The Universal Survey Museum

Scholars Carol Duncan and Alan Wallach produced an article which primarily seeks to explain how the true nature of art museums is similar (or in some ways identical to) "Ceremonial Architecture" dating back to ancient times. This includes both conceptual and architectural references to "temples, palaces, treasuries, and tombs". They pose an interesting argument in how the practice of ritualistic processions through sacred structures for a means of moral or spiritual enlightenment was an common practice amongst a large majority of ancient cultures. The fact that spiritual megaliths were constructed from the neolithic age right through to the modern day, manifesting as grandiose temples or churches.
To a certain extent this does hold true throughout much of recorded history, however as Duncan and Wallach point out, there was a gradual shift in how these "Temples of Art" went from being theological epicenters to secularized cultural hubs. As religion gradually became more interwoven with politics during such times as the reign of the Holy Roman Empire under Constantine, the line between religion and monarchy began to blur dramatically. In order to legitimize their reign as god-king to the commoners, theocratic monarchs funded the construction of massive cathedrals filled with lavish art and decor, meant to leave the common man awe-struck and humbled by the experience.
After the Renaissance the theocratic political system began to gradually dissolve into more conventional monarchies. However the focus did not stray too far from it's origins. Rather than being strictly religious in purpose, the cathedrals and holy sites were annexed by the royal family and used to impress foreign dignitaries and enrich the upper class. During this time much of the world's classical art fell into private collections that were only seen by the common man on rare occasions. However this phase too, was to be short lived.
The prime example of a major reclamation of the "Temple of Art" for the common man was during the French Revolution, as cited by Duncan and Wallach. When Napoleon seized control of the monarch's estates, he began to make the once-hidden fine art available to the masses. In direct opposition to the French Monarchy, the royal grounds were opened to the public (albeit on a limited basis). This set the stage for what has become one of the world's most highly regarded artistic institutions: the Louvre in Paris. Combining all the elements of Classical, Medieval, and Renaissance architecture, the "New Temple of Art" was an amalgamation of all the influences preceeding it.
However what brings the essay full circle is the inclusion of the American adaptation of the Neo-Classical styles found in Europe, and our unique approach to what we consider public art. Being founded on an entirely anti-monarchy platform, America (striving to compete with it's European forebearers) wanted to again reinvent the concept of widespread culture. Rather than utilizing preexisting palaces or holy sites, the American museum was generally founded on entirely secular spaces, but seeks to evoke the same sense of awe and inspiration the first temples did. Only this time, all people are welcomed into it. No longer is the museum relegated to preists, kings, or even the upper class.
Which begs the question - what will be the next incarnation of the "Temple of Art"? Only time will tell.