunderstandingofthe

monument’sspecifichistory,butwereveryinterestedinhighlightingitsfluidcharacter.

Historiansweredividedinthiseraaboutthefirstgrouptolaythefoundationsofthe

Alhambrasite.SomecreditedtheRomans,whileothersfavoredthePhoenicians.Most

agreedthatrebelMuslimIbnu’l-ahmartookpossessionofGranadaandneighboringJaen

fromtheAlhomadesaround1232,allowingeitherhimorhissuccessorMohammedIIto

16DepartmentofIslamicArt."TheArtoftheNasridPeriod(1232–1492)".InHeilbrunnTimelineofArtHistory.(NewYork:TheMetropolitanMuseumofArt,2000–).http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/nasr/hd_nasr.htm(October2002).

8

buildtheAlhambraastheyknewitintheirera.17However,thefluidcharacterofSpainand

theAlhambra,asperceivedbytheartistsandscholarsdiscussedbelow,heldmuchmore

importthanthehistoricaldetailsreconstructedbytheirpeers.

ItwastheinstabilityandmutabilityofSpain’scharacteristicsandattributesinthe

nineteenth-centuryEuropeanmind,notitshistoricalbackground,thatallowedforthe

proliferationofmultipleseeminglyincompatibleviewsofitsmonuments.AsClaudia

HopkinsneeHeidesuccinctlysummarizes,theAlhambrawas,amongotherSpanish

monuments,especiallysusceptibletovariableinterpretations:

Firmlylocatedinthepast,theAlhambraofferednoresistancetoitspowerfultranslators.Likeaplaything,itwasdismantled,brokendownintopieces,puttogetheragaininlinewiththelatesttaste,intellectualconcerns,demandsofthemarket,andultimatelyconsumerism.18

Thismutablespacewithacharacterthatis,inpart,fabricatedbyitsWesternviewersis

whatEdwardSaidcallsan“ImaginaryGeography.”Thiskindofgeography,Saidargues,

reflectstheEuropeancreationoftheOrientbasedonEurocentricpreconceptions.This

fabricatedOtherhasnovoiceofitsownbecauseitonlyexistsasaproductofEuropean

thoughtsaboutit.19InsteadofunderstandingtheOtherthroughaculturallysensitive

historicallens,scholarsoftheEastcreatedImaginaryGeographieswhichtheyimbuedwith

theirownpreconceivednotionsaboutEasternculturalcharacter,evolutionaryinferiority,

andcolorfulheritage.TheseimaginativereconstructionsoftheEastwerewildlypopularin

17HistoricalNoticebyPascualdeGayangos,precedingPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambrabyOwenJones.PopularscholarlyopinionbeforedeGayangosheldthatIbnu’l-ahmar,nothissuccessor,beganconstructionoftheAlhambra.DeGayangoschallengedthisperspectiveintheprefacetoJones’sbook.18ClaudiaHeide,"TheAlhambrainBritain,”219.19EdwardWSaid,Orientalism.(NewYork:VintageBooks,1994),55-57.Said’sconstructionofawhollypassiveotherisnarrowinitsvision.However,intryingtounderstandhowJones’sowncultureimpactedhim,itisnotexpedientheretoexpounduponthewaysthattheOtherrespondedtoandreshapedtheImaginaryGeographycreatedbytheBritish.

9

Jones’stimeandwerereiteratedsofrequentlywithintheOrientalistdiscoursethatthey

wereconsideredobjectivefact.

AlthoughSpainisnotpartofthegeographic“Orient,”itssimilarlymutablecharacter

andhistoricconnectiontotheEastmadeitsusceptibletothisformofinterpretation.The

SpanishImaginaryGeography,ascreatedbytheBritish,allowedfortheheterogeneous

perspectivesontheAlhambrathatexistedinJones’stime,butscholarsdeemphasizethe

waysinwhichJonestreatedtheAlhambra,insomeways,asanideologicallyloaded

ImaginaryGeography.HisrepresentationsofthephysicalaspectsoftheAlhambraare

generallyaccuratebecauseofhiscarefulresearch,butthechoiceshemaderegardingwhat

toincludewithinhisbookandregardingthemodesofrepresentationheemployedreflect

theBritishImaginaryGeography.AlthoughJoneswassuccessfulinformallyappreciating

thematerialremainsoftheAlhambra,hisunderstandingofthestructuredidnotalignwith

localizedexperiencesoftheAlhambrainitsnativeculture.Previousscholars,whofocus

moreonJones’sformalaccuracythanhisideologicalcontext,havesimplifiedJones’s

complexrelationshiptothismonument.

Inthenineteenth-centuryBritishcontext,dualperspectivesonSpainwerenot

uncommon.Atthistime,Britishcitizenswerebeginningtotraveltomoreremoteand

exoticlocationsthaneverbefore.Spain,asadestinationthatwasforeign,buteasily

accessible,wascomingintovogueasatouristdestination.20Becauseofitsincreased

popularity,Britishacademics,novelists,andtravelwritersbegantowriteaboutSpanish

Iberiamoreoften.Bothscholarlyandpopularpublicationswereproducedinlarge

20GrahamMowlandMichaelBarke,"ChangingVisitorPerceptionsofMalaga(Spain)anditsDevelopmentasaWinterHealthResortintheNineteenthCentury,"StudiesinTravelWriting18,no.3(07,2014),234.

10

quantity,informingreadersaboutmanyaspectsoftheSpanishcharacter,includingits

culturalcustoms,beliefs,ideologies,anditspeople.Withinthiscontext,Britonswereable

tosimultaneouslyadoptseeminglyincompatibleviewsofSpainwithoutquestioningtheir

veracity.ThetwomostprominentdichotomousperspectivesonSpaininJones’sworkare

itspositionasbothIslamicandCatholic,anditsstatusasbothstaticandactive.Inthis

section,Iwillexpounduponthemanifestationoftheseperspectivesinvariouspublications

asawaytointroduceJones’sAlhambraanditsideologicalrelationshiptotheworkofhis

peers.

ThefirstsetofseeminglycontradictoryconceptionsaroseasBritonsconsidered

Spain’salterity.AsapartofSouthernEurope,SpainwassusceptibletoOtheringby

NorthernEuropeans.Intheforum“Europe’sSouthernQuestion:TheOtherWithin”in

Nineteenth-CenturyContexts,JosephA.ButtigiegexplorestheissueofNorthernprejudice

againstSoutherncountriesinnineteenth-centuryEurope.21Buttigieghighlightshow

Montesquieu’stheoriesofclimatologyledtoawidespreadperceptionthatthewarmer

climatesofSouthernEuropeadverselyaffectedthemoralcharacterofSouthern

Europeans.22Lessmoral,andlesscapableoftechnologicalandculturaladvancement,the

countriesofSouthernEuropewereconsiderednaturallyinferiortotheirNorthern

Europeancounterparts.

Nineteenth-centuryBritons,persuadedinpartbytheoriesofclimatology,were

acutelyawareofthedissimilaritybetweenSpainandBritain.However,severalkey

elementsoftheSpanishcharacterwerehighlightedasthemainmanifestationofSpain’s

21JosephA.Buttigieg,introductionto"Forum—Europe'sSouthernQuestion:TheOtherwithin."

Nineteenth-CenturyContexts26,no.4(12/01;2014/11,2004):311-314.22Buttigieg,introductionto“Forum—Europe’sSouthernQuestion,”333.

11

“Otherness”.Forsome,SpainwastheCatholicOtherthatdestroyedthewonderful

civilizationoftheMoorsandcorruptedthenationthroughitsrelianceonthepharisaical,

superstitiouspriesthood.23DespitethisCatholicdominanceintheregion,andthefinal

expulsionoftheMoorsin1609,SpainalsomaintainedanIslamiccharacterinthemindsof

manynineteenth-centuryEuropeans.24EvencontemporarySpaniards,whoboreno

relationtothemedievalMusliminhabitantsofSpain,werethoughttobemore“Oriental”

thanEuropean.25ThisalternateconceptionofSpain’sreligiouscharacterledtodepictions

ofSpainthatemphasizedtheexotic,themysterious,andtheEasternflavorofthenation.In

somecases,theCatholicandIslamicnaturesofSpainwerewoventogetherwithinasingle

artisticproductionleadingtoacomplexreinventionofitsmonuments.

IrishAntiquarianJamesCavanahMurphy’s(1760-1814)ArabianAntiquitiesof

Spain,publishedposthumouslyin1816,wasonesuchproduction.Itwasthemost

importantbookofillustrationsofSpaininitstime,anditwasstillwidelyregardedwhen

JonespublishedhisAlhambra.26Joneshadacopyofthispublicationinhislibrary,

suggestingitsimportanceinthecreationofhismonumentalproduction.27PartIof

Murphy’sbookwascomposedofninelithographicillustrationsofCordova—primarily

focusingonthearchitectureofthemosqueprecinct.Themoresubstantialsecondpart

describedandillustrated“antiquities”(mainlyarchitectural)fromGranada.Ofthese

23“Moor”wasatermusedinthenineteenth-centurytodescribetheIslamicpeoplesofal-Andalus,

howevertheterm“Moorish”oftenreferredtostylisticqualitiesfrommanydifferentgeographical

regionsintheMuslimworld.(SeeMcSweeny,47).24ClaudiaHeide,"ADreamoftheSouth:IslamicSpain."inTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,editedbyBaker,Christopher,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton.(Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009),65.25Heide,“ADreamoftheSouth,”65.26DiegoSaglia,PoeticCastlesinSpain:BritishRomanticismandFigurationsofIberia,(Amsterdam;Atlanta:Rodopi,2000),261.27CarolFlores,“OwenJones,Architect."(Ph.D.,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,1996),40.

12

ninety-sevenplates,seventy-sevendepictsomeportionoftheAlhambra,illustratingthe

monument’searlyimpactonBritisharchitectsandtravelers.Murphy’sworkis

characterizedbyromanticdescriptions,emphasizingthesublime,anddetailed

reproductionsshowinghisimmensetechnicalcuriosity.Murphy’sendorsementofthe

publicationofTheHistoryoftheMahometanEmpireinSpain,tobereadasanintroduction

tobook,illustrateshisinterestineducatinghisaudience,whilemanyofhisplatesindicate

thathewantedtoenchantthem.28

Thetitleofhisbook,ArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,revealstheimplicitconnection

MurphysawbetweenSpainandIslam.Arabianantiquitiesweresuchanimportantpartof

theSpanishcharacterthattheymeritedtheirownbook.Theinclusionofsomanyplatesof

theAlhambrawithinthisvolumeshowstheenduringIslamiccharacterofitslayout,

architecture,andornament.MurphyalsotiedtheAlhambratoIslamthroughmythical

storiesandanecdotesfromthelivesofMuslimrulersofGranada.29

DespiteMurphy’spurportedfocusonArabianantiquities,healsohighlightedthe

presenceoftheSpanishCatholicclergythroughouthisbook.Manyofhisplatesdepict

monasticfiguresinanegativelight(discussedinmoredepthbelow),andseveralofhis

descriptionshighlightwhatMurphycallsthe“furiousbigotryoftheSpaniards.”30Inhis

descriptionforPlateXI,MurphycriticizestheimpositionofthepalaceofCharlesVwithin

28JamesCavanahMurphyandThomasHartwellHorne.TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain.(London:Cadell&Davies,1815),7.Subtitled“containingageneralhistoryoftheArabs,theirinstitutions,conquests,literature,arts,sciences,andmanners,totheexpulsionoftheMoors,”TheHistoryoftheMahometanEmpireinSpainwaswrittenbylinguistJohnShakespearandProtestanttheologianandlibrarianThomasHartwellHorneasanintroductiontoArabianAntiquitiesofSpain.29SeeMurphy,TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,descriptionsforPlatesXI,XV,XXIX,XLIIinwhichMurphydiscussesMoorishtreasure,theKeyofGod,thelastMoorishSultana,andMoorishdisregardforKoranicmandates. 30Murphy,ArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,12.

13

theAlhambracomplex,andprovideshismostscathingreviewoftheCatholicMonarchsof

SpainandtheirunscrupuloustreatmentoftheMoors:

…Inanyothersituationbutthis,thepalaceofCharlesV.wouldjustlyexciteadmiration:buthereitismisplaced,andproducesonlydisgust,especiallywhenitisrecollectedthatitsexpensewasdefrayedbypartofthemoneyobtainedunderafalsepretencefromtheunhappyMoors.ThatoppressedpeoplehadpresentedtheEmperorwith80,000ducats(accordingtoPedraza,butM.Peyronsays1,600,000ducats),asaboonfornotdeprivingthemoftheArabiclanguage.Theartfulmonarch,receivedtheirmoney,anddeludedthemwithpromisesthatwereneverfulfilled,andwhichdidnotevenputastoptotheinfamoussystemofpersecutingandransomingthem,undertheinsidiouspretenceofeffectingtheirconversion.31

MurphyadmitstoadmiringthepalaceofCharlesVforitsformalqualities.However,the

king’smaliciouspracticesinSpaininthenameofCatholicismtaintedMurphy’sperception

ofthestructurewithinthecontextoftheAlhambra.Murphy’soutrageattheimpositionof

CatholicismuponIslamwithintheAlhambraindicateshowthecoexistenceofboth

religiousOtherswasacentralaspectoftheSpanishcharacterinhismind.

AnothersetofseeminglyinconsistentviewpointsemergedasBritonsconsidered

whethertheAlhambrawasastaticmonumentfromthepastthatshouldbeviewedthrough

anostalgiclens,orwhetheritwasanactive,livingmonumentthatcouldshape

contemporaryideologies.RomanticartistsandwritersweredrawntoSpainbecauseofits

popularityamongtouristsandarmchairtravelers.However,therewasalsointerestin

Spainasacatalystforintellectualdiscovery.ThroughstudiesofSpain,Britishtravelersand

audiencesnotonlygrewtounderstandmoreaboutthehistoryoftheregion,theyalso

attemptedtounderstandandshapenineteenth-centuryculture.Individualspromotedtheir

ideologiesandtheoriesaboutmanydifferentfacetsofhistoricalandcontemporarysociety

throughtheirpublishedperspectivesonSpanish.TreatingSpainasaplatformfortheir31Ibid,8.

14

ideas,politicaltheoristspromotedprogressivism,socialactivistsventuredtounderstand

theimplicationsofslavery,andfemaleauthorstriedtopromotewomen’srights.32Ifan

idea,policy,orpracticewasunpopularinBritain,perhapsitsmeritscouldbejustified

throughrelatedphenomenainSpainanditwouldgainacceptance.Whilethismayseem

inconsistentwiththewhimsical,nostalgiccharacterofSpainpromotedbytheRomantics,

manyauthorsandartistsvisualizedtheAlhambraasbothperpetuallynostalgicand

imminentlyrelevanttocontemporarydiscourses.

ScottishartistandRoyalAcademicianDavidRoberts(1796-1864)representedthis

dualperspectiveoftheAlhambra.HeillustratedtheimportantTheTouristinSpain:

Granada,byThomasRoscoe,in1835tocapitalizeoncontemporaryinterestinromantic

reconstructionsofSpainandtheAlhambra.33Thisvolumebecameoneofthemostpopular

iterationsofJennings’LandscapeAnnualseries,whichallowedtheBritishmiddle-classto

cheaplycollectfineartastheyfantasizedabouttraveltootherlocales.34Theentireseries

ofSpanishAnnuals(1835-1838;Granada,Andalusia,BiscayandtheCastiles,Spainand

Morocco)wasverylucrativeforJennings,anditwasoneoftheformativeproductionsin

Roberts’sartisticcareer.35ThomasRoscoeintroduceshisworkasbothfactualand

romantic,basedonhispersonalnostalgiaandthewhimsicalnarrativesthroughouthistext.

Roberts’sillustrationsandtheaccompanyingdescriptionscomplementRoscoe’s

32JuanL.Sanchez,"Spain,Politics,andtheBritishRomanticImagination."(Ph.D.,UniversityofNotreDame,2007),68;DavidHowarth,TheInventionofSpain:CulturalRelationsbetweenBritainandSpain,1770-1870,(Manchester,UK;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress;DistributedexclusivelyintheUSAbyPalgrave,2007),23;John-DavidLopez,"TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain"(Ph.D.,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles),11-12.33Heide,“AlhambrainBritain,”206.34DiegoSaglia,"Imag(in)ingIberia:LandscapeAnnualsandMultimediaNarrativesoftheSpanishJourneyinBritishRomanticism."JournalofIberian&LatinAmericanStudies12,no.2(08,2006),126.35Saglia,“Imag(in)ingIberia,”128.

15

purposes—alternatingbetweenthehistoricalandtheromanticallyanecdotal.Roberts’s

descriptionofthevignetteonthetitlepageillustrateshisromanticsentiments:

Theaspectoftheentireregionisnowwildanddesolate,butstill,inspots,retains

marksofitsformercultivation.Althoughalmosttotallyneglected,thesoilissorich,

thatthetouristhasthegreatestdifficultyinkeepinghishorsefromsinkingoverthe

kneesinthethickalluvialsoil.36

Thisstyleofdescriptionnicelycomplementshisillustrations,discussedbelow,which

interprettheAlhambraalmostexclusivelythrougharomanticlens.

WhileRobertsconformedtotheromanticpurposesofthepublicationasawhole,he

alsousedhisillustrationstopromotehistheoriesabouttheconnectionbetweenGothicand

Islamicarchitecture.37Roberts,amongothersinthenineteenthcentury,believedthat

IslamicarchitecturegaverisetotheGothicstyleinEurope.38Hewasabletogarnerfavor

forthisidea,whichwaspreviouslyunpopular,throughhisrepresentationsofthe

Alhambra.39ForRoberts,thenostalgic,historiccharacterofthemonumentdidnot

invalidateitsimpactoncontemporarytheory.Rather,inproductionslikeRoberts’s,thereis

asubtleandintricatebalancebetweentheromanticizationoftheAlhambraandthe

applicationofitsprinciplestonineteenth-centurydebates.

Thesubtlebalanceofwhatmodernscholarsmightconsiderconflictingideologies,

foundintheworksofbothMurphyandRoberts,arefoundtoanequaldegreeinOwen

Jones’sPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra.Thisbook,publishedserially

from1836to1842,standsapartfromtheworksofMurphyandRobertsbecauseofits

36ThomasRoscoe,TheTouristInSpain:Granada.(London:R.JenningsandCo.,1835),x.37 ToniaRaquejo,"The'ArabCathedrals':MoorishArchitectureasseenbyBritishTravellers."TheBurlingtonMagazine128,no.1001(August,1986),560.38Thisistheviewstillheldtodaybymanyscholars.

39Raquejo,“The‘ArabCathedrals’”,555-563.

16

breadthanditsattemptatvisualandhistoricalaccuracy.40However,Jones’sperspectiveon

theAlhambraissimilarlycomplexandequallyevidentthroughhisvisualandliterary

programs.LikeMurphy,JonesrespondstoSpainasanunfavorablyCatholic,but

perpetuallyIslamiclocale.LikeRoberts,hisworkappealstohisviewersasromanticand

nostalgicwhileitsdetailspromotehisarchitecturaltheories.

Jones’suseofcolor,oftenstudiedbyscholars,isoneofthemainindicatorsofJones’s

distinctlynineteenth-centuryperspectiveontheAlhambra.Chromolithography,Jones

found,wasmuchmorecomplicatedthanstandardlithographicpractice,butitwastheonly

processthatcouldfaithfullyreproducetheboldcolorsofhisAlhambra.Afterinitiallyhiring

DayandHaghetocreatehiscolorfulplates,Jonesboughthisownlithographicpresswhich

hesetupat11JohnStreet,Adelphi.41Atthispoint,Jonesbecamedeeplyinvolvedinthe

printingprocesshimself,hiringagroupofprinters“after[his]ownheart,”whowouldhelp

himproduceasuperiorproduct.42Jonestooksuchpainstoperfectthelithographyinhis

Alhambrabecausepromotingpolychromyinornamentationwasanimportantpartofhis

comprehensiveprogram.Whileheeducatedandexcitedhisaudiencewithhisdepictions

anddescriptionsoftheAlhambra,hewantedapprovalofthepolychromaticsystemsof

ornamentationheproducedforGreatBritain.

TheunclearorganizationofJones’sbookalsoindicateshisgoalsandperspectives

beyondscholarship.Inthefirstvolume,Jones’splatesareorganizedneitherbyimagekind

orrelativegeography.Forresearchandexplanationpurposes,IhavecategorizedJones’s

40WhenhewasunabletoobtainsponsorshipfromtheFrenchgovernment,Jonesfundedmuchof

theAlhambraprojecthimself,receivingremunerationfromhis163subscribers.KathrynFerry,“OwenJonesandChromolithography,”ArchitecturalHistory,46(2003),176-177.41 Darby,"OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”45.JonesemployedtheVizetellyBrothersandCo.toprinthiswoodblocksandtext,andGaywood&Longwarthtoprinthisengravings.42Ferry,“OwenJonesandChromolithography,”180.LetterfromJonestoBonomi,17June1836.

17

imagesintosixdifferentgroups:plans,views,sections,details,elevations,areas,and

pieces.Plans,elevations,andsectionsaresimilarlyschematicinnature(seefigures2and

3),whileareasandviewsgivetheviewerabettersenseofhowregionsoftheAlhambra

functioninrelationtooneanother(seefigures4and5).Detailsandpiecesareboth

decontextualizedportionsoftheAlhambra—rangingfromornamentationandcolumn

capitalstodoors(seefigures6and7).Piecesareseparatedfromdetails,however,inthat

detailsalwaysnecessarilydepictornamentationfromthesamepartoftheAlhambra,while

piecesdepicteithersimilarornamentsfromdifferentlocations,orspecificelementslike

doorsandwindows.AlthoughalloftheplansfallatthebeginningofJones’sAlhambra,and

mostofthepiecesfallattheend,thereisnoimmediatelycomprehensibleorganizational

strategybasedonimagetypeinthemainbodyofthebook.

Jones’sfirstfewplatesdepictthePuertadePrincipalódeJustica,theCasaReal,the

PatiodelaAlberca,andtheSaladelosEmbaxadores,fromsouthernmosttonorthernmost

region,leadingthereadertobelievethatJonesorganizedhisbookgeographicallyinstead.

However,thisinitialprogressiongiveswaytoseeminglyrandomjumpsfromplacetoplace

withintheAlhambracomplex.TwoseriesofplatesXIII-XXIandXXVII-XXXIhoveraround

theCourtoftheLions,buttheplatesbeforeandafterthesesectionsdonothaveaunifying

geography.Thisun-systematicapproachisfurthercomplicatedbytheserialnatureofthis

production.Plateswerenotreleasedinnumericalorder,andthereisnoindicationthat

theirreleasewasdeterminedbygeographyorplatetype.43Thiscontrastssharplywith

othersimilarcataloguesfromthenineteenthcentury,likeDescriptiondel’Egypt(1809-

1822).The894platesofDescriptiondel’Egyptaredividedintothreesections:Antiquities,

43SeeFerry,“OwenJonesandChromolithography,”178.

18

theModernState,andNaturalHistory.TheAntiquitiessectionofthework,which

correspondsmostcloselytoJones’sAlhambra,isfurtherdividedusinganinherentlogic.

DifferentEgyptianstructuresarepicturedfirstthroughanaerialmap,thenthrougha

landscapeview,thenthroughelevationsandsections,whicharesubsequentlybroken

downtotheirornamentalandarchitecturaldetails.Oneasobsessedwithaccuracyas

modernscholarsportrayJonesmighthavemethodicallyreconstructedhischosen

monumentwithadiscernableorganizationalschemesimilartotheonefoundin

Descriptiondel’Egypt.PerhapsJones’sinattentiontoorganizationshows,instead,his

variedimaginativeaimsandobjectives,whichdidnotrequirehimtopresentacompletely

legiblerecreationofthemonument’sorganization.

WhileJones’sdisorganizationshowsthathehadconcernsbeyondaccurate

reporting,otheraspectsofJones’sAlhambramanifestspecificideologiesmore

prominently.Jones’sunderstandingoftheAlhambraasapartoftheEastisunequivocalin

hiscategorizationandfragmentarytreatmentofdifferentaspectsoftheAlhambra,andin

hisattentiontothetranslationofArabicinscriptions.Jones’sAlhambraisfilledwith

decontextualizedplatesdepictingveryspecificareasofthemonument.Hisdepictionsare

furtherclassifiedaseither,asthetitlestates,plans,elevations,sections,ordetails.

Classificationandfragmentationwerepopulartoolsusedbynineteenth-centuryscholarsof

OrientallanguagestohelptheirreadersbetterunderstandtheEast.InOrientalism,Edward

SaidstatesthatOrientalismhad“aproclivitytodivide,subdivide,andre-divideitssubject

matter.”44ThiswasacalculateddecisiononthepartofOrientalistscholarslikeFrench

linguistAntoinedeSacy,whodevelopedatheoryoffragmentsthatwouldallowhimto

44Said,Orientalism,98.

19

presentisolatedexcerptsofArabictextstohisEuropeanreaders.45Theisolationof

excerpts,alongwithallowingdeSacytohighlighthiscommentaryonthetextshe

translated,wasdesignedtomakehismaterialmoremanageableforhisreaders.Similarly,

Jones’sisolationofelementsoftheAlhambramayhavehelpedhisreadersmoreclearly

comprehendtheunfamiliarIslamicarchitecture.Individingthecomplexornamental

schemesintosmallersections,Jonesallowedhisviewerstobuildtheirknowledgeof

Islamicarchitecturewithoutbecomingoverwhelmed.Arabictranslationwasanothermajor

taskoftheOrientaliststowhichJonespaidspecialattention.ByincludingSpanishArabist

PasqualdeGayangosintheproject,JonesaffirmedhisinterestintheAlhambraasa

monumentcloselytiedtotheEastanditslanguages.

InafurtherefforttogivehisreadersthemostcomprehensivepictureoftheEastern

characterofthefourteenth-centuryAlhambra,andtopromotehisdesigntheories,Jones

extensivelyreconstructedwhatwas,inhistime,alreadyadilapidatedmonument.

ThroughouthisAlhambra,hisreconstructiveeffortsrangefromfillinginarchitecturalgaps,

torecreatingcolorschemes,toeliminatingCatholicinterventionsinthepalatialcomplex.46

Jones’sdescriptiveplatesalsoexplainandevaluaterestorationeffortsandlater

interventionsintheAlhambra.OftencriticalofCatholicdestruction,orattempted

restoration,ofthe“Moorish”ornamentation,Jonestakeseveryopportunitytoexplain

detailsoftheAlhambrathatdonotcoincidewiththedecorativeschemeheis

reconstructing.AlthoughJonesistransparentaboutwherereconstructionsoccur,he

arguesthatportionsoftheAlhambrathatdonotcorrespondtohisdesigntheoriesarethe

45Ibid,128.46SeeFigure8.UponJones’svisittotheAlhambra,thefaçadeoftheCourtoftheMosquewas

disfiguredbylaterinterventions,butitwasrestoredinitsentiretyinPlateXXIII.

20

resultofamisunderstandingofthespace,oroflaterinterventions.Inaccordancewiththis

argument,Jonesfrequentlyexplainshisreconstructedcolorswithindescriptiveplates.

AlthoughJones’sAlhambradepictsprimarilyarchitecturalandornamentaldetails,

hisinclusionoffiguresinsomeillustrationsshedslightonhisperceptionsofSpainandthe

Alhambra.AllthreeofJones’s“Views”containfigures(figures4,9,and10),asdotenoutof

elevenvignettesfromthedescriptivepages(seefigure11).“Views”contextualizethe

ornamentsandspacesdiscussedelsewhereinJones’sAlhambrabyshowingtheir

connectiontooneanotherandthroughtheuseofthesefigures.WhileJones’sviewercan

seethewaymuqarnasvaultingandarabesquepatterninginteractinsitu,shecanalsogeta

senseofhowpeoplerelatetotheirarchitecturalsurroundings.Usedtoconveyasenseof

scale,thetypesoffiguresJonesincludeshelpconstructthepastandpresentcultural

contextofthemonument.Jones’swoodcutvignettesonlyoccuronsevendescriptivepages

inthelengthyfirstvolume,andtheyarealmostneverreferredtointhetext(seefigure12).

However,thesevignettesappearmorewhimsicalandromanticthanhislithographed

plates,emphasizingthegrandeuranddecayoftheAlhambra.

Incontrasttohisromanticvignettes,Jones’sdescriptivetextsareinformation-rich.

ManyofhisdescriptivepagescontainEnglishandFrenchtranslationsofArabic

inscriptions,explanationsofthetechniquesusedtofabricatedifferentsectionsofthe

Alhambra,andevenspecificmeasurementsofthedifferentareasofthepalace.

Additionally,inthesepages,JonestriestosituatethearchitecturalschemeoftheAlhambra

withinthebroadercontextofIslamicarchitecture.Despiteexpressingelsewherethatthe

ornamentoftheAlhambrasurpassesanyotherornamentintheMuslimworld,Jonesmay

includethesecomparisonstohelphisreaderscomprehendtheunfamiliarornamentation

21

oftheAlhambra.47Onafewoccasions(DescriptivePlatesXVII,XX,XXI,andLI)Jonesuses

romanticlanguagetodescribetheAlhambra,buthemoreoftenengageswithOrientalist

scholarsthanwiththeRomanticsinhisdescriptivetext.48

AsnotedbyartandculturalhistorianGülruNecipoğluinTheTopkapıScroll:

GeometryandOrnamentinIslamicArchitecture,thesecondvolumeofJones’sAlhambraisof

anentirelydifferentcharacterthanthefirst.49Thevolume,containingfiftyplateswith

eighty-sevenimages,doesnotcontainthedescriptive,contextualmaterialcharacteristicof

Jones’sfirstvolume.Onlynineoftheplates,allofwhichappearnearthefrontofthe

volume,arestandardlithographs.Theremainingforty-oneplatesarechromolithographs

depictingdetailsfromvariousregionsoftheAlhambra.Twelveoftheseplatescorrespond

tonineplatesfromJones’sfirstvolume.50Thesehighlightorexpandparticulardetailsfrom

Volume1togivethereadermorevisualinformation.However,thethirty-eightotherbold,

decontextualizedplatesappearlikepagesinapatternbook.Patternbooks,popularinthe

nineteenthcentury,werecreatedtoprovidedecorativemotifsforinteriordesignersand

architectstoincorporateintotheirdesigns.51MuchlikeJones’ssecondvolume,thesebooks

containedconsecutivepagesillustratingdifferentornamentalelementswithlittletono

descriptivetext.ThedrasticdifferencebetweenthethoroughcontextualizationofJones’s

47SeeOwenJones,TheGrammarofOrnament.(London:DayandSon,1856),MoresqueOrnament.48HisengagementwithscholarsisevidencedbyhisfrequentcitationofOrientalisttranslator

EdwardWilliamLane’sMannersandCustomsoftheModernEgyptiansof1836(seeforexamplePlateXXVI),andofSpanishlinguistPabloLozanoyCasela’sAntiguedadesArabesdeEspañaof1780(seePlateXXII),amongothers.

49 GulruNecipoglu,TheTopkapıScroll:GeometryandOrnamentinIslamicArchitecture:TopkapıPalaceMuseumLibraryMSH.1956.(SantaMonica,CA:GettyCenterfortheHistoryofArtandtheHumanities,1995),63.

50JonesAlhambra,Volume2,PlatesXII,XIV,XV,XVIII,XIX,XXIV,XXVII,XXXI,XXXIV,XXXVI,XXXVII,XXXVIII.

51Jones’sExamplesofChineseornamentselectedfromobjectsintheSouthKensingtonmuseumandothercollectionsof1867isanexampleofapatternbook.

22

firstvolume,andthedecontextualizationofhighlylegibledetailsinhissecondvolume

supportsNecipoğlu’sclaimthatJonespurposefullyformattedhissecondvolumeaspattern

book.52AlthoughmanyhavenotedJones’soverarchingeducationalgoals,viewinghis

secondvolumeasapatternbookaddsaninterestingcomplexitytoJones’sproduction.

AlthoughscholarshavestudiedJones’sAlhambrainthepast,thissectionhas

providedafoundationforexploringhisworkinadifferentway.Ihaveshownthatthedeep

culturalconstructsthatinformtheworksofhiscontemporariescanalsobeseeninthe

generalformatofJones’sbook.IwillfurtherelaborateitscomplexitiesbelowasIcompare

Jones’simaginativereconstructionsoftheAlhambramorecloselywithspecificdepictions

byhiscontemporaries.

52Necipoglu,TheTopkapıScroll,63.

23

EXPLORINGTHEDUALOTHERNESSOFJONES’SALHAMBRA

AshistorianDavidHowarthstatesinTheInventionofSpain,“Catholicismwasthe

mostcharacteristicthingaboutSpaininthemindsoftheBritish.”53Thisbeingthecase,it

seemsonlynaturalthatIbegintodelvedeeperintomyreevaluationofJones’sAlhambra

withthisconsiderationinmind.Catholicisminthebroadestsensewasunpopularamong

theBritishpublicandpolicymakersdespitethepassageoftheCatholicEmancipationAct

inAprilof1829.54BritishProtestanttheologiansinthisperiodconsideredtheCatholic

faithuniversallyheretical.‘Popery’wascondemnedwhereveritexistedbecauseitwas

thoughttoseparateworshippersfromanunmediatedrelationshipwithGod.However,

theologianspitiedresidentsofothercountriesforbeingsubjecttoCatholicreligious

systems,whiletheyviewedSpanishCatholicsasalmostuniversallyfanatical.This

fanaticismwastypifiedbythecrueltyofSpanishInquisitorsduringthecrusades,andwas

consideredanenduringqualityofSpanishclergyandlaypeoplethroughthenineteenth

century.55BritonsalsoviewedthepoliticalramificationsofCatholicisminSpainina

negativelight.TheCatholicgovernmentofSpain,byexpellingthelastoftheethnic‘Moors’

in1609,wasthoughttohaveretardedtheprogressofSpanisheconomics,subsequently

requiringBritishinterventioninthepeninsula.56ThesenegativeviewsofSpanish

53Howarth,TheInventionofSpain,64.54Ibid,61.55 Stevens,MichaelS."SpanishOrientalism:WashingtonIrvingandtheRomanceoftheMoors."(Ph.D.Dissertation,GeorgiaStateUniversity,2007),2.56Stevens,“SpanishOrientalism”,35;Heide,“ADreamoftheSouth,”65.

24

CatholicismwereperpetuatedamongsttheBritishpublicthroughanti-Spanishpropaganda

pamphletsthatdenigratednearlyeveryaspectofSpanishlife.57

JamesCavanahMurphy’sinterpretationoftheAlhambraemphasizesthe

superstitious,unscrupulousnatureofSpanishCatholicismanditsclergy.Thetenthplateof

TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain,depictingthefaçadeoftheAlhambrafromadistance,

exemplifiesMurphy’snegativeperspective(figure13).Murphy’simagehastwodistinct

focalpoints.ThefirstistheloomingTorredeComares,andthesecondistheprominently

foregroundedsceneofaSpanishCatholicclergyman,across,andanartist.InMurphy’s

scene,Catholicismhasbecome,veryliterally,thefrontmatter.WeseetheCatholicpriest

performingaChristianblessingonacross,erectedneartheIslamicstructure,ashis

personalartistsitsbyrecordingtheevent.58

AshistorianMichaelStevensnotesinSpanishOrientalism,theartistinthisscenecan

alerttheviewertothenegativeconnotationofthepriest’spresenceattheAlhambra.59This

artist,commissionedtorecordthepriest’sreclamationofandblessingovertheregion,

makestheCatholicendeavorseemunspiritualandostentatious.Bybringinganartistto

whatcouldbesacredevent,thispriestseemsmoreinterestedinreceiving

acknowledgementforhiscontributiontotheChristianizationofSpain,thaninactually

helpingthecountryoritsinhabitants.ForMurphy’sBritishviewers,thiscouldreaffirmthe

notionthatpriestshaveaheightenedsenseofself-importance,creatingbarriersbetween

CatholicworshipersandGod,andcorruptingtheChristianfaith.Fromaformalperspective,

57Lopez,“TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain,”18-21.58AlthoughthisisanimaginativecreationbyMurphy,contemporarythoughtheldthatoverlypiousinvadersaddedcrossestotheinterioroftheAlhambrato“Christianize”thespacesafteritwasconquered.59Stevens,“SpanishOrientalism,”92.

25

theartistactsasabarrierbetweenthepriestandthecross—asymbolofChrist—

highlightingthedisconnectbetweenpriestsandtruereligion.Additionally,thedistance

betweenthissceneandtheAlhambracreatesasensethatthesemendonottrulybelongin

thislocation,despitetheirpersonalsenseofimportance.ForMurphy,thissceneisnotone

ofprivatespirituality,butofareligiousfaçademaskingarrogance,pretentiousness,anda

conqueringspirit.60

JonesshowstheCatholiccharacteroftheAlhambrainamuchmoresubtleway.

InsteadofforegroundingthenegativeaspectsofCatholicisminSpaintohighlightSpanish

alterity,JonespraisestheNasridcreatorsoftheAlhambra,thusimplicitlycriticizingthe

currentCatholicrulersofSpain.Jones’svignetteheadingthedescriptionofPlateIprovides

aparalleltoMurphy’stwentiethplate(figure14).Jones’sscenedoesnothaveadefined

focalpointandhisfigures’diminutivesizeandnon-descriptSpanishdressmakethem

relativelyunimportantincomparisonwithMurphy’spriest.InascenewhereMurphymade

aconsciousdecisiontoblatantlyCatholicizetheAlhambra,Jonesmadeadifferentdecision.

Infact,JonesalmostuniversallyexcludedCatholicclergymembersfromhisdepictionsof

theAlhambra.

Inhisthirteenplatesandvignettesthatshowfigures,clergyappear,subtly,twice.It

alsoseemsthatJonesonlydepictspriestlyormonastictypesontheoutskirtsofthecentral

Alhambracomplex.InthevignetteofdescriptivePlateXXIII,theclergymanisdepicted

conversingwithaturbanedmaninthecourtofthemosque(nowCatholicchapel).Itseems

thatJones’svieweronlyseesthisCatholicfigureherebecauseheisabouttoenterintoa

Catholicspace,whichisunexploredinJones’svolumes.Amaninwhatcouldbepriestlyor60HiscollaborationwithThomasHartwellHorne,whoalsoauthoredPopery,theenemyandfalsifierofScripturein1844,providesfurtherevidenceofMurphy’smistrustofCatholicism.

26

monasticattireisalsoseenattheoutsideedgeoftheCourtoftheFishpondinPlateIV

(figure4).NeithermanisforegroundedwithintheAlhambracomplexandneitheris

activelyengagedinCatholicliturgy.

Similarly,JonesremovesalmostalltracesofCatholicarchitecturalalterationswithin

thefortress.InRe-envisioningtheAlhambra,LauraEggletonhighlightsJones’sselective

editingofCatholicornamentationwithintheAlhambra.Shecloselyexaminesthe

Alhambra’smosque-turned-chapelthatJonesomitsfromhisreconstruction.Byomitting

thisspaceentirely,JonesavoidedthetiledmuralsaddedbyCharlesVbearingcrown

emblemsandtheslogan‘PlusOultre’,whichisprominentlyvisibleinmodernphotographs

(figure15).61Despitethefactthatthemosquewaslikelythemostcharacteristically

MuslimfeatureoftheAlhambracomplex,itsmorerecentCatholicinterventions,which

Jonesviewedasarchitecturally,andthusideologically,inferiortotheoriginalMuslim

design,causeditsexclusionfromJones’svisualprogram.62

InsteadofincludingCatholicinterventionswithintheAlhambra,Jonesfocuseson

thearchitecturalprowessofitsmedievalcreators.HisPlateX,“DetailsoftheGreatArches.

HalloftheBark,”(figure16)isnotonlymasterfullyrendered,butitsdescriptionoutlines

thecomplexgeometricschemesthattheoriginalarchitectsemployedtocreatethis

intricateedifice(figure17).JonespraisestheseNasridconstructorsofthespacefortheir

appliedknowledgeofmathematicsincreatingmuqarnasvaulting.However,farfrombeing

61HeomitsthisregionfromhisvisualreconstructiondespitethefactthathementionstheCatholicalterationofthespaceonDescriptivePlateXLIII.62ForJones,architecturaldetailinreligiouscontextsflowedfromtheideologiesofthereligionthatcreatedthem.Forthisreason,Jonesgenerallybelievedthatreligiousgroupsthatweretruertotheirreligiousfaithcreatedsuperiorarchitectureandornament.FormoreofJones’sviewsonthissubject,seeOwenJones,"OntheInfluenceofReligionuponArt,"inLecturesonArchitectureandtheDecorativeArtsbyOwenJones,(London:Chadwyck-Healey,1835),3-25.

27

asignthatJonesfavoredmedievalMuslims,thismorepositiveviewofthefourteenth-

centurybuildersoftheAlhambracouldhavebeenadevicetocriticizemodernSpanish

Catholicismwithinthecomplex.

Nineteenth-centuryBritonsoftenpresentedmedievalal-Andalus,thefourteenth-

centuryGranadineregionruledbytheNasrids,asahybridutopiathatengendereda

societyofreligioustoleranceandintellectualprogress,unlikethereligiousandsocial

stricturesthatinhibitedSpanishprogressinthemodernera.63ScottishnovelistWalter

ScottillustratesthispopularviewoftheMoorsinhisnovelIvanhoe(1820).Init,Jewish

characters,RebeccaandIsaac,takerefugeinthekingdomofGranadawheretheywillbe

acceptedandprotected,astheywouldnotbeinEngland.64ItseemsthatJonescouldbe

reiteratingthisunderstandingofmedievalSpainbecausehefeltthattheCatholicruleof

SpainwaslesslegitimatethantheformerNasridrule.Thereligiousstricturesofthe

CatholicChurchanditsmonarchydestroyedthecivilizationthatproducedJones’sfavored

ornamentalschemesandbegantolettheAlhambrafalltoruin—compellingJonesto

presentitinafullreconstruction.CatholicrulersandparishionersdidnotbelonginJones’s

reconstructionofSpainbecauseoftheirdisregardfortheornamentandcustomsthat

precededthemintheregion.IndelegitimizingtheCatholicpresenceintheAlhambrainthis

way,JonesrecognizesthatCatholicismisafundamental,albeitnegative,partofthe

monument’scharacter.AlthoughJonescouldhavehadprimarilystylistic,ratherthan

religiousmotivesforthismethodofreconstruction,hisartisticpredecessorsandthe

63Howarth,TheInventionofSpain,10;Eggleton,"Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra,"218;Heide,"ADreamoftheSouth,”65.ThestateofpeacefulcoexistencebetweenChristians,Muslims,andJewswithinIberiankingdomsfromtheeighthtofourteenthcenturiesiscommonlyreferredtoas“LaConvivencia”64Stevens,SpanishOrientalism,46.

28

overarchingreligiousandpoliticalclimateinwhichheworkedlendcredencetothis

interpretation.

AsJonespraisestheAlhambra’sMuslimcreators,showinghisimplicitbiasagainst

SpanishCatholics,healsoperpetuatestheideathatSpainisOtherbecauseofitsIslamic

historyandenduringIslamiccharacter.TheIslamichistoryofSpainnaturallyresultedina

continued,wide-reaching,interestinSpainasEast.Thisisexemplifiedthroughthecareer

ofnotedSpanishArabistPascualdeGayangos.Includedasahistorianandtranslatorfor

Jones’sproject,deGayangosdedicatedhiscareertounderstandingHispano-Islamichistory

throughthestudyoftheArabiclanguage.WheneverdeGayangosdiscussedSpain,itwasin

thecontextoftheMoorsandfocusedonunderstandingthehistoricMuslimcharacterofthe

region.65Onapopularlevel,SpainwasalsotransmittedtothewiderBritishpublicasa

partoftheincreasinglypopularOrientalistfad.AsBritishaudiencesbecamemore

interestedintheEast,travelers,artists,publishers,andplaywrightscateredtothisinterest

byusingtheOrient(includingSpain)astheirsubjectswithgreaterfrequency.66

DespitethepopularityofSpainasapartoftheOrient,theAlhambrawasnot

inevitablyIslamicinnineteenth-centuryBritishdepictions.WhilebothJonesandMurphy

emphasizedtheIslamicnatureoftheAlhambra,notedOrientalistpainterJohnFrederick

Lewis(1804-1876)emphasizedthepeculiarityofSpain’sSpanishinhabitantswithinthis

space.Bythetimeofhisdeath,Lewiswasoneofthemostprominentmembersofthe

Britishartestablishment,andoneofthemostwellknownpaintersoftheEast.67His

65Heide,“TheAlhambrainBritain,”212.66Saglia,PoeticCastles,261.67 LewiswasbestowedthehonorofelectionasaRoyalAcademicianin1865.BrionyLlewellyn,“"SolitaryEagle"?:ThePublicandPrivatePersonasofJohnFrederickLewis(1804-1876)”inThe

29

matureoeuvreischaracterizedbymeticulous,ethnographicrepresentationsoftheEast,

especiallyEgyptandtheOttomanEmpire.68Theseiconicrepresentations,whichwere

createdmuchlaterthanhisSpanishworks,emphasizetheculturalalterityofhisEastern

subjects.HehighlightsthelavishsensualityoftheOrientandgiveshisviewersaninside

lookattheseductiveharemculturethatwassomysterioustoWesternviewers.However,

earlyinhiscareer,LewistraveledtoSpainandproducedabodyofworkthatdivorcedthe

countryfromitsIslamicheritage.HisSpanishworksfocusedonthepassionandsensuality

ofcontemporarySpaniardsinsteadofthemysteryofMedievalMuslims,andaremoreakin

togenrescenesthantheethnographiccatalogshewouldlaterproduce.69Givenhislater

interestindepictingtheIslamicOther,Lewis’sinterpretationofSpainhighlightsthe

consciouschoiceinvolvedinJones’sconstructionofanIslamicAlhambra.

Inhisdrawing,CourtyardoftheAlhambraof1832-33(figure18),Lewisemphasizes

theSpanishcharacteroftheAlhambraintwoways.70First,heobscuresmostoftheIslamic

ornamentationoftheAlhambra.AlthoughexteriorsurfacesoftheAlhambraareoftenun-

ornamented,theornamentationaroundthedoorwayinLewis’ssceneisverynon-descript

andalmostentirelyinshadow.Thisisespeciallystrikinggiventherelativelackofshadow

intherestoftheimage.Thehorseshoearch,thethincolumns,andtheruinedjalousiesgive

PoeticsandPoliticsofPlace:OttomanIstanbulandBritishOrientalism.editedbyReinaLewis.(Seattle:UniversityofWashingtonPress,2011),167. 68 JohnM.MacKenzie,Orientalism:History,Theory,andtheArts.(Manchester;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress,1995),48;EmilyM.Weeks,CulturesCrossed:JohnFrederickLewisandtheArtofOrientalism,(NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2014).69ClaudiaHeide,"TheSpanishPicturesque,"inTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,eds.ChristopherBaker,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton(Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009),49.

70Itisunclearwhichcourtyardthisdrawingissupposedtoreference.Someofthearchitectural

elementsarereminiscentoftheCourtoftheMosque,butLewis’sconfigurationofthespaceseems

unlikeanyofthe“courts”containedwithintheAlhambra.

30

thevieweranindicationthatthisisaMuslimstructure,butLewisdoesnotpresentthe

IslamicornamentoftheAlhambrawiththedetailofJonesorMurphy.Hisrepresentationof

vegetalornamentislooselysketchedin,thegeometricjalousiesarerelativelyindistinct

becauseofshadow,andthereisacompleteabsenceofepigraphicornamentation.Despite

itsfinerfinishedlook,thisdrawingwaslikelynotintendedtobeafinishedproduct,which

mayaccountforthelackofdetail.However,theprominentshadowswouldhaveobscured

theornamenteveninamorepolishedwork.

Second,LewisincludesonlySpanishfigureswithinthiscourtyard.Thetwomenon

theleftareiconicSpanishmuleteers.WashingtonIrvingdescribedthesemenasthemain

carriersofcommerceinSpain,asmenwholivedfrugallyandroughlytosurvive.Irvingalso

popularizedMuleteersintheEnglish-speakingworldasnaturallypoeticandtalented,and

theircaravanswereconsideredoneofthepicturesquesightsintheAndalusian

landscape.71Thewomaninthedoorway,andtheyoungerwomanonthestepsareboth

veiled—apopulartrendacrosssocio-economicclassesinthisera.Thebeardedmaninthe

hatandcapeseemstostandbetweenthemuleteersandthedoorwayontheright.Hetoois

inSpanishdress,wearingthetightpants,boots,andcapereminiscentofaSpanishmajo.72

Majoswerecharacterizedbytheirgarishcostume,andfierypassionassociatedwiththeir

lowerclass.LewissituatestheseindividualseasilywithintheAlhambraastheSpanish

Other.Despiteitshistory,ornamentation,andarchitecture,theAlhambraisnotinevitably

Islamic.ForLewis,itisSpanishatitscore.

Bycontrast,thereisalwaysaMuslimpresencewithinJones’sViews.His

woodblocksoftendepictthoseincontemporarySpanishdressalone,buthismajor71WashingtonIrving,TalesoftheAlhambra,(Philadelphia:Carey&Lea,1832)17-18.72Seefigure19depictingRichardFordinaMajocostume.

31

lithographiccompositionsarenotwithoutprominentlyIslamicfeatures.Infact,mostofhis

viewscontainMuslimfiguresexclusively.PlateIV,“ViewoftheCourtoftheFish-Pondfrom

theHalloftheBark”,inwhichfiguresincontemporarySpanishdressdominatethe

pictorialspace,istheexceptiontothisrule(figure4).However,abearded,turbanedmanis

foregroundedandplacedclosesttotheornamentaldesigns,themainsubjectofJones’s

plate.Thismanisseatedonthefloor,aposturecommonlygiventoMuslimsinnineteenth-

centuryEuropeandepictions,andissmokingwithamanincontemporarySpanishdress.

PlateXIXisamoretypicalrepresentationofpeoplewithinanarchitecturalspace.It

utilizesthreeMuslimtypesthatwouldbecomeprominentinthelaterEasternworkofJohn

FrederickLewis—theseatedtype,andtheturbanedsmokerwithhisAfricanservant

(figure10).Inthe“ViewintheHallofTwoSisters,”Jonesrecreatesalmostallofthe

Alhambra’scharacteristicfeaturesforhisviewers.Intheforeground,oneseesmanyofthe

stuccoedarabesquesandgeometricmosaicdetailsthatJonesreproducesmorecloselyin

hisfirstandsecondvolumes.Thisviewalsoincludesnichesandscallopedarchwaysinthe

fore,andmuqarnasvaultingabovethearchesinthebackground.Thecomprehensivedetail

intheforegroundcanbeexaminedtotheminutestlevelandretainitsprecision,andthe

ornamentaldetailsinthebackgroundarestillveryrecognizabledespitetheatmospheric

perspective.ThisisanimportantviewforJonestoreproducebecauseitgiveshisviewers

anideaofhowthearchitecturalelementsworktogetherwithintherealspaceofthe

Alhambra.ThisviewisalsosignificantbecauseitreinforcestheMuslimcharacterofthe

monumentthroughtheinclusionofMuslimtypes.Intheforeground,Jonesincludesa

bearded,turbanedmanwithhisyoungAfricanservantwhocarrieshispipe.The

preponderanceofpictorialrepresentationsofMuslimswithAfricanservantsseemsto

32

suggestthatitwasanespeciallypopularandintriguingrelationshiptonineteenth-century

Europeans.Thesmokingofapipeorhookahwasalsoseenasacharacteristicpartoflifein

theEast.Inthebackground,anothermaninEasterndresssits,contemplative,withserving

vesselsinfrontofhim.Despitehisaccouterments,thisindividualseemsalmost

lackadaisical.Thisseated,turbanedtypewouldalsobecomepopularinLewis’slaterwork

depictingEgyptandtheOttomanEmpire.73MoreakintoLewis’sEgyptianworksthanhis

SpanishAlhambra,Jonesadoptsamodeoffiguralrepresentationthatassociatesthe

monumentverycloselywithIslamandtheEast.Byincludingfiguretypescommonlyused

byOrientalizingartists,Jonesentered,insomeways,theOrientalistdiscourse.Whilehis

ornamentalrecreationswereoftenaccurate,hisfiguresimaginativelyreconstructedthe

peoplethathebelievedbestaccompaniedthismonument.

Despitetheaboveevidence,scholarshavetroubleunderstandingJones’sAlhambra

asbothIslamicandCatholicbecausethishybriditymanifestsitselfasprimarilyIslamic.In

Murphy’sArabianAntiquities,theIslamo-CatholiccharacteroftheAlhambraishighlighted

throughtheovertinclusionofCatholicclergymemberswithintheIslamicspacesofthe

monument.AlthoughtheAlhambrabearsexplanationandillustrationbecauseofits

“Arabian”character,MurphyhighlightshowtheCatholicOtherthathasintrudedwithinthe

space,fundamentallyalteringitscharacter.Bycontrast,JonesrespondstotheCatholic

presencewithintheIslamicAlhambrabyerasingCatholicinterventionsfromhis

reconstruction.ThisomissionofaCatholicpresencewithintheAlhambracreatesa

significantabsence.Farfrombeinginconsequential,theCatholicinvolvementinthe

Alhambrawassoprominent,andsodistasteful,thatitwarrantedwillfulomission.

73Seefigure20.

33

InexcludingtheCatholicaspectsoftheAlhambra,Jonessuccessfullyacknowledges

andcritiquestheIslamo-CatholiccharacterofSpainanditsmonuments,withouthavingto

strayfromhismedievalfocus.BecauseofhisinterestintheIslamicheritageand

ornamentationofthesite,JonescriticizesthewaytheAlhambrahasbeenCatholicizedin

hisera,inadvertentlyhighlighting,thus,thesubsequentCatholicconquestofthe

monument.IfthecontemporaryAlhambrawasnotinsomeways“Catholic”inJones’smind,

hewouldnotshowthePalaceofCharlesVinhisgeneralplanoftheAlhambraormention

otherCatholicinterventionsinthespace.Bymentioningtheseinterventionsbriefly,but

marginalizingtheminhisbroaderliteraryandpictorialprogram,Jonesstrengthenshis

critiqueofanIslamo-CatholicAlhambra.

ItseemsverylikelythatthiscritiqueisindeedofCatholicinterventions,andnotof

specificstylisticchangesbecauseofthewayJonesaddressesarchitecturalchangeswithin

histext.HeneverusesstylistictermswhencritiquinglaterchangestotheAlhambra,which

hereferstoharshly,butvaguely.AlthoughhealsodoesnotmentionthatCatholicrulers

werethosewhoundertook“repeatedrestorations”thatdefacedthepalatialornament,his

audiencemayhaveinferredthatthesewerethealterationshewasreferringto.74Thisis

especiallyprobablegiventhemoreovertcriticismundertakenbyMurphyseveralyears

earlier.TheseeminglycontradictoryreligiouscharactersoftheAlhambramaybeless

visiblymanifestedinJones’sAlhambrathaninMurphy’sArabianAntiquities,butJones’s

bookstillunderstandsthenineteenth-centuryAlhambraasIslamo-Catholic.Thevisual

absenceofCatholicclergyorCatholicarchitectureinJones’sAlhambraisasmeaningfulas

74OwenJones,Alhambra,DescriptivePlateXIII.

34

theirinclusionbyMurphy,andshowsasimilarcritiqueoftheIslamo-Catholiccharacter

thatwasforceduponthemonumentthroughCatholicinvasion.

ScholarsarealsoreluctanttoacceptJones’sworkasacommentaryontheIslamo-

CatholiccharacteroftheAlhambrabecauseoftheappearanceofaccuracywithinhis

architecturalreconstructions.SinceJonesendeavoredtoproduceafaithfulreconstruction

ofthefourteenth-centuryIslamicAlhambra,hisworkisviewedasifitwerescientific

ratherthansubjective.Somehowtheintegrityofhisornamentaldetailsisviewedas

inconsistentwithJones’scriticalcommentaryonthelayeredreligiouscharacterofthe

Alhambrainthenineteenthcentury.However,itisclearthattheseeminglyinconsistent

religiouscharactersoftheAlhambrawerebothveryimportanttonineteenth-century

Britishinterpretersofthespace.Jonescouldoffertohisreadersanaccurate

reconstructionofAlhambricornamentationasheprovidedhiscommentaryonthe

contemporaryreligiouscharacterofthemonumentwithoutcausingconfusion.75However,

ourmodernsensibilities—whichdivorceaccuratedepictionsfromvalue-laden

interpretations,andrejectdichotomy—havealteredourunderstandingofthescopeand

purposesofJones’sAlhambra.AlthoughJonesundoubtedlyattemptedtoaccurately

reconstructtheMedievalMuslimmonument,hisAlhambraalsogivesusinsightintothe

dualOtherwithintheAlhambrainthenineteenthcentury.

75Jones’swillingnesstosacrificeadepictionofthecontemporarycharacteroftheAlhambrainanefforttoreconstructhisconceptionofitsMedievalstateisreminiscentoftherelationshipbetweenEugène-EmmanuelViollet-le-DucandtheGothicarchitectureofFrance.However,itshouldbenotedthatJones’srestorativeeffortswereconfinedtohisimaginativereconstructions,ashedidnotattempttoengageinremedialarchitecture.FormoreonViollet-le-DucseeMartinBressani,ArchitectureandtheHistoricalImagination:Eugène-EmmanuelViollet-le-Duc,1814–1879,(Farnham:AshgatePublishingLtd.,2014).

35

EXPLORINGTHEFLUIDHISTORICCHARACTEROFJONES’SALHAMBRA

FormanyBritishtravelers,Spainrepresentedapre-industrializedpastthatwas

unmarredbytheconcernsofrapidurbanization.76Thesetravelerspopularizedaromantic

conceptionofSpainandtheAlhambrathatpermeatedBritishrepresentationsofthis

location.Inundatedwithromantictravelaccounts,novels,andworksofart,British

commonerswidelyviewedSpaniardsasprimitivesavageswholivedinalandscapeofpre-

modernruins.77TheseviewsofSpainledtoanostalgicconceptionofthepurityofthis

“less-advanced”society,andtodepictionsthatignoredprogressandmodernization.78

ManyfixedtheirromanticgazeonMoorishSpainandtheAlhambrabecauseits

preservationremindedtheEuropeantravelerofaradicallydifferentpastthatwasin

dangeroffadingaway.79AsopposedtotheIslamicmonumentsinthegeographic“East”

thatwerestillusedandinhabitedbynon-Europeans,theAlhambrarepresentedastatic,

historicmonumentthroughwhichtheRomanticartistscouldrecapturethepast.Romantic

depictionsofSpanishscenes,liketheworksofDavidRoberts,makeheavyuseof

atmosphericperspective,OrientalandSpanishtypes,andsignsofdecaytoemphasizethe

sublimequalitiesofthecountry,itsarchitecture,anditspeople.80AlthoughJones’s

76Lopez,“TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain,”11.77Eggleton,“Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra,”125;Howarth,TheInventionofSpain,49-50.78ClaudiaHeide,"TheSpanishPicturesque,"51.79 JohnSweetman,TheOrientalObsession:IslamicInspirationinBritishandAmericanArtandArchitecture,1500-1920.(NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,1988),131.80TheSublimeembodiesnotionsofgrandeur,beauty,andhorror.Ifsomethingisconsideredsublime,itisbothwonderfulanddisconcerting.TheideaofsublimityisalsocloselyassociatedwithapicturesqueconceptionoftheEast.ClaudiaHeide,"TheAlhambrainBritain,”207.

36

lithographedarchitecturalreconstructionsaredevoidoftheseelements,manyofthe

woodcutsillustratinghisdescriptivepagesembracethemwhole-heartedly.

ThefootnoteaccompanyingJones’swoodblockondescriptivePlateLImakeshis

intentiontopresentromanticviewsonhisdescriptivepagesclear:

The‘CasadeSanchez’nolongerpossessesthepicturesqueappearanceshewninthewood-cut.In1837,thewholefrontwasrestoredandbeautified,andthepondconvertedintoagardenbyoneoftheresidentmilitaryofficersofthefortress.81

Here,Jonesstatesthatheisforsakinghispristinereconstructioninfavorofapicturesque

depictionoftheCasadeSanchezthatdoesnotreflectitscurrentstate.Beingneithera

completelypastorpresentreality,thiswoodcutanditsdescriptionareindicativeofJones’s

acceptanceofromanticandpicturesquereconstructionsoftheAlhambra.

JonesandDavidRobertslikelymetduringtheirsimultaneoustripstoSpainandthe

Alhambra,wheretheyobservedandrecordedthemonumentoverthesameperiodoftime.

TheirsubsequentromanticreconstructionsoftheAlhambra,publishedwithinayearofone

another,arestrikinglysimilar.Roberts’sfrontispieceforTheTouristinSpain:Granada

depictsascenewhosefocalpointistheAlhambra’sTowerofComares(figure21).The

towerloomsoverthefiguresintheforegroundandtheSpanishlandscape,fillingthetop

two-thirdsofthepictureplane.Inloomingassuch,thetowerevokestheforebodingnature

ofthesublime.Thediminutivesizeofthefiguresfurtheremphasizeshowtheviewer

shouldbeinaweofsuchamonumentalconstruction.Signsofdecayonthestructureare

obvious:theforemostarchitecturalelementsarestrippedoftheirouterstuccoexposing

guttersthatprotrudefromthesideofthissecondarytower.Furtherbackinthescene,

exteriorarchitectureisalsocrumblingandstructuralelementsareexposed.Theentire81Seefigure13.

37

façadeseemstoriseoutof,orperhapscrumbleinto,therockoutcroppingonwhichitis

built.ThesesignsofdecayemphasizethenostalgiaevokedbytheAlhambra,whichwas

oncethecenterofathrivingcivilization,buthasfallenintodisuseanddisrepair.

Robertsalsoutilizeslighttoaccentuatehisromanticreconstruction.Thelightofthe

settingsunfiltersthroughgapsinthearchitecture,floodingsomesectionswithlightand

obscuringothersinshadow.82Theraysoflightareclearlyseenemanatingfromtheleft

sideofthecentraltower,toemphasizetheephemeralityofthisplace,andmetaphorically

representtheAlhambra’sdeclinefromitsoriginalglory.Finally,Robertsobscuresthepath

totheAlhambratoaddtothemysticalnatureoftheromanticruin.Althoughthefiguresat

thebottomoftheillustrationareonapath,theviewercannotdiscernhowthatpath

reachestheAlhambra.Thepathreappearsbehindthetreesinthemiddleground,andin

otherlocations,butthereisnodefinitepointatwhichthepathreachesthefortress.The

Alhambra,illustratedthroughoutTheTouristinSpain:Granada,ultimatelyremains

inaccessibletothefiguresinthisprint.

Jones’swoodcutprintsonthedescriptivepagesoftheAlhambraaresimilarly

romanticintheirpresentationofthemonument.Jones’sviewoftheTowerofComareson

thebackofhisfirstdescriptivepageisnoexception(figure22).Althoughdevoidofthe

humanpresencefoundinmanyofJones’sotherwoodcuts,thisscenealsoemploysthe

romanticizingtechniquesfoundinRoberts’sfrontispiece.Jones’sTowerappearsata

greaterdistancethanRoberts’s,butitisviewedfromasimilarangle.Byforegrounding

foliage,Jones’sTowerseemstallerwithoutphysicallytakingupthemajorityofthepicture

plane.Thisfoliagealsoobscurestheviewer’saccesstothetower.Althoughthereisempty82GiventhefactthatfaçadeoftheTorredeComaresfacesnortheast,andtheraysoflightarecomingfrombehindandtotheleftofthecentraltower,onecandeducethatthisisasunsetscene.

38

spaceontheleftsideoftheimage,themaintowerofthisfaçadeseemstooovergrowntobe

reached.Itrisesstarklyfromuntamednatureasamonumentcloselyassociatedwithit.

Theassociationbetweenabuiltstructureandthewild,untamednaturalsettingmakesthe

structureseemevenmoreunrulyandimposing.SignsofdecayarealsopresentinJones’s

woodcut,althoughnotasprominentlyastheyareinRoberts’s.Theforemostsignsofdecay

areontheToweritself,withitsstuccocrumblingoff.Becauseofthetower’sdistancefrom

theviewer,muchofthisdecaymaybeobscured.83

Jones’spuzzlinguseoflightinthisprintillustratesthecomplexityofhisromantic

reconstruction.Althoughthehighcontrastbetweenlightandshadowcorrespondstoa

traditionalRomantictreatmentoflight,thewaythefaçadeofthetowerisilluminatedisnot

naturallypossible.TheviewercanseethesunsettingclearlybetweentheTowerof

Comaresandthesmallertowerontheright.However,theouterfaçadeoftheAlhambrais

bathedinlight.Theimpossibilityofthislightingservestwopurposes.Thefocalpointof

thisimageremainshighlighted;theloomingTowerofComareswithitscrumbling

architecturecanbeseenclearly.Simultaneously,thesettingsunmakeslightseemto

radiatefromwithintheAlhambra.AlthoughJonesconstructstheAlhambraasadilapidated

location,thislightcouldalludetothericheswithinthisstructure.Lightcomesfromwithin

theAlhambratotellJones’sviewersthattheformergloryoftheAlhambraisstillavailable

tothemthroughJones’sreconstruction.Curiously,Joneslabelsthiswoodcutprint“Tower

ofComares,”butlabelsnoothers.Thereasonsforthisdecisioncannotbeknownwith

certainty,butitcallstomindthewayinwhichRoberts’sfrontispieceislabeledinThe

83However,weknowthatJonesdidnottrytohidetheruinousaspectsoftheAlhambrainhisvignettesbasedonhisotherwoodblockprintfromthesamepage.Seefigure23.

39

TouristinSpain:Granada.PerhapsJonesdecidedtolabelhiswoodcuthereasareferenceto

thisRomanticmodel.

Jones’sworkissimilar,althoughnotidentical,toRoberts’sonanotherfront:both

menpromotetheirdesignandarchitecturetheoriesthroughtheAlhambra.Inthissense,

JonesandRobertstreatedtheAlhambraasanImaginaryGeographyatitsmost

fundamentallevel.BothtookthehistoricAlhambraandmadeitimminentlyrelevantinthe

contemporarydebatesinwhichtheywereengaged.InJones’scase,thedebatefocusedon

polychromyincontemporaryornament.InhisextensivetravelstotheEast,Jonesbecame

fascinatedwiththewaysinwhichpolychromaticornamentationenhancedtheoverall

effectofarchitecture.Althoughprimarycolorswereusedoftenintheornamentalschemes

Jonesstudied,theywereseldomfoundinBritishdesignleadinguptothenineteenth

century.84JonescreatedhisAlhambratocounteractthistrendbypopularizingbold

polychromaticornamentationwithintheBritishnationalstyle.Roberts,ontheotherhand,

wasengagedinadiscoursethatsoughttovalorizeGothicarchitecturethroughits

connectiontoIslamicart.RobertsbelievedthatGothicarchitecturehaditsrootsinthe

Islamicarchitectureofthepast,sohealteredhisperspectiveoftheAlhambratohighlight

theGothicizinginclinationsofitspre-Gothicarchitecture.85Byfocusingonspecificaspects

oftheAlhambra,bothmentransformedthemonumenttosupporttheirrespective

positions.Thesemenwerenotaloneinpromotingtheoriesofdesignthroughthe

Alhambra,butajuxtapositionoftheirdepictionswillfurtherclarifyJones’sinterpretive

choices.

84Darby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”29,64.85Raquejo,"The'ArabCathedrals',”560.

40

Jones’sPlateXXVII,containingdetailsoftheHallofJustice,isabold

chromolithograph,utilizinggold,black,andredforvisualimpact(figure24)86,while

Roberts’sIllustrationoftheHallofJustice,fromTheTouristinSpain(1835)isastandard

greyscalelithographthatimbuestheHallwithintrigueincompletelydifferentways

(figure25).Roberts’sillustrationisascene,inrealspacewithinteractinghumanfigures,

whileJones’sisanarchitecturaldrawingfocusingonaspecificcolorfulsectionoftheHallof

Justice.87Jones’snotationofscaleinthemiddleofthepageemphasizeshiscommitmentto

numericprecision.Bycontrast,Robertsiswillingtotakearchitecturallibertiesinhis

reconstruction.Heelongatesthearchways,makingthemslightlymorepointedthanthe

archesoftheactualstructure,andsaturatesthemwithdetail,toensurethattheyloomover

thefiguresinthescene.ThiseffectivelymakeshisHallofJusticeappearmoreGothicthan

Jones’s.ThelightinginRoberts’sworkalsoservesthispurpose:thelowerareaofthe

lithograph,filledwithpeople,islightandairy—makingthedarkerarchitecturalportion

seemevenmoredrasticandbrooding.

AlthoughJones’sdetailmaybemorearchitecturallycorrect,he,too,selectively

presentedaspectsoftheAlhambratoconstructanarrativeforthespace.WhereasRoberts

elongatedarchesandaddedaforebodingatmospheretotheHallofJustice,Jonesaddeda

colorschemethatwasnotextant.InsteadofpresentingtheAlhambraashesawit,Jones

86Otherversionsofthisplate(particularlytheoneheldattheUniversityofMinnesota)containbrightbluepigmentwherethereislightgreyintheUniversityofSouthFloridacopy.Therearetwopossibleexplanationsforthisdiscrepancy.First,thepigmentintheUSFcopymayhaveoxidized,renderingthebluesmoremuted.Second,copieswithbrighterpigmentmaybefromprintrunsconductedafterJones’sdeath.Formoreonthecolor,andtheprocessofcoloring,inJones’sworkseeFerry“OwenJonesandChromolithography.”87Interestingly,despitethedepthofJones’swork,heonlyrecreateddetails,pieces,andsectionsoftheHallofJustice.WhileViewsfromtheLion’sCourtandHallofTwoSistersareimportanttoolsforhisviewerstoconceptualizethesespaces,perspectivalscenesoftheHallofJusticearenotablyabsent.

41

reconstructedthecolorsoftheAlhambrathatconfirmedhistheoriesaboutthebeautyof

boldcolorinarchitecturaldesign.Thereislittledoubtabouttheaccuracyofhiscolor

reconstructionhere,sinceitwasbasedonpigmentscrapingsfromthesite.However,there

issomeskepticismaboutthecompleteaccuracyofallofhisreconstructions.Forexample,

JonesclaimedthatthemarblecolumnsoftheAlhambraweregilded.Hearguedthatgilded

columnswouldmakethespacevisuallymorepleasing,sotheymusthavebeengilded,

despiteliteraryevidencetothecontrary.88

WhetherornotJones’spolychromaticreconstructionswerealwayscorrect,thefact

thathechosecolor(atgreatexpensetohimself)overstandardlithographsisofimminent

importance.Jonesreconstructedadecontextualized,colorfulsectionoftheornamentation

oftheHallofJusticetoprovideapre-modernfoundationforbrightlycoloredornamentin

Britishdesign.89Insteadofutilizingastandardlithograph,heusedchromolithographyto

emphasizethebold,primarycolorschemethathethoughtcreatedrepose.90Toachievehis

designgoals,thisornamentaldetaildidnotneedtobecontextualized,orpresentedwithin

anarchitecturalspace—itneededonlytobecolorful.Jones’semphasisoncolor,asapartof

hisbroaderdesigntheory,illustratesthatthenostalgic,staticAlhambrahadcontinued

relevanceforhimselfandhispeers.

TheAlhambra’sappealasbothstaticandactivemightinitiallybemorepuzzling

thanitssimultaneousCatholicandIslamiccharacter.Ifamonumentishistoricand

nostalgic,canitalsoberelevanttocontemporaryconcerns?Aromanticlocaleis

88ForinformationonthisdiscrepancyseeDarby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”56-57.

89Darby,“OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal,”29.

90“Repose”isawordlaterusedbyJonesinTheGrammarofOrnamenttodescribetheresultofornamentthatwasperfectlybalanced,needingneitheradditionsnorsubtractionstosatisfythe

viewer.IntheGrammar,JonesindicateshowcloselytheMoorsfollowedthenaturalrulesofornamentation,whichcreatedrepose.

42

foreboding,ruinous,andpicturesquebydefinition.Itisviewedwithlongingand

appreciatedforitsawfulcharacter,notforitsrelevancetocontemporaryintellectual

debates.Viewersinterestedintheromanticismofmedievalmonumentsmaynotbeequally

concernedwithcontemporarytheory.Yet,JonesandRobertsapplieddesignprinciples

fromtheromanticAlhambratodistinctlynineteenth-centuryarchitecturaldebatesin

publicationsmeantfordiverseaudiences.

ThiscanbeseenasanespeciallystrategicmoveonJones’spart.Jones’sbookneeded

tooffersomethingtothenon-architect.Whileplans,elevations,sections,anddetailswere

interestingtoasmallsubsetofthepopulation,hisdescriptionswithinlaidromantic

woodblocksintriguedawiderpublic.AsareviewerfromtheLiteraryGazettewrotein

1842,“…forwhileeverythingthatcouldcaptivatethetasteofthedilettantehasbeen

soughtforandengraved,detailsofhighimportancetothearchitect,ground-plansand

sectionsofbuildings,worthyoffrequentimitation,havebeencarefullyattendedto.”91This

viewerbelievedthatJones’sengravingscaptivatedsomeonewithamorecasualinterestin

themonumentinawaythathislithographedarchitecturalelementscouldnot.Including

somedepictionsoftheruinedstateoftheAlhambramayhavealsobolsteredhisclaims

aboutitspolychromaticornamentation.ByshowingthattheAlhambrawasnotentirelythe

monumentitusedtobe,Jonesmadehisaudiencewonderabouttheappearanceofa

pristineAlhambra.Jones’sreconstructionofthefullypolychromaticinteriorthensatisfied

hisviewers’curiosity.Jonesemphasizedtheseseeminglyincongruousunderstandingsof

theAlhambratohisbestadvantage.Thepreviousgrandeurshowninhis

91"Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra;fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin

1834bytheLateM.JulesGowry,andin1834and1837byOwenJones,"TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1333(Aug.6,1842):558.

43

chromolithographsmadetheAlhambra’ssublimequalitiesevenmoredistinct,andJones’s

romanticdepictionsmadehisreconstructionsmoreenticing.

Disinterestamongscholarsintheinterplaybetweennostalgiaandcontemporary

discourseinJones’sAlhambraisevenmorebafflingthanthepreviouslackofresearch

abouttheinteractionbetweenCatholicismandIslaminJones’sdepictions.WhileJones

deliberatelyhidestheCatholicnatureoftheAlhambrainhisreconstruction,the

romanticismofhiswoodcutsisovert.Yet,scholarsfocusonhowhisAlhambrapromotes

contemporarytheoriesandneglecthowitcoincideswithromanticsentiments.Ithinkthis

stems,onceagain,fromareluctancetobelievethatanauthorcouldconveymultiple

contradictorypremisessimultaneously.SinceJones’sinterestintheAlhambra’simpacton

contemporarycolortheoryisveryclearlymanifestedinhisvolumes,scholarsdonot

inquirefurtherintothewaysinwhichJonesmayhaveportrayedtheAlhambraasastatic

monument.ByfocusingonthenumberedplatesofJones’svolumesinsteadofhis

descriptivepages,scholarshavefurtherreinforcedthenotionthatJones’sAlhambrawasan

activemonumentunlikethenostalgicAlhambrasofhispeers.However,inrecognizingthe

complexityoftheworkofhispeers,andthefrequentconnectionbetweennostalgic

depictionsandcontemporaryissues,themultipleperspectivesofJones’sAlhambrabecome

muchmoreevidentandhisvolumesbecomeevenmoremeaningful.

44

CONCLUSION

Nineteenth-centuryinterpretersoftheAlhambra,withtheirfulladoptionof

seeminglyinconsistentviewsofthespace,inadvertentlymirroredthefascinatingly

contradictoryhistoryofthemonument.AlthoughtheAlhambraevincespowerinits

constructionanddesign,itwasbuiltbyrulerswhosepowerwasinjeopardy.Whilethere

wasrelativepeaceandsecuritythroughtreatiesandvassalshiptotheChristiankingsof

SpainduringtheconstructionoftheAlhambra,thedeathofitslastmajorpatron,

MuhammadV,in1391,usheredinaperiodofinfightingandincreasedexternalpressure,

weakeningandsubsequentlyterminatingNasridruleintheregion.92Outsideofitscontext,

thefortressandpalaceoftheAlhambramightbeviewedasevidenceofathriving,secure

nation-state.However,inthecontextofNasridruleinSpainitsignalsafinaleffortby

MuslimrulersinSpaintoasserttheirdominanceoveradwindlingdominion,andto

forestalltheinevitablecompletionoftheReconquista.Althoughnineteenth-century

scholars,writers,andartistswerelikelyunawareofthedisconnectbetweenNasrid

presentationofgrandeurandtheiractualauthorityintheregion,theirinterpretationsof

thesite’spastandpresentledtofruitfulreconstructionsofthiscomplexity.

Inmirroringthecomplexhistoryofthemonument,nineteenth-centuryartistsand

scholarsalsoemphasizedspecificdualitiesthathadgreaterhistoricalpertinencethanthey

mayhaverealized.ThetwofoldreligiouscharacteroftheAlhambra,whichwasa

prominentpartofnineteenth-centuryconceptionsofthemonument,haditsoriginsinthe92HughKennedy,MuslimSpainandPortugal.(NewYork:Longman,1996),288-292.

45

monument’screation.BeforetheCatholicinterventionsandadditionstothespace,

CatholicismwasanintegralfactorinshapingtheconstructionoftheAlhambraandthe

subsequentAndalusiancivilizationunderNasridrulers.Notonlydidtheever-present

threatofCatholicinvasionpromptacostlyshowofstrengthandfortitude,buttherealized

CatholicconquestofSpainalsodrovelargeMuslimpopulationstothelastseatofMuslim

ruleintheIberianpeninsula.Thisincreasedpopulationfacilitatedthegrowthofal-

Andalus,whichwasmaintainedpeacefullythroughacceptanceofseveralminoritygroups.

Althoughnineteenth-centuryscholarsemphasizedtheprogressivevaluesofthe“Moors”

thatfosteredgoodwillbetweenpeoplewhowereotherwisepariahs,Catholicdominancein

theregionlikelyplayeditspartinthecreationofamotleysocietywithinthewallsofthe

Alhambra.AnostalgicviewoftheAlhambra,popularinJones’sera,waslikelyalsoheldin

anearlyperiodinitshistory.Whilethemajorconstructionofthemonumentwas

completedduringthelastperiodofMuhammadV’srulefrom1362to1391,Muslimrulers

continuedthebuildonthesitethroughthe1450s.93However,in1492Granadafellto

FerdinandandIsabellaofSpain,markingthecompletionoftheReconquista.Withthequick

transitionfromactiveMuslimcultivationofthesitetocompleteCatholiccontroloverit,it

islikelythatMuslimslookedtotheAlhambraasthelastsurvivingremnantoftheirbygone

civilizationsoonafteritsconstructionwascompleted.

WithhisPlans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra,OwenJones

contributedtothecomplexandelaboratehistoryoftheAlhambramonument.Joininghis

peersinre-presentingtheImaginaryGeographyoftheAlhambratohiscontemporaries,

Jonesemphasizedsomeofthemostfascinatingcontradictionswithinthecharacterofthe

93RobertIrwin,TheAlhambra.(Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2004),vi-vii.

46

monumentthatscholarsarestillexploringtoday.Jones’sAlhambrawaspeculiaramongthe

workofhiscontemporariesbecauseheexploredthemonument’sseeminglyinconsistent

facetsthroughapurportedlyaccuratereconstructionofthefourteenth-century

architecture.However,Jones’sAlhambrawasCatholicandIslamic,staticandactive,precise

andwhimsical,anditremainsanimportanttoolforunderstandingBritishviewsofSpainin

thenineteenthcentury.

FuturescholarscouldexplorehowJones’sPlans,Elevations,SectionsandDetailsof

theAlhambraembodiedBritishconceptionsofSpaininmanyproductiveways.AlthoughI

haveprovidedabroadoverviewofthetypesofplatesinJones’swork,onecouldgointo

muchgreaterdepthabouthoweachtypeofplatefunctionswithinthewhole.Byisolating

groupsofplates,onemightuncoveranevengreatercomplexityinthewayJones

approachedtheAlhambrainrelationtocontemporarytheoriesandperceptions.Within

theseplategroups,PlatesXLVIthroughLthatdepictfiguralpaintingsontheceilingofthe

HallofJusticeseemespeciallyripeforcontextualinterpretation.Adeeperreadingof

Jones’stextshouldalsobeundertakentoassessthewaysinwhichJonesinteractedwithhis

peersonaliterarylevel.Scholarsshouldalsoconsiderotherprominentfeaturesofthe

SpanishImaginaryGeographythatJonesmayhaveincorporatedintohisAlhambra.Other

nineteenth-centurywriters,scholars,andartistsexploredeconomicpolicy,humanrights,

andsuffrageinSpaininanefforttoshapeBritishideologies,andJonescouldhavebeen

amongthem.Finally,thisstudyhasshownthatJones’sPlans,Elevations,Sections,and

DetailsoftheAlhambraisanintegralpartofawiderdiscussionaboutthefluidnatureofthe

Alhambra.Inthefuture,Jones’sAlhambrashouldbesituatedwithinthewiderscopeof

historicliteratureonthemonumentthatincludesbothWesternandnon-Westernsources.

47

FIGURES

Figure 1: Owen Jones. Plate XXXIV from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 2. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

48

Figure 2: Owen Jones. Plate III, “Plan of the Royal Arabian Palace in the Ancient Fortress of the Alhambra” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Colored Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

49

Figure 3: Owen Jones. Plate V, “Transverse Section of the Court of the Fishpond, Looking Towards the Palace of Charles the Fifth” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

50

Figure 4: Owen Jones. Plate IV, “View of the Court of the Fish-Pond from the Hall of the Bark” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

51

Figure 5: Owen Jones. Plate IX, “Divan, Court of the Fish-Pond” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

52

Figure 6: Owen Jones. Plate XXIX, “Detail of an Arch. Portico, Court of the Lions.” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

53

Figure 7: Owen Jones. Plate XXXV, “Capital of a Column from the Hall of the Ambassadors, and Four Small Engaged Shafts from the Hall of the Two Sisters” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

54

Figure 8: Owen Jones. Plate XXIII, “Court of the Mosque” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

55

Figure 9: Owen Jones. Plate XIX, “View in the Hall of the Two Sisters” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

56

Figure 10: Owen Jones. Plate XIII, “Entrance to the Court of the Lions (Restored)” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Lithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

57

Figure 11: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Plate XIII from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Print on Paper. Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum Library’s Rare Books, Smithsonian Institution Libraries.

58

Figure 12: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Plate LI from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Print on Paper. Cooper-Hewitt, National Design Museum Library’s Rare Books, Smithsonian Institution Libraries.

59

Figure 13: James Cavanah Murphy. “The Royal Palace and Fortress of Alhamba. At Granada” from Arabian Antiquities of Spain, 1813. Woodblock Print on Paper. Getty Research Institute.

60

Figure 14: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Plate I from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Print on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

61

Figure 15: Tiled ‘Plus Ultra’ mural dating from the reign of Charles V. Photo courtesy of Laura Eve Eggleton.

62

Figure 16: Owen Jones. Plate X, “Details of the Great Arches. Hall of the Bark” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

63

Figure 17: Owen Jones. Descriptive Plate X (front and back) from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Prints on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

64

Figure 18: John Frederick Lewis, Courtyard of Alhambra, 1832-1833. Watercolor drawing on paper. The Fitzwilliam Museum.

65

Figure 19: Jose Becquer. Richard Ford as a Majo, 1832. Watercolor on Paper.

66

Figure 20: John Frederick Lewis. And the Prayer of the Faith shall save the Sick, 1872. Oil on Canvas. Yale Center for British Art.

67

Figure 21: David Roberts. “Tower of Comares” from The Tourist in Spain. Granada. 1835. Lithograph on Paper. New York Public Library.

68

Figure 22: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Page I “Tower of Comares” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Prints on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

69

Figure 23: Owen Jones. Vignette from Descriptive Page I from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Woodblock Prints on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

70

Figure 24: Owen Jones. Plate XXVII, “Details of an Arch in the Hall of Justice” from Plans, Elevations, Sections, and Details of the Alhambra, Vol. 1. c. 1836-1842. Chromolithograph on Paper. Special & Digital Collections, Tampa Library, University of South Florida.

71

Figure 25: David Roberts. “Hall of Justice” from The Tourist in Spain. Granada, 1835. Lithograph on Paper. New York Public Library.

72

REFERENCES

PrimarySources

"Plans,Elevations,andSectionsoftheAlhambra;withtheElaborateDetailsofthisBeautifulSpecimenofMoorishArchitecture."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1041(Dec31,1836):842-843.

"Plans,Elevations,andSectionsoftheAlhambra;withtheElaborateDetailsofthisBeautifulSpecimenofMoorishArchitecture."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1119(Jun30,1838):412.

"Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra;fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834bytheLateM.JulesGowry,andin1834and1837byOwenJones."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1333(Aug6,1842):558.

"Plans,Elevations,andSectionsoftheAlhambra."TheLiteraryGazette:AWeeklyJournalofLiterature,Science,andtheFineArtsno.1205(Feb22,1840):124.

Borrow,George.TheBibleinSpain;Or,theJourneys,Adventures,andImprisonmentsofanEnglishmaninanAttempttoCirculatetheScripturesinthePeninsula.London:J.M.Dent&Co.;NewYork,E.P.Dutton&Co.,1907.

Calvert,AlbertFrederick.TheAlhambra:BeingaBriefRecordoftheArabianConquestofthePeninsulawithaParticularAccountoftheMohammedanArchitectureandDecoration.London;NewYork:JohnLaneCompany,1906.

Goury,JulesandOwenJones.Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra/fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834byJulesGoury,andin1834and1837byOwenJones.withaCompleteTranslationoftheArabicInscriptions,andanHistoricalNoticeoftheKingsofGranadafromtheConquestofthatCitybytheArabstotheExpulsionoftheMoors,byPasqualDeGayangos.London:O.Jones,1842-45.([London]:VizetellyBrothersandCo.)

Irving,Washington.TalesoftheAlhambra.Philadelphia:Carey&Lea,1832.

Jones,Owen."OntheInfluenceofReligionuponArt."InLecturesonArchitectureandtheDecorativeArtsbyOwenJones,3-25.London:Chadwyck-Healey,1835.

73

———.OntheTrueandtheFalseintheDecorativeArtsLecturesDeliveredatMarlboroughHouse,June1852.London:StrangewaysandWalden,Printers,28CastleSt.LeicesterSq,1863.

———.TheGrammarofOrnament.London:DayandSon,1856.

Murphy,JamesCavanahandThomasHartwellHorne.TheArabianAntiquitiesofSpain.London:Cadell&Davies,1815.

Roscoe,Thomas.TheTouristInSpain:Granada.London:R.JenningsandCo.,1835.

SecondarySources

Alcantud,JoséandAntonioGonzález."SocialMemoryofaWorldHeritageSite:TheAlhambraofGranada."InternationalSocialScienceJournal62,no.203-204(Mar,2011):179-197.

Baker,Christopher,ClaudiaHeide,DavidHowarth,andPaulStirton.TheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectors:GoyatoPicasso.Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009.

Bargebuhr,FrederickP.TheAlhambra:ACycleofStudiesontheEleventhCenturyinMoorishSpain.Berlin:DeGruyter,1968.

Bendiner,KennethPaul."ThePortrayaloftheMiddleEastinBritishPainting,1835-1860."Ph.D.,ColumbiaUniversity,1979.

Bressani,Martin.ArchitectureandtheHistoricalImagination:Eugène-EmmanuelViollet-le-Duc,1814–1879.Farnham:AshgatePublishingLtd,2014.

Buttigieg,JosephA.Introductionto "Forum—Europe'sSouthernQuestion:TheOtherwithin."Nineteenth-CenturyContexts26,no.4(12/01;2014/11,2004):311-337.

Colley,Linda.Britons:ForgingtheNation,1707-1837,rev.ed.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2009.

Crang,PhilipandSoniaAshmore."TheTransnationalSpacesofThings:SouthAsiantextilesinBritainandTheGrammarofOrnament,"EuropeanReviewOfHistory16,no.5(October2009):655-678.

Crinson,Mark."VictorianArchitectsandtheNearEast:StudiesinColonialArchitecture,ArchitecturalTheoryandOrientalism,1840-1870."Ph.D.,UniversityofPennsylvania,1989.

Daly,Gavin.TheBritishSoldierinthePeninsularWar:EncounterswithSpainandPortugal,1808-1814NewYork:PalgraveMacmillan,2013.

74

Darby,Michael."OwenJonesandtheEasternIdeal."Dr.,TheUniversityofReading(UnitedKingdom),1974.

Darby,MichaelandVictoriaandAlbertMuseum.TheIslamicPerspective:AnAspectofBritishArchitectureandDesigninthe19thCentury.London:LeightonHouseGallery:WorldOfIslamFestivalTrustPublication:DistributedbyScorpionCommunications,1983.

DepartmentofIslamicArt."TheArtoftheNasridPeriod(1232–1492)".InHeilbrunnTimelineofArtHistory.NewYork:TheMetropolitanMuseumofArt,2000–.http://www.metmuseum.org/toah/hd/nasr/hd_nasr.htm(October2002).

Dodds,JerrilynnDenise.Al-Andalus:TheArtofIslamicSpain.NewYork:MetropolitanMuseumofArt:DistributedbyH.N.Abrams,1992.

Eggleton,Lara."Re-EnvisioningtheAlhambra:ReadingsofArchitectureandOrnamentfromMedievaltoModern."PhDthesis,UniversityofLeeds,2011.

———."HistoryintheMaking:TheOrnamentoftheAlhambraandthePast-FacingPresent."JournalofArtHistoriographyno.6(2012):1-29.

Ferry,Kathryn."OwenJones."Crafts(0306610X)no.198(January,2006):20-21.

———."OwenJonesandtheAlhambraCourtattheCrystalPalace."InRevisitingAl-Andalus:PerspectivesontheMaterialCultureofIslamicIberiaandBeyond,editedbyGlaireD.Anderson,andMariamRosser-Owen,227-245.Boston:Brill,2007.

———."PrintingtheAlhambra:OwenJonesandChromolithography."ArchitecturalHistory46,(2003):175-188.

Flores,CarolA.Hrvol."EngagingtheMind'sEye:TheuseofInscriptionsintheArchitectureofOwenJonesandA.W.N.Pugin."JournaloftheSocietyofArchitecturalHistorians60,no.2(June,2001):158-179.

———."FromGildedDreamtoLearningLaboratory:OwenJones'sStudyoftheAlhambra."StudiesinVictorianArchitectureandDesign1,(2008):18-29.

———."OwenJones,Architect."Ph.D.,GeorgiaInstituteofTechnology,1996.

Grabar,Oleg.TheAlhambra.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,1978.

———.TheMediationofOrnament.Princeton,NJ:PrincetonUniversityPress,1992.

Heide,Claudia."ADreamoftheSouth:IslamicSpain."Chap.3,InTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,editedbyBaker,Christopher,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton,65-69.Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009.

75

———."TheSpanishPicturesque."Chap.2,InTheDiscoveryofSpain:BritishArtistsandCollectorsGoyatoPicasso,editedbyBaker,Christopher,DavidHowarthandPaulStirton,47-51.Edinburgh:NationalGalleriesofScotland,2009.

———."TheAlhambrainBritain.BetweenForeignizationandDomestication."ArtinTranslation2,no.2(2010):201-222.

Heleniak,KathrynMoore."AnEnglishGentleman'sEncounterwithIslamicArchitecture:HenrySwinburne'sTravelsthroughSpain(1779)."JournalforEighteenth-CenturyStudies28,no.2(09,2005):181.

Hertel,Patricia."DerErinnerteHalbmond:IslamUndNationalismusAufDerIberischenHalbinselIm19.Und20.Jahrhundert."München:Oldenbourg,2012.

Hitchcock,HenryRussell.EarlyVictorianArchitectureinBritain.NewHaven,CT:YaleUniversityPress,1954.

Howarth,David.TheInventionofSpain:CulturalRelationsbetweenBritainandSpain,1770-1870.Manchester,UK;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress;DistributedexclusivelyintheUSAbyPalgrave,2007.

Irwin,Robert.TheAlhambra.Cambridge,MA:HarvardUniversityPress,2004.

Jespersen,JohnKresten."OriginalityandJones''theGrammarofOrnament'of1856."JournalofDesignHistoryno.2(2008):143.

———."OwenJones's"theGrammarofOrnament"of1856:FieldTheoryinVictorianDesignattheMid-Century(Britain)."Ph.D.,BrownUniversity,1984.

Kennedy,Hugh.MuslimSpainandPortugal.NewYork:Longman,1996.

Lanford,Catherine.“ImperialismandtheParlor:OwenJones'sthe'GrammarofOrnament'.”TheWordsworthCircle,38(2001).

Llewellyn,Briony.“"SolitaryEagle"?:ThePublicandPrivatePersonasofJohnFrederickLewis(1804-1876)”inThePoeticsandPoliticsofPlace:OttomanIstanbulandBritishOrientalism,editedbyReinaLewis,167-181.Seattle:UniversityofWashingtonPress,2011.

Lopez,John-David."TheBritishRomanticReconstructionofSpain."Ph.D.,UniversityofCalifornia,LosAngeles,2008.

Lyotard,Jean-François.ThePostmodernCondition:AReportonKnowledge,trans.GeoffBenningtonandBrianMassumi.Minneapolis:UniveristyofMinnesota,1984.

76

MacKenzie,JohnM.Orientalism:History,Theory,andtheArts.Manchester;NewYork:ManchesterUniversityPress;DistributedexclusivelyintheUSAandCanadabySt.Martin'sPress,1995.

McSweeney,Anna."VersionsandVisionsoftheAlhambraintheNineteenth-CenturyOttomanWorld."West86th:AJournalofDecorativeArts,DesignHistory&MaterialCulture22,no.1(Spring,2015):44.

Moser,Stephanie.DesigningAntiquity:OwenJones,AncientEgyptandtheCrystalPalace.NewHaven:PublishedforthePaulMellonCentreforStudiesinBritishArtbyYaleUniversityPress,2012.

Mowl,GrahamandMichaelBarke."ChangingVisitorPerceptionsofMalaga(Spain)anditsDevelopmentasaWinterHealthResortintheNineteenthCentury."StudiesinTravelWriting18,no.3(07,2014):233.

Necipoglu,Gulru.TheTopkapıScroll:GeometryandOrnamentinIslamicArchitecture:TopkapıPalaceMuseumLibraryMSH.1956.SantaMonica,CA:GettyCenterfortheHistoryofArtandtheHumanities,1995.

Nochlin,Linda."TheImaginaryOrient."InPoliticsofVision;EssaysonNineteenth-CenturyArtandSociety,33-59.NewYork:Harper&Row,1989.

Paquette,Gabriel."TheImageofImperialSpaininBritishPoliticalThought,1750-1800*."BulletinofSpanishStudies81,no.2(03,2004):187-214.

Pratt,MaryLouise.ImperialEyesTravelWritingandTransculturation.2nded.London;NewYork:Routledge,2008.

Raquejo,Tonia."The'ArabCathedrals':MoorishArchitectureasseenbyBritishTravellers."TheBurlingtonMagazine128,no.1001(August,1986):555-563.

Ringrose,DavidR.Spain,Europe,andthe"SpanishMiracle",1700-1900.Cambridge;NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,1996.

RosserOwen,Mariam.IslamicArtsfromSpain.London:NewYork:V&APub.;DistributedinNorthAmericabyHarryN.Abrams,2010.

Ruggles,D.F.Gardens,Landscape,andVisioninthePalacesofIslamicSpain.UniversityPark,PA:PennsylvaniaStateUniversityPress,2003.

Said,EdwardW.Orientalism.NewYork:VintageBooks,1994.

Saglia,Diego."Imag(in)IngIberia:LandscapeAnnualsandMultimediaNarrativesoftheSpanishJourneyinBritishRomanticism."JournalofIberian&LatinAmericanStudies12,no.2(08,2006):123-146.

77

———.PoeticCastlesinSpain:BritishRomanticismandFigurationsofIberia.Amsterdam;Atlanta:Rodopi,2000.

Sanchez,JuanL."Spain,Politics,andtheBritishRomanticImagination."Ph.D.,UniversityofNotreDame,2007.

Searight,Sarah"OwenJones:TravelandVisionoftheOrient.”Alif:JournalofComparativePoeticsno.26,(2006):128-146.

Stevens,MichaelS."SpanishOrientalism:WashingtonIrvingandtheRomanceoftheMoors."Ph.D.,GeorgiaStateUniversity,2007.

Sweetman,John.TheOrientalObsession:IslamicInspirationinBritishandAmericanArtandArchitecture,1500-1920.Cambridge;NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress,1988.

Thomas,Abraham,VictoriaandAlbertMuseum.OwenJones.London:V&APub,2010.

VanZanten,David.TheArchitecturalPolychromyofthe1830's.NewYork:GarlandPublishing,1977.

Vernoit,Stephen.DiscoveringIslamicArt:Scholars,CollectorsandCollections1850-1950.London:I.B.Tauris,2000.

VictoriaandAlbertMuseum.OwenJones:IslamicDesign,DiscoveryandVision.London;Sharjah:VictoriaandAlbertMuseum;SharjahMuseumsDepartment,2012.

Weeks,EmilyM.CulturesCrossed:JohnFrederickLewisandtheArtofOrientalism.NewHaven:YaleUniversityPress,2014.

Wolffe,John.TheProtestantCrusadeinGreatBritain,1829-1860.Oxford;NewYork:ClarendonPress;OxfordUniversityPress,1991.

78

APPENDIXI

VariantCopiesConsulted

InmyresearchIwasfortunatetobeabletoexaminethreevariantcopiesofPlans,

Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra.Whileallversionscontainedthesame

basicstructureandplates,thereseemedtobegreatvarianceinprintingtechniquesand

subsequenthandling.TheUniversityofSouthFloridacopy,theprimarysourceof

informationforthisthesis,isnotableforitsmutedgray-blueinallchromolithographed

plates,andforthedestroyedfinaldescriptivepageandmissingfinalplateinthefirst

volume.Bycontrast,theUniversityofMinnesotacopyisinpristinecondition,butseemsto

beacompilationofplatesinvarioussizesfromthepressesofbothJonesandtheVizetelly

Brothers.ThelithographsaregenerallydarkerandmoredetailedthanintheSouthFlorida

copy,buttheblueshaveinconsistentsaturation.TheUniversityofMinnesotacopyisalso

notablebecauseitwasunboundandeachpagepermanentlyreboundwithinavellum

sheath.Thethirdcopy,containingonlythefirstvolume,wasdigitizedbytheSmithsonian

InstituteLibraries,andviewedelectronicallythrougharchives.org.AlthoughIcouldnot

examinethephysicalcopy,itslithographsandchromolithographsseemgenerallydarker

thantheSouthFloridacopy,butbluepigmentisalmostentirelyabsentfrommostofthe

chromolithographs.Thechromolithographsdepictingmosaictileworkaretheexceptionto

therule.Thisdigitalcopywasprimarilyusefulwithreferencetothedescriptivepages,

whichIcouldaccesswithouthavingtotraveltoaSpecialCollections.Thefollowingcatalog

entriesarederivedfrominformationfromtheholdinginstitutionsandmyown

observations.

79

UniversityofSouthFlorida

Goury,JulesandOwenJones.Plans,Elevations,Sections,andDetailsoftheAlhambra/fromDrawingsTakenontheSpotin1834byJulesGoury,andin1834and1837byOwenJones.

withaCompleteTranslationoftheArabicInscriptions,andanHistoricalNoticeoftheKings

ofGranadafromtheConquestofthatCitybytheArabstotheExpulsionoftheMoors,by

PasqualDeGayangos.London:O.Jones,1842-45.([London]:VizetellyBrothersandCo.)

2v.:20p.,51leavesofplates(somecolor);50leavesofplates(somecolor);60cm.

Notes:ChieflyinEnglishandFrench.Volume1hasaddedt.p.:LaAlhambrapalais...Volume2hasaddedt.p.:DetailsandornamentsfromtheAlhambra.SomeillustrationsengravedbyW.S.Wilkinson,E.Kennion,T.T.Bury,CarlRauch,lithographedbyF.FinlayafterOwenJones,JulesGoury,andEnrique.“VizetellyBrothersandCo.Printers135FleetStreet"--t.p.verso.SouthFloridaCopy:Vol.1lacksplate51,containsdescription.(OCoLC)02803628.

UniversityofMinnesota





2volumes:illustrations(partcolor);60cm. Notes:ChieflyinEnglishandFrench.Volume1hasaddedt.p.:LaAlhambrapalais...1841."VizetellyBrothersandCo.Printers135FleetStreet"--t.p.verso.UniversityofMinnesotaCopy:Bothvol.rebound.Containssmallerplatesaffixedtolargerfolios.(OCoLC)2803628.

80

SmithsonianInstitute





1Volume:344p.;illustrations(partcolor)Notes:ChieflyinEnglishandFrenchVol.1hasaddedt.p.:LaAlhambrapalais...1842Vol.2hasaddedt.p.:DetailsandornamentsfromtheAlhambra.1845.SmithsonianCopy:Plate49MissingfromOriginal.DigitizedbyCooper-Hewitt,NationalDesignMuseumLibrary’sRareBooks,SmithsonianInstitutionLibraries,wassupportedinpartbyfundsfromtheMetropolitanNewYorkLibraryCouncil(METRO)throughtheNewYorkStateRegionalBibliographicDatabasesProgram.(OCoLC)ocm02803628.

Documents

Incongruous Conceptions: Owen Jones’s Plans, Elevations