4.Pseudo Saracenic擬サラセニック

要約

明治政府は積極的に西洋の近代科学技術の導入を進めたが、建築は技術的機能の上に趣味趣向の衣を纏う。建築は個人の趣味趣向のみならず、地域や国家のそれをも表現することになり、さて国際社会にデビューした明治日本は自らをどのように表現しようとしたのであろうか。天皇を国家の中心に据えるといっても、イデオロギーでは可能であっても、天皇制を形で表現するのは難しい。本稿では明治政府の最初期の建築として工部省工学寮工学校を取り上げ、そこでどのような建築様式が選ばれたたのかを問う。次に、この学校の最初の建築学教師として就任したジョシア･コンダーが，どのような建築様式が日本にふさわしいものと考えていたのかを考察する。結論としては、工部省官僚はイギリスとのつながり強かったため、工学寮工学校にも同時代のイギリスの大学等で主流であったゴシック様式を選んだ。しかし、イギリスがアジア及び中近東の亜熱帯熱帯に植民地を拡大すると、一方的にイギリス本国の趣味趣向をそのまま持ち込むことに矛盾を感じる者が出現してきた。イギリス領インドではムガール朝イスラーム様式を加味した建築が考案され、来日したコンダーはこれが近代日本にも適合する建築様式であると理解した。コンダーはムガール朝イスラム建築を近代日本にふさわしい様式であると教えるだけではなく、明治政府から依頼された上野帝室博物館、北海道開拓使物産売捌所、鹿鳴館などの実作においてもインド･イスラーム様式を採用した。彼はこれをシュード･サラセン（擬イスラーム）様式と呼んだが、それは日本人からはその意図は理解されなかった。

Abstract

Modern Japanese architectural practice can be said to begin with the construction of government buildings in the early Meiji period. In order to train architects for government works, the Ministry of Public Works (Koubu-syo) established the College of Engineering (Kougakko) in 1871. At first, architectural method was taught by a Scottish instructor of civil engineering, but in 1877, the Ministry appointed a professor of architecture, Josiah Conder from London. As soon as he arrived in Tokyo, he began work on important government projects such as the Ueno Imperial Museum, the Exhibition Hall of the Hokkaido Development Agency, the new Imperial Palace, the Akasaka Geihinkan (Foreign Guest House) and the Rokumeikan (National Banqueting Hall). Conder intended to create a modern architectural style suitable for Japan, both through his own practice and by teaching. Even though Conder's contribution to early Japanese modern architects who designed government buildings was great, his use of Saracenic motif to create a modern Japanese style has not been well understood. This article will discuss the introduction and development of the modern style in Japan.

I. The Imperial College of Engineering (Koubu Dai Gakko)

After the Meiji Restoration in 1868, Edo, the old feudal capital, was renamed Tokyo and made the capital of the new Japanese state. In 1870, the Ministry of Public Works was established. One of its purposes was to furnish Tokyo with new facilities for the new government institutions. Since governmental organization was based on European and American models, the Meiji government wanted buildings to use architectural styles appropriate to these new institutions.

In 1871, the School of Engineering (Kougakko), renamed the College of Engineering (Koubu Daigakko) in 1873 was founded within the Ministry to train the Japanese engineers who would carry out projects of modernization, such as building of model factories and the Tokyo Redevelopment project. The first Minister of Public Works, Hirobumi Ito (1841-1909), later Prime Minister, and the first Vice-Minister, Yozo Yamao (1845-1915) asked Baron Kelvin of Physics and Professor John Macquron Rankine, of the faculty of Civil Engineering of the University of Glasgow to recommend instructors for the new college.

本稿は1992年開催『オーストラリア･ニュージーランド建築史学者会議』のために執筆し、同年7月5日に発表したもので、その後の私の研究の進行によって以下の修正を加え、日本語版とした（July 17, 2017）。

1. 工学寮小学校校舎は、工部省雇いのシビル･エンジニアのマクヴェインとジョイナーによって設計されたが、設計から施工までスコットランドの有力建築家キャンベル･ダグラスの支援があった。日本最初のゴシック復興様式（ロンバルディア･ゴシック）となった。

2. 工学寮大学校はボアンヴィルによってルネッサンス様式で設計された。この様式は、ボアンヴィルの師匠の一人であるウィリアム･ヘンリー･ホワイトが最も得意とし、1871年にはカルカッタ管区大学を設計していた。

3. 1870年前後、英領インドではゴシック復興様式に替わって擬サラセン様式が公共建築様式として提案され始めていた。

I. 工部大学校

1868年の大政奉還と明治維新により、幕府が置かれた江戸は東京に改名された。1870年に工部省が創設されることになり、

Fig.1 Baron kelvin        Fig.2 Prof. Rankine, proponent of "Sandwick Course"

   Yamao knew Kelvin and Rankin from his studies of civil engineering of Glasgow from 1863 to 1868*. As a result, the new engineering instructors were from Scotland except for the Professor of Architecture. It is not clear why someone from London rather than Scotland was selected. He was Josiah Conder (1852-1920), who had studied architecture with Professor Thomas Roger Smith (1830-l903) at the University of London, and had worked in the office of William Burges (1827-1881), the prominent Victorian Gothic architect. Conder was not appointed until a year after the other instructors, so probably there were not available in Scotland architects who were familiar with Asia, or interested in going to Japan.

Fig.3 Henry Dyer, Principal of College of Engineering  Fig.4 Josiah Conder, first Professor in Architecture

Fig.5 College of Engineering [Koubu-Daigakko], designed by Charles Alfred Chastel de Boinville in 1874

From 1864 to 1866, Smith had worked in Bombay designing government buildings, notably the General Post Office, the European General Hospital and the Residency Building at Gunersh King. In 1868, Burges prepared the plans for the Bombay School of Art. They were the best known British architects who had worked for the Indian government and were familiar with India.

Fig.6 Crimean War Memorial Chapel, proposed by Burges, 1856, "Builder"

Fig.7 Bombay School of Art, proposed by William Burges, 1864, "Builder, 1864"

Fig.8. Bombay Hospital, proposed by Thomas Roger Smith, 1866, "Builder"

   So, Kelvin or Rankine probably consulted them about an architectural instructor for the new Japanese College of Engineering. Smith was Condor's paternal Uncle. As Conder had studied with Smith from 1868 until 1875 and then worked with Burges from 1875 until 1876, he must have known their work for India. Conder's early work in Japan demonstrated his connections with Smith and Burges.

II. Conder and the Pseudo-Saracenic

Style immediately after his arrival in Japan in January 1877, Conder began to research Japanese architecture. He studied Buddhist temples, shrines and residential buildings in the Tokyo area. He wrote about his investigations in an article entitled "Notes on Japanese Architecture" in Transaction of the Royal Institute of British Architects 1878-79. Although he described the types, construction methods, and materials of Japanese architectre, he did not discuss their relationship to the Japanese climate and way of life.

Instead, he enphasized Japanese architecture's similarity to European classical, especially Greek architecture. He used European architectural terms to describe such Japanese building forms as Daimyo Yashiki (residences of feudal lords). For example, he wrote, "over the entrance to the house there is a wide portico, supported upon strong posts, " and "they sometimes have an open loggia to the upper floor. "He concluded by saying: "There is in some of these a low mass of buildings, marking the approach to a Daimyo's dwelling, a simple grandeur of line of proportion and balance of parts, reminding one as much of the repose and beauty of Greek architecture, as the Japanese decorative ornamrnt in many of its forms, and in the beauty of its execution, reminds one of Grecian art." In other words, he tried to understand Japanese architecture in terms of European classical architecture. But, although he recognized a resemblance between Japanese architecture and European classical architecture, he did not use the Classical style, but the Gothic and Saracenic styles when he was commissioned to design government building projects in 1878; for instance the Exhibition Hall of the Hokkaido Development Agency and the Ueno Imperial Museum. He considered that these styles were suitable for modern Japanese architecture, which had to be substantial, fireproof building. We can imagine some reasons he chose Venetian Gothic style for the Exhibition Hall. His teachers, especially Burges, prefered the Gothic style and had designed public buildings in Bombay in Gothic style during the 1860s'. Also, Conder won the Soane Award with a country house in Gothic style shortly before going to Japan. So, his tastes were typical of the late Victorian period. 

Fig.9 Indo-Saracenic Architecture, praised by James Fergusson in the mid-19th century.

However, for the Ueno Imperial Museum, he chose to use pseudo-Saracenic style. The building was intended to store and exhibit Japanese antiques, which were eagerly sought for the European market. In a speech at his commendation ceremony in 1920, he described his intentions in using this kind of style, and his regrets that they still were not understood. "I wanted to find a style for a masonry building, which would be rational but also have the oriental features found in Indian or Saracen architecture. I, therefore endeavored to give a distinctive character to the Museum building which would store Far Eastern antiques. But, I still do not know if people can understand my motive in introducing the pseudo-Saracenic style in Japan' . Pseudo-Saracenic style was not an existing technical term, but J. Conder's own invention. He modified 'Indian or Saracenic style' to suit modern Japan. He must have been familiar with the so called Indo-Gothic style, because his teachers had employed it in designs for government buildings in Bombay during the 1860s' . But, he chose to use pseudo-Saracenic style, ratber than Indo-Gothic in Japan. Conder probably knew of the developrnent of another architectural style in Madras by Robert Fellowes Chisholm (1840-1863), the Madras municipal architect and Lord Napier, governor of Madras in the early 1870s. They intended to revive the Saracenic architecture of India for Madras govemment buildings, instead of following Smith and Burges attempt to inplant the Gothic style of southern Europe to India. They considered that Byzantine style, and even Saracenic style would be acceptable to European Christians in India, because they believed that Mogul architecture was derived from Byzantinr through the Saracens. Therefore, they thought that modern architecture in India should be based on Byzantine or Saracenic architecture* * . Conder felt synpathetic with this Saracenic revivalism, and believed that the pseudo-Saracenic style would be suitable for modern Japan. Conder used the characteristic motifs of Mogul architecture in an entrance sunnounted by vase-shaped columns supporting chahatris (small pavillions on tbe roof). He did not use the Mogul motif of canti levered deep eaves, but employed foiled arches on the second floor and pointed borse-shoe arches on the ground floor. These are typical motifs of Mediterranean Saracenic and Byzantine architecture. Conder's "pseudo-Saraoenic" style integrated motifs from tbe Mediterranean with tbose from South Asia**. Unlike Chisholm, who lived in India, Conder had limited access to design sources for the Saracenic style. Conder's eclecticism did not allow a strong and unified stylistic statement, but resulted in a weak and ambiguous design. However, as he designed modern Japanese buildings using his pseudo-Saracenic style, such as the Rokuneikan [National Banqueting Hall, conpleted in 1883], he gradually became distanced frorn his teachers, and eventually decided to make his home in Japan. Even after the completion of his contract with the Ministry of Public Works, Conder continued to lecture on Indian architecture in the College of Engineering, as he probably believed that the style was suitable to n~ern Japan. The first generation of Japanese modern architects were too busy with nation-building to make any alternative to Conder's pseudo-Saracenic style.

III. National style after the Sino-Japanese War

In 1880, the first class of five young Japanese architects graduated from the Inperial College of Engineering. All of them worked on ingportant building projects until their deaths. As Tatsuno Kingo (1854-1919) was the best student among them, he was given a scholarship to study architecture in the United Kingdom for three years. When he returned, he led young Japanese architects as the first president of the Architectural Institute of Japan. For major build-ings such as the Dai lchi Bank and Tokyo Station, he used the so-called Free Classical Style except for some projects carried out after the Russo-Japanese War of 1904-05. 

Fig.10 Ueno Imperial Museum, designed by Conder, 1878

Fig.11 National Dancing Hall [Rokumeikan], designed by Conder, 1880

These buildings were the three Kokugikan [National Sumo Hal Is] at Asakusa, Ryogoku and YokohaTna(unrealized) for regular Sumo conpetition. Sumo conpeti-tions had been held in small tenporary buildings which were built for each season and then tcrn down, but these buildings were too small to hold the rapidly increasing audiences. Tbe Imperial Diet in 1906 appropriated funds for the construction of permanent halls. The proj ects were cournissioned to Tatsuno, who used the pseudo-Saracenic style for this building, as seen in his drawings (Fig. 2). He described in 1909 the background of the construction and his intentions in the following way; "As seen in the ruins of the arrphitheaters which Rome left both in its home territory and throughout its enpire, such as in Germany, Gaul, Britain and so on, the tastes of victorious Rorne were cruel. The Roman national sport was gladiatorial corrpetition, but the sumo of our e¹pire is refined. Sumo becarne popular after the victory of the war of 1895 [Sin(~Japanese War] , I svppose this was not only because of the appearance of strong wrestlers, but also because of the national mo~ after the victory* ' . " We must find the reasons Tatsuno chose to use this style for the buildings. He sought a nationalistic or inperial style, as he conpared the Surno of the Japanese Enpire to the 'cruel' vvrestling of the Roman Empire. So, for Tatsuno Saracenic architecture expressed Japanese nationalism, although it had been sinlply a rnoc]ern Japanese style for Conder. This can be seen in the works of the contemporary young architects who studied with Tatsuno. Katsuya Yasuoka (1868-1942) graduated from the Imperial University in 1891, and worked for the building department of the Mitsubishi zaibatsu.

Fig.12 First Ryogoku Sumo Wresting Hall, designed by Kingo Tatsuno, 1907

Fig.13 First Ryogoku Sumo Wresting Hall, photographed in 1927.

In 1905, Yasuoka used Saracenic style in his design for the Hall of the Temporary Military Hospital in Shibuya, Tokyo. This hall was intended by Baron Hisaji lwasaki to provide recreation facilities for the wounded soldiers retuming fro¹1 the Russc~ Japanese War, and was ren~eled after the war as a memorial hall*,. Iwasaki was the third president of the Mitsubishi zaibatsu, which prospered during the war. This use of Saracenic motif differed from European Orientalism, because Yasuoka and lwasaki both regarded it as representing Japanese national is¹L Tatsuno and Yasuoka did not try to find or reinterpret nationalistic motifs within Japanese architecture, instead they relied sinlply on the Saracenic style, which was introduced by Conder as a modern Japanese style. It becarne a nationalistic or patriotic representation when Japan went to war Hongajithe first defeat of a Eurcpean nation by an Asian nation sinoe the Crusades*'. Also Tenshin Okakura (1862-1gl3), first principal of the Tokyo School of Art, expressed this national nnod throughtout his books* * . 

Fig.13 Hongaji Missionary Hall, designed by Chuta Ito, 1912

Fig.14 Higashi-Honganji Tsukuji Temple, photographed in 2001.

IV. Conclusion The first Japanese nationalistic design was invented as the Indo-Saracenic style by Josiah Conder, and then reinterpreted by Kingo Tatsuno and his follo-wers as an expression of national identity when Japan was at war with Russia, a ChiristianEurcpean nation. However, the style soon disappeared, since it did not apeal to ordinary people. Japanese architects of that time were not familiar with the historical development of Japanese architecture and the architectural preferences of ordinary peQple. Toeir preference, the scfcalled Wafu [traditional Japanese style] , timber buildings with large tiled roofs and Karahafu [an ogee gable over the entrance] has been realized by Daiku [Japanese master-bui Iders] and a few architects unconsciously sincethe Edo period(1603-1868). It was natural for Japanese architects conscious of thier own tradition to try to put a large tiled roof on a masonry building. Later, this style was called Nibon Shumi [Japanese Taste] , which was co¹uTlon for modern Japanese buildings during 1920s. At same time, Saracenic style vvas revived once again during 1920s by Chuta Ito, first Japanese maj or integrator of Japanese architecture, in order to integrate all Asian religions and the spirit of Asia into Japanese culture. This requires further research.

Notes

1)Architectural Institute of Japan, ed. , kanda,' l!ihoo k'eochik'ugak'u llattatsy Shi [1listorp of th,, D(~v(~lopJ?,~1?t of llod,prll Japan,?se prchlt,~ctdre] (Tokyo: Maruzen, 1972), p. 1801.

2)Obituary of Josiah Conder, Journal of the Foyal //'st,'tute of Sr,'tish l'rchit,~cts, 25 Sep. 1920, p. 459.

3)Izumida, Hideo, 'Scottish Architects and Civil Engineers in the Far East 1840-70', Jourl?al of the l?rchitectyral llerita9'p Socl,~tP of scotland II, July 1991, pp. 93-98.

4)Obituary of R.T. Smith, D,'ct,'()1?arp of N:at,'o/?a/ C,'o9raphp (London, 1978), p. 2894. 5)Croo~ J.M. , //,'//,'an Fyrsl,~s aod //,'gh victor,'an Dreao (London, 1981), p. 241.

6)Conder's article also was published in th,~ Cu,'Ider dated March 9 and 16, 1878.

7)Conder, Josiah, 'Notes on Japanese Architecture', rfansact,'ol? of the F(,pal !st,'tute of Cr,'tish l?rch,'tects 1878-79.

8)Nakamura, Tatsutaro, tr. , '~pe~h of Josiah Conder', k:¢1'ch,'k'a ('assh,' Uournal of the prch,'t,~ctufal !/?st/tl/te ('f Japal7], v0.402, 1920. I have retranslated this into EnglishL

9)Metcalf, Thomas R., /'a lnper,'al vi.-,'on ([ondon: rab,?f aod rab,?r, l9t9), pp. 54-60.

10)'Architecture in Madras', rhe ~t/" /d~r, June 5, 1869, p. 449 and 'Modern Architecture in India', rh(p Cuild(~r, Aug. 27, 1870, pp. 680-82.

11)Although Conder has never been to ~pain, there were pictures of mosaic tiles and capitals of AlhaJibra Place in his sketchboo~ which is preserved in Tokyo University.

12)Tatsuno, Kingo, 'Sumo Jyosetsu Kan O~ew Building of Wrestling Society] ', tl~/?ch,'k'u ('assh,'. vo/.2r~/, 1909, pp. 15-19.

13) 'Tokyo Yobi Byoin Shibuya Bunin Syobyohei Syukaijyo CHall of Tokyo Te¹porary Military Hospital, Shibuya] ', ~~ochik'u ('as.-h,'. v0.2tg, 1905. p. 82.

14)Ohama, Tetsuya, Il,~,'J',' no 80hpo [rho Sll'o-Japan¢se lldr aod Fusso-Japal"Ps,' llar as se,~1? bp ord,'1?arp peopl(~] (Tokyo: Kawade Bunko, 19gl), po. 133-147. 15)Okakura, Tensin, rho l'uakeoioa of the rast (London: John Murray, Igol) and The ld~als of th,p ra)-t (London: John Murray, 1903).