(SS

Hii
jf Psy 9}

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

an

tf
hn

eta
ea BA Hh

a

Gi

A

 

ri
bt

ee
pry
 

 

CORNELL
UNIVERSITY
LIBRARY

 

BOUGHT WITH THE INCOME
OF THE SAGE ENDOWMENT
FUND GIVEN IN 1891 BY
HENRY WILLIAMS SAGE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
Cornell University Library

Development & character of Gothic archit
DEVELOPMENT & CHARACTER

OF

GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE
DEVELOPMENT & CHARACTER

OF

GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE

BY

CHARLES HERBERT MOORE

WITH ILLUSTRATIONS

London
MACMILLAN AND CoO.

AND NEW YORK

1890

All rights reserved
 

  
 

     
  
    
  

i CORNELL *
;UNIVERS! TY.
\. LIBRARY,

Nantes

4

COPYRIGHT
1890
By CHARLES HERBERT MOORE
PREFACE

In the following attempt to set forth the development and
character of Gothic architecture, I use the term “ Gothic,”
because it has been established by custom to designate the
architecture of the late Middle Ages as distinguished from
that of ancient and early medieval times; and because,
since it was owing to the infusion of Northern genius that
the style was brought into being, it is not an entirely
inappropriate term. But I use it in a restricted sense;
confining it to that style of the Middle Ages which was most
distinctly a medizval product. In thus restricting the term,
I am forced to exclude the greater part of what has usually
been called Gothic architecture, because of its failure to
exhibit those qualities of design and construction which are
distinctive. The general term foznted architecture will suffice
to include those inferior works which have been hitherto
erroneously classed with Gothic. The position to which my
study of the subject has led me differs considerably from
that which has hitherto been maintained, especially by
English writers. In the. works of the true Gothic style
a noble and well-conceived original design is carried out
systematically, with strict logic of construction, with thorough
regard to mechanical and statical principles, and with a
controlling sense of beauty. They are works of the highest
art, in which the understanding of technical methods is
so complete as to serve as the secure foundation for the
creations of the poetic imagination. It will, doubtless, seem
vi PREFACE

 

to readers already more or less familiar with the subject an
extravagant position that Gothic architecture, as I define it,
was never practised elsewhere than in France. Yet from
this position I can see no escape.

The French origin of Gothic is, indeed, now pretty
generally admitted on the continent of Europe; but the
exclusive claim of the architecture of France, in the Middle
Ages, to be called Gothic has not thus far, so far as I
know, been advanced. This being the case, nothing short
of a close analysis and comparison of the different pointed
styles of Europe—a work which, strange as it may seem,
appears not before to have been undertaken—could be
expected to establish a view so different from that which
commonly prevails. I have, therefore, been impelled to
undertake an examination of the architecture of the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries in Europe, and I have endeavoured
in this essay to illustrate the results of this examination in
a clear and intelligible manner, and in such a way that, so
far as might be, the monuments should speak for themselves.
This examination I have made, for the most part, at first
hand, except in regard to the architectures of Germany and
Spain, my acquaintance with which is through books and
-photographs only.

The main conclusions of the book may,I fear, be unwelcome
to many English readers who have regarded Gothic archi-
tecture as a no less English than continental product. But
though, as I believe, the English claim to any share in the
original development of Gothic, or to the consideration of the
pointed architecture of the Island as properly Gothic at all,
must be abandoned, there is yet abundant reason for English
satisfaction in English architecture, as one of great noble-
ness and beauty, whose monuments can hardly be too highly
prized or too zealously protected. And if the French
monuments are found to be still more marvellous and
beautiful, and to be the result of an earlier and more inde-
pendent development, and even to have furnished the chief
PREFACE vii

 

inspiration for what is best in England, these facts will, of
course, be acknowledged with generous frankness so soon as
they are seen to be established.

The idea has widely prevailed, and does still prevail, that
Gothic was an art common to the nations of the North, and
each country has in turn laid claim to superiority of style.
This idea, as I endeavour to show, is incorrect, and has arisen
largely from a lack of clear analysis of the true Gothic style,
and from the habit of classing together, as if they were all of
the same nature, various forms of pointed architecture which
‘resemble each other only superficially. The peculiarities ex-
hibited by the different countries have hitherto been taken
merely as local variations of this supposed common style ;
and hence it has become usual to speak of French Gothic,
of English Gothic, and of German Gothic, as if these various
styles were all equally Gothic. Some writers have, in recent
times, gone further, and have claimed for the countries, to
which they have respectively belonged, the original invention
of Gothic. Thus Rickman begins his well-known and
valuable essay? by saying: “The science of architecture
may be considered in its most extended application to
comprehend buildings of every kind; but at present we
must consider it in one more restricted, according to which
architecture may be said to treat of the planning and
erection of edifices, which are composed and embellished
after two principal modes: (1) the antique, or Grecian and
Roman ; (2) the English or Gothic.” Some German writers
have maintained with equal assurance that to German genius
is due the origin and development of Gothic; while the
French, though generally manifesting a preference for their
own style, have perhaps made no greater claim than either
the English or the Germans to its original authorship.

These various and conflicting views have retarded a true
understanding of the arts of the Middle Ages ; and they have
naturally tended to strengthen the disesteem with which, in

1 « An Attempt to Discriminate the Styles of Architecture in Ingland.”
vill PREFACE

 

some quarters, since the time of Vasari, the Gothic style
has been regarded. While the whole pointed architecture
of Europe is taken together as Gothic, it is not strange that
it should appear as an art without principles. But so soon
as the principles of the true style are understood, and com-
parison of the architectures of the different countries is made
by the light of them, the origin and exclusive existence of
Gothic in France will be readily discerned.

It has been necessary to devote a considerable portion of
the book to detailed descriptions of structural forms and
adjustments. These may prove tedious to the unprofessional
reader ; but I have endeavoured to make them as brief as was
consistent with thoroughness, and to express myself, as far as
possible, in terms that may be generally understood.

The illustrations to the book have been reproduced
either on wood or by mechanical process from drawings, the
most of which were made on the spot, or from photographs,
by myself. For some of the illustrations of sculpture
the drawings have been made from photographs either
by my daughter, or by myself; and several of the most
elaborate illustrations of entire buildings have been drawn
from photographs for the engraver by Mr. H. W. Brewer
of London, the well-known architectural draughtsman.

I am indebted for help in gathering materials, and in
other ways, to the kindness of many persons; but most
especially to M. PAbbé Miiller of Senlis, to the Very
Reverend William Butler, Dean of Lincoln, to my architect
friends, Messrs. A. H. Mackmurdo of London, and W. P. P.
Longfellow and C. A. Cummings of Boston, Massachusetts,
to my friends, Professor George H. Palmer and Mr. Wm. C.
Lane of Cambridge, Massachusetts (the latter of whom has
prepared the index), and, above all, to my friend, Professor C.
lk. Norton of Cambridge, Massachusetts, without whose critical
revision I should hardly have wished to publish the book.

CAMBRIDGE, Mass,,
October 1889.
CONTENTS

CHAPTER I

DEFINITION OF GOTHIC

Incorrect ideas respecting Gothic architecture—Aversion to the pointed style first
arose in Italy—This style naturally unsuited to Italian tastes and traditions
—Gothic art an outgrowth—The genius of the north modified by that of the
south—The abandonment of Gothic architecture coincident with the growth
of artificial conditions of society—The architecture of the Renaissance not a
popular architecture—Awakening of an antiquarian interest in the pointed
styles—Growth of a spirit of investigation—English and continental mis-
conceptions of Gothic—Architectural styles distinguished primarily by struc-
tural characteristics—The Gothic an organic system—Its evolution out of the
Romanesque—The Roman constructive system—-Early Romanesque develop-
ments—The constructive advantages of the pointed arch—The flying buttress
—Summary of the structural characteristics of Gothic—The system developed
in three-aisled buildings—Rudeness not a characteristic of Gothic art—
Painting and stained glass—Living character of Gothic sculpture—Antique
elements of Gothic ornamentation—Conventional character of Gothic ornament
—Organic treatment of constituent elements in Gothic ornament—Archi-
tectural fitness of Gothic sculpture—Gothic art of short duration—The
cathedral edifice the central object of popular interest—The monastic activities
in building—The Gothic style developed by the laity—Gothic architecture
mainly an architecture of a aaa ca art
native to France Pages 1-31

CHAPTER II
GoTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE

Region of the early Gothic movement—Existing buildings the only sources of
information—First manifestations of new principles—The vaults of Morienval
—FEarly vaulting of St. Denis—Senlis and Noyon—Vaulting of the Abbaye-
aux-Hommes—Constructive system of San Michele of Pavia—lIts influence on
Norman building—Relation of piers to vaults in the Cathedral of Senlis—
x CONTENTS

 

Quadripartite system of the Cathedral of Noyon—Buttress system of Noyon
—Structural progress exhibited in the Cathedral of Paris—Vaulting systems
of the choir and nave of Paris—Vaulting systems of Mantes, Laon, Bourges,
Sens, and Dijon—Local differences of constructive detail, and mutual
influences of various provinces—Developments of the thirteenth century—
Modifications of the lower pier consequent upon new adjustments of the
abacus to its load—Vaulting systems of the advanced Gothic—Structural
reason of the twisted surfaces of Gothic vaulting—Vaulting systems of
Chartres, Reims, Amiens, and St. Denis—Buttress systems of St. Martin
at Laon, St. Leu d’Esserent, Noyon, Soissons, Chartres, Amiens, and
Reims—Evolution of the pinnacle—Modes of enclosure—Development of
the clerestory opening in the Cathedral of Paris—Development of tracery—
Screening of the triforium in French churches—Development of the Gothic
apse—Mode of vaulting the apsidal aisles—Chapels of the apse—Charac-
teristics of the French transept—Development of the west facade—Develop-
ment of the spire—General aspect of the Gothic edifice—General and spon-
taneous character of the Gothic movement in France Pages 32-123

CHAPTER III
POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND

Rare occurrence of the pointed arch and of groin ribs in England before the last
quarter of the twelfth century—Approach to Gothic principles in the vaults
of Malmesbury Abbey—Little approach to Gothic in the buildings im-
mediately following Malmesbury—Structural system of Fountains Abbey—
Structural system of Kirkstall Abbey—No important advance takes place in
England till after the building of the choir of Canterbury—Structural system
of Canterbury—Structural system of Chichester—Structural system of the
choir of Lincoln—St. Mary’s, New Shoreham—Byland and Whitby—The
choir of Ripon—Lack of unity of principle in the early pointed architecture
of England—Lack of Gothic principles in the later pointed buildings of
England—Multiplication of ribs in later English vaulting—Buttress system
and clerestory of Lincoln—Structural system of Salisbury—Structural system
of Wells—Structural system of the Abbaye-aux-Dames—The Presbytery of
Lincoln—The Cathedral of Lichfield—-Modes of enclosure—Character-
istics of the east end—Characteristics of transept ends—Characteristics of
the west front—Towers and spires—Structural features of the chapter-house——
Vaulting of rare occurrence in the smaller churches of England 124-169

CHAPTER IV
POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMANY, ITALY, AND Sparx

Slowness of Germany to adopt the new principles of building—The Cathedral of
Speyer an almost unmodified Romanesque structure—The Cathedral of
Bamberg hardly changed in principle—Gothic characteristics in the vaulting

f
CONTENTS xi

 

of Magdeburg—Nearer approach to Gothic in the Cathedral of Limburg on
the Lahn—lIts likeness to Noyon—Freiburg. and Strasburg—The Kreuz-
kirche at Breslan—Cologne Cathedral completely Gothic-—But not a German
product—Peculiarities of St. Elizabeth at Marburg, St. Sebaldus at Nurem-
berg, and other buildings of the same class—East ends, transept ends, and
western facades—Towers and spires—Slowness of Italy to adopt the pointed
style—The monastic orders retain control of building in Italy longer than
elsewhere—The church of St. Francis of Assisi—Sta, Maria Novella and Sta.
Croce at Florence—The Cathedral of Florence—S. Petronio at Bologna—
S. Anastasia at Verona—The church of the Frari at Venice—S. Martino at
Lucca—The western fagade—East ends and transept ends—Towers and
spires—The churches of the twelfth century in Spain—Introduction into
Spain of the Gothic of France—Clerestory and buttress system of the
Cathedral of Burgos—Burgos, Toledo, and Leon perfectly Gothic in their
internal systems is Pages 170-199

CHAPTER V
GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE

Functional development governed by artistic feeling in Gothic profiles—The
mechanical function of the capital not consistently recognised by the Roman
and Romanesque builders—In France, after the eleventh century, the
adjustment of the capital to its load was constant—The thickness of the
shaft determined largely by the nature of the material used—The thickness
of the abacus varies in proportion to the spread of the capital—Abacus and
astragal of one piece with the bell in Gothic capitals—The French abacus
usually square in plan—The abacus profile—Finest types of capitals belong
to the early period of the Gothic style—Changes in the form of the capital
consequent upon changes in the arch section—The Gothic base a modification
of the ancient Attic base—Its plinth more developed than in the ancient type
—The angle spur—The spread of the base usually increased as the diameter
of the shaft is diminished—Diminution of the plinth and change of its form
in the later Gothic style—String profiles—Evolution of the drip-moulding—
Internal strings—The corbel table not a Gothic feature—Arch mouldings—
Change in the arrangement of grouped abaci consequent on change in arch
profiles—Evolution of mullion profiles 200-223

CHAPTER VI

PROFILES OF THE TWELFTH AND THIRTEENTH CENTURIES
IN ENGLAND AND OTHER COUNTRIES

Superior character of the profiles of early capitals in England—French design
and workmanship in capitals of the choir aisle of Lincolna—Anglo-Norman
imitations of French work—The wreathed type of capital—-Extravagant orna-
mentation of the later English capitalsk—The moulded capital—Profiles of
xii

CONTENTS

 

abaci— Profiles of bases—String profiles—Employment of the corbel table
in the pointed architecture of England—Arch mouldings—Romanesque
types of capitals long retained in Germany—Characteristics of capitals in the
German pointed style—Capitals of the choir of Cologne—Base profiles of
Cologne—Arch mouldings of Cologne—Profiles of capitals and bases in
Italian pointed architecture—Profiles of Italian arch mouldings, vaulting
ribs, and string-courses—Nothing of importance to notice in the profiles of
Spain Fi Pages 224-246

CHAPTER VII

GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE

Development of medizeval sculpture in France antecedent to that of other countries

—Sources of instruction open to the sculptors of Western Europe—New life
displayed in the art of the schools of Cluny—Exceptional conditions for the
growth of art in the Ile-de-France—The early sculptures of St. Denis—The
sculptures of St. Trophime at Arles—Refined qualities of the early
sculptures of Chartres—The human figure not employed as a caryatid in
Gothic architecture—Statues not placed in niches in this architecture—Rela-
tionship of sculpture to structural elements in Gothic art—Early reliefs of St.
Denis and Paris manifest a new spirit—Qualities of design, execution, and
sentiment in the sculptures of the lintel of Senlis—Natural elements common
alike to Greek and medieval sculpture—Superior freedom of the sculpture of
the early thirteenth century—Sculptures of the west front of the Cathedral of
Paris—Likeness to Greek art noticeable in these sculptures— Points of similarity
in the Greek and medizval genius—The statue of the Virgin in the south

—~portal of Amiens—The statue of the Virgin in the portal of the north transept

Rare use of figure sculpture in connection with the pointed

of Paris—Gothic sculpture the first in which expression predominates over
form—Bodily beauty not ignored by the Gothic carvers—Significance of
the grotesque element in Gothic art—The artists of the Ile-de-France the
first to emancipate foliate sculpture from old conventions—Expression of nature
in early foliate carvings—Early motives for ornament derived from the leafage
of springtime-—Delicacy of hand manifest in Gothic sculpture— Monumental
fitness always regarded by the early carvers—Excessive naturalism of the
later Gothic carvings—The quality of breadth in Gothic art—The colouring

of Gothic sculpture 247-283
247-283

CHAVTER VIII

SCULPTURE OF THE TWELFTH AND THIRTEENTH Centuries
IN ENGLAND AND OTHER COUNTRIES

‘ architecture of
England—Norman sculptures of Lincoln and Ely—Exceptional character of

the sculptures of Wells—The sculptures of Wells unrelated to the structural
CONTENTS xill

 

elements — Their naturalistic qualities —Their rudeness of execution—
Awkward placing of the interior sculptures of the Presbytery of Lincolhn—
Lack of artistic gift displayed in Anglo-Norman foliate carving—Artificial
character of conventionalised forms in England—Figure sculpture not
generally employed as an architectural adjunct in the pointed architecture of
Germany—The statues of Cologne are Renaissance rather than medizeval
art—Distinctive types of German foliate sculpture—Late development of
figure sculpture in Italy—lItalian sculpture an individual, rather than a
communal product—Italian sculpture not organically related to architecture
— Prevalence of surface reliefs—Two elements conspicuous in Italian sculpture
—Classic elements of the art of Niccola Pisano imitative rather than spon-
taneous—Nearer approach to Gothic character in the art of Giovanni Pisano
—tThe influence of nature and expression of beauty in the art of Giovanni
Pisano—Little of distinctive importance in the foliate sculpture of Italy—
Close imitation of nature a tendency in this sculpture—No important
developments in sculpture ever had place in Spain—The carvings of Spanish
Gothic copied from the French Pages 284-297

CHAPTER IX
GotHiIc PAINTING AND STAINED GLAss IN FRANCE

Figure painting not much employed in Gothic architecture—The characteristics
of the figure painting of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries illustrated in
the manuscripts of the time—Little progress in the art of painting was made
by the Gothic artists—Chromatic design in Gothic art developed chiefly in
the department of stained glass—The inherent limitations of this art—This
art not capable of development beyond the conditions that were reached in
the Middle Ages—Examples of stained glass in St. Denis, Chartres, and
other churches “ ; 298-304

CHAPTER X

PAINTING AND STAINED GLASS IN ENGLAND AND OTHER
COUNTRIES

Nothing different from the painting of France was produced during the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries in the other countries of Europe—Earliest develop-
ment of painting in Italy posterior to the epoch of Gothic art—Technical
characteristics of early Italian painting—Its monumental qualities—Its union
of pictorial and decorative elements—Its expressional purpose—No peculiar
styles of design in stained glass were produced in England, Germany, Italy,
or Spain . ; ‘ : 305-309
xiv CONTENTS

 

CHAPTER XI
CONCLUSION

The witness of the monuments to the origin of Gothic principles in France borne
out by historical considerations—The different and less favourable conditions
for the growth of art of England in the Middle Ages—Effects on art of the
Norman Conquest—Reaction of the native genius—Slowness of the Germans
to modify their Romanesque style-—German pointed architecture mainly
copied from France—No native development of Gothic in Italy—Lack of
constructive character in Italian building—Social and political conditions in
Spain unfavourable to development of the arts Pages 310-315
20.

21.

23.
24.
a6:
26.
27.
28.
29.
30.

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

. Monolithic Arch and Lintel
. Offset Arch
. Section of a Part of the Flavian Amphitheatre

Plan of one Bay of the Basilica of Constantine

Romanesque Pilaster Strip

. Romanesque Buttress

. Section of the Abbaye-aux-Hommes

. Section of the Abbaye-aux-Dames.

. Diagram of Round-arched Vault

. Diagram of Pointed-arched Vault

. Diagram of Apsidal Vault of Morienval

. Perspective View of Apsidal Vault of Morienval

. Plan of Apsidal Vault of St. Denis

. Plan of one Bay of S. Michele of Pavia

. Elevation of one Bay of S. Michele of Pavia

. Elevation of one Double Bay of the Abbaye-aux-Hommes
. Section of Main Pier of Senlis

18.
. Section of one Bay of Senlis

Elevation of one Double Bay of Senlis

Perspective View of one Double Bay of Senlis
Section of Pier, Choir of Noyon

. Vaulting System of the Choir of Paris

Section of Vaulting Shafts of the Nave of Paris
Vaulting System of the Nave of Paris

Vaulting System of Laon .

Impost Section of the Choir of Paris

Impost Section of the Nave of Paris

Impost Section of the Sixth Pier of the Nave of Paris
Section of the Sixth Pier of the Nave of Paris
Section of the Seventh Pier of the Nave of Paris

PAGE

Io
1

II

12
13
14
16
17
34
35
37
40
41
42
44
45
46
47
49
56
56
57
58
61
62
63
63
64
xvi

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

 

FIG.

31:
32.
33:
34:

35:

36.
37-
38.
39-
40.
41.
42.
43-
44.
45-
46.

Impost Section of the Seventh Pier of the Nave of Paris

Perspective View of the Seventh Pier of the Nave of Paris .

Section of Pier with Grouped Shafts of Laon

Imposts of the Choir of Soissons and the Sixth Pier of Paris
respectively .

Perspective View of one Bay of the Clerestory of St. Leu
d’Esserent ‘ ;

Section of Vaulting Conoid of St. Leu d’Esserent

Perspective View of one Bay of the Clerestory of Chartres

Perspective View of one Bay of the Clerestory of Amiens

Section of Pier of the Nave of St. Denis

Flying Buttress of St. Martin of Laon

Flying Buttress of the Apse of St. Leu d’Esserent .

Flying Buttress of the Nave of St. Leu d’Esserent

Flying Buttress of the Nave of Noyon

Flying Buttress of the Nave of Amiens

Flying Buttress of the Apse of Reims

Two Bays of the Clerestory of the Nave of Paris

46 bis. Clerestory Opening, Nave of Paris, showing Alterations in the

47-
48.
49-
50.
51.
52.
53-
54-
55.
56.
57+
58.
e 59-
60.

a

61.

v
62.

63.

Lb 64.

65.

66.

67.

68.
69.

Arch .
Clerestory Opening of the Nave of St. Leu d’Esserent
Aperture of the Apse of Reims
Plan of the Vault of the Apse of Noyon
Plan of the Vault of the Apse of Paris
Plan of the Vault of the Apse of Chartres .
Plan of the Vault of the Apse of Amiens
Portion of the Interior of the Apse of St. Remi of Reims
Portion of the Exterior of the Apse of St. Remi of Reims
Plan of Vaulting of the Apsidal Aisles of Paris
Interior View of the Apsidal Aisle of St. Leu d’Esserent
View of the Church of Vaux-sous-Laon
Facade of the Abbaye-aux- Hommes
Facade of the Cathedral of Senlis .

_ Facade of the Cathedral of Paris

Facade of the Cathedral of Amiens

Tower of Morienval

Tower and Spire of Chamant

Spire of Chartres .

Spire of Senlis : :

General View of St. Leu d’Esserent

General View of the Cathedral of Reims

Diagram of .\isle Vault of Malmesbury Abbey
Perspective View of one Bay of Malmesbury Abbey

PAGE
64
65
66

67

70
71
73
75
76
77

79
80

81
82
83
85

86
87
S89
93
94
96
97
98
99
100
IO!
104
105
107
109
lil
Tl3
II4
115
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

 

xvil
FIG, PAGE
70. Aisle Vault of Fountains Abbey . : 128
71. Portion of the Interior of the Choir of Canterbury 129
2. One Bay of the Cathedral of Chichester 132
73. Section of Pier, Chichester Cathedral 133
74. Plan of the Original East End of Lincoln Cathedral 135
75. Plan of Vault, Choir of Lincoln Cathedral 136
76. Section of the Choir of Lincoln Cathedral 137
77. Piers at Crossing of Lincoln and Canterbury respectively . 138
78. Clerestories of the Abbaye-aux-Dames and the Choir of Lincoln
respectively 140
79. Plan of Vault, Nave of Lincoln 144
80. Vaulting Conoid, Nave of Lincoln 145
81. Pier Sections, Nave of Lincoln ¥ 145
82. Flying Buttress and Clerestory, Nave of Lincoln . 146
83. Vaulting Conoid, Salisbury Cathedral 147
84. Elevation of Clerestory, Salisbury Cathedral 148
85. Interior System of Wells Cathedral 151
86. Interior System of the Abbaye-aux-Dames 152
87. Interior of Clerestory, Presbytery of Lincoln 155
88. Flying Buttress and Clerestory, Presbytery of Lincoln 156
89,,Exterior View of the East End of Ely Cathedral . 159
90 Exterior View of the East End of Lincoln 161
Ole West Facade of Lincoln . 163
9% Central Tower of Lincoln 166
93. Elevation of one Bay of the Cathedral of Speyer . 171
94. Elevation of one Bay of the Cathedral of Bamberg 172
95. Elevation of one Bay of Limburg on Lahn 174
96. Elevation of one Bay of the Kreuzkirche at Breslau 175
96 dzs. Plan of one Bay of the Kyreuzkirche at Breslau 176
97. Cross Section of St. Elizabeth at Marburg 177
98. Cross Section of the Cathedral of Poitiers 178
99. Tower and Spire of Breslau 180
100. Tower and Spire of St. Elizabeth at Marburg 180
tor. Section through one Bay of Sta. Maria Novella 183
102, Internal System of Sta. Maria Novella 184
103. Section of Pier, Cathedral of Florence 187
104. Internal Pier, Cathedral of Florence 188
105. Facade of the Cathedral of Siena 190
106. Tower and Spire of Sta, Maria Novella 192
107. Tower of the Scaligeri, Verona 193
108. Aisle Windows of Sta. Croce 194
109. Flying Buttress and Clerestory of Burgos Ci Sinal 197
Capital of the Palace of Diocletian 201

110.

b
LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS

 

xviil
ae PAGE
111. Capital of the Gallery of Sta. Agnese at Rome 202
112. Capital of the Sanctuary of Senlis 203
113. Capital of the Triforium, Choir of Paris 204
114. Capital of the Triforium, Nave of Paris 205
115. Capital of the Triforium of Laon . 206
116, Capital of St. Aignan at Senlis 207
117. Profiles of Early French Mouldings 207
118. Profiles of Abaci 208
119. Capital of Chapel in the Choir of Amiens 209
120. Profile of Base, Nave of Senlis 210
121. Perspective and Profile of Base, Choir of Paris 21L
122. Profile of Base, Triforium of Nave of Paris 212
123. Perspective of Base, Triforium of Nave of Paris 212
124. Small Base, Choir of Soissons : 213
125. Perspective of Base of West Pier, Nave of Paris 213
126. String Profiles, Nogens-les-Vierges 214
127. String Profiles, St. Evremont, Creil, and Senlis 214.
128. Profile of Cornice, Cathedral of Paris 215
129. Profile of Triforium String, Nave of Paris 216
130. Profile of Flat-topped String 216
131. Profiles of Triforium String, Nave of Amiens 217
132. Profiles of Arch Mouldings, Poissy, Morienval, and St. Martin des

Champs 218
133. Profiles of Arch Mouldings, St. Denis and Laon . 218
134. Profiles of Arch Mouldings, Morienval, St. Denis, sens and Laon 219
135. Profile of Transverse Rib, Apsidal Chapel of Senlis 220
136. Rib Sections, Amiens, Beauvais, and Villeneuve . 226
137. Plan of Impost, Triforium of Senlis 221
138. Plan of Impost, Nave of Amiens. 221
139. Mullion Sections, St. Léu d’Esserent, Reims, and Amiens 229
140. Capital of East Transept, Lincoln 225
141. Capital of Arcade, South Aisle of Choir, Lincoln 226
142. Capital of Arcade, West Transept of Lincoln 227
143. Wreathed Capital, West Transept of Lincoln 229
144. Capital of Arcade, North Choir Screen, Lincoln 230
145. Capital of South Transept, Wells Cathedral 231
146. Moulded Capital, Triforium of Beverley . go
147. Profiles of baci, Lincoln, Glastonbury, and Wells 232
148. Profiles of Bases, Lincoln 233
149. Profiles of Bases, Ely, Lincoln, naan: and Whitby 333
150. Profiles of Bases, Lincoln and Temple Church 234
151. Base with Angle Spur, Porch of Wells ‘ 234
152. String Profiles, Lincoln, Glastonbury, and Wells . 235
 

LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS XIX
FIG. PAGE
153. Perspective View of Round Impost, Southwell 236
154. Arch Section, Malmesbury Abbey 237
1§5. Arch Section, Choir of Lincoln 237
156. Section of Vault Rib, Choir of Lincoln 238
157. Capitals, Cathedral of Magdeburg 240
158. Base, Cathedral of Magdeburg 241
159. Capital of Triforium of Choir, Cologne 241
160. Profile of Base, Cologne Cathedral 242
161. Profile of Arch Moulding, Cologne Cathedral 242
162. Capital of Nave, Sta. Maria Novella 243
163. Profiles of Bases, Sta. Maria Novella, Cathedral of Florence, and
Sta. Croce ‘ : 244
164. Profile of Vault Rib, Cathedral of Florence 246
165. Figures from Greek MS., National Library of Paris 248
166. Figure from Greek MS., National Library of Paris 248
167. Sculpture of Notre-Dame du Port, Clermont-Ferrand 250
168. Statue of St. Trophime, Arles 251
169. Statue of Transept, St. Denis 252
170. Statue of West Front, Chartres 253
171. Sculpture of Lintel, Senlis 256
172. Sculpture of Tympanum, Portal of the Virgin, Paris 260
173. Statue of North Transept, Paris . 263
174. Sculpture of the Portal of the Virgin, Paris 267
175. Capital of Sanctuary, Noyon Cathedral 268
176. Capital of the Abbaye-aux-Dames 269
177. Acanthoid Leafage : 270
178. Capital of Triforium of Nave, Senlis 271
179. Crockets of Triforium of Nave, Paris 272
180. Capital of the Chapel of the Catechists, Paris 275
181. Sculpture of Archivolt, Paris 276
182, Sculpture of Triforium String, Amiens 277
182 d2s. Sculpture of Cornice, Amiens 278
183. Sculpture of String-Course, Noyon 279
184. Sculpture of Archivolt, Porte Rouge, Paris 280
185. Sculpture of West Front, Lincoln 285
186. Statue of West Front, Wells 286
187. Sculpture on Lintel, Transept of Southwell 288
188. Sculpture of Leaf Forms, Lincoln 290
189. Capital of Triforium of Nave, Lincoln 291
190. Design from MS. Life of St. Denis 300
191. Figure from the Jesse Window, Chartres . 303
CHAPTER I
DEFINITION OF GOTHIC

SINCE the decline of Gothic architecture the ideas which
have prevailed respecting it have been for the most part
confused and incorrect. Indeed, until within the last fifty
years only the most vague notions of it were entertained even
by students of architecture. The very name Gothic, though
not wholly inappropriate, originated in a spirit of contempt,
which naturally precluded any disposition to study atten-
tively enough to understand it, this splendid manifestation
of human genius. The architects and amateurs of the
schools of Sansovino and Palladio in Italy, where the re-
vival of taste for classic forms of art had set in as early as
the time of Brunelleschi, could not be expected to admire
anything so far removed from the spirit of the art which
was in fashion with them. The maniera Tedesca, as they
called such Gothic as they possessed—supposing Gothic art
to be of German origin, because their own pointed style was an
importation from Germany—was regarded by them as bar-
baric and without principles, in comparison with their gram-
matical Vitruvian orders. It was not unnatural that such
distaste for the pointed style should be felt in Italy, for the
style was foreign to Italian genius and Italian traditions. It
had been adopted merely as a fashion, and the very modifica-
tions which the Italians wrought in it show how little suited
it was to their wants. It is, indeed, impossible for a people
possessed of an art, which is a natural outgrowth of their
wants and tastes, and hence proper to them, to adopt and
practise rationally, and to make their own, another art which
is an outgrowth of other and different needs and predilec-
B
2 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

tions. The Greek and Roman types of building were not
only the natural inheritance of the Italians, but they were
the best for them as being suited to their climate and as
supplying all their demands of convenience and taste.

On the north and west of the Alps the case was different.
Here the traditions of classic art were not, in the same sense,
an inheritance. The ancient forms of building had here been
an importation. They had never here been wholly under-
stood, and they were not well suited to the conditions of
climate and of race. But the Gothic style which gradually
took form in France was a natural outgrowth and expression
of the genius of the people, and it was as well suited to
them and to the local conditions as the classic styles had
been to the people and the climate of the South.

Yet here, too, at length, the fashion of distaste for Gothic
set in—following the lead of the more natural Italian
reaction,—though the change ‘did violence to much that
in architecture was proper to Northern temperament and
Northern needs.

This fashion had its root in the prevalent, yet often
insincere, feeling characteristic of an artificial state of society,
such as that which Northern Europe, and especially France,
exhibited at the end of the fifteenth century,—a state of
society in which display of private wealth and pleasurable
indulgence became the chief animating motives of an
art that found its main expression in vast and luxurious
private dwellings. In the former time private dwellings,
even those of the rich, had been comparatively unpretentious
and plain in character, while the Church edifice, the great
centre of social and communal interest, and the product of
the joint energy and enthusiasm of all classes, had been
enriched by generous expenditure of toil and public and
private treasure, but now it was the dwellings of the rich
that chiefly demanded the services of art. The ambition of
Charles VIII to possess a palace equal in splendour to those
which he had seen in Italy, indicates the early stage of a
movement which, gathering force under Francis I, and
greatly stimulated by the genius of De L’Orme, reached its
height in the sumptuous architecture of the reign of Louis
XIV.

The taste for the new style was long confined to the
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 3

 

upper classes. This architecture could never become really
an architecture of the people; and the cities and, here and
there, the church held out against it. But with the growth
of artificial conditions the new fashion at length prevailed,
and under its influence it was not strange that the Gothic
monuments of .the country were not only neglected and de-
spised, but shamefully, and often irreparably, disfigured.

In England the taste for the pseudo-classic orders, fostered

by the genius of such men as Inigo Jones and Wren, was
not less hostile to Gothic. Any feeling for medieval forms
which had lingered on through the Elizabethan period was
soon effectually quenched. Germany, though not quick to
accept the Renaissance style, was also at length conquered
by it. Everywhere some form, though often a travesty, of
the revived classic taste prevailed. Gothic art became every-
where extinct.
‘ Fashion, however, began after a while to change. In the
course of the eighteenth century an antiquarian interest in
pointed architecture was awakened and received a con-
siderable stimulus from the zealous but ignorant advocacy of
Horace Walpole. The attention of amateurs began to be
directed towards existing monuments, and the publication
(1780-1795) of Carter’s volumes with measured drawings,
followed before long by the works of Britton and Pugin,
created an extensive, though not a discriminating taste for
the long-abandoned pointed style. So undiscriminating,
indeed, was this new interest that it long remained unpro-
ductive of good results. No just notion of the nature of
Gothic was anywhere entertained. That it involved prin-
ciples beyond those which were revealed to a superficial view
nobody yet imagined. The whole subject of the modifica-
tions and transformations which pointed architecture had
undergone at different periods in its history was shrouded in
obscurity. No correct classifications had been made, and
attention was, for the most part, directed to the later and
least excellent varieties. Before there could be progress
toward a true understanding of pointed buildings, it was
necessary that the different forms which they had assumed
should be examined and classified.

But at length this progress began. In the year
1817 appeared Rickman’s first essay—Awn Aittempt to Dis-
4 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

criminate the Styles of Architecture in England. This
book did much to clear up the confusion that had prevailed,
by pointing out that the differences of style which appeared
in the English monuments might be broadly divided into three
groups belonging, respectively, to three successive periods of
construction. And, although Rickman’s work was naturally
imperfect and inadequate, its classifications were mainly
correct, and it has served as a substantial basis for all
subsequent study of the pointed architecture of England.
So good was it, however, that the many other treatises
which soon after appeared did little more than extend the
field by bringing a larger number of buildings into notice.
Professors Whewell and Willis, however, deserve to be
mentioned as learned and able investigators who must
always command the respect of students of architecture.
Whewell, in his Motes on German Churches, did much to
systematise methods of observation, and Willis, in his
Architecture of the Middle Ages, and in his Essay on
Vaulting, has given us a more thorough analysis of con-
structive systems than any other English writer, and has
also rendered acknowledged service to the most able writers
of the Continent. But neither of these authors succeeded
in bringing out with clearness the essential principles of
Gothic.

In the year 1851 was published Sharpe’s Seven Periods
of Church Architecture, which showed that Rickman’s division
of styles might be subdivided. But beyond this Sharpe did
nothing to invalidate the correctness, in broad outline, of Rick-
man’s work. As regards the true nature of Gothic, Sharpe
himself, though a writer of much merit, did not possess a
true conception. For he says, referring to the commonly
received distinction between Romanesque and Gothic, which
is merely that one employs round, and the other pointed
arches, that he has “little hesitation in adopting this primary
division as the groundwork” of his system And in his
various other works, excellent as they are in many ways, he
everywhere treats the subject of Gothic design as consisting
merely in this and other peculiarities of detail. Of the
considerable number of more recent English writers on
Gothic art few, if any, have contributed towards a more just

1 Seven Periods of Church Architecture, p. 4.
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 5

 

apprehension of its principles. English writers generally
have understood by Gothic merely a style of building in
which pointed arches take the place of round ones, and in
which mouldings and other details are treated in a peculiar
way. Hence, in treating of the evolution of Gothic, English
writers, with hardly an exception, confine themselves to the
consideration of these subordinate things. Even Sir Gilbert
Scott, who has shown more insight than most others, quite
fails to lay hold of the ruling principles and to exhibit them
with clearness. And his son, Mr. G. G. Scott, even de-
scribes’ incidentally some of these principles without empha-
sising them as fundamental.

A recent Belgian writer, regarding the subject from the
English standpoint, has published a book,? in which it is
assumed that Gothic consists in a purely decorative modifica-
tion of the component members of a building. These
members —- capitals, bases, mouldings, etc.— he examines
without due reference to their mutual adjustments and
functional offices, and considers that the more they differ
decoratively from corresponding members in the preceding
styles, the more Gothic they are. For standards of Gothic
form he points to those buildings in which such details
depart most widely from the Romanesque types. And others
which, in these features, retain the older characteristics he
affirms to be on that account not Gothic. -

In France the history of the revival of interest in Gothic
seems to have derived its impulse from an influence trans-
mitted from England. One of the earliest French writers
to show an intelligent interest in the subject was M. de Cau-
mont, who, however, equally with the authors already named,
misconceives the nature of Gothic art. Thus, in treating of
the transition, he says: “La révolution architectonique qui
sopérait durant la période transitionnelle ne consistait pas
seulement dans la substitution de l’ogive au plein-cintre, mais
aussi, comme nous le démontrerons, dans ladoption d’un
systtme nouveau de moulures pour la decoration, et dans
abandon de la plupart des ornaments usités aux XI*° et XII*
siécles.” *

1 History of Church Architecture, p. 141.

2 La Filiation généalogigue de toutes les Ecoles Gothigues. Par Jean-
Francois Colfs. Paris, 1882.

3 De Caumont, Architecture Religieuse, p. 387.
6 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

These conceptions of the nature of Gothic are inadequate.
It is not by the consideration of such structurally unessential
features that an understanding of the subject can be reached.
By such approach it would
be impossible to discover the
principles of any art. The
principles to be considered
are constructive principles.
They determine the nature
A B and govern the entire fabric
ates of every art. In architecture
they are pre-eminently fundamental. In architecture mere
forms apart from their functional offices and relations are not
enough to enable us to apprehend the distinctive character-
istics of styles. Semicircular forms instead of straight
beams may, for instance, be used to bridge the spaces
between the upright supports of a building without a result
which would constitute between a building employing the
latter form and one employing the former, a difference of
architectural style. For an arch may be cut out of a single
stone, as at A, Fig. 1, as it frequently is in the buildings of
Central Syria,’ where the constructive principle is, of course,
that of the plain lintel, as at B, Fig. 1. Or the arch may
be built up in horizontal
courses of small stones, and | | |
thus be what is known as
the offset arch (Fig. 2), like
the gate of Ephesus, which
is still on the principle of

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

the lintel. It is not until

the arch is constructed of =
separate stones cut into the =a foe =
shapes of voussotrs, when Latkes
it comes to exert a lateral Ree eee

thrust which requires to be FIG. 2.
met by some Opposing force, that we have a new con-

l See L’Architecture civile et religteuse du I? au VIL sicle dans la Syrie
centrale. Par M. Le Cte de Vogiié. Paris, 1865-1877. The Basilica of
Mondjelia, described on p. 98, presents in its nave arcades a singularly system-
atic use of monolithic arches. At first glance one would naturally pronounce

the construction Romanesque. It is not until we scrutinise the joints of masonry
that the trabeate principle of its construction is perceived,
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 7

 

structive principle, the systematic employment of which in
architecture constitutes a new style.

In a secondary sense, indeed, it may be admissible to
speak of differences of style where there are no differences
of constructive principle. Egyptian architecture is, in this
sense, a style different from Greek, and arched Roman
is a style different from Romanesque. The Romanesque
may be broadly divided into two styles—the Eastern and the
Western ; and the variety of Western Europe may be said to
be of one style in North Italy, of another in Southern Gaul,
of another in Normandy and England, etc. While of pointed
architecture it may be said that there are differences of style,
or rather that there are many varieties, some of which are
nearer to, and some more remote from, the type which alone
is strictly entitled to be called Gothic. But it is only in a
secondary sense that it is correct to speak thus of styles
in which there are no fundamental structural differences,
Pointed architecture is not, in the strict sense, a style distinct
from that which is round arched ; for pointed arches in aper- ,
tures do not much differ structurally from round ones. Gothic
architecture differs from Romanesque far more fundamentally;
than by the use of pointed arches in place of round arches,
or by the substitution of one decorative system for another. '

In the midst of such imperfect apprehension as has thus
far generally prevailed, and as preliminary to what is to
follow on the nature and origin of Gothic art, it will be well
for us to seek a clear and unmistakable definition of it, in
order that we may have a standard whereby to estimate the
degrees of Gothic quality that may appear in the pointed archi-
tecture of different countries and at different epochs. Such
a definition is afforded in the monumental work of M.
Viollet-le-Duc, the Dzctionnatre Raisonné de Lf Architecture
Francaise. He has therein given a profound and exhaustive
illustration of Gothic. He has shown that Gothic architecture
came into being as a result of the development of a new
constructive system of building. A system which was a

~—gradual—evolution out-of the Romanesque; and one whose
distinctive characteristic is that the whole character of the
building is determined by, and its whole strength is made to
reside in a finely organised, and frankly confessed, framework,
rather than in walls. This framework, made up of piers,
8 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

arches, and buttresses, is freed from every unnecessary
encumbrance of wall, and is rendered as light in all its parts
as is compatible with strength in a system whose: stability
depends not upon any inert massiveness, except in the
outermost abutments, but upon a logical adjustment of
active parts whose opposing forces produce a perfect equi-
librium. It is thus a system of balanced thrusts, as
opposed to the former system of inert stability. Gothic
architecture is indeed much more than such a constructive
system, but it is this primarily and always. And so funda-
mental and far-reaching is this mode of construction as the
distinctive principle of Gothic, that it may be taken as a
rule that wherever we find it developed there we have a
Gothic building, even though the decorative system connected
-with it may retain many of the Romanesque characteristics.
And, on the other hand, wherever this principle of thrust
and counterthrust is wanting there we have not Gothic, how-
ever freely the pointed arch may be used, and however widely
the ornamental details may differ from Romanesque types.
The evolution of the Gothic system was gradual, and the
final results were unforeseen when the first steps were taken.
This is evident from the characteristics exhibited by the
transitional monuments which remain. The first steps were
taken early. Indeed, the beginnings of Gothic antedate con-
siderably the period which is usually assumed as that of
transition. The earliest functional grouping of supports in
the churches of Northern Italy was, it would seem, the real
beginning ; though it was a beginning that was destined to
remain unfruitful in its own locality. But there is reason to
suppose that the Lombard buildings? of the early eleventh

i

1 By Lombard buildings it is not necessary to understand buildings erected
by the Lombards. The existence at the present time of work actually wrought
by Lombard hands has been clearly disproved, and the designation Lombard, as
applied to the churches of the eleventh century in North Italy, has been dere.
fore, objected to. But the style of these buildings is undoubtedly the result of
Lombard influence, though the date of their erection was subsequent to the
Lombard occupation. The conclusion reached by Sig. Quintino and others who
have treated the subject, that the architecture in question is derived wholly from
Roman and Byzantine sources, is certainly incorrect. For nowhere in either
Roman or Byzantine design is there any precedent for that functional grouping
of shafts and piers that is met with in buildings like San Michele of Pavia and
St. Ambrogio of Milan. The fact would seem to be that the Lombard iifueniée
upon architecture was strong enough to outlive the period of actual Lombard
sojourn. After two hundred years of settlement the influence of such a people
could hardly fail to have become in a measure permanent. es
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 9

 

century were the sources from which the Normans derived a
large share of their architectural inspiration. A comparison
of the Church of San Michele of Pavia with that of the
Abbaye-aux-Hommes of Caen would alone suggest this, even
if we did not know that Lanfranc, who was Abbot of the
Monastery when this church was building, had come from
Pavia. The rudimentary principles of structure embodied
in the churches of Lombardy seem to have been thus trans-
mitted to the North, where they were rapidly developed,
so that from San Michele of Pavia to the Cathedral of
Amiens a logical and progressive series of changes may be
traced.

Gothic architecture is thus in no sense an independent,
though it is a distinct style. And hence it is not strange
that the finest Gothic buildings should retain, as they do,
many traces of the Romanesque elements out. of which they
were evolved. — It is a mistake to suppose with M. Colfs that
such lingering of older elements necessarily marks a building as
wanting in Gothic character. On the contrary, such elements
are natural to Gothic, which is an art not only derived from
Romanesque, but which zs Romanesque recreated. Every
constructive member of a Gothic building exists, in
rudimentary form, in a vaulted Norman building. Even
the osseous system which distinguishes Gothic exists there
in potency. But the creative principle of the new style
is not in Norman art yet recognised, and the structural
system does not yet frankly and independently exercise its
functions.

It may help us to gain a more complete idea of Gothic
briefly to review some of the steps in the process by which
the transition was effected. And we may advisably begin
with the first principles of arched construction.

I have already alluded to the fact that a new principle
was introduced into the art of building when the arch exert-
ing side thrusts was first employed. The most effective way
to meet such thrusts is by some kind of external abutments.
But the thrusts of arches may also be neutralised by down-
ward pressure upon the walls where they operate. Both
methods were employed by the Romans and by the Roman-
esque builders, as well as by the Gothic architects. In the
case of a simple arched opening in a wall the thrusts are, of
10 GOTAIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

course, stayed in both of these ways. The lateral masses of
wall act as buttresses, and the superincumbent masonry tends
to overcome the side pressure by its weight. Where a space
between two parallel walls is roofed over by
a barrel vault the continuous side pressures,
which would tend to overthrow the walls, are,
in Roman constructions, met by thickening
the walls enough to resist the thrusts—the
extra thickness given for this purpose forming
‘a continuous abutment. The walls in
Roman buildings are also sometimes
weighted by heavy masonry above the
springing of the vaults. In Roman
buildings of several stories, such as the
Flavian amphitheatre (section, Fig. 3),
the walls of the lower stories are enor-
mously thick, and the vault pressures
are further stayed by the weight of
the walls above. The top story has
no vault, and the weight of its thinner
wall helps to maintain the stability of
the vault below. By such massive
masonry employed in this double way,
the pressures of Roman vaults are
much more than met. In the case of
Roman intersecting vaults, like those
of the Basilica of Constantine, the thrusts, instead of being
continuous, as in the foregoing instance, are concentrated upon
those points (a, plan, Fig. 4) from which the groins spring,
where they are met by walls set across the aisles and divid-
ing them into separate compartments. These walls are, of
course, true buttresses in disguise. The compartments of the
aisles are covered by barrel vaults springing from the dividing
walls, and thus, having their axes at right angles to the side
walls of the building, they exert no thrust upon these side
walls, and consequently no external stays are required.
hus the buttress employed by the Romans was not a

| buttress pure and simple, devised to meet a side pressure
with economy, as well as efficiency, and openly confessed as
a functional member, They always contrived to arrange
the plans of their buildings so that some of the enclosing or

   
 
 
  
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC II

 

dividing walls should act as stays to their vaults,! or else they
resorted to the methods before noticed of employing such

j
BZ
]

;

A

 

FIG. 4.

vast thickness of wall as to secure stability by sheer inertia
of material.

The Romanesque builders went a step farther in the
development of the buttress, in accordance with their
general progress in the art of construction. They at first
placed a pilaster strip on the outside of the wall against
the pressure that was to be met, treating it as a
distinct functional member (Fig. 5). It is true that the
Romans had employed en-
gaged columns in the sam
positions, but they had of
ployed them for a decorative
purpose only. And even in
early Romanesque construc-
tions the pilaster strip had a
little-more than a decorative. =
value. It did, indeed, stiffen
the wall somewhat, — this
was the reason for its use,
the walls of Romanesque buildings not having the great
thickness that was common in Roman walls,—but it had
not projection enough to bear much vault pressure. It had,
however, rarely to meet such pressure, except in the aisles

 

FIG. 5.

1 See August Choisy, L’Art de Batir chez les Romains, p. 93; et seq.
12 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

 

 

where the vaults were of no great span. But though it was

of slight efficiency in vaulted constructions, it yet had great

value as marking the place where, in such constructions,
\ additional strength was required by the walls. And in the
later Romanesque, as vaulting be-
came more general, the pilaster
strip was developed into a true
buttress (Fig. 6).

A beginning was made in the
direction of further progress when
the Romanesque builders began to
vault their naves. It was then
found that the pilaster buttress
against the clerestory wall was not
enough to stay vaults of so much
wider span than those of the aisles
for which a buttress like that shown
in Fig. 6 had been adequate. Ex-
pedients to augment the resistance
of the clerestory buttress were

accordingly resorted to which were destined ultimately to-—
yield unforeseen results.

In the Abbaye-aux-Hommes at Caen the forms of the
vaults—which date from the early part of the twelfth century,
and are among the earliest that were constructed over a nave—
were such as to exert powerful thrusts. That is to say, the
arches of their groins were curves of low sweep, such as the
Romanesque builders had derived from Roman intersecting
vaults, and consequently of enormous push. To stay these

_ vaults the expedient was adopted of constructing demi-barrel
vaults, springing from the top of the aisle walls, and abutting
against the wall of the nave under the aisle roofs (Fig. 7).
These demi-vaults were in reality concealed continuous flying
buttresses. But they were flying buttresses of bad form,
for only a small part of their strength met the thrusts of the
vaults, the rest being exerted against the walls, between the
piers, where no props were required, and where their effect
would have been disastrous had not these walls been of
excessive massiveness. The level of the abutment was,
moreover, so low that it failed to meet the points where
the thrusts were greatest. The precise chronological sequence

 
1 DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 13

 

of buildings in which the successive improvements on this
mode of buttressing were made cannot be traced. But an
illustration of the next step is afforded by the Abbaye-aux-
Dames (Fig. 8), which seems to have been vaulted somewhat
later than the Abbaye-aux-Hommes.! In this case, instead of

 

FIG. 7.

a continuous arch, or demi-vault, springing from the aisle
wall, separate arches were established, springing from the
aisle walls opposite the piers, and abutting against the
piers only, where the thrusts of the vaults were gathered.
But these arches still fell too low to be wholly effectual, and
as the precaution was not taken to reinforce the buttresses |
of the aisle walls the supports have yielded, and the original |

1 See LiZglise S*® Trinité et LP Egtise St Etienne & Caen. Par V. Ruprich-
Robert. Caen, 1864.
i
1

14 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

vaults have been destroyed. But the same arrangement
may be seen in the nave of the Cathedral of Durham
where the original vaults remain. Their duration, however, is
owing to the enormous massiveness of the construction rather
than to the form of the support, which of itself is inadequate.
Hence, though an important improvement was attempted in
these instances, a satisfactory solution of the problem of the

 

FIG, 8.

buttress was not yet reached. The abutting arches of the
Abbaye-aux-Dames and of Durham are indeed true flying
buttresses, but they have not the character of such members
in Gothic architecture, inasmuch as they are ill adjusted
and are not externally apparent.

An advance of no less importance than this buttress
development and an integral part of the growing system
was the employment of independent arches, or ribs along
the lines of the groins, projecting below the vault surfaces
and in a measure sustaining them. Here, as in the case of
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 15

 

the buttress, the Romans had employed a kindred principle,
though in a most rudimentary way. They had constructed
a framework of masonry to give strength to their vaults,’
‘put with them this framework was buried in the thickness
of the masonry instead of projecting from, or even appear-
ing upon, its surface. It consequently failed to possess the
important use of the rib system we are now considering,
which, being quite independent of the vaults, -serves as a
“strong centring, and prevents any rupture that may by any
chance take place in one cell or compartment of the vault,
from_ communicating ‘itself to others. In addition to this,
“the employment of an independent support for each rib and
arch to be carried—which constitutes the functional group-
ing of supports above spoken of—completed the structural
improvements devised by the Romanesque builders.

Weare yet far from the Gothic system. The inert prin-
ciple of construction, the massive walls, the small apertures,
and the horizontal lines of this Romanesque architecture
make it still closely akin to the old Roman style. But
there are rudiments in it already quickening with latent life,
which will completely transform the Romanesque building.
The evolution of the Gothic system consisted in gradually
perfecting the the rudimentary skeleton, so as to make it an
independent st structure. To every part.a complete and inde-
“pendent working ‘efficiency was-to be given, and. an_appro-
priate artistic,as well as a mechanical value. All this was
rendered possible to a far greater degree than it could
otherwise have been by the introduction or the pointed arch,
not as an ornamental feature in doors and windows; but as
a constructive device in vaulting.

~~ The properties of the pointed arch which enabled the
Gothic builders to overcome difficulties in vaulting that had

than the round arch, and that with a . given. span its ¢ crown,
may be 1 made- toreach any level. Its employment in the
transverse arches of the vault raised their crowns so that,
with arches of full semicircular sweep for the diagonals, the
thrusts were greatly diminished. The vaulting of oblong
compartments had before been attended with difficulties
resulting from the fact that the height of the crown of a

1 See Choisy, LD Art de Batir ches les Romains.
16 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

semicircular arch is determined by its span. In vaults over
oblong compartments the crowns of the round arches which

spanned the narrow sides would not reach the level of those
which spanned the longer

< sides. While if full semi-
x _ circular arches were used
: J

 

b \ for the diagonals of such

vaults their crowns would

= reach highest of all. Thus

as i in Fig. 9 the height cd

of the arch acé is less
than fe, the height of the
¢ J arch a fg, which again is
less than 7, the height
of the arch az7, A vault
constructed upon such a
f system of arches must
have an excessively domed
form. To obviate this, in
part, the expedient was adopted of stilting the narrow arches.
The point of their springing was raised to a level consider-
ably above the springing of the greater arches, so as to
bring all the crowns nearer to the same height, and thus to
reduce the amount of doming required. But even with this
odification a vault over an oblong compartment, upon a
system of round arched ribs, is excessively heavy, exerts
powerful thrusts, and presents an awkward appearance. Ob-
long groined vaults, though sometimes constructed, were
therefore usually avoided by the Romanesque builders,
‘who, indeed, had rarely vaulted their naves, the portion of
_ the building where, in North-Western Europe, oblong com-
. partments most frequently occur. They contented them-
selves with vaulting the aisles whose compartments were
commonly square, and where groined vaults, on round arches,
were easily constructed and easily rendered secure.!
The introduction of the pointed arch, however, obviated
these difficulties. It now became possible to construct

 

 

 

T
'
1
1
1
+
1
1
1
'
'
'
'
'
‘

FIG. 9.

! In Germany the Romanesque builders avoided the difficulties referred to in
the text by planning their buildings with square compartments in both nave and
aisles. One bay of the nave embraced, in this system, two bays of the aisles,
This form, which is of Lombard origin, is the usual form in the Rhenish churches
of the twelfth century. .
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 17

 

groined vaults over oblong compartments ‘without either
doming or stilting, since the crowns of all the arches could
be readily brought to
the same level what-
‘ever their differences
“of span (Fig, He,
—-But~ it~, im-
portant to Baars
that, in true Gothic,
oblong vaults are
never constructed
upon ribs which all
spring from the same
level, and whose
crowns all reach the
same height. Other
exigencies, which will
be explained in the
next chapter, stood in the way of so constructing them.
True Gothic vaults are always, to some extent, both stilted
anid domed. But “though full advantage of the pointed arch,
in affording any height with any span, could not be taken,
its introduction was a great help, and it gave a powerful
stimulus to constructive invention.
_ With the reduced thrust of the vault, secured by the

  

 

 

FIG, Io.

much reduced, and new Ww experiments ‘soon_led to their better
adjustment._ _The flying buttresses were brought to bear
more directly upon ‘the points of greatest pressure, which
were found to be at a higher level than those upon which the
abutting arches of the Abbaye-aux-Dames and of Durham
Cathedral had been brought to bear. In order to reach
these points it was necessary to make the flying buttresses
spring over the aisle roofs, and thus to become marked ex-
ternal features—as in St. Remy at Reims, St. Leu d’Esserent,
St. Germain des Prés at Paris, and a few other early Gothic
monuments which still retain their original flying buttresses.
The vault ribs and the vaults themselves were now also
made lighter. And finally the ribs were more closely grouped
at their springing—being made to interpenetrate, more
or less, by which means the pressures were concentrated to
Cc
18 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

the utmost, while the sustaining shafts and piers, for which
the best materials were selected, were reduced to a minimum
f thickness. As this development of an independent frame-
ork progressed, the intervening walls, now no longer needed
or the stability of the fabric, were also reduced in thickness ;
and the small apertures of the Romanesque style gave place
to larger openings, which were gradually more and more en-
larged until they filled the entire space between the supports.
The general form and constructive features of a developed
Gothic building may be summarised as follows :—

1. The plan consists of a nave, the eastern portion of
which forms the choir, with side aisles, sometimes
single and sometimes double, and a transept,
usually also with aisles. The nave and choir
terminate at the east, almost invariably, in either a
semicircle or a polygon, around which the aisles
are continued. At the west the termination is
square, the aisles at this end terminating in towers.
‘The nave is separated from the aisles, and the aisles
when double are separated from each other, by
-rows of piers which support the ‘superstructure.
The whole is enclosed, on the ground-story, by a

_ thin wall beyond which, opposite the piers, are the

-\far projecting and massive buttresses.

2. The vaults, whose plan and construction determine
the number and arrangement of the piers and
buttresses, are furnished with a complete set of ribs
—namely, transverse ribs, diagonal ribs, and
longitudinal ribs... These ribs are independent
arches, of which the transverse and longitudinal
( Ones are pointed, while the diagonals are usually
_round ; and upon them the vault masonry simply
rests—the one never being incorporated with the
other.

1 T call the rib which runs parallel with the long axis of the building the longi-
tudinal rib, rather than by its common English name—wall rib—because in true
Gothic there are no walls enclosing the ends of the vault compartments. The
three ribs named in the text—transverse, diagonal, and longitudinal—are the only
constructive ribs of any vault, hence they may be said to constitute a complete rib
system. The additional ribs, Zéernes, ticrcerons, ete., which appear in the later
forms of vaulting, more especially in England, are mere surface ribs having no

real function. The employment of such ribs may be considered a sign of misap-
prehension of Gothic principles,
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 19

 

3. The ribs spring from slender shafts, compactly
grouped, and often detached, though having their
bases and capitals incorporated with the great
piers which rise from the pavement, through the
successive stories, to the nave cornice. Each one
of these piers is a compound member consisting
of a central body, with which are incorporated all
the vaulting shafts, besides the columns which carry
the pier arches on the ground-story, and those
above which carry the arches of the triforium, and
finally the buttress of the clerestory. Upon the
piers are concentrated all the side pressures of the
vaults, but these side pressures are so neutralised
by the buttressing that the piers require only to be
massive enough to bear the weight of the vaults.

4. The clerestory buttresses, which receive the thrusts of
the nave vaults, are reinforced by flying buttresses
springing over the aisle roofs, and rising from the
vast outer buttresses, which are incorporated with
the respond piers of the aisles.

5. The walls, required for enclosure only, are reduced to
a minimum of thickness, and are confined to the
ground-story, and to the spandrels of the arcades.
The apertures fill the whole space laterally between
the piers.

It will thus be seen that the full development of the
Gothic system is brought out only where the plan of the
building includes a central nave and side aisles. It was in
such buildings that the system was evolved. The principle of
the prop or brace, which the flying buttress embodies, as con-
trasted with the inert stay, which the solid Romanesque buttress
embodies, is one of the most fecund principles of Gothic con-
struction. By its use, in connection with that of the pointed
arch in the ribs of the vault, is the Gothic attenuation of
supports rendered possible. A single-aisled building, like the
Sainte Chapelle of Paris, or the Chapel of St. Germer, may,
indeed, be strictly Gothic as far as it goes. For it may, as
these buildings do, consist of a completely functional skeleton,
though not a highly organised one, upon which everything
else depends. When the system was once developed in
20 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

buildings of three or more aisles, it was natural to employ a
simpler form of it in the construction of buildings of simpler
plan. But it is unlikely that architecture like that of the
Sainte Chapelle would ever have come into being had
buildings of so simple plan only been required. It was

ythe need of vast stone-roofed churches, such as could not

' be constructed without aisles, that stimulated the genius of the
Gothic builders, and led to the remarkable results that fill us
to-day with wonder and admiration.

Such is the structural character of Gothic architecture.
But it was not in constructive invention alone that the genius
of its builders found expression. Before the time of Gothic art,
a genuine artistic aptitude,—an aptitude which found expres-
sion in graphic and plastic, no less than in constructive art, had
been manifested in the Northern genius. But the painting
and sculpture of the Northman were at first rude and uncouth,
often extremely so; and_ this rudeness hasbeen widely
held to characterise Gothic art also. But rudeness is by no
means a characteristic of Gothic, which is not a product of
unmixed Northern genius. For, by the time that Gothic
architecture had begun to take form, the mingling of races,
that had long been going on, had produced, in-the—tocality
where this art first appeared, a people in whose constitution
were happily blended some of the finest characteristics of
the Latin and Germanic stocks. It was this people who
developed the Gothic style and gave to its marvellous con-
structive system an equally new and appropriate system of
adornment. Gothic art is not an art of barbarians, as the
pseudo-classicists of the Renaissance would have us suppose.
It is far otherwise. It is the art of that civilised people
which grew up, through generations of conflict-and mutual
interchange of thought, out of the fusion of Northern and
Southern blood. This fusion produced a superior artistic
race,—a race in which the genius of the North supplied an
active imagination and a daring spirit of invention, while
that of the South supplied a disciplined feeling for beauty
and the traditions of ancient art.

The artistic genius of the Gothic builders showed itself
not only in the proportions! of the great masses and com-

' Though they wrought with a fine sense of proportion, there is, I think, no
reason to suppose that the medieval architects were governed by mathematical
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 21

 

ponent details of their monuments, but in the wealth of
sculpture and painting with which they adorned them. Both
of these arts were employed as auxiliaries; but it was
sculpture rather than painting that received the highest
development. Not that the Gothic artists had less aptitude
for painting. Traces enough of their painting, and a vast
wealth of manuscript designs, remain to show their capacity
in this direction. But painting could hardly reach any
full development in connection with a system of archi-
tecture which presented so little wall space whereon to paint,
and which so strictly required, in the auxiliary arts, an
absolute subjection to architectural expression. The art of
producing brilliantly-coloured designs in glass to fill the
vast openings of the new architecture was, indeed, a kind of
painting, which the Gothic artists made peculiarly their own,

and developed magnificently. But a twofold convention,
that of architectural fitness on the one hand, and the far-
reaching one growing out of the translucent medium on the
other, limited this art to the strictest heraldic conditions.
The dazzling brilliancy, too, of stained glass designs was
overpowering to the effect of painting on an opaque surface.
And hence, except in a subordinate kind of decoration,
strong in colour, and heightened by gilding—like the borders
of the pages of an illuminated manuscript—on small spaces
and slender shafts, and even on sculpture, there was little
call for the exercise of this branch of the painter’s skill.

But sculpture did not require broad surfaces, and its effect
within the building was not injured by the brilliancy of
coloured glass, while on the exterior it was the most effective
kind of enrichment. It was appropriate just where painting
was not. Capitals, string-courses, archivolts, etc., all admitted
and even called for enrichment by sculpture. The art of
sculpture, accordingly, became, in Gothic architecture, an in-
separable auxiliary, and almost an integral part of the fabric.

formulas of proportion to any such extent as writers like Mr. Penrose, for
instance, have maintained. The tendency to consider such formulas as essential
to an artist dates from Vitruvius, and has been widely misleading. The formulas
of Vitruvius are mechanical and arbitrary. Whatever their value for purposes of
analysis, they have an inferior part in creative performance. For an artist, in his
creative processes, works by an intuitive sense of laws of which he can be, at
most, but partially conscious. He often transcends, and frequently even violates,
the scientific formulas. Hence Bacon’s remark: ‘‘ There is no excellent beauty,
that hath not some strangeness in the proportion.”
GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

i)
wn

In this sculpture a singular correspondence with the
spirit of the Gothic construction is manifest. As there is a
living expression in the constructive system which dis-
tinguishes it from all other systems, so is there an expression
of vitality in this Gothic sculpture which distinguishes it
from all other sculpture. A fine appreciation of the life
of natural organic forms, from which they largely drew
their motives for ornament, is displayed by the Gothic
carvers, and displayed in an unparalleled degree. Whether
in mere ornament—the enrichment of capitals, the running
patterns of string-courses, the vowssoirs of archivolts,—or in
figure or animal sculpture, this expression of life is alike
conspicuous. It is true that in all good ornamental sculpture
of the previous schools of art a greater or less degree
of vitality had been expressed. Most Greek ornament,
though severely conventional, owes its beauty to these living
qualities of lines and surfaces. And in Greek, no less than
in Gothic sculpture, these living qualities arise from a
greater or less conformity with the characteristics of form in
natural things. There may not have been, in the mind of
the Greek carver when designing his ornament, any conscious
reference to nature; but that the lines and surfaces of the
best Greek ornaments possess, however abstractly, a degree
of conformity with those of natural things will hardly be
questioned. The profile of the Doric capital, the Ionic
volute, and the acanthus foliage of the Corinthian capital are
conspicuous instances ; but in Gothic ornament this expres-
sion of life is more distinctly marked. In it the reference to
nature is more distinct, more direct, and more systematic,
than had ever before been the case. Even a likeness to
individual species of vegetation soon makes its appearance
in the growing style; and an extensive range of flora—
answering, in some cases, to that of the locality in which the
work was wrought—is used to adorn the Gothic building.
But the life derived from nature which appears in Gothic
sculpture is no more an independent development than
is the constructive system. The elements of Gothic
ornament may almost all be traced back to the arts of
antiquity. These antique elements were taken up by the
Romanesque designers, at first in a spirit of coarse and
ormal imitation, but finally with truer feeling which gave
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 23

 

rise to a renewed animation and to extensive variation of
types, by which the way was prepared for the further modifica-
tions of the Gothic artists, in whose hands they receive a
living character, varied by a fertility of invention, altogether
without precedent.

In connection with the qualities of vitality and likeness
to nature, must be noticed the conventional character that
coexists with them in Gothic design. This conventional
character is a result, in part of the traditional elements on
which their art was based, and in part also of the native
feeling of the designers, who well understood that the
difference between nature and art, especially in architecture,
is one that ought never to be lost sight of. In its integrity
Gothic art does not permit the limits of architectural propriety
to be overstepped by imitative realisation. It is conventional
in the strictest and truest sense ; but it is never arbitrarily so.
Its convention is the natural result of obedience to the
limitations imposed by position, material, and architectural
fitness. It is only in the decline of Gothic—a decline that
sets in much earlier than has been commonly supposed—that
anything like direct imitation of nature appears.

Throughout the period of its integrity the traditional
principles of ornamentation are retained. They are often,
indeed, applied in such new ways as almost to lose their
identity; but they are never thrown aside. The ancient
principles of ornamental design, the ancient grammatical
forms of expression, are of universal propriety because they
are based upon fundamental, and therefore authoritative,
laws of relation and quantity. The combinations of
elements may be endlessly varied, but the ruling principles
may never be superseded.

And superseded they never are in true Gothic. Gothic
sculpture being, as I have already said, like Gothic construc-
tion, an evolution out of older elements, it bears, through its
whole duration, distinct traces of them. Thus in Amiens
Cathedral there are string-courses adorned with running
ornaments, the disposition of whose parts recalls the egg and
dart design of the Greeks. Others are based upon the
various conventional meanders and scrolls of classic design.
But instead of the abstract forms of the antique details we
have the generic types, and even many of the individual
24 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

peculiarities of natural leaves and flowers. In the one

motive a rounded foliate or floral boss answers to the ovate
member of the ancient scheme, while a tendril with lateral
leaves answers to the dart. In the others the meander or
scroll is a living branch, into the spaces enclosed by the
wavy or convoluted lines of which grow, as if of their own
volition, leaves and fruits, giving place at happy intervals to
fluttering birds, or springing, crouching, or reposing animals.

Everything is designed organically. Leaves and buds
spring from growing stems, fruits depend naturally from
their branches, animals live and leap. In this respect
Gothic ornament is in striking contrast to what we find in
the so-called revived classic art, where natural objects are
treated inorganically, where fruits and flowers are represented
as tied up into bunches, or are hung in formal festoons, and
where even artificial objects enter largely, as leading elements,
into the decorative composition. Everywhere in Gothic art
is life, but life ordered by and obedient to the require-
ments of architectural congruity, so that the resulting
conventional character becomes as conspicuous as the living
naturalism. More life and abstract natural beauty it is
hardly conceivable that human art could express. A nearer
approach to imitative realisation would violate the nature of
stone and defeat the ends of art. The artist is keenly
appreciative of nature, but he equally perceives the purposes
of his art. In judgment of what to take and what to leave
he is unerring. The springy line and gracefully undulating
surface are caught from nature and wrought into the stubborn
stone; but the designer experiences no embarrassment in
keeping within the limits of what stone can be made rightly
to express.

This living and refined beauty, coexisting with architec-
tural subordination, is as marked in Gothic figure sculpture
as it is in that of the lower forms of ornament. And in
figure sculpture, no less than in lower ornament, there are
marked signs of Greek influence and kinship.’ This shall

1 Nor is it impossible, in some measure, to account for this; though fully to
trace the lines of connection might be difficult. The Greek elements in Gothic
sculpture have been noticed, though not exhaustively treated, by M. Viollet-le-
Duc. It ought to be made the subject of a special treatise by some competent
writer, To treat the subject justly would require both scholarship and trained
artistic facully—such as are rarely united in the same individual.
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 25

 

be further considered, though it cannot be adequately treated,
in future pages. It is enough here to remark that all of
those fundamental principles of design which characterise the
finest plastic art-of Greece—such as organic composition,
‘breadth of masses, refined flexures of surfaces, quiet grace of
contours, moderation of curvature in figures and draperies, and
“general dignity of pose and gesture—are constantly present in
the works of the Gothic carvers. While in addition to these
qualities there are in Gothic figure sculpture the same adapta-
tion to position, and the same subjection to architectural
effect, that we find in foliate ornament. And herein consists
largely the difference, in so far as treatment is concerned,
between Greek and Gothic design. Sculpture as an inde-
es :
pendent art ‘reached a higher perfection in Ancient Greece
and in Renaissance Italy. But as an architectural auxiliary
there is no sculpture comparable to Gothic. Nor is Gothic
sculpture rendered altogether inferior as sculpture by this
subordination. On the contrary, this stern subjection brings
out some of the grandest qualities that sculpture can attain.
It enforces the omission of all that is trivial, and gives
emphasis to what is significant and important.As instances
of Gothic sculpture in which these qualities are especially
marked may be mentioned, the statues of the west portals of
Chartres, the bas-relief of the Assumption of the Virgin on
the lintel of the main portal of the Cathedral of Senlis—to
be more fully noticed when we come to treat of French
sculpture,—and the statue of the Virgin in the portal of the
north transept of the Cathedral of Paris.

It should be noticed also that there is in Gothic sculp-
ture a structural fitness wherever occasion calls for it—
as, for instance, in the corbelled projections which support
the wide abaci of capitals. It is remarkable that a high
degree of beauty often appears to result from such structural
adaptation. Indeed, the beauty of the finest Gothic capitals
is largely due to the forms which adapt them to their
functions, and render them to the eye, as well as in reality,
strong and efficient working members. With this functional
form of the main mass every detail of ornament appears to
act in sympathy, though it be only in the direction of its
lines. There is an expression of upward impulse in the
endlessly varied Corinthianesque foliation of the Gothic
26 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE cuar.

 

capital which carries out the principle of bearing up so
emphatically marked in the bell. And to this the graceful
reverse curves of the helices only add value by contrast.
It is noticeable that’ in Gothic of the best character the
sculpture of functional members is not such as to disguise
their general contours. The bell of the capital, for instance,
is never so much cut away or so loaded with projections
\_as to injure the main mass.

. This life and this beauty, based upon logical principle,
extend through the entire Gothic system ; and in nothing are
they more marked than in the profiles of mouldings. The
profiles of string-courses, for instance, which in the Roman-
esque style retain the level upper line peculiar to antique
mouldings, and suitable to a southern climate, are in the
Gothic gradually changed to a form in which the level line
gives place to a steep sloping line which sheds water.
quickly, and is hence adapted to the stormy climate’ of the
North. This steep right line is associated with curves of
varying flexure beneath, forming simple and _ effective
mouldings enriched in the sheltered hollows by sculpture.
These profiles assume a great variety of forms, while they
never fail to exhibit graceful lines and proportions. In
capitals and bases a subtle sense of function and of beauty
is always conspicuous, though these forms also are of
endless variety. The profile of the capital is made up of
lines that are adapted in all their parts, as they are not in
any other style, at once to the shaft which the capital
crowns, and to the load which it carries. The base also—
almost always some modification of the Attic type—is
equally admirable in its profile, giving, with artful grace,
real and apparent stability to the shaft. Indeed, there is
hardly a more beautiful thing in Gothic art than one of
these base profiles. The proportions of its parts, the use of
contrasting angles, and especially the character of the curve
of the lower torus, are unsurpassed, if indeed they are
equalled by any of the mouldings of antiquity.

In a definition of Gothic architecture none but the
truest form of the art properly concerns us, The many
offshoots, imitations, and modifications of Gothic, which
subsequently sprang up in different parts of Europe, often
no doubt possess great interest, and even sometimes great
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 27

 

beauty, but they do not afford us a true illustration of the
Gothic style. This truest form of Gothic, that which alone
is really Gothic, or, in other words, really a new and con-
sistent style, differing fundamentally in both its structural
and decorative systems from all other styles, is, it may as
well be said here, native to France only. Hence upon the
Gothic of France our definition is necessarily founded.

This Gothic art, like every other great art, was, in its
completeness, of short duration. After a considerable period
of preparation and germination, a period during which the
Romanesque— first in Lombardy, and afterwards in Nor-
mandy—had been reaching out more and more after new
principles, a combination of happy conditions conspired gradu-
ally to bring it into full and fair being. Early in the twelfth ,
century was brought about in Northern Gaul that fine
balance of ethnologic, religious, social, and political in-
fluences of which the development of Gothic architecture
is among the happiest results. But with the quickly
succeeding disturbance of this nice adjustment of conditions ;
the character of the art gradually changed, and a course of
decline became inevitable and rapid. If we would truly
know Gothic art we must study it in the vigour of its
early life. Its characteristics in this state are what I have
attempted briefly to describe, and shall, in the course of
the succeeding chapters, endeavour more fully to illustrate.

The edifice which chiefly stimulated Gothic invention
was the cathedral—the leading object at once of popular,
municipal, and ecclesiastic enthusiasm. In it were centred
all the most potent and active interests, religious and social ;
and the best genius of the time was expended upon it.
The-cathedral church especially was the outgrowth of the
growing freedom from monastic and feudal oppression, “and
an expression of monarchical and communal organisation, as
well as of religious faith and aspiration. So close, at this
time, was the connection between things civil and religious
that popular monuments could not fail to partake of the
nature of both. History affords no parallel to the spirit
which gave rise to the Gothic cathedral. The nearest
approach to it was that which produced the Greek temple.
Both were conditions of intense popular enthusiasm engag-
ing with religious ardour in the construction and adornment
28 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

of monuments for public benefit and enjoyment. It was
the cathedral, the largest, the most comprehensive, and the
most popular form of Christian church, that brought out the
full development of Gothic architecture.

Nevertheless, the first steps of change from Romanesque
to Gothic were taken before the great cathedral movement
set in. They were taken in the monastic churches, and
with them the study of this change must begin.

The vast new impulse in building which, in the eleventh
century, extended all over Christian Europe, assumed a
peculiar and potent character with the religious orders of
the North. In Italy, while buildings of great extent and
magnificence, such as the Cathedral of Pisa, were at this
time begun, no new system was foreshadowed in their
construction, no new principle was introduced. Italian
art, excepting always that of Lombardy—which was not an
outcome of native genius,—was, in the eleventh century, as
strictly classic in principle as that of Christian Rome had
been in the fifth. But north of the Alps, or rather north of
the Loire, a new style of architecture was in process of de-
velopment. The monastic orders of the North, less | given than
those of the South to seclusion, contemplation, and inaction,
became very energetic builders. With them, at this time,
mutual intercourse and interchange of ideas were general, a
spirit of invention was active, and constructive enterprise
was astir in all directions! The immunity from pillage
which the monastic establishments had enjoyed during the
most troubled times had enabled them to accumulate wealth
which, together with their enlarged relations with the
masses of the people, suggested the need of more ample
and more elegant accommodations. The churches of former
times seemed poor and unworthy, and their rebuilding on a
more extended and more magnificent scale became frequent.

These monasteries had early taken every means to
qualify large bodies of men to practise the arts. They had
organised and maintained schools where art and science
were taught—where architecture, sculpture, and painting
were cultivated under the guidance of traditions which

1 The monastic buildings were not only planned, and the work on them
directed by the monks, but they were also, in many cases, largely constructed
with their own hands. See Lenoir’s Architecture A/onastique, p. 36, ct sey.
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 29

 

regulated the forms of production, while they yet left
some scope for the free play of new ideas. Under these
conditions were made the first attempts to employ the
pointed arch constructively in vaulting, and to infuse a new
character into the old forms of ornament by ingrafting upon
them motives derived from a more independent outlook into
the world of nature. These monastic experiments were often
awkward and unsuccessful, but each one of them suggested
further improvements which were quickly undertaken ; and
however imperfect were the results reached, their animat-
ing spirit was always admirable.

But the monasteries, active and ingenious as were their
inmates, were not the sources whence were to issue the
most potent ideas and influences. The development of the
Gothic system was not to be the work of the monk. There
were limits to the freedom that might be exercised under
the shadows of the cloister; and the architectural require-
ments of monastic routine and ceremonial were of com-
paratively narrow range. A freer spirit of enterprise, a,

wider experience of life, and a more majestic service were |

needed to call into activity the highest powers of invention,
and fully to develop the genius of the Middle Ages. Yet
there are few things more interesting, more instructive, or
more beautiful in human history than the way in which
these early cowled builders struggled against difficulties
and disadvantages, and laid the foundations of an art which

was, in the stronger hands of their lay successors, to cul-

minate in the perfections of Chartres and Amiens.

One further point must be noticed, namely, that the
architecture of the Middle Ages not only reached its highest
perfection in the cathedrals, but that it was, in the strictest
sense, an architecture of churches only,—that is to say, it
was in church edifices only that the style was completely
developed. The forms and features which were first brought
into being in the church were afterwards applied, as far as they
were suitable, to such civil, military, and domestic buildings
as had any architectural character; but in such buildings
there was no independent development. Broadly speaking,
this has always been so. Architecture, inspired by religious
faith and designed for religious uses, has ever preceded that
designed for secular purposes, and has largely determined the
30 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

character of secular building. We are apt to forget that the
leading architecture of the Egyptians was that of the temple;
that almost the only architecture of the Greeks was that of
their temples; that all the best elements of classic Roman
architecture were borrowed from Greek temples; that the
civil architecture of the Middle Ages was that of the churches
modified to meet civil needs ; and that the original elements |
of modern architecture were developed in ancient temples ©
and in medizeval churches.

Finally, the close connection that in all times of living
art exists between the work of the hand and the ideas and
emotions of the mind is pre-eminently displayed in the art
we are considering. So much is this the case that not only
is the stamp of thought and feeling impressed upon every
fragment of sculpture in the manner that we have already
moticed, but more than this, the church edifice was like a
vast open page whereon were written in imagery, which the
most illiterate could read, the sacred legends and traditions
‘of the common faith. These legends and traditions must be
reckoned first among the sources of inspiration which
stimulated the imaginations and guided the hands of the
artists who wrought upon the fabric. The considerable body
of religious literature that had been produced in the early
Middle Ages called out the warmest sympathies and the
highest aspirations of the people, and filled their minds with
devotion to the fabric whose erection was to be, so far as
they could make it, a fitting expression of their beliefs and
hopes.

In fine then, Gothic architecture may be shortly defined as
a system of construction in which vaulting on an independent
system of ribs is sustained by piers and buttresses whose
equilibrium is maintained by the opposing action of thrust
and counterthrust. This system is adorned by sculpture
whose motives are drawn from organic nature, conven-
tionalised in obedience to architectural conditions, and
governed by the appropriate forms established by ancient
art, supplemented by colour design on opaque ground and
more largely in glass. It is a popular church architecture,
—the product of secular craftsmen working under the
stimulus of national and municipal aspiration and inspired
by religious faith.
I DEFINITION OF GOTHIC 31

I have said that this architecture in all its distinctive
characteristics is native to France and to France only. I
shall endeavour in the following chapters to illustrate this
fact by a detailed examination and comparison of the
pointed architectures of the different countries of Europe,

first as regards their constructive, and afterwards as regards
their decorative systems.
CHAPTER II
GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE

By France in this chapter, and indeed throughout this book,
is meant the France of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries—
that is, the Royal Domain of the Capetian Dynasty and
portions of a few contiguous provinces, chiefly Champagne,
Burgundy, Picardy, Orléanais, and Berry. To this region
the early Gothic movement was confined. Indeed, its
earliest manifestations were circumscribed by even narrower
limits, those, namely, of the Ile-de-France—that is, of the
region of which the larger part is now included in the depart-
ments of the Seine and the Oise.

Though many of the works of this early art have perished,
much yet remains, and the beginning and course of develop-
ment of the new style may, by careful examination and
comparison of the characteristics of existing buildings, be
made out with substantial correctness, though no other
sources of information exist. For such scanty written
records of building as have been preserved are wholly
devoid of information respecting principles and methods
of construction. We are compelled, therefore, to rely upon
independent study of the buildings themselves.

We need not stop to consider the earlier innovations in
buildings in which the round arch alone continues to be em-
ployed—as in the apse of St. Martin des Champs at Paris,
and in the Collegiate Church of Poissy, where the vaulting
compartments are merely separated by transverse ribs,—but
rather begin our investigation of the growth of Gothic in
France, with those monuments in which the pointed arch first
appears as a constructive device in vaulting.
CHAP, II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 33

 

The new principles of construction are first distinctly
and skilfully exemplified in the Abbey Church of St. Denis,
which dates from 1137 to 1141. And the origin of Gothic,
so far as existing monuments exhibit it, is, on the Con-
tinent, now commonly traced to that building only. But the
Abbey Church of Morienval, near Crépy-en- Valois, appears to
anticipate, though in a halting manner, some of the principles
that are carried out so remarkably in St. Denis. This
church, a construction of the eleventh century, has an apse
which dates from the end of the eleventh or the beginning
of the twelfth century, and a rudimentary apsidal aisle
whose vaults have diagonal ribs, pointed archivolts, and
even rudely pointed transverse arches, though of these last
arches one has no rib, while the other has a rudely adjusted
and very heavy round-arched one. The diagram” (Fig. 11)
illustrates the form and construction of one compartment of
these vaults, the one marked a on the reduced plan of the
apse given at A. It will be seen that the narrow archivolt
a, in the plan B, whose elevation is at a’, is both stilted and
pointed, in order to bring its crown up to nearly the same
level as that of the wider spanned round arch 4, whose eleva-
tion is at 4’; and that the transverse arch ¢, situated at 6 in
the plan A, is more acutely pointed for the same reason,
while the transverse arch @ assumes the form of an irregular
ellipse. It is interesting, as showing that constructive exi-
gencies alone here brought about the use of the pointed
arch, to notice further, that the ridges of the longitudinal
cells, g and 4, having to pass through the intersection of the
diagonals, and curving with the form of the apse, bring the
crowns of these transverse arches to one side, rather than

1 Three of these archivolts are pointed, and one is round, there being four
arches in all to the apse arcade. The Report of the ‘‘ Congrés Archéologique de
France” for the year 1877 thus alludes to this apse: ‘‘ Nous voudrions aussi
dégager de l’époque ogival certains églises ot, malgré l’ogive et méme la nervure,
on trouve dans les moulures, dans les colonnes ou dans quelques dispositions
générales, des formes qui rappellent par trop encore soit le XI° siecle, soit les
premiers rudiments de la transition. Le chceur de l’église de Morienval mérite
a cet égard d’étre cité tout le premier: la nervure et l’ogive avaient été fort
peu pratiquées lorsqu’il fut construit, et peut-étre, ou plutdt selon toute probabilité,
c’est 14 que les habitants du Valois virent pour la premiere fois ces germes fécunds.
dun nouvel art de batir.”

2 I am indebted for this diagram to Mr. G. F. Newton, who kindly took
the pains to go for me from Paris to Morienval, and secure the data which my
own notes had not fully included.

D
34 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

over the centres of their bases, and thus give unequal
curvature to their sides. This would hardly have been
tolerated had it been merely a preference for the form of the
pointed arch which determined its use. These awkward
arches are so plainly the result of a groping struggle with
the difficulties of vaulting a curved oblong space, that they
seem to show beyond question that the pointed arch was not
introduced as an admired form, but that it came unsought

 

 

FIG, Il,

in the course of constructive experiment. The interest of
this vault lies chiefly in what it exhibits of experiment in the
application of new principles as yet but feebly apprehended.
This groping procedure is shown again in the forms given
to the plans of the diagonal ribs which are curved instead
of being straight, in order, in some measure, to avoid the
extreme one-sided position of the ridges of the longitudinal
cells, which must pass through their intersection, and also to
avoid, in some measure, the excessive inequality of the sides
of the transverse arches. By this means, too, the inequality
of magnitude in the transverse cells, e and f, is in some
W GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 35

 

degree lessened. The perspective elevation of this vault is
shown in Fig. 12.)

Incomplete and awkward as is the system adopted at
Morienval, we have here a form of vault construction

     
  

   
 
 
 

  

f=.

ATI AQ feria

i ce ‘i id f. jl

1" ) \ % ff k 2)
. - o\

’ i ey
‘A. i fy
Wor al Hea hy

ih
cass

saree vy)
a

such as had been before unknown; a form which, though
imperfectly carried out, already contains some of the most
characteristic structural features, and involves some of the

1 This figure is copied from a drawing by M. Boesviswald, architect of the
French Government, and published with his permission.
36 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

most important principles of the Gothic vault. The apse
of Morienval, therefore, rather than that of St. Denis, must
be regarded as the first step known to us on the way to the -
Gothic style. The full value and far-reaching consequences
of what was here rudely accomplished were, indeed, not yet
recognised ; but everything was sure in time to follow on
such a beginning.

Between Morienval and St. Denis no intermediate steps
in the line of progress can now be traced. Yet it would
seem that such must have existed; for not only does St.
Denis show a consistent advance in the direction that had
been indicated at Morienval, but the mastery of the new
principles, the skill of execution, and the comparative light-
ness and elegance of the work, are such, that it is hard to
believe so much could have been accomplished at a single
stride.

Of the work wrought under Suger at St. Denis the greater
part has been destroyed; but the aisles of the choir and
apse and the apsidal chapels remain in excellent condition.
The construction is on a much larger scale than that of
Morienval, and in place of the rudimentary apsidal aisle we
have here amply developed double aisles to both apse and
choir—foreshadowing the vast and magnificent aisles of Paris,
Chartres, and Amiens,—whose vaults show no sign of hesita-
tion and little executive imperfection. They are furnished
with a full system of sustaining ribs, of which the transverse
and longitudinal ones are pointed. The diagonals are round
arches, and project vigorously, effectually strengthening the
groins. Their intersection is far above the crowns of the
enclosing arches, and the cells are thus necessarily much
domed.’ Here, for the first time among existing monu-
ments, does the rib system wholly determine the forms and
constitute the strength of the vaults. The architect of
St. Denis was a master of the principles involved in his
scheme. His complex plan is carried out in all its details
with astonishing sureness.2. In the curved compartments of
the apsidal aisle, for instance, the difficulty’ which in Morienval

1 More or less doming is a constant characteristic of French-Gothic vaults.
The courses of masonry, from rib to rib, are all distinctly arched, and the ridges
of the cells are consequently arched also, even in Amiens Cathedral.

* See Viollet-le-Duc, Dict. s.c, Trait, p. 201, et se

ie g.3 and Voute, pp. 503-
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 37

 

led to the one-sided form of the transverse arches, is over-
come by the application of the new principle that the forms
and arrangements of the ribs shall determine those of cells.
Thus an equal-sided pointed arch spans the end of the com-
partment, and the
ridge of the cell is
made to meet its
crown. Moreover,
the unequal dimen-
sions of the trans-
verse cells, which the
vault of Morienval
exhibits, is largely
avoided by disposing
the opposite branches
of each diagonal rib,
so that in plan they
meet at an angle,
thus bringing the in-
tersection of the diagonals in the centre of the compartment
(Fig. 13). The difficulties of vaulting a structure of such
plan by any of the older methods of vaulting were very
considerable, and when accomplished, the result was neces-
sarily very unsightly. For the varying dimensions of the
spans to be arched over inevitably occasioned either most
awkward differences of level in the springing of the arches,
or else equally awkward differences in the elevations of
their crowns. But by the use of the pointed arch, which
readily adjusts itself to any span without a change in height,
such a plan is easily vaulted, and with beautiful rather than
unsightly effect.

The original arcade piers of the choir and sanctuary? do
not exist, the piers having been reconstructed, together
with the high vaults, in the thirteenth century; but the
shafts which divide the aisles remain unchanged. They
are monoliths of slender proportions, though heavy enough
for their work, which is considerable. They taper a little
and have a slight entasis—a lingering characteristic of
ancient art which appears also in several other early Gothic
buildings. Their capitals are considerably advanced towards

FIG, 13.

1 The sanctuary is the semicircular part of the choir.
38 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

Gothic form by spreading to receive, upon an ample abacus
surface, the threefold load of transverse, longitudinal, and
diagonal ribs. It is to be regretted that we have now no
means of ascertaining what were the forms of the choir
vaults and what was their system of supports. The bases
of the piers of the sanctuary are all that remain of this
system, which was, however, there can be little doubt,
substantially like that of the nearly contemporaneous
structures presently to be noticed.

In Morienval and St. Denis we have, then, the Gothic
principle of vaulting in its inception and in its earliest com-
plete character, as displayed in ground-story vaults of
small dimensions. The next examples show the nature of
the early vaults and vaulting systems on a larger scale.

It is impossible to be precise in chronological sequence,
but the Cathedrals of Senlis and of Noyon must, it would
seem, have followed very soon after Suger’s work at St. Denis.
They are beyond doubt nearly contemporaneous buildings,
and M. Vitet has shown’ that the early portions of the exist-
ing Cathedral of Noyon must have been begun as early as
1150. The eastern portions only of these buildings belong
to this early date; the naves were not completed till later
in the century. In Senlis all to the east of the transept,
and in Noyon both choir and transept, illustrate the progress
that had been made by the middle of the twelfth century.
Both of these churches have apsidal aisles, apsidal chapels,
and vaulted triforium galleries. The choir of Senlis is of
the unchanged primitive construction, with a few minor
exceptions, up to the level of the clerestory string ; but its
present high vaults and clerestory are the incongruous and
ill-proportioned work of a much later epoch. The arrange-
ment and the forms of the piers indicate that the original
vaults were sexpartite, and, after those of St. Denis, they must
have been among the very earliest vaults of considerable
scale constructed on Gothic principles. Hardly any vaults
of this form remain in the Ile-de-France of a date earlier
than those of the choir of the Cathedral of Paris, which were
completed about 1180. The earliest progress of sexpartite
vaulting, in France proper, cannot therefore now be studied ;
but there are sexpartite vaults in the Norman churches of

1 Notre-Dame de Noyon. Pax L. Vitet. Paris, 1845.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 39

 

Caen which afford instructive illustration of the beginnings
of such constructions. Of these the vaults of the Abbaye-
aux-Hommes are the earliest, dating from the early part of
the twelfth century.’ They are beyond doubt among the
earliest, if they be not the very earliest, sexpartite vaults
that were anywhere built. But they are not Gothic vaults,
notwithstanding their transverse and diagonal ribs, because
the rib system is neither complete nor independent. It
is not complete because there are no longitudinal or wall
ribs ; and it is not independent, though it is not incorpor-
ated with the shell of the vault, because the forms of the
arches do not determine the forms of the vaults, but are
themselves determined by these forms. The mind of the
builder was preoccupied with the traditional methods of vault-
ing, based upon the intersecting principle, and the ribs of
his vaults were accordingly made to follow the old forms ;
hence the transverse ribs are round arched, and the diagonals
are elliptical—forms opposed to Gothic principles as exert-
ing the maximum rather than the minimum of thrust.
The lateral cells, however, take a new form, which is a
step in the direction of Gothic, since it is necessitated by
the positions and the curves of the intermediate and diagonal
ribs, to which these cells have to accommodate themselves.
In covering the triangular spaces enclosed by these ribs and
the clerestory wall, it was impossible to avoid those twisted
surfaces which have often been mistakenly regarded as
among the defects, though they really are among the
essential characteristics, of Gothic vaults. In this instance,
however, the twisted surface is less pronounced than it would
otherwise be, because the longitudinal arches are made to
assume an upright elliptical form—-which however, adds
to the awkwardness of the whole effect.2. But with all their

1 See L’Eglise Ste. Trinité et LP Eglise St. Etienne & Caen. Par V. Ruprich-
Robert. Caen, 1884.

2 In plain intersecting vaults the courses of masonry are, of course, all parallel
with the axes, and hence the surfaces of the lateral cells are everywhere at right
angles with the clerestory wall—upon which they trace segmental curves. But
when the lateral cell is divided, by an intermediate rib, into two smaller cells,
these cells must have oblique axes ; and their surfaces are necessarily also oblique.
Moreover, the shell having to fit itself on to the triangle formed by the diagonal
and intermediate ribs (which are portions of arches of different curvature) and the
clerestory wall, has, of necessity, to assume an irregular shape. The efforts to

keep the courses of masonry, as nearly as might be, parallel with the axes of the
oblique cells may have been the cause of the elliptical forms of the wall arches.
40 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

defects these vaults mark an early step of much importance ;
and the sexpartite form was a novelty which stimulated the
artists of the neighbourhood of Paris to devise improvements,
by means of which the true sexpartite Gothic vault was
produced.

The motives which, in the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, led to
the adoption of the sexpartite vault are not clear, but the forms
of the piers which differ alternately in having respectively a
single engaged shaft, and a broad pilaster in addition to sucha
shaft, probably suggested it. This arrangement of the piers,
which the builders of the vault found existing in the originally

Mi Vf) Uy
ty aml
Ws

7)

Yj pe Wd iy Y/;

er,
777,
iT ———

Wf Le te

a Po

| ed : i

a if 1

; SK ie lh

7 7) vp) Sy hs

iy Yip pp 7
i a

S
ie

 

; Wy
ly fo |
=.

SS

  

FIG. I4.

unvaulted edifice, was beyond doubt derived from the Lom-
bard churches, though it differs in one important particular
from the Lombard example. The Church of San Michele of
Pavia, for instance, exhibits an alternate arrangement of piers,
but one which, if designed for vaulting, was clearly intended
for quadripartite vaults over square compartments, each em-
bracing two bays of the aisles; and hence the intermediate
piers, having no function in connection with the high vaults,
do not rise above the triforium. The arrangement will be un-
derstood by reference to the plan and elevation (Figs. 14 and
15) of one bay of this church! The existing quadripartite

1 Figures 14, 15, and 16 are copied from M. V. Ruprich-Robert's frchttecture
Normande,
I GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 41

 

vaults do not belong to the original construction, and it is
quite possible, indeed perhaps probable, that no vaults were
originally intended, but that the main piers carried at first
mere transverse arches, such as may still be seen in the

 

FIG. 15.

basilica of San Miniato at Florence, and such as were con-
structed also iri the Church of Notre-Dame du Pré at Mans.’
In these cases the intermediate trusses of the timber roofs
rest on the walls without any supporting shafts, which are,
of course, not required. But in the Abbaye-aux-Hommes
(Fig. 16) the shafts of the intermediate piers are carried up

1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Zravée, p. 242.
42 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

to the top of the wall,’ and hence, when the vaulting was
undertaken, they may naturally have suggested the inter-

 

FIG. 16.

mediate arch of the sexpartite vault. However this may
be, the piers, though not originally designed or adapted for
! A similar alternate arrangement of piers with intermediate shafts carried up

to the top of the wall was not unfrequent in Norman buildings, both in Normandy
and in England, as in Jumiéges and Norwich. Constructively this is useless alike
11 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 43

 

vaulting, are now, having been shortened and slightly modi-
fied for the purpose,' fairly well suited to such vaults as they
carry. The two sides of the pilaster and the engaged shaft
of the main pier carry respectively the main transverse rib
and the two diagonals, while the intermediate shaft carries
the intermediate transverse rib; and, there being no wall
ribs, no other supports are required.

The principle of the sexpartite vault, with an appropriate
vaulting system, thus, it would appear, accidentally developed
and rudely embodied, in the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, became
fruitful immediately in the Ile-de-France ; where all chance
work and groping experiment were being rapidly superseded
by constructive foresight and consistency. Here in the
Cathedral of Senlis there was nothing fortuitous or incongru-
ous. The vaults and vaulting system were simultancously
conceived, and were, in all respects, parts of one whole. This
is fully indicated by the piers, though not a stone of the
primitive vaults remains in place. As the rib skeleton now
determined the forms of the vaults, so with equal strictness
did it determine the forms of the piers. These piers of
Senlis are alternately massive and slender; the main pier
being in section (Fig. 17) primarily a square intersected un-
symmetrically by a rectangle. Against the four projecting
faces of this pier rise, respectively, four engaged columns, a,
6, c, and d, as shown in the section. Of these @ supports
the main transverse rib of the high vault, 6 and ¢ support
the archivolts of the ground-story, and @ supports the trans-
verse rib of the aisle vault. On each of the angles of the
square central mass are worked round shafts, 7, g, z, and 7;
f and g to carry the diagonal ribs of the high vault, and
7 and 7 to carry the diagonal ribs of the aisle vaults. While
in the re-entering angles on the choir side are placed the
shafts e and 4%, which carry the longitudinal ribs. The only
capitals on the ground-story level are those of the archivolt
columns and the aisle vaulting shafts. The five members

for vaulting (as vaults would have to spring from a lower level) and for timber
roofs (which require no shafts whatever). It bespeaks a want of constructive
logic in the Norman builders which, as we shall see in the following chapter,
frequently appears also in the Anglo-Norman pointed architecture.

1 To adapt the main pier more perfectly to the vaulting the pilaster was cut
away at a level about two metres below the springing of the vaults, and short
lateral round shafts were here introduced to support the diagonal ribs ; « corbel
on each side being interposed.
44 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

of the great vaulting group ascend without interruption to
the springing of the high vaults; and the whole pier is
built up of coursed masonry, admirably cut and closely
jointed. The intermediate pier consists, on the ground-

1
'
'
'
'
'
'

ir
'
1
'
\ \ 1
,
|

   

 

FIG. 17.

story, of a plain round column, from whose capital rise
three slender vaulting shafts to support the intermediate
transverse rib and the two clerestory ribs, the two ground-
story archivolts and the transverse and diagonal ribs of the
aisle vaults.

The arches of the great arcade are pointed and of one
order. The triforium arches are also pointed, and are of two
orders—the one not concentric with the other, an unusual
arrangement, but one which occurs also in the apse of St.
Denis. These triforium arches are carried by monolithic
shafts, compactly grouped with the pier, and are not divided.
Figures 18 and 19, an elevation and a section of one double
bay, will afford a clearer idea than words can do of the
character of this structure. And the perspective view (Fig. 20)
of the opposite bay! will convey some impression of the

1 These illustrations include only what remains of the original construction.
The clerestory piers and vaulting are, therefore, wanting, and the wall is left

incomplete in the section because subsequent alterations have obliterated the old
design in the parts omitted.
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 45

 

 

 

beauty and the degree of Gothic expression that were
reached in this interesting monument.
It will be seen that the architect not only intended

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Eu
ee
ass as a ae east wes

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Pe moe

ric, 18.

from the first to vault this choir, but that he perfectly under-
stood what the form and construction of the vaulting was to
be; that he had, in fact, settled in advance his scheme for
the vaulting in every detail, so that his ground- plan was
laid out, and the sections of his piers were determined by its
TAB OB nee cence cin

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 19,
CHAP. 1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 47

 

requirements. The principle fortuitously foreshadowed in
the Abbaye-aux- Hommes is here developed with both
scientific and artistic precision.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 20.

The same constructive logic is exhibited in other por-
tions of this interior. The vaults of the aisles, of the apsidal
chapels, and of the triforium gallery show no defects of
48 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

principle; and they are admirable. in workmanship and
remain in perfect condition. They are so closely similar to
the aisle vaults of St. Denis that no further description is
necessary.

It may here be remarked that we have reached the time
of greatest perfection in masonry. After 1130 the walls,
piers, and vaults of the twelfth century are unrivalled for
fineness of facing and jointing. They are, in this respect,
in striking contrast to those of the more hasty constructions
of the thirteenth century. And nowhere do we find skill in
the manipulation of carefully selected material more admir-
ably exhibited than in this building.

A noticeable characteristic of the choir of Senlis is that
it exhibits a nearer approach to Gothic principles and ex-
pression within than without. The interior is indeed frankly
Gothic, though still massive, while what remains of the ex-
terior is, in its broad walls and round-arched openings,
almost strictly Romanesque. In this and in other early |
monuments of France, we see the style in process of forma-
tion according to the vital law of all organic development
—the functions to be exercised calling into being and giving
appropriate form to the requisite organs. We do not find
the change from Romanesque to Gothic beginning in a mere
arbitrary transformation of external forms and details—
external forms and details are, in France, the last things to
change. The growth of the Gothic principle begins at the very
heart of the fabric and gradually works outward till every part
is reached. Operating first imperfectly in the diminutive
vaults of Morienval, perfecting the vault forms in St. Denis,
and now from the high vaults of Senlis creating for itself an
appropriate, though not a final system of internal supports,
it moves on, as we shall see, in this creative fashion, till the
full development is accomplished.

What was the precise mode of buttressing the high vaults
we have now no means of knowing. It is possible that
flying buttresses may have sprung over the aisle roofs ;
but there is hardly an instance of an external flying
buttress of this early epoch, and it appears more probable
that the triforium vaults formed the only abutments to
the piers, which are almost heavy enough to bear the
thrusts independently. As may be seen in Fig. 19, the
Il GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 49

 

capitals! from which the high vaults sprang, were situated
below the level of the clerestory string, so that these vaults
may have been sufficiently abutted by those of the triforium.
The choir of the Cathedral of Noyon has many points of
resemblance to that of Senlis. It is on a somewhat larger
scale, is lighter in the proportions of its parts, and, in some
respects, betokens a freer exercise of the inventive talents of
that great body of secular builders which was now taking the
lead in architectural constructions, and finding scope for its
genius in these communal cathedrals that were beginning to
rise, in quick succession, in the newly-chartered towns.
Noyon had been one of the first cities to organise a com-
mune ; and it had done so under the fortunate circumstance
of its bishop having taken the initiative in the work, so that
from the first. there was harmony between the ecclesiastical
and civil authorities,? which is curiously imaged in the church.’
The vaults of this choir happily remain in good preservation.
Unlike the original vaults of Senlis, they are quadripartite in
oblong compartments ; and hence we have here a uniform,
rather than an alternately varied, series of vaulting shafts
and piers. The transverse ribs alone are pointed, and the
round-arched longitudinal ribs are so much stilted as to
bring their crowns up nearly to the level of the crowns of
the diagonal ribs. There is, therefore, hardly any doming in
these vaults. Three vaulting shafts, rest- ee
ing on the capitals of the ground-story
piers, sustain the transverse and diagonal
ribs respectively. The piers of the ground-
story are, in the choir proper (with ex-
ception of two massive clustered ones,
which were designed to support towers
against the east side of the transept),
plain round columns with a single engaged
shaft (as in the section, Fig. 21). In the
sanctuary the columns are more slender and have no engaged

FIG. 21.

1 The original capitals remain in place in the easternmost piers; the ad-
ditional height to the springing of the present vaults being reached by building up
on them.

2 A. Thierry, Lettres sur ? Hist. de France, p. 223, e seq. .

3 The ecclesiastical elements of design appear in the pronounced apsidal
chapels and the apsidal terminations of the transepts. It may be, too, that the
round arches which mingle so curiously in this building with the pointed arches
are concessions to ecclesiastical traditional preference.

E
50 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

shaft ; they are monolithic, and have a slight entasis, like
those of the aisles of St. Denis, and their capitals are of
distinctly Gothic form in their functional adaptation to the
new structural conditions.

The ground-story arcades are round arched except in the
sanctuary, where they are pointed. The triforium open-
ings are coupled pointed arches divided by groups of three
detached monolithic shafts. Over the triforium is an
arcaded gallery in the thickness of the wall, composed of
diminutive trefoiled round arches, and the clerestory openings
are round arched and undivided.

Unhappily the buttress system has been reconstructed, so
that the original formsare uncertain. It can, however, hardly
be doubted that flying buttresses sprang over the aisle roofs
in true Gothic fashion, for the clerestory rises so high above
the vaulted gallery that the vaults of this gallery could
hardly have formed effectual abutments to the high vaults ;
while the walls and piers, being less massive than those of
Senlis, could hardly have sustained the vault pressures
without reinforcement. On the whole, the Gothic principle
is far advanced in this choir of Noyon, though its interior is
by no means so pure and harmonious in design as that of
Senlis. The nave was constructed at a somewhat later,
though still at an early epoch ; and in it a fuller apprehension
of the freedom afforded by the new principles of construction
is indicated in the more slender proportions of piers and
shafts, and in the increased magnitude of openings. In these
respects, indeed, the nave of Noyon is hardly surpassed by
any other monument of the twelfth century. Like Senlis,
this nave was designed to carry, and it probably did at first
carry, sexpartite vaults ;! its piers differ from those of Senlis
in their lighter proportions and in minor details only. The
ground-story arcade has pointed arches of one order, and the
triforium openings consist of a pointed arch in each bay
spanning a sub-order of two pointed arches. These are
divided by a shaft of unprecedented slenderness, and the
tympanum is pierced with a trefoil, an early step in the
direction of plate tracery. There can be little question that

| The existing vaults date from the thirteenth century (L. Vitet, Monographie de
VEglise Notre-Dame de Noven ; and Viollet-le-Duc, svc. Cath&irale) and are
quadripartite. The original transverse ribs remain, and are alternately massive
and slender in conformity with the requirements of sexpartite vaults.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 51

 

flying buttresses substantially like those now existing—which
probably date from the time of the reconstruction of the
vaults in the thirteenth century—abutted against the main
piers; and thus the Gothic constructive system was com-
plete in its principal features here at Noyon soon after the
middle of the twelfth century.

Though there are many minor puzzles presented by the
respective peculiarities of these early buildings which, in the
absence of clear documentary records, often prevent an exact
determination of their chronological relationships, yet there
can be little question that such constructions as the choir of
St. Germain des Prés at Paris, the nave of St. Stephen’s at
Beauvais, the Churches of St. Leu d’Esserent, and St. Martin
at Laon, besides many others, were nearly contemporaneous
with Senlis and Noyon. Each of these buildings presents
characteristics peculiar to itself, which show a degree of in-
dividual independence in the builders that is no less striking
than their common allegiance to the leading idea which was,
day by day, gaining distinctness, and was rapidly transform-
ing the art of building. Some of these peculiarities we shall
have occasion to refer to farther on, while we now pass to
the consideration of the structural forms exhibited by some
of the larger buildings of the second half of the twelfth,
and the beginning of the thirteenth centuries—the vast
Cathedrals of Paris, Laon, Chartres, Bourges, Reims, and others,
—in which the highest perfections of the system were
reached, and in which the astonishing rapidity of the Gothic
development is shown.

But first it may be noticed in passing that the two modes
of vaulting—the quadripartite and the sexpartite—go along
together from the first, though in the earlier monuments
the sexpartite form is the most common. Even in vaults
so early as those of the Abbaye-aux-Dames of Caen,
where a curious kind of sexpartite system? prevails, the

1 The vaults of the Abbaye-aux-Dames are really quadripartite over square
divisions embracing two bays each, with a dividing transverse arch carrying
a vertical wall up to the crown of the vault. This might almost seem like an
experiment tending toward the true sexpartite form, were it not pretty well
ascertained that they were of later construction than the true sexpartite vaults of
the neighbouring Church of the Abbaye-aux-Hommes. The same form of vault
occurs in several other Norman churches, as that of the Priory of St. Gabriel
(Calvados), and that of Ouestreham, both of which are illustrated in M. Ruprich-
Robert’s Architecture Normande.
52 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

vault of the westernmost bay is quadripartite on an oblong
plan. In the choir of Noyon all the vaults are, as we have
seen, quadripartite in oblong compartments, and they are the
same in the choir of St. Germain des Prés. The idea that
the sexpartite vault was developed first and was gradually
superseded by the quadripartite form does not seem correct.’

Of the greater cathedrals the one in which the Gothic
principles are first distinctly and systematically manifest is
that of Paris. And this wonderful monument, notwithstand-
ing all that it has suffered from violence and so-called restora-
tion, exists to-day in almost complete constructive integrity.
Here is a vast central aisle so admirably roofed with stone that
the construction has lasted intact ® for seven hundred years,
and will probably, if not injured by violence, last for centuries
to come. These vaults are of the sexpartite form, and those
of the choir, being about contemporaneous with those which
originally covered the nave of Noyon, doubtless in the main
show us what these were. The transverse ribs are pointed, the
longitudinal ribs are pointed (here they differ from the vaults
of the nave of Noyon, whose longitudinal ribs appear to have
been round arched), and the diagonal ribs are semicircular.
The intersection of the diagonal ribs is at a higher level than
the crowns of the transverse ribs, which, in turn, are higher
than the crowns of the longitudinal ribs. The vaults have
thus a distinctly domed form which, at this period, was
almost universal. All these ribs are independent arches which
determine the forms of, and actually sustain, the vault shells.
In vaults of this form the lateral cells are, as I have already
remarked, necessarily oblique to the axis of the nave, and their
surfaces assume forms which are difficult to define. Indeed,
more or less obliquity and irregularity of surface is a constant
and necessary characteristic of true Gothic vaults, even of those
which are quadripartite. Gothic vaults are never simple

1 Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Construction, p. 103, refers to sexpartite vaults as
constructed ‘suivant la méthode des premiers constructeurs Gothiques.”

® Notre-Dame of Paris not only remains structurally in comparative perfection,
but also retains a large part of its original sculpture. Within the building
everything above the ground-story is the genuine untouched work of the twelfth
and thirteenth centuries, and of the exterior the sculptures of the tympanums, the
archivolts, and large portions of the jambs of the great portals remain as originally
executed. ~

* The vaults of the choir are absolutely perfect ; those of the nave have had

to undergo some slight repairs since their partial reconstruction early in the
thirteenth century.
UW GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 53

 

intersecting pointed vaults. The new constructive principles
did not admit of such forms. Gothic vault-forms do not
admit of description in geometric terms. They vary ac-
cording to the spans, the altitudes, the curves, and the points
of springing of the arches that compose the rib system,
and it is by the forms and relations of these arches only that
such vaults can be described. In the vaults of Paris the
filling-in consists of successive courses of arched masonry
reaching from rib to rib over cach triangular space of the
plan. The beds of these successive courses are not parallel
one with another, but incline variously according as the
mason found necessary or convenient in developing the
twisted concave surfaces required by the varying spans and
positions of the ribs, In early vaults, like these of Paris, the
courses usually have a considerable rise near the springing, from
the longitudinal rib toward the diagonal; and they become
gradually more level as they approach the crown of the vault,
where they are more nearly parallel. But perfectly par-
allel they hardly ever can be, since each course is properly a
portion of a surface which is concaved in all directions.
The masonry of these vaults, especially in the choir, is
perfectly faced and closely jointed.

The vaulting shafts are slender, and rise from the great
capitals of cylindrical columns which constitute the piers of
the ground-story. The flying buttresses were originally
double—that is to say, the piers which divide the double
aisles were carried up above the roof, where each one received
the head of a flying buttress which sprang from the outer
buttress, over the outer aisle, and gave foothold to another
flying buttress which spanned the inner aisle and abutted
against the great piers.'. The principle of equilibrium main-
tained by opposing thrusts is here completely developed.
The inert principle is wholly abandoned. The maximum
of internal space for circulation and for prospect is attained
by attenuation of supports, and if the maximum of size in
external openings is not reached, it is not because any obstacles
stand in the way, but only because the idea of having the
largest possible openings has not yet presented itself to the
minds of the builders.

1 The present flying buttresses, consisting of arches which clear both aisles
at a single span, are alterations of the thirteenth century.
54 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

A somewhat detailed consideration of the leading con-
structive characteristics of this building, and a comparison
of them with those of other kindred buildings, will enlarge our
understanding of the Gothic principles which are peculiar to
France. These principles are substantially carried out in all
of the great churches which were erected in this region be-
tween 1160 and 1220; but they were carried out more
completely and consistently in some of them than in others.
Hardly one of them unites all the perfections of which the
entire group affords illustration; and the great variety of
forms, under which the same leading idea struggles for
embodiment, gives striking evidence of the active spirit of in-
vention which animated this remarkable building movement.

One marked peculiarity of the Cathedral of Paris is that
its piers are not adapted in form and magnitude to its
sexpartite vaults. In this respect the adjustment of piers to
vaults is the precise reverse of that which we have seen in
the nave of Noyon, where the piers, fashioned for sexpartite
vaults, are now covered with those of the four-celled form.
It would seem that in Paris quadripartite vaults must have
been intended when the plan was laid out, and that, for some
now unknown reason, the sexpartite form was adopted after
the building had been carried up to the springing of the vaults.
For up to this level the construction of the piers is perfectly
adapted for quadripartite vaulting—all the ground-story
columns being of equal magnitude, and each of them carrying
a group of three vaulting shafts, of which one group is pre-
cisely like another. The incongruity thus presented in both
Paris and Noyon between the forms of the vaults and the
adjustment of their supports is a serious defect in each of
these otherwise admirable structures as they now exist; a
defect which so contradicts the logic of the Gothic system as
to leave little doubt that it was in each case the result of
changes made in the original project—the changes having
been wrought at Noyon probably at a later date than the
original construction of the building, and at Paris after the
construction had reached the springing of the vaults.

1M. Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Construction, remarks that the ill adjustment of the
piers to the vaults in the Cathedral of Paris had in his early studies of the building
greatly puzzled him; but that in the course of later investigations he perceived

that the necessities of the sexpartite vault system were really provided for by the
monolithic shafts which surround every alternate one of the piers which divide the
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 55

 

But in the Cathedral of Paris, though the same general
incongruity exists in both choir and nave, there is a marked
difference in the forms, the arrangements, and the adjust-
ments of the respective vaulting systems. In the choir, the
original design of 1163,! the vaulting shafts rise without
break from the capitals of the ground-story to the springing
of the vaults, varying in magnitude according to their re-
spective loads. They are built up in courses—the central
one being engaged against a projecting pilaster, and the
lateral ones against the face of the pier. In the main
group—that which carries the main transverse rib and two
diagonals—the capitals are all on the same level. The
central capital is set even with the wall, while the lateral
ones are set diagonally, in the direction of the diagonal ribs.?
These lateral capitals carry, besides the diagonal ribs, each a
small shaft which rises to support the longitudinal rib whose
springing is at a higher level—an arrangement of great
significance as we shall presently see. In the intermediate
group the arrangement is different. Here the central shaft
only has its capital at the level of the springing of the great
ribs, the side shafts rising unbroken to the higher points of
springing of the longitudinal ribs, where they receive their
capitals.

Figure 22 will illustrate these features. In this figure A
exhibits the plan of the group of abaci of the capitals of the
main vaulting shafts, and the sections of the ribs which they
support ; B is the plan of the abacus of the intermediate
capital, with the section of the intermediate rib, and the
sections of the side shafts; C is a perspective view of the
main group, and D a perspective view of the intermediate

aisles—those so reinforced being opposite the great piers which carry the main
transverse ribs and the diagonals of the vaults. This is hardly a justification of
the construction as it exists. For this mode of reinforcement does not accommo-
date itself to the extra weight as well as thrust that falls on the main piers. And
it isa mode that does not appeal to the eye at all. Moreover, it exists in the
nave only. The dividing piers of the choir aisles are all alike.

1 Notre-Dame et ses premiers architectes, etc. Par M. C. Bauchal. Paris,
1882.

2 This is the usual arrangement of the vaulting capitals so long as the ribs
retain a square section; but it shows the logic of the Gothic system to find that
when the rib section is reduced to more or less of a wedge-shape—as it is in
simple form at St. Denis, Senlis, and some other early buildings, and in more
complex form at Amiens and elsewhere—then the central capital is, except in the
earliest buildings, set diagonally, and the lateral ones are set even.
56 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

group. It will thus be seen that here in the choir the main
and the intermediate groups of vaulting shafts differ ac-
cording to their respective functional exigencies.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

B A
FIG. 22,

But in the nave, which was probably completed by 1196,"
the vaulting system exhibits no such differences. Here the
vaulting shafts (which are of unprecedented slenderness, and
are not engaged with the pier, but are detached, as in the
section, Fig. 23) are all of the same magnitude, notwith-
standing the unequal weights which they have to carry.

os They are not, as in the choir,
C) C) built up in courses of small

 

 

 

stones, but are each composed

C ) of several, in most cases five,
lengths of strong cliguart.

FIG, 23. Each group has all of its

capitals (A, B, Fig. 24) at the springing of the great ribs.
This arrangement is perfectly adapted to quadripartite
vaulting, but it is ill adapted to the six-celled vaults
which are reared upon these capitals. For while in the

1 See note 1, p. 55.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 57

 

main group (A, Fig. 24), the abaci are well covered by the
three great ribs, and the bases of the small shafts which
carry the longitudinal ribs, the lateral abaci of the inter-
mediate group B, in the same figure, have the larger portions
(e, in the plan D) of their surfaces unoccupied, since there
are no diagonal ribs to be supported here. This is mani-
festly illogical as well as unpleasing to the eye. The only
arch in this pier which springs from this level being the
intermediate transverse rib, the central shaft which carries it

 

 

FIG. 24.

is the only one that requires a capital here. The lateral
shafts ought to continue unbroken to the higher point from
which the longitudinal ribs spring, as they do in the inter-
mediate system of the choir.

In the Church of Mantes, a construction of the same
epoch which bears much resemblance to Paris, the vaults
are also sexpartite; and they are here prepared for by
piers which are alternately massive and slender—the massive
ones having all their vaulting members built up from the
pavement—as at Senlis and Noyon. But the vault sup-
ports, unlike those of Senlis and Noyon, consist, as in Paris,
58 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

of three shafts both in the main and in the intermediate piers
—the longitudinal ribs not being independently provided for
below the springing of the vaults, but rising from shafts carried
by the same capitals which support the diagonal ribs.
Sexpartite vaults occur again in the Cathedral of Laon,
a building nearly contemporaneous with the nave of Paris,
and here we meet with still another arrangement of supports
(Fig. 25). The ground-story piers are, as in Paris, simple
round columns whose capitals support the vaulting shafts ;

 

 

 

FIG, 25.

but instead of three such shafts to each pier, an arrangement
which affords no provision for the alternately varying number
of ribs to be carried, there are five shafts to the main piers
and three to the intermediate ones, thus giving each rib in
the vault its own independent support. In other words, the
vaulting system of Laon is the same as that of the choir of
Paris, except that the shafts which carry its longitudinal
ribs, instead of resting, at the main piers, on the capitals
from which the diagonal ribs spring, descend with the other
vaulting shafts to the ground-story capitals. From this

1 The Cathedral of Laon was begun almost immediately after the establish-
ment of the Commune in 1191. See Viollet-le-Duc, sv. Cathddrale, p- 305.
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION 1N FRANCE 59

 

level, therefore, the system is as logical as the systems of
Senlis and Noyon. But the want of adequate support in
the lower piers for the heavy main groups is a defect which
mars this otherwise magnificent interior? It should be
added that the vaulting shafts of Laon vary in magnitude
in conformity with the weights they have to support—the
central shaft which carries the main transverse rib being the
largest, those which carry the diagonal ribs smaller, and
those of the longitudinal ribs the smallest.

The Cathedral of Bourges, constructed mainly during
the first quarter of the thirteenth century,? has also sex-
partite vaults, and the disposition of its piers and shafts is
peculiar though almost entirely logical. These piers are, in
effect, gigantic round columns from the pavement to the
springing of the vaults. As they rise through the arcade
spandrels they leave something less than a quarter of their
diameters projecting, and in conformity with the construc-
tion of the vault they are alternately massive and slender.
Engaged in them are slender, coursed, vaulting shafts—not
closely grouped according to the usual arrangement, but
widely separated upon the great cylindrical surface. The
adjustment of these vaulting shafts to the vaults is sub-
stantially the same as at Laon—the main shafts alone having
capitals where the great ribs spring, while the supports of
the longitudinal ribs rise unbroken to the higher level of
the springing of these ribs. The one illogical feature of the
vaulting system of Bourges is that its lesser shafts do not
vary in magnitude according to their functions. With this
exception there is hardly any Gothic building which exhibits
greater constructive propriety ; for a complete structural
continuity is maintained, in both main and intermediate
piers, from the pavement to the crowns of the vaulting
arches.

Another mode of sexpartite vault support occurs in the
Cathedral of Sens (second half of the twelfth century) and

1 In two of the piers, on each side of the nave, the great cylindrical columns
are each reinforced by four lesser shafts supporting the four angles of the abacus.
This and many other variations of structure which occur here and in many other
of these great buildings show an ever-ready disposition to experiment as new
ideas were suggested.

2 The existing edifice was commenced during the first years of the thirteenth
century, but the vaults were not reached before 1230. Viollet-le-Duc, s.v.
Cathédrale, p. 2943 and s.v. Architecture, p. 235.
60 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

in Notre-Dame of Dijon, built about 1225. In these
instances the main pier has three vaulting shafts, and the
intermediate pier but one—the longitudinal ribs being
carried by shafts which rise from a ledge at the clerestory
level.

Of these various modes of adjustment of sexpartite vaults
to their supports the most logical are perhaps on the whole
the earliest. In these every member in the vault has, except
in the intermediate piers, its own support from the pavement ;
and these supports are graduated in size in conformity with
the weights with which they are charged. In Bourges the
continuity of support from the pavement in all of the piers
makes the system of. its construction more logical than that
of Senlis or of Noyon, except for the defect of the equal
magnitude of the vaulting shafts.

These examples are enough to show how great are the
minor differences exhibited by these early Gothic buildings.
No two buildings ever show precisely the same arrangements
of structural parts; yet every one of them exhibits the clear
apprehension by their builders of the governing principles of
the new style. The differences are largely due to local and
individual differences of genius. Each locality developed
to some extent its own natural modes and predilections,
which modified the central influence that went forth from
Paris and its neighbourhood, and thus produced more or less
mixed forms of art. Sens and Dijon, for instance, show the
united influences of Burgundy and the Ile-de-France, Bourges
is a creation of the school of Poitou modified by the central
school, while the Cathedral of Reims is a product of the
school of Champagne, with a large infusion of influence from
that of the Ile-de-France.

We have thus far considered the dispositions and adjust-
ments of vaulting systems to vaults, for the most part in
buildings of the twelfth century and of the first quarter of
the thirteenth, We have now to examine these adjustments
in the more fully developed structures of the thirteenth
century ; and it may be well to begin with the early

1 The Carte des Monuments Historiques de France, prepared by the Commis-
sion of Historic Monuments for the French Government, is a valuable aid to the

student in respect to the various schools and their mutual influences during the
twelfth century.
ul GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 61

 

developments of the piers on the ground-story level—
developments which constitute one of the most interesting
branches of the subject, and afford important illustration of
some of the fundamental principles of the Gothic style.

In the transitional buildings with sexpartite vaults the
main piers, made up of square members and engaged
vaulting shafts, like those of Senlis and Noyon, could hardly
be improved as regards their functional adjustment and
expression. But they were so massive as to take up a great
deal of room, and hence were more or less inconvenient. It
was probably to avoid this inconvenience that plain round
columns were employed for the ground-stories in Paris and
Laon; but these round columns were soon felt to be
unsatisfactory, as affording no independent supports for the
various members of the superstructure. Such columns did not
partake of the new principles that now characterised every
other constructive member of the building. Attempts to
improve them were therefore made, and a new and strictly
functional form was soon devised, a very early, perhaps the
first, example of which may be studied in the nave of the
Cathedral of Paris.

The first step in the change appears to have been
connected with a new adjustment to its load of the form of
the abacus of the great
capital of the round [ e
column,—an adjustment d
rendered necessary by
the employment of two
arch orders in the great
arcade instead of one.
In the choir of Paris the
arches of the great arcade
are of one order on the
choir side, and of two
orders on the side of the b
aisle, as in the plan (Fig. a
26). The transverse rib,
a, of the aisle vault is so
wide that the diagonals, 4 and c, which are also rather wide,
leave little of the abacus surface unoccupied on the aisle
side; and the bases of the vaulting shafts, d, e, f, on the

 

 

 

FIG. 26.
62 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

choir side are so spread out that the square abacus which
carries this compound load fits it sufficiently well. But in
the nave (Fig. 27), where the pier arches are of two orders
on both sides, and where the vaulting shafts and the ribs of
the aisle vault are smaller and more compactly grouped, the
square abacus is not so well fitted to its load. Large
portions of its surface, a, 0, ¢, and d, are left unoccupied, not-
withstanding that its corners are cut away in order to
diminish this useless surface. But with this measure the
builders appear not to have been satisfied; and in order to
give the lower pier a more functional correspondence with

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 27.

the superstructure, they before long did away with the
device of terminating the pier by a capital at this level,
and starting afresh to erect upon it the high vault supports.
As a final result the true Gothic pier was produced in
which all the vaulting members receive continuous support
from the pavement, substantially as in the main piers of
Senlis and Noyon, but superior to these by exhibiting the
utmost compactness consistent with the complete discharge
of their function.

The first modification in the nave of Paris occurs in the
sixth pier counting from the transept. Here a smaller
column, to augment the support of the vaulting shafts, is
incorporated with the great round column, and corresponding
additions are made to the great base and to the capital.
II GOTAIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 63

 

Larger portions are cut off from the corners of the abacus,
whose plan, thus modified, is shown in Fig. 28, while a section
of the pier is shown in Fig. 29. Piers of similar section
had occurred earlier in the choir of Noyon, and even in some

 

 

 

FIG, 28.

Norman buildings, as in the transept of Ely in England ;
but in these cases they are not, as they plainly are in Paris,
links in a chain of progress. This was, however, but a
partial, and perhaps on the whole even a doubtful, improve-
ment. It provided an independent sup-
port for the vaulting shafts, but left the
archivolts and the ribs of the aisle vaults
without such supports. It had, moreover,

an awkward appearance, and the abacus ie
of the capital was still ill adjusted to its

load. It was next seen that if the vault-

ing shafts were to have separate support boas
in the lower pier, the other members of the
superstructure ought to be supported in eee

like manner. Accordingly in the seventh
and westernmost pier this idea was carried out, and an
almost perfect Gothic pier was constructed—a pier which
furnished the type that was henceforth employed with many
variations of proportion and detail, and which attained its
64 GOTHIC ARCHITECTUFE CHAP.

 

highest perfection in the nave of the Cathedral of Amiens.
The section of this pier is shown in Fig. 30, its abacus

surface with the plan of the imposed load, in Fig. 31, and a
perspective view taken from

the opposite triforium, in
order to show as much as
can be seen of the upper sur-
face of the abacus and of the
form of its load, is given in
Fig. 32. It will be seen on
the plan that the portion of
the abacus which covers the
capital of the great round
column is now circular; that

the abaci of the lesser capitals
of the engaged shafts are
square in agreement with the sections of the sub-archivolts
and of the transverse rib of the aisle vault, which they
respectively support; and that over the engaged column,
which falls under the vaulting shafts, a portion of the great

a

FIG, 31.

FIG. 30.

 

 

 

abacus projects in a segmental curve, forming a band to this
column, which is not provided with a capital — partly.
perhaps, because it is really the lower member of the eroup
of vaulting shafts which have their capitals at the springing
of the vaults, and partly also because a capital here would
Il GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 65

 

present a much greater abacus surface than the bases of the

 

FIG. 32.

vaulting shafts would cover. The unsymmetrical plan of
the impost (Fig. 31), where one of the lateral vaulting shafts
F
66 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

advances forward of the other, is caused by the thickening

of the arcade spandrel on that side in order to reinforce the

great piers of the western tower. The adjustment of this

compound abacus to its load could hardly be improved ;

there is even less unoccupied space here than in the square

abacus of the choir already noticed. The form of the com-

pound capital, as shown in the perspective view, is also

admirable, the lesser heights of the smaller members being

well proportioned to their lesser diameters, and these again

harmonising well with the central mass. The entire group

is one of the most beautiful, as it is also one of the
grandest, in the whole range of Gothic design.

Another mode of reinforcing the lower pier is that which

occurs in the nave of Laon

(section, Fig. 33), as an excep-

tion to the plain round columns

which form the prevailing sup-

port. In this case five detached

monolithic shafts are grouped

with the great cylinder, four of

them being placed so as to

support the angles of the

C) s+ abacus, and the fifth sustaining

the central member of the

C) group of vaulting shafts. This

is certainly, in many respects,

a fine pier, but it is not so

compact, nor so consonant with Gothic principles, as that of

Paris. It was, therefore, not so well worthy of adoption, and
in fact it was not employed elsewhere.

The lower piers (A, Fig. 34) of the choir of Soissons are
interesting as being designed on the same general principle as
the sixth pier of Paris (B, in the same figure), while exhibiting
a marked improvement upon it. Here the engaged column
is more slender than at Paris, and instead of an independent
abacus to its capital, the octagonal abacus of the great
capital is made to project so as to cover it. The engaged
column being a part of the original design and not an
experimental interpolation, as at Paris, the whole lower pier
is so adjusted to the superstructure as to bring this smaller
column fairly under the vaulting system to be sustained.

FIG. 33.
6L SCINVO NI UNOIAVHAG AO SLOAdSV AAILVUVdUWNOOD

II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 67

 

Another improvement is that of the diagonal positions given
to the plinths of the lateral vaulting shafts in correspondence
with the positions of the vaulting capitals. These plinths
are thus parallel also with the sides of the great abacus,
where it projects to cover the capital of the lower vaulting
column ; the adjustment of the great abacus to its load is,

 

FIG, 34.

toreover, as close as possible, and the whole design is
oth compact and elegant.

We may now examine the vaults and vaulting systems
° the more advanced Gothic of the first half of the
\irteenth century, in which the continuity of members, from
le pavement upwards, becomes an unvarying principle.
lot that every individual member of the superstructure now
as an independent support from the foundation, but there
at least one independent shaft on the ground-story level
staining each main group above.

From the beginning of the thirteenth century the
68 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

quadripartite vault, which was now greatly improved in form,
came into general, though not invariable,! use ; and in con-
nection with it the form of the lower pier, which had been
developed in the west bay of Paris, was generally adopted.

The improvements in the vault consisted in replacing
the round longitudinal arch—such as that of the choir of
Noyon and of St. Germain des Prés—by a pointed arch
(such as had been employed in the sexpartite vaults of Paris,
and other contemporaneous buildings) ; and in making the
crowns of all the arches reach more nearly to the same
level, thus doing away with the excessive doming that had
characterised the earlier quadripartite vaults.

There is one most important characteristic of French-
Gothic vaults that often passes unnoticed, the real sig-
nificance of which has not, I believe, as yet been explained
by those writers who have noticed it. It is that (alluded to
above, page 39,in connection with the vaults of the Abbaye-
aux-Hommes at Caen, and of Notre Dame at Paris) of the
twisted surfaces caused by stilting the longitudinal arches, so
that their springing begins at a much higher level than that
of the main arches.

A frequent misunderstanding of the Gothic vault has arisen
from supposing that, by taking advantage of the properties of
the pointed arch, all its ribs were made to spring from the same
level and reach the same height, however they might vary in
span.” It is indeed true that the use of the pointed arch made
this possible, but it is equally true that in strictly Gothic vaults
the pointed arch was never so used; in such vaults the
longitudinal rib was always stilted. This fact is noticed by
Willis, who merely remarks in relation to it that “it is a
very universal arrangement of clerestory vaults, and is
productive of great beauty and convenience, but it leads to
some difficulty in the form and arrangement of the vaulting
surface.” Other writers have supposed that this arrange-'
ment was intended to provide for largeness of clerestory

1 The sexpartite vaults of Bourges date from the latter part of the first half
of the thirteenth century. Those of the choir of Beauvais are still later. But
though thus sometimes still employed, the sexpartile form had now become as.
unusual as, nearly a century before, the quadripartite form had been.

2 See, for instance, Ferguson’s /istory of Architecture, vol. i. p. 51

3 Tn his essay on the Construction of the Vaults of the Middle Ages,

. : published
in the Zransactions of the Royal Institute of British Architects Jor the }

‘ear US42.
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 69

 

openings. Thus Sir Gilbert Scott! says, “The side arches
were sometimes stilted, not from any necessity, but merely
to afford greater space for clerestory windows.” But that it
was not adopted because it was productive of beauty or
convenience, nor to afford greater space for clerestory
windows, a just consideration of the structural exigencies
involved would show beyond question, even if it were
not proved by the fact that the same peculiarity is
frequent long before the clerestory opening is developed
so as to fill the whole space beneath the longitudinal rib.
In fact, the opening occupies but a comparatively small
portion of this space in all early Gothic buildings, as may be
seen in Paris, in Mantes, in Laon, in St. Leu d’Esserent,
in the Collegiate Church of St. Frambourg at Senlis, and
in many others. Fig. 35, a perspective view of one bay
of the clerestory of St. Leu d’Esserent, will illustrate this
point. Here the springing, a, of the longitudinal rib will
be seen to be above the springing, 4, of the main ribs by
almost half the vertical height of the vault. It will be
seen, too, that the intrados of the flying buttress, visible
through the window, meets the pier at the same level. It
is well known that the thrusts of the great vault ribs are
not confined to their points of springing, but that there is a
tendency in the arches, when firmly abutted at these points, to
rise at their haunches, in consequence of which they require
to be reinforced in these parts. Now the method here
employed by which the line, a, 4, is made to rise vertically to
the level, a, brings the triangular vault surface, 4, a, ¢, into a
plane, which is inclined to the pier in the direction of the
thrust of the diagonal rib; and as the diagonal rib of the
next adjoining compartment, with the corresponding portion
of vault surface, is inclined to the same pier in the opposite
direction, the obliquity of each pressure is neutralised ; and
as the haunch of the transverse rib is reinforced by a solid
filling-in, a perfect concentration of thrusts upon the pier is
secured—the greatest power of these thrusts falling where
the flying buttress is brought to bear? The horizontal

1 Lectures on the Rise and Development of Medieval Architecture, vol. i. p.
63. London, 1879.

2 This was the intention, but actually the flying buttresses are not brought

to bear precisely on the points of greatest thrust in St. Leu d’Esserent, as will
be seen farther on.
70 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

section (Fig. 36), taken at the level, a (Fig. 35), will more
fully explain the form of this portion of the vault and the
manner in which the pressures are gathered upon the pier.

YS
CNS

y

AOS

o

 

 

 

 

 

hy
aah
|:

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 35.

Here a, 4, and ¢ are the great ribs whose thrusts, in the
direction of the arrows, are concentrated upon the pier, d,
and are counterbraced by the flying buttress, ¢ In other
words, the section through the vaulting conoid at half its
MW GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 75

 

vertical height gives the triangle, a, 0,c,in A, and not the
square, a, 0, c, @, in B in the same figure.

No single feature could be chosen which would exhibit
more clearly the essential principles of Gothic construc-

 

|
fs 1
Gi
7

FIG. 36.

tion. It exhibits, in fact, its governing characteristic, upon
which, more than upon anything else, every other characteristic
depends. And in view of this hardly any one can fail to see
the error that even so learned an authority as Sir Gilbert
Scott commits when he remarks that the stilting of the
clerestory arches did not arise from any necessity, but was
effected merely to afford greater space for clerestory windows.
72 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

Without this concentration of thrusts, as far up as they
extend, that compactness of the pier, which is so essential to
the Gothic system, could not exist.

How this form of the clerestory was afterwards taken
advantage of for larger openings we shall see when we come
to consider modes of enclosure. For the present we must
confine our attention to the forms and adjustments of the
vaults, the vaulting supports, and the general framework of the
buildings of the early thirteenth century in France. Mean-
time, however, it may be remarked that the ribs of the vaults
of these, as of the earlier buildings, consist only of such as
have a constructive office—namely, the transverse, the dia-
gonal, and the longitudinal ribs. Ridge ribs and surface ribs,
which sometimes appear later, do not occur at this epoch.
Of the constructive ribs none are ever wanting, nor are
independent supports for them ever wanting in the piers.
Throughout the building there is a structural reason for every
member that meets the eye, though the degree of perfec-
tion with which minor structural exigencies are met continues
to vary.

In the nave of St. Leu d’Esserent, whose vaults we have
just considered, the lower piers and the vaulting shafts are
wrought substantially on the model of those of the western-
most pier of Paris; but they differ in having a complete
capital over the engaged column which sustains the vaulting
shafts, as well as in having the central portion of the great
abacus in the form of a square set diagonally to the axis of
the nave, instead of a circle, and also in having the longitu-
dinal rib shaft rest upon the clerestory ledge instead of rest-
ing upon the same capital which carries the diagonal rib.
This nave is one of the very earliest of the constructions
of the thirteenth century, and its design, in many points,
resembles rather the work of the latter part of the twelfth
century—to which epoch it might be supposed to belong
were it not for the forms of the lower piers, the character of
its capitals, and the forms of the clerestory openings which
shall be noticed farther on.

The nave of the Cathedral of Chartres followed quickly
after that of St. Leu, which it closely resembles in main
features,.though the design is carried out on a much grander
scale. | Here the vaults, which in St. Leu are constructed
I GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 73

 

on very low arches, are more acutely pointed; even the
diagonal ribs having the pointed form. The stilting of the
longitudinal rib is still more marked in these vaults; its

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

springing being more than half the vertical height of
the vault above the springing of the great ribs, and the
principle of concentrated thrusts upon the pier is therefore
more distinctly emphasised (Fig. 37). The lower piers are
alternately round columns with engaged octagonal shafts,
74 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

and octagonal columns with engaged round shafts. The
main vaulting column has no capital, but is simply banded
by the abacus moulding, as in the westernmost pier of Paris.
The great abacus is in form like that of St. Leu, except that
over the main vaulting shaft it assumes the curve of the band
just mentioned. Five vaulting shafts, instead of three, as at
St. Leu, rise from this abacus, the shaft of the longitudinal rib
descending with the rest to this level. These shafts are in
three magnitudes corresponding with the magnitudes of ribs,
which they respectively carry. The great compound pier
capitals are admirably proportioned ; and the arrangements
and proportions throughout—those of the vaults, the piers, the
ground-story arcade, the triforium, and the clerestory—make
up a whole which is perhaps the most harmonious that had
been devised up to its date, and one that was hardly ever
surpassed, notwithstanding its comparatively massive con-
struction.

In the Cathedral of Reims, the lower portions of which,
with exception of the westernmost bays, are contemporaneous
with Chartres,’ the structural system is again substantially the
same, though the proportions and the general style of the
details differ considerably. The narrow arches of the vaults
are stilted in the same manner, the vaulting shafts vary
functionally in magnitude, and they all descend to the capitals
of the lower piers, which piers are of the type of Paris, St. Leu,
and Chartres. The great compound capitals are, however,
not so well composed as those of Chartres, since the smaller
members are of equal height with the central ones. As in
Paris and Chartres, the main vaulting shaft has no capital,
though it has much the appearance of possessing one in con-
sequence of the carved ornament with which it is banded.

We now come to the building in which the greatest per-
fections of the Gothic system are realised—the nave of the
Cathedral of Amiens, which was begun in the year 1220.
Not only is this nave the grandest in scale of any in France—
being in height forty-two metres from the pavement to the
crown of the vault, and in width nearly fifteen metres from
centre to centre of its piers,—but its design may justly be
considered as the crowning glory of Gothic art, and the

} The Cathedral of Reims was begun in 1212. Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Cathédrale,
P. 315.
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 75

 

grand summing-up of the principles and constructive forms
that had been gradually taking shape since the beginning
of the twelfth century. At first
glance it may appear that the
longitudinal rib is not so much \y.'
stilted as are those of the buildings ‘\r
before noticed; but this is only
because the capitals of their shafts
are not situated at the true impost
level. The arch is really stilted
above these capitals, so that the
vault surfaces continue to rise
vertically for a considerable height
above the springing of the great
ribs, whose pressures fall directly
upon the pier (Fig. 38), as in the
previous examples.

The main vaulting shaft is now,
for the first time in a quadripartite
vaulting system, perfectly con-
tinuous from the pavement; that
is to say, it is not sustained by a
separate member in the lower pier,
as at Paris, Chartres, and Reims ;
and it is not only continuous, but
it also has the same diameter
throughout. The shafts of the
diagonal ribs rest upon the great
pier capital as before, and those
of the longitudinal ribs are brought
down to the triforium ledge, uniting
the clerestory and triforium into
one composition in a manner which
finds earlier illustration in the
choirs of St. Germain des Prés and
St. Remi of Reims, and further
development in St. Denis and
Sées. The abaci of the capitals are everywhere adjusted
in form to the sections of the members which they carry ;
and those of the vaulting shafts are set in the directions of
the ribs which they sustain.

ql
AW DKW es
\ \ \ wi
\
NS

st
i

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 38.
76 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

I have remarked above that no Gothic building unites
all the perfections of which the entire group affords
illustration ; but of the nave of Amiens it may be said that
a more admirable carrying out of Gothic principles can
hardly be imagined.

The nave of St. Denis resembles in some of its features,
though not in its
proportions, that of
Amiens, to which
it is not long sub-
sequent in date.
Its vaults, however,
are in form more
like the earlier ones
of which those of
the Church of St.
Leu d’Esserent are
an instance. Their
arches are of low
sweep, and do not
give to the vaults
so much soaring
expression as was
common in contemporaneous constructions. The lower
piers are largely a return to the Romanesque type—con-
sisting of square members with engaged shafts, as in the
section, Fig. 39. The three principal vaulting shafts rise with-
out interruption from the pavement, while those of the longi-
tudinal arches rest, as at Amiens, upon the triforium ledge.
In the choir still another vaulting system is employed. Here
the lower piers are plain round columns, against which the
group of principal vaulting shafts rise, cutting through their
capitals, and to these capitals the shafts of the longitudinal
ribs descend, so that above the ground-story there are five
shafts against each pier, as at Chartres and Reims.

The enormous, thoughill-proportioned and yet magnificent
choir of Beauvais presents, as it now exists, no new features
in its vaulting system. The existing sexpartite vaults are
not of the original design, but were probably constructed
towards the end of the thirteenth century when, after serious
ruptures had taken place in consequence of faulty con-

FIG. 39.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 77

 

struction, intermediate piers had to be introduced, and the
whole design to be largely remodelled

Minor differences of adjustment in the internal vaulting
systems of the French churches of this time are no less
frequent than in those of the earlier times ; but the general

 

FIG. 40.

principles which govern them are everywhere the same ; and,
as we have now considered the main types of construction,
we need not investigate them further, but may pass to the
consideration of the forms ef external support which com-
plete the anatomy of the Gothic structure.

One of the earliest remaining examples of a Gothic
buttress system is that of the Church of St. Martin of Laon

1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Cathédrale, p. 336.
78 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

(Fig. 40). The pier buttress, a, which is incorporated
with that portion of the internal pier upon which the vault
thrusts are gathered, is a plain, square-edged mass of
masonry reinforced by a flying buttress, 6, which springs
from the great outer buttress, c, the one inert member
of the structure. The flying buttress is a square-edged
rampant arch loaded with masonry, whose upper = sur-
face is brought into a right line which slopes a little less
steeply than the chord of the arc, and is covered by a plain
flat coping. The very massive lower buttress, c, is adjusted
to the flying buttress, 4, by a simple set-off, d, which pene-
trates the roof of the aisle, and is carried on a substructure
of masonry over the transverse arch of the aisle, abutting
against the pier at the springing of the vaults. These vaults
are thus effectually propped both at their haunches and at
their springing, but the whole construction is somewhat
needlessly heavy.

Flying buttresses of lighter construction occur in the
apse of St. Leu d’Esserent (Fig. 41), which dates from the
last quarter of the twelfth century, or perhaps a little earlier.
The pier buttress does not, in this system, rise above the
abutting arch—the semicircular wall of the apse presenting an
unbroken surface above this level, while below this point it is
of the same form as that of St. Martin of Laon. The lower
or outer buttress has three set-offs and rises to a considerable
height above the roof of the aisle before the arch, whose
intrados is set even with its inner face, springs. The back
of the flying buttress is no longer a continuous sloping right
line extending to the outer face of the system, but it is met
by a level surface in which the outer portion of the buttress
terminates, and the whole is covered, as at St. Martin, by a
flat coping. In this case no portion of a lower prop is
visible above the roof, though there probably is one beneath it.

Some improvements upon these forms are shown in the
buttresses (Fig. 42) of the nave of the same building, which
date from the end of the twelfth, or the beginning of the
thirteenth century. The buttresses of the apse, by the
number and depth of their set-offs, indicate that the builder
considered their efficacy to depend upon a far-projecting
foundation from which, by an inclined outline, somewhat of
an oblique action, from the ground upwards, should be
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 79

secured ; but it was soon seen that the same result might
be reached on a less projecting foundation by giving more
weight to the upper part of the buttress. Accordingly the
outer faces of these buttresses of the nave rise more vertically
and have a more equal volume at different levels. A further
improvement which they exhibit is that of the gabled form

 

 

FIG. 41.

in which their tops terminate—a form which is better adapted
for protection, as more readily shedding water, and one which
is also more pleasing to the eye. The pier buttress is, like
that of the apse, stopped at the level of the coping of the
flying buttress, the wall above being entirely unbrokey
throughout its length, which is the case also in some other
undeveloped Gothic buildings, as in the apse of St. Remi of
1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Contre-Fort, p. 297.
$0 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

Reims, and, I believe, also in that of St. Germain des Prés
of Paris. This pier buttress is not, as in the preceding
examples, in the form of a continuous pilaster-like member,
but is based upon a substructure (a, Fig. 42), which rises

       

 

pa at
A
ee aT
= Or ity

iE 4

 
   

    
  

 

through the roof and is carried above the transverse arch of
the aisle vault.

Many of these early flying buttresses were ill adjusted
from want of accurate knowledge where they should abut.
It required repeated experiment to teach the precise points
upon which they should be brought to bear. This flying
buttress of St. Leu effectually meets the higher pressures
exerted by the vault haunches, but those at the springing
were not securely braced. It was apparently thought that
Il GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 81

 

the substructure a, including that portion of it which is
beneath the aisle roof, would form a sufficient abutment
to these lower pressures, but this did not prove to be
the case. The piers sub-
sequently yielded at the
springing, and it was found
necessary to add a second
arch beneath the first. Ex-
perience, in fact, showed
that the pressures of a vault
cannot be concentrated upon
any single point, but only
upon a line which extends
over a considerable portion

Te att
lee et

of the pier from the spring- Bete et i
ing point upwards. ee i i
In the buttress system = [- i TM

of the nave of Noyon (Fig.
43), which dates from the
time of the reconstruction
of the vaults early in the “27
thirteenth century, the flying ail
buttress assumes an im-
proved form, in being both ,
narrower and deeper, thus ”
covering at once a greater
vertical and a diminished
lateral extent upon the pier,
—a form more in accord-
ance with the exigencies of the vault pressures. The intrados
of the flying buttress, which in St. Leu is on a level with the
impost of the longitudinal vault rib, is here in Noyon con-
siderably below this level, while its upper part reaches as
high as that of St. Leu; and instead of a shallow clere-
story buttress terminating where the arch abuts, there is a
vigorously salient one reaching to the top of the wall.
The flying buttress is thus brought to bear upon a line
(which is already, considerably fortified by a pier buttress)
rather than upon a point. Just what the form of the
structure may be under the roof I am not aware; but as
this nave has a high vaulted triforium gallery, there is doubt-
G

   

FIG. 43.
82 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

less an abutment of some kind carried over its vaults to
meet the pier at the springing of the high vaults. It may
be added that this buttress system has proved effectual,
the vaults having stood with-
out yielding for more than
six hundred years. As a
minor improvement the back

>

a re
Spb
Ee

J a of the flying as well as the
mar: top of the upright buttress

   

=
=
DS

assumes the gabled form, and
a small finial marks the first
attempt to render pleasing
by ornament this latter im-
portant functional member.

In the choir of Soissons,
a monument but little sub-
sequent in date to the time
of the reconstruction of the
buttress system of Noyon,
still further improvements
were made in the form of the
flying buttress. Here two
arches, one above the other,
were established, and resist-
ance to the thrusts of the
vault was thus distributed
vertically over a yet greater
portion of the pier. The
top of the inner half of the
outer buttress is here carried up above the back of the
flying buttress, helping by its weight to neutralise the vault
pressures, and preparing the way for the pinnacle which was
soon after introduced. The pier buttress assumes under each
arch the form of an engaged shaft with base and capital.
Shafts in this place had occurred earlier in the buttress
systems of St. Remi of Reims and the choir of St. Germain
des Prés, and they now became very frequent features,

T The flying buttresses of Soissons were quickly followed
by a beautiful variation on the same principle in those of
the Cathedral of Chartres, where the superposed arches are
united by an open shafted arcade. \ Henceforth the employ-

vi
rr,

FIG. 44.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 83

 

ment of two arches in the buttress system became practically
constant ; and perhaps the grandest illustration of the type
is that which is afforded in the nave of Amiens (Fig. 44). In
double-aisled buildings a double system of flying buttresses was
introduced, one system over each aisle. In these cases the
dividing piers of the aisles rise through the aisle roof, above

   

 
 

wf

ae

  

      

  

 

 

FIG. 45.

which they receive the heads of the outer system of arches
and give foothold to the inner one. The flying buttresses
of the apse of Reims (Fig. 45) are of this form.

The evolution and adjustment of the pinnacle, which is so
conspicuous a feature in this last example, was rapid after
the device of weighting the top of the buttress had been
introduced. At Chartres, where the superincumbent weight
terminates in a truncated oblong pyramid in place of the
84 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

gabled coping of Soissons, we get one of the intermediate
steps of this development; but at Chartres this weight is
still placed over the inner portion only of the buttress ;
it was presently seen, however, that it would be more
effectual if set farther out upon it. Accordingly at Amiens
(Fig. 44)! this weight is set flush with the outer face of the
buttress, in the form of an upright square mass of masonry
crowned by a steep pyramid, and the Gothic pinnacle stands
forth in essential completeness. But the inventive faculties
of the Gothic artists were fertile in variations upon this
feature in which the constructive and decorative functions
are so equally joined ; and among the grandest results of
their inventive activity are the pinnacles of Reims, which
date from about 1240, and combine in one magnificent
design the forms both of Soissons and Amiens. In this design
the inner portion of the buttress, capped with a gable, rises
far above the solid part of the outer portion, receiving the
thrust of the upper abutting arch; while over the outer por-
tion is an open-shafted canopy of elegant design, surmounted
by a massive octagonal pyramid and by four lesser pyramids
covering the angles of the square base on which they rest.

Thus the forms of these external supports, no less than
those of the interior, were gradually developed as the
mechanical exigencies involved were more and more
perfectly apprehended. But, as with everything else in the
Gothic system, a fine artistic spirit was always equally and
simultaneously operative, which made beauty of form as
imperative as constructive fitness; and hence these hard-
working members are also among the most ornamental
features of the Gothic edifice, so much so that their
important constructive office has sometimes been largely
lost sight of? But in French Gothic, after 1160 at the
latest, the stability of the structure is always absolutely
dependent upon this member.

From the vaults and their internal and external supports,.

1 The upper portions of the buttresses of Amiens have been remodelled in the
Flamboyant style. The pinnacle given in the illustration is taken from Viollet-
le-Duc, s.v. Cathédrale, Fig. 20, p. 329.

2 An eminent English architect recently remarked to me that, in his opinion,
the flying buttress was not really necessary to the stability of a vaulted building,

citing, in support of this opinion, the nave of Salisbury Cathedral, where the:
external flying buttress does not occur.
I GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 85

 

which together constitute the real structure of a French
Gothic building, we may now pass to the development of the
Gothic modes of enclosure. In early Gothic buildings
massive walls filled the spaces between the piers much as
they had done in Romanesque constructions. The openings
remained small and were often even round arched, as at
Senlis and Noyon. The nave of the Cathedral of Paris

VV (AOS
SANS: SS Wo.

SS
SoS

>»

 

FIG. 46.

affords a good illustration at once of the early forms of wall
and opening, and of the changes that were quickly introduced
as the Gothic idea began to take more distinct form in the
minds of the builders. Of the two bays of the clerestory of
that building shown in Fig. 46,' the one on the spectator’s
right retains its original form. It is the bay next the
transept—the great pier, c, being one of the four piers of the
crossing. In this bay the clerestory window is a simple

1 This being a perspective view, looking upwards from the opposite triforium,
all the forms appear a little foreshortened.
86 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

pointed arched opening above the level of the springing of
the vaults, and although larger than such openings had been
in Romanesque design, it nevertheless is simply an opening
in a wall, the area of the solid still
being greater than that of the void.
Beneath the clerestory is a circular
opening, filled with a peculiar and
beautiful form of tracery, occupying
the space between the vaults of the
triforium gallery and the timber
roof which covers them. The whole
design is one that exhibits a good
deal of massive wall space, and an
eye not quick to recognise leading
structural features might not readily

FIG, 46 bis. perceive that this is really a build-
ing whose stability resides not in its walls, but in its frame-
work.

Early in the thirteenth century the original vaults of this
nave, which had been completed in the preceding century,
were damaged by fire and had to be repaired.* It would
appear, indeed, that their lateral cells were wholly recon-
structed and somewhat changed in form ; for the longitudinal
arches of the original cells which remain in place fall
considerably below the present vault surfaces,” as may be
seen in Fig. 46. Contemporaneously with this repairing
and remodelling of these nave vaults great changes were
making in other parts of the building—chiefly in the
clerestory—in conformity with developments that had else-
where taken place. These developments consisted chiefly in
the enlargement of apertures, and in the dividing of them by
mullions and simple forms of tracery. The apertures of the

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

1 Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Cathédrale, p. 292.

2 They do so in some, though not in all, of the bays. Indeed, great and
very puzzling variations are exhibited in the different bays of this clerestory.
For instance, in the first five bays on the north side of the nave, counting from
the choir, the original longitudinal ribs are surmounted by other arches, in each
of which the extrados is more acutely pointed than the intrados, which follows
the form of the old arch, thus giving a more pointed form to the vault cell than
it had originally. But the sixth, seventh, and eighth bays have their old arches
raised by stilting to the new level, and thus these cells have the same form that
they had originally. In the sixth and seventh bays the outline of the window
head is not concentric with the archivolt, but is rendered more pointed by a
singular filling-in, as shown in Fig. 46 7s.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 87

 

nave of St. Leu d’Esserent (Fig. 47) show the first step of
this development in the grouping of two or more openings
under one enclosing arch. Grouped openings had, indeed,
been employed much earlier. Twin round-arched windows
occur in the clerestory of Noyon; and in the triforium of

aie tt
eit
a

wn

 

“yl

FIG. 47.

St. Germer (Oise) coupled round arches surmounted by a
circular opening occur. The same arrangement is partly
carried out at a still earlier date in the triforium of the
Norman Church of Cerisy-la-Foret (Manche), where the
circle over the arches is not pierced through the tympanum,
but is formed by a moulding on its face. In the triforium
of the nave of Noyon are coupled pointed arches with a
88 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

pierced trefoil in the tympanum above. But already a new and
far-reaching development of these germ forms had begun
whose progress was most rapid. In the clerestory openings
of St. Leu we have coupled pointed arches surmounted by a
circle, within which is a thinner plane of masonry pierced with
a six-foiled opening. Internally the longitudinal rib forms an
encompassing pointed arch to the group, and externally
there is a similar arch in the wall which projects beyond the
plane of the grouped openings, throwing the design into
two orders, as in Fig. 47. Windows like these of St Leu,
though more enriched in having moulded archivolts and
shafted jambs, occur also in the clerestory of the choir
of Soissons. In these examples we have the radical forms of
a great variety of subsequent Gothic apertures.

As I have before remarked, constructive development
was the moving cause of change in every portion of the
building, and the enlargement of the apertures was rather due
to the nature of the construction than a result of endeavour
to produce a beautiful and imposing effect, though such
endeavour doubtless became also operative as constructive
development went on.

The apertures of the clerestories of St. Leu and of
Soissons were followed almost immediately by those of the
apsidal chapels of the Cathedral of Reims, which date from
about 1215, and though designed on the same general
scheme, present an entirely new character (Fig. 48). For
here, instead of solid spandrels between the main openings,
we have lesser openings following the outlines of the larger
ones; and thus instead of grouped openings we have
rather a single opening divided by slender bars of stone.
Moreover, these bars are no longer left, like the former
pierced masonry, with plain flat surfaces, but are lightened
and enriched by mouldings which, on the jambs and on
the mullion, assume the forms of slender shafts with capitals
and bases. In short, what may be called the pierced plane
of masonry of St. Leu is here converted into Gothic tracery.

The great change referred to above, which was wrought
soon after its first completion in the clerestory of Paris, con-
sisted chiefly in substituting for the old ones openings like those
of the apsidal chapels of Reims. But these new openings of
Paris mark one further step in the development of tracery.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 89

 

The tracery of Reims, as will be seen in the figure, is made
up of many small pieces of stone jointed as in ordinary arch
“ me TW Tren i hh Mr gH AS ee
in leo au in Sulit -

oe

Sea >} Scie
i] fi :
i ue i Wie Me 4 A

 

ie x

ae [he
rn

    
 

 

 

      
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ea ea C ee wg eS . SiS Ce
i ou if YY Cy s Ag \ vl | wall
“ My WY J 4 a AY AK i
Li 7 7 Neel ‘ ee
Me ‘ RR \ st
Oa Mh | Wo! Ye
i i \ WF ‘i 1 } YA
W \\ a" i oH
y 4 aA
el ( \ ATR A il
" WE ih Way : a a) uo
i MO \ ; yh
ot | i \ A J. ‘y 4
is i 1" HH XK \ Ly PR y ; 3
3 Ht a a ~ : |
tip: ! \ Wy S\ Westie” A Hl fr
in é : JP NTA
i Uh A y / \ Wr oh
HIN MRS

 

uy ; ie
\ He a

i

is

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ta ait!
"aN | i il
Tam We
ai Ml WW

FIG. 48.

construction ; but that of Paris is composed of fewer, and
consequently larger pieces——a method which rendered it
go GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

possible to make the bars very much more slender, and yet
to secure equal strength. One of these new clerestory
windows is seen in the left bay in Fig. 46. To accomplish
the change the pretty circular opening, seen in the unaltered
bay to the right, had to be sacrificed; a string-course was
inserted far below the springing of the vaults, down to
which level the splays of the new openings were brought.
The tracery is more simple than that of Reims, the sexfoil
being omitted from the circle, and it is also more slender.
The form of the window head is changed from that of the
original window into a more acutely pointed arch, which is
nearly concentric with the remodelled vault above it... Both
it and the vault disagree strikingly with the old longitudinal
rib which remains undisturbed, affording an instance of the
frankness with which traces of what previously existed are
allowed to remain in medizval work when occasion gives
rise to changes or corrections. Such traces add much to
the historic value of these monuments, and not unpleasantly
correspond with what we frequently find in the works of old
designers in the sister arts of painting and engraving, where
corrections are made with little attempt at concealment, as
in the case of the well-known horse’s hoof in Diirer’s
engraving of the Knight and Death.”

In the case of these clerestory windows of Paris it may,
I think, be questioned whether they were improvements to
the building. There was a severe and simple beauty in the
older design, with its unique rose in the upper triforium,
that is not wholly compensated for by the tall new windows
which do not fit very well into the old work. The windows,
moreover, though their tracery, in its mode of construction
and in its lightness, is an advance upon the tracery of Reims,
are, in their relation to the building, not so distinctly Gothic ;
for the windows of Reims completely fill the spaces between
the piers of the building, while those of Paris still leave a
large wall space remaining.

Very soon after it had been recognised in the apse of
Reims that the openings might safely be made equal to the

‘1 Many more particulars concerning the changes that were made in this

building at this time are given by Viollet-le-Duc, s.zv. Construction, and elsewhere ;
but those noticed above are, for the most part, not referred to by him.

2 Motives of economy doubtless had much to do with the preservation of old
work when changes were made in these buildings.
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE gI

 

entire spaces between the piers, the now growing art of
painting on glass led to the universal practice of making
them so. Vast and resplendent colour-designs in glass,
softening the light and affording a grateful warmth of effect,
thus became the leading mode of enrichment of the interior
by colour. ‘

The tracery by which these great openings were divided
was constructively necessary to support the expanses of
enclosing glass against the force of winds; and the
greater the area of the opening the larger was the number of
tracery bars required to afford this support. Hence the
extensively subdivided tracery of the vast apertures of fully
developed Gothic buildings—like the Cathedral of Amiens
—which, by its very nature, afforded a beautiful mode of
enrichment and adornment of the windows.

The enlargement of the clerestory opening, to the ex-
tent of doing away with the wall entirely beneath the vault
rib, resulted in an important simplification of the con-
struction, of which we have, I think, the first instance in the
clerestory of the nave of Amiens, where the longitudinal rib
and the archivolt of the opening, as has been pointed out by
M. Viollet-le-Duc, become one and the same member, while
the longitudinal rib shaft becomes a member of the window
jamb.

As before noticed, the clerestory and triforium in the nave
of Amiens are united into one grand composition by the
descent of the longitudinal rib shafts and the shaft of the
central mullion to the level of the triforium string. These
three members divide each bay of the triforium into two
bays, in each of which is a pointed arch encompassing
a sub-order of three pointed arched openings. The same
arrangement is repeated, with minor variations, in the nave
of St. Denis. In this case each of the three mullions
of the clerestory window descends through the triforium,
dividing it into four bays—an arrangement which gives to
the triforium a somewhat unpleasant effect by making its
main divisions to consist of a series of upright rectangles.

The triforium passage in France, when it is not a vaulted
gallery, is always enclosed by a thin screen of masonry, hiding
the open space between the aisle vaults and the timber roof
over them. Nothing but masonry is, therefore, to be seen in
g2 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

the interior of a French church, in consequence of which it
has a strikingly consistent and monumental effect that is
in some degree lost when the timbers of the triforium are
exposed to view.

In the aisles, as in the clerestory and triforium, the
openings, in the fully developed style, reach from pier to
pier—a thin wall for enclosure, carried up to the window sills,
being all the wall that is visible from the interior.

Thus were the walls of the former style practically
suppressed, their place being taken by screens of painted
glass, sustained by a slender framework of stone wrought
into beautiful geometrical designs.

We have now examined the leading structural develop-
ments of French Gothic buildings as far as concerns their
longitudinal bays, and it only remains to examine those of
the eastern and western terminations, and also of transept
ends, and of towers and spires.

The traditional semicircular apse, greatly enlarged and
varied in the developed style by a polygonal form, is the
characteristic eastern termination of French churches, though
in exceptional cases this form gives place to the square, as
at Laon Cathedral, where the original round apse was re-
placed at an early period by a square end.

A more beautiful termination than the round or poly-
gonal apse, as designed by the medizval architects of France,
it is hard to conceive. No part of the Gothic edifice does
more honour to these builders. The low Romanesque apse—
vaulted as in older times with a plain semi-dome—pre-
sented no constructive difficulties, and produced no very
imposing effect. But the soaring French chevet, with its
many-celled vault, its divided stories, and its encircling aisles,
taxed the utmost inventive and executive skill, and deserves
universal admiration.

It is now hardly possible to trace the earliest development
of the Gothic chevet. That of St. Denis was destroyed in the
thirteenth century, and certainly not one of an earlier date
exists complete. The apse of Senlis has lost its original vault,
and is therefore serviceable as an example only so far up as
the clerestory string. But the apse of the Cathedral of Noyon
remains complete and in excellent condition. Like all early
Gothic apses it retains the semicircular plan, which had
Il GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 93

 

been constant in Romanesque design. Its high vault (plan,
Fig. 49)1 is in five cells, whose ribs intersect upon the first
transverse rib of the choir, and are abutted by the diagonal
ribs of the first rectangular compartment. In order to effect
the abutment this compartment is made tripartite—that is,
its diagonal ribs, instead of each consisting of two branches
abutting in the centre of the compartment, and thus, in plan,

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 49.

following the diagonals of the rectangle, consist of but one
branch which runs to the centre of the eastern transverse
rib. These branches are abutted, however, by the first two
ribs respectively of the apse compartment; and hence the
two compartments together may be considered as forming
one octopartite vault.

In elevation each bay of the apse is like a single bay of
the straight part of the edifice, except that it is narrower
and is on a curved plan; its vault cells also are substantially
like the lateral cells of the rectangular compartments, except

1 This figure is copied from Vitet’s Monograph on the Cathedral of Noyon.
94 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

that those portions which are comprised between the ribs
and the piers up as high as the springing of the narrow arches
which span the ends of the cells, become merely vertical
walls instead of having the conoidal form. In fact, the
vaulting system and the forms of the lower portions of the
vaults are in the apse very much as they are in the
intermediate system in sexpartite vaulting.

 

 

 

 

 

 

|

FIG. 50.

The apse of the Cathedral of Paris is the next one of
importance, and it is among the most admirable and
majestic apses in France. Its high vault is, like that of
Noyon, in five cells, and its ribs intersect, in the same
manner, on the transverse rib of the adjoining rectangular
compartment, being abutted as before by the ribs of this
compartment (Fig. 50).' But beyond this there is a differ-

1 The are of the plan of the apse is in this case more than half a circle, its
centre being somewhat eastward of the point of intersection of the ribs. Two of
these ribs are consequently longer than the others.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 95

 

ence, which is worthy of notice, between these two construc-
tions. In the choir of Noyon, the vaults being quadripartite,
the ribs of the compartment adjoining the apse would
not naturally have furnished an abutment for those of the
apse; for the diagonals of a quadripartite vault intersect
in the middle of the compartment. Therefore in order to
secure abutment this compartment was made tripartite as
we have seen, uniformity being sacrificed, in a truly Gothic
spirit, to constructive exigency. But in Paris, and also at
Bourges, the vaults of the choir being sexpartite, the plan
is so arranged that a half of a double compartment shall
adjoin the apse. The transverse rib upon which the apse
ribs intersect thus corresponds to the intermediate rib of a
sexpartite compartment, and hence this rectangular com-
partment is naturally tripartite, and forms a natural abutment
to the compartment of the apse. For a sexpartite system
no better arrangement could be devised.

Even for quadripartite vaulting the arrangement of Noyon,
though logical and effectual, is not the best. The marked
disparity in form and in the size of the respective cells,
which it occasions between the easternmost compartment
and the other compartments of the choir, was a defect which
the builders were not slow to observe and to correct.

A better arrangement was discovered at Chartres (Fig.
51), and was afterwards more perfectly carried out at Amiens.
At Chartres the centre of the arc of the apse is, as at Paris,
set eastward of the line spanned by the easternmost trans-
verse rib; but instead of lengthening the apse ribs (as they
are lengthened at Paris) to meet this transverse rib, they
are shortened so as to meet a little eastward of the true
centre, while additional ribs, a, are introduced, springing from
the easternmost piers of the choir, whence they also converge
upon the same point. These additional ribs thus furnish
effectual abutment to the others, and the vault of the apse
is rendered independent of the vaults of the choir. The
choir vaults are now uniformly quadripartite ; the awkward
expedient adopted at Noyon being no longer necessary. At
Chartres, too, the semicircular or segmental form is replaced
by that of a polygon. The introduction of the two additional
ribs in the vault gives eight instead of five cells to the apse,
and the plan thus becomes a polygon of seven sides ex-
96 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

clusive of the long side marked by the transverse rib which
separates the apse from the choir.

 

 

 

 

FIG, 51.

The apse of Amiens (Fig. 52)’ is perhaps the grandest
in which this polygonal plan is carried out. And its plan,
though perfectly simple, is most ingenious and _ perfect.
The centre of the arc is in this case set to the eastward still
farther than at Chartres, and upon this centre the ribs are
made to converge. These ribs are now consequently all of
the same length; and the whole effect is harmonious and
admirable in the highest degree.

Among the finest earlier Gothic apses is that of St. Remi
of Reims, which was constructed toward the end of the
twelfth century. Below the clerestory it closely resembles the
apse of Paris; its lower piers, its vaulting system, and the
forms of ground-story and triforium arcades (like Paris it has
a vaulted triforium gallery) being almost identical in design.
It is, however, in advance of Paris as regards attenuation of
supports and general lightness of construction. Like the
Cathedral of Noyon it has a second triforium ; and it is
noticeable that this second triforium is united with the
clerestory by shafts which embrace both stories, as at
Amiens and St. Denis. The openings of the clerestory and
the outer openings of the vaulted gallery are three in each

1 Fig. 52 is copied from Viollet-le-Duc.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 97

 

bay ; they are closely grouped, and entirely fill the spaces
between the piers. This is not a common form of opening
in France, and it is not strictly in accordance with the
Gothic system; for although the openings quite fill the
spaces between the piers (the dividing members having
scarcely more volume than mullions), they do not quite fill
the space beneath the vault rib, since their solid tympanums
necessarily occupy a good deal of it.

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 52.

There is hardly a construction in France of more interest
than this portion of St. Remi as showing how the Gothic
style is but an evolution from the Romanesque. Ex-
ternally the plain round apse, the projecting apsidal chapels,
and the general quietness of effect are strikingly reminiscent
of the old monastic style ; while yet the bold flying buttresses
and the large openings, nearly suppressing the walls, bespeak
a structure on strictly Gothic principles. This apse is another
striking illustration, too, of the fact that the development of
Gothic construction was from within outward, the internal
arrangements necessitating those of the exterior, and the
exterior assuming the Gothic expression first, as here shown,

H
98 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

in the large constructive members, and finally in every detail.
Figs. 53 and 54, portions of the interior and exterior, re-
spectively, of this apse will illustrate these remarks.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG, 53.

The vaulting of the apsidal aisles presented difficulties
which had been very embarrassing to the constructors
previous to the employment of the pointed arch and the
adoption of a system of supporting ribs. These difficulties
grew out of the peculiar forms of the spaces to be vaulted—-
II GOTAIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 99

 

forms which presented great disparity between the spans of
the pier archivolts and those of the wall arches. The inter-
section of a cone (which was necessarily the form of the
transverse vault) with a barrel vault on a segmental plan

na

NOOR

Spies

 

 

FIG. 54.

gave groins whose plans were wavy lines, and which were so
salient in parts as to possess little strength. Many unsightly
results were produced in the efforts of the Romanesque
builders to construct such vaults at once securely and
conveniently To illustrate these experiments would
require more space than it is worth while to give to them
in this connection. It is enough here to say that the

1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Voute, p. 489, e¢ seg.
100 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

difficulties which they attempted unsuccessfully to solve with
the round arch were wholly removed, as we have seen in St.
Denis, by the use of the pointed arch and of groin ribs.
In addition to what has already been shown concerning
the vaults of St. Denis
Ds ¢ one further illustra-
tion of the flexibility
of the Gothic system,
in the construction of
such vaults, is afforded
by the Cathedral of
Paris.

The form of each
vaulting compartment
of an apsidal aisle is,
of course, trapezoidal ;
and where two such
compartments adjoin
each other concen-
trically, as they do in

the double apsidal aisles of Paris (Fig. 55), there results
an awkward difference in the lengths of their sides. The
simple arrangement employed at St. Denis and elsewhere
might still, of course, be employed ; but the disparity in the
spans of the arches and in the magnitudes of the cells
would, on this arrangement, be very great. To obviate this
the architect of the apse of Paris adopted another method
whereby all the longitudinal arches are rendered of nearly
equal span. This result is obtained by dividing the longest
side of the compartment A into two parts by the insertion
of a pier, a; and the longest side of the compartment B into
three parts by the insertion of two piers, 8 and c There are
no intersections of the arches, and consequently no common
keys in these compartments, each line in the plan re-
presenting a complete arch

In regard to chapels the Gothic apse in France differs
considerably in different buildings according as the ecclesi-
astical, or the communal, influences predominated in the
foundation. In the one case chapels are general and

FIG. 55.

vi For full particulars regarding the mode, at once simple and ingenious, of
filling in these triangular spaces, see Viollet-le-Duc, 5.2. Voute, p. 512.
1 GOTAIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 101

 

pronounced, while in the other they are either, wholly
wanting or are but slightly developed. The Cathedrals of
Senlis, Noyon, and Chartres are instances of the first, and

those of Paris and Bourges of the second class. In the

 

FIG. 56.

more developed Gothic, as at Amiens and Beauvais, apsidal
chapels become general, and add great richness to both the
interior and exterior effects of the building.

The combination of apse, apsidal aisle, and apsidal
chapels called for a wonderful degree of structural ingenuity,
and led to some of the most charming interior effects. And
102 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

among such combinations hardly any are more admirable
than those which were constructed towards the close of the
twelfth century, of which St. Leu d’Esserent (Fig. 56) affords
a typical example.

The plans of nearly-all_large French churches include
transepts. Bourges, among cathedrals of the first magnitude,
is exceptional in having none. In some large buildings, as
in Paris, the transept is of slight projection. In others, as
at Noyon and Laon, it is more extended. In some cases it
is without aisles, as at Paris and Noyon. In others it has
aisles, as at Chartres, Amiens, and Reims. More rarely, as
at Sens, there is an eastern, but no western aisle. And
in some transepts, as in those of Laon and Sens, there are
chapels opening out of the eastern aisle. The transept
usually terminates in a square end; but at Noyon both ends
are apsidal, while at Soissons one end is round and the other
is square. The round transept end is formed by a continua-
tion of the side walls and buttresses, with their horizontal
divisions. But in the usual square termination an ap-
propriate fagade is given, which is often of a very imposing
character. This fagade corresponds, in its main divisions,
with the interior, being in three stories, exclusive of the
gable. Where there are aisles the vertical divisions are
marked by buttresses which divide the facade into three
bays. The flying buttresses appear over the roofs of the
aisles, and the whole structure is largely expressive of the
form of the interior. On the ground-story of the central
compartment there is a great portal, while the aisle ends
usually have windows instead of doors. At the triforium
level is a range of arched openings, while in the division
above is usually a vast wheel window surmounted by a
gable. The facade of the south transept of Amiens answers
to this description completely. But every great church
exhibits more or less conspicuous variations from every
other in this, as in its other main parts. In some cases the
transept portals are so vast and so richly adorned as to
almost equal, as at Paris, and sometimes even to surpass, as
at Chartres, those of the main facade. The transepts of
Chartres are provided with vast and unique porches which,
with their respective portals, are among the grandest archi-
tectural productions of the Middle Ages,
YN GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 103

 

Of the majestic aspect of the great west end of a French
Gothic cathedral too much in praise can hardly be said,
notwithstanding that in it the constructive principles which
distinguish the style, and which most excite our wonder and
admiration, are least manifest. These fagades are sometimes
criticised on the ground that they disguise the true char-
acter of the structure behind them. It is, perhaps, true that
an entirely satisfactory design for a western fagade was
hardly ever realised in a large Gothic church, though at
Paris, Amiens, and Reims we have west fronts of magni-
ficent, and for the most part appropriate, character.

It may be said in behalf of these designs that it is not
an imperative principle that a fagade should wholly express
the structure of the building of which it forms the front.
The facade rarely can do this in any architecture. But it
may be admitted as a principle that unnecessary conceal-
ment of internal arrangements is an architectural offence ;
and hence those horizontal arcades which connect the
towers in the grandest of Gothic fronts, hiding the forms of
the gables behind them, may seem at first not easily de-
fensible. It should be remembered, however, that the gable
over a Gothic nave is not the true roof, and that the form

- of the vault is not wholly incongruous with the horizontal
arcade. To the eye at least this arcade harmonises well
with the total composition—a composition which is de-
termined largely by the great lateral towers; and to the
eye, if not in reality, this arcade performs the function
of steadying the towers. As for the towers themselves, it
would be hard to conceive any more appropriate termination
for the aisles. And yet from the front view they quite mask
the whole of that wonderful mechanism of flying buttresses
which reveals so much of the distinctive character of Gothic
art. But it is always easy to get a view which commands
the whole structural system, and in such a view we are
impressed with the majesty and appropriateness of the
mighty towered western front. In fact, criticise it as we
may, it is hard to see what better could be done. Without
the towers the front would be wanting in that special
emphasis and dignity which are appropriate to a great
communal edifice. In the smaller and less important
churches a treatment like that of transept ends was some-
104 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

times adopted. The small Church of bo aeuar nies LS
57) has a facade of this form. The whole structural char-
acter of the building is perhaps as fully expressed in this
facade? as it could be ; and where there is, as in this case, a
transept and a central tower, the whole together makes a

charming and impressive composition. Bisa
The practice of terminating the western extremities oO
the aisles of large churches by towers was established in the

 

FIG. 57.

Romanesque period ; and an instance of the simple character
of the resulting facade is afforded by the Abbaye-aux-
Hommes (Fig. 58). These towers are flanked by plain
pilaster buttresses of two orders, which rise without set-offs
to nearly the level where the towers disengage themselves
from the central compartment of the facade. At this level
they are banded by a string-course which continues across
the entire front, and above it they are carried up three
stories higher.2 The facade is divided into three stories

1 T have seen this church from a distance only; and I am not sure whether
this facade is at the eastern or the western end.

2 The spires which now crown these towers do not, of course, belong to the
GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 105

Il

 

marked by plain string-courses.

In the ground-story three

round arched portals of modest dimensions, and each of
three orders, open into the nave and aisles respectively ;
while in the central compartment are three round arched

 

       
     

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 58.

The original roofs were replaced by them in the thirteenth

small arched opening, completes a design which is simple

A low gable over the central compartment, with a single
even to baldness.

openings in each of the upper stories, and in each tower
compartment is one such opening in each of the same stories.

original construction.

century.
106 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

It will be instructive to follow some of the changes
which were wrought by the Gothic builders upon this simple
scheme, and to see what different character they finally give
it, retaining to the last these leading component elements.
The development was less rapid here than in the other parts
of the building ; and, indeed, it was not till near the end of
the twelfth century that the distinctly Gothic impress began
to predominate over the Romanesque characteristics. Still
the germs of the new style appear in the facade of St. Denis
—in the larger dimensions of its recessed portals, in the
presence of the pointed arch in some of its openings, in the
large wheel window of the upper compartment of the
central bay, and in the general character of its sculptured
enrichments.

A more distinct approach to the Gothic type is shown in
the facade of the Cathedral of Senlis (Fig. 59), which dates from
the end of the twelfth century. Although in main features
it is almost the same as that of the Abbaye-aux-Hommes, it
nevertheless shows a new spirit—a spirit that bespeaks the
vigorous activity of the Gothic genius. Here are the same
plain square-edged tower buttresses dividing the front vertically
into three bays. The central bay is divided horizontally into
three stories by simply moulded string-courses, the upper
one of which breaks around both towers and buttresses.
The whole width of the central bay in the ground-story is
occupied by a recessed portal in five orders with pointed
arches, which is probably the earliest of the unparalleled
series of portals of distinctly Gothic type which so distinguish
the architecture of France in the twelfth and thirteenth
centuries. Over this portal is a great pointed arched opening
of four orders, which must originally have been divided by
one or more shafts and a pierced tympanum, but whose
present dividing members are incongruous interpolations of a
later time. In the third story is a small circular opening of
three orders—also filled with tracery of a later date,—and
on either side of it is a pointed arched niche?! of two orders,
enshrining a statue. There is a smaller pointed doorway of
three orders in the ground-story of each tower bay, the stilted
and pierced tympanums of which are of curious design. Above

. The niche is not a Gothic feature, but as yet the Gothic fagade was but
beginning to develop.
Il GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 107

 

the doorway in the south tower is a small pointed arched
aperture of two orders, while the corresponding opening in
the north tower is smaller and round arched. Above each
of these openings there is an obtusely pointed blind arcade

 

of two arches on slender shafts, and over these again are
small circular openings like that on the same level in the
central bay. The tower buttresses here, unlike those of the
Abbaye-aux-Hommes, continue up to the cornice of the first
story above the roof of the nave. In this story the space
108 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP. II

 

between the buttresses is occupied by coupled pointed arched
openings of two orders. The north tower was not completed
above this level; but that on the south is surmounted by a
spire of early thirteenth century construction, and of almost
unrivalled beauty.

Unlike the main body of the building, the Gothic facade
is largely the result of a mere modification and enrichment
of Romanesque forms rather than a growth from new con-
structive principles. The fagade with its towers is, for
the most part, simply a storied edifice, which may, indeed,
as at Reims, by the width of its openings, the slenderness
of their dividing members, and the general upward impulse
of its lines, attain a high degree of Gothic expression, but
it is not a structure into which any dynamic principle
largely enters. This being so, the criticism which early
Gothic facades, like the Cathedral of Paris, sometimes receive,
as wanting in Gothic character, is not well founded. The
facade of Paris (Fig. 60) is one of the most Gothic, as it
is also one of the grandest of structures of this kind. It
is certainly the most remarkable facade that had been
erected up to its time; and for dignity, sobriety, and ex-
treme beauty of details it has hardly been surpassed. The
general scheme of design is still the same as in the Abbaye-
aux-Hommes; but such is the treatment of its elements
that the Gothic spirit is manifest in every part. Its large
divisions are admirably proportioned and beautifully sub-
divided. The Romanesque characteristics have completely
disappeared from the apertures, arcades, and even from the
moulding profiles, while in Senlis the Romanesque profiles
are largely retained. Three majestic portals on the ground-
story, above them a great central rose flanked on each side
by twin pointed apertures and a circle embraced by an
encompassing arch, a magnificent shafted arcade, sheltering
twenty-eight sculptured statues, dividing these stories, an
elegant, though gigantic, open arcade over all, and the
two towers, each pierced by coupled pointed openings, rising
one story higher, make up a most impressive architectural
composition.

The magnificence, without extravagance, of the still
richer facade of Amiens (Fig. 61) is, in some respects,
beyond all praise. In addition to the leading features of
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
110 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP. II

 

Paris it has gables over its three vast portals; these gables
are advanced so as to be even with the outer faces of the
buttresses—an arrangement which adds greatly to the depth
of the archivolts, and converts the lower portions of the
buttresses into doorway jambs. Beneath the arcade of
sculptured statues is an elegant open arcaded gallery ; while
the great open arcade of the top story of Paris gives place,
here at Amiens, to two superposed lesser arcades connecting
the towers above the cornice. It is sadly to be regretted
that the great rose has lost its original tracery—the existing
flamboyant tracery wholly disagreeing with the spirit of the
rest of the design. In this facade wall-spaces are every-
where in effect suppressed, and the Gothic character is every-
where strongly emphasised. Indeed, this facade, like the
interior which it encloses, marks the culmination of Gothic
art in its entirely normal condition.

It is hard to speak critically of so marvellous a structure
as the fagade of the Cathedral of Reims. The period of its
foundation (1260) was a time when the vitality and spontaneity
of the Gothic movement were, in great measure, spent ; and
the signs of waning life are not wanting in this monument.
It has qualities, however, which almost entitle it to a first
place among Gothic fagades. In the magnitude of its open-
ings, the attenuation of their dividing shafts, and the general
predominance of vertical members, it is more Gothic in
expression than any other fagade of the thirteenth century in
France, and yet its defects are both serious and prominent.
Among the most marked of these is the projection of the
great portal jambs, with their archivolts, beyond the faces of
the buttresses, and the continuation of the splays to the outer
faces of the jambs, so that those of the adjoining portals
almost meet in a sharp edge. The buttress is thus quite
suppressed as a feature in the ground - story, where it is
especially important that it should be pronounced. Another
unhappy arrangement is that of the pointed arch encom-
passing the great rose, which gives the rose the effect of an
awkwardly managed afterthought. The soaring aspect,
which is very marked in this design, is secured not only
by great height in proportion to width, and general pro-
minence of upright lines, but also by the artifice of breaking
the level courses by gables rising through them, and by the
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 
112 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

addition of an acute gable above the top arcade between the
towers.!

The west fronts of Senlis, Paris, Amiens, and Reims
sufficiently illustrate the development and the characteristics
of the French-Gothic facade. Its typical form, as exhibited
in the Cathedral of Amiens, is truly a marvel of architectural
design. With the given elements and conditions it is hard
to see how a more consistent and beautiful product could
have been created. The arch, the shaft, the buttress, and the
dividing string are employed in it not only with mechanical
propriety, but with the most subtle artistic feeling. Indeed,
by the simple adjustment of proportions the Gothic builders,
in these structures, wrought wonders.

Nor ought we to convey the impression that structural
developments were altogether wanting in this part of the
building, though it is true that here such developments were
fewer, and were hardly ever apparent externally.

M. Viollet-le-Duc has shown,? for instance, that in vast
buttresses like those of the facade of Paris the tendency to
settlement of the mortar beds is greater at the inner part, which
is the more heavily weighted, than at the outer face. This
inequality of settlement would tend to cause rupture were the
buttress constructed of mere horizontal beds of masonry all of
the same material. But if the weight falling on the lower
portions of the inner part were diminished by a system of
props carried up obliquely at different levels from the outer
face, the tendency to rupture would be neutralised. Accord-
ingly it has been found that the buttresses of the facade of
Paris have an internal structure consisting of a superposed
series of inclined masses of harder masonry which conduct
a great part of the weight from the inner portion to the outer
face of the buttress. To secure the outer face against
yielding to the outward push of these props the bonding
of the masonry is reinforced, at the levels where they find
foothold, by cramps of iron. The buttress thus becomes
really an organic structure, exhibiting something of the
dynamic principle which reigns throughout the rest of the
building.

1 In later forms of Gothic this artifice is carried to excess, as at Rouen and
Cologne.
* S.v. Construction, p. 158, ct seg.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 113

 

Of external features none is more striking, and after the
flying buttress, none shows more of the Gothic spirit, than
the stone spire with which, in the design, if not in the executed
work, the tower was crowned.
It is a feature, too, which, more
emphatically perhaps than any
other, marks the communal
spirit and influence. The spire
formed the governing feature
in any general view of the
medizval town, and was a
sign of municipal power and
prosperity. It was natural,
therefore, that the spire should
call forth the special enthu-
siasm and effort of the lay
builders.

Before the twelfth century
nothing like a true spire had
been built. The French towers
of the eleventh century, when
roofed with stone, had these
roofs constructed in the form
of a low square pyramid, like

: ; : ‘un
those which still exist over the |

te

a

towers that flank the apse of
Morienval (Fig. 62), and date
from about the middle of the
eleventh century.

In Normandy a more pointed
pyramid frequently took the place of the low one, as at
Basly and Rosel (Calvados), but it was still on a square
base.

In the Ile-de-France, however, the true octagon spire,
surmounting the square tower, with pinnacles occupying the
angles of the square, occurs early in the twelfth century, as
in the small churches of St. Vaast de Longmont, Chamant
near Senlis, and others. Of these Chamant (Fig. 63) is
especially interesting as exhibiting features which were
afterwards magnificently amplified in the unique spire of
the Cathedral of Senlis. These features are the acutely

I

 

FIG. 62.
114 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

gabled dormers,' with pierced tympanums, one on each of
the four faces of the octagon that are even with the tower
walls, and, above these dormers, the
openings pierced through each face
of the octagon. There are probably
few spires of earlier date; and
from such simple types the progress
was surprisingly rapid—-each new
construction showing some innovation,
and generally some improvement,
upon what had been accomplished
before. There were difficulties to
be overcome of no slight magnitude.
To manage the transition from the
square plan of the substructure to the
octagonal plan of the spire, so as to
secure both stability and beauty, was
by no means an easy matter when
there were no precedents to guide the
constructor.

If we regard these early spires as
experiments, which indeed they were,
in a new form of structure, we may
well wonder at their cleverness ; but
if we judge them by the subsequent
achievements in the building of spires,
we appreciate the points in which
they fail.

The adjustment of the octagon to
the square, as exhibited in this spire
of Chamant, was but partially success-
ful. The transition is too abrupt—
the upper story of the tower is not happily connected with
its substructure and superstructure by any continuity of
members ; but a great improvement was very soon made,
and the typical Gothic spire was brought into existence
almost at one stride, in the Cathedral of Chartres,

The south tower and spire of this cathedral (Fig. 64)

 

FIG. 63.

L Gabled dormers, though of a more primitive form, occur in the Norman
pyrainidal roof of St. Contest (Calvados). If they occur elsewhere in Norman
design they are certainly rare.
1 GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 115

 

were constructed between 1140 and 1160. Here the
octagonal pyramid, instead of rising directly from the square
tower, is raised upon an octagonal
drum, and four pinnacles built up
vertically against the diagonal
walls of this drum are based
upon the angle buttresses of the
tower, continuing their lines and
crowned by pyramidal summits
at the level where the great
pyramid begins. Pointed arched
openings in the four cardinal faces
of the vertical octagon are sur-
mounted by acute gables which
rise far above the angle pyramids
and abut the inclined walls of
the spire. Coursed half-round
mouldings strengthen and adorn
the spire angles,’ and a similar
moulding is wrought upon the
middle of each face. The transi-
tion from the square to the octa-
gon is thus accomplished in the
happiest manner; and the con-
tinuity of lines, all of which have
a perfectly structural function
and expression, is complete from
the ground to the apex.

The spire of the Cathedral of
Senlis (Fig. 65), erected early in
the thirteenth century, marks the
culmination of pure Gothic design
in this feature. In constructive
principle it presents all the ex-
cellences of the spire of Chartres ;
while for beauty of proportions,
grace of outline, and refinement
of details, it is hardly equalled by any other spire of

 

 

 

 

1 Similar mouldings had been employed in some Norman constructions, as
in the Tower of St. Loup (Calvados), figured in M. Ruprich-Robert’s Architecture
Normande.
 

 

 

 
CHAP, II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 117

 

the thirteenth century. In this case the octagonal drum
is much more elongated than at Chartres, as are all the
other proportions of the structure. The pinnacles which
here also rise from the angle buttresses are triangular in
plan, and consist each of three slender monolithic shafts,
which reach to about one-half the height of the drum,
carrying pointed arches surmounted by acute pyramids.
The axes of these pyramids are not vertical, but are in-
clined inwards towards the diagonal faces of the drum,
preparing the eye for the inclined lines of the spire, their
apexes rising just above the drum cornice. Ai tall pointed
arched opening pierces each cardinal face of the drum, and
a tall dormer, with acute and pierced gable, breaks each face
of the spire. Above these members the walls of the spire
are pierced on each face with two narrow upright openings
and one circular opening. Engaged coursed shafts rise
against the angles of the drum, and crockets adorn the
angles of the spire and of the summits of the pinnacles.

In spires of this form the diagonal walls of the octagon
are sustained by squinches in the re-entering angles of
the tower, and these, with their superstructure, bind and
weight its walls, and thus help to consolidate the fabric ;
while the oblique pressures of the spire are reduced to
a minimum by thinness of masonry, and by the weight of
the abutting dormers.

Of early Gothic spires on a large scale few now exist.
In many of the cathedrals and larger churches the progress
of the works was arrested before these features were reached,
as at Paris; and in others spires were constructed and
subsequently destroyed, as at Laon. But such construc-
tions as we have noticed are enough to show that the
imaginative and mechanical resources of the Gothic artists
were largely displayed in them as well as in other parts of
the fabric.

In the general external aspect of the French-Gothic
church, except in that which is presented by the front,
the structural system is everywhere plainly expressed.
We see at a glance that this is not an architecture of
walls and trussed timber roofs, but that it is an archi-
tecture of vaults maintained by piers and buttresses. So
marked is this appearance that M. Renan, in his excellent
il
is ae

vl

a

a mn

an =

 
  

be

   

i

a

i mt
igi

  

,
% ey AN
Oh at Wg

i i al

ay

  

i wf

ut

  

   

iY

iI

MO 2 | x
ia tt

il
si

S Shin i

te ae pt
ul

    

  
 
  
 
  
 
  
  
   
   

?iarriare|

fh 1

oY

TTR

FIG. 66.
CHAP. II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 119

 

remarks on Gothic art,! likens the Gothic edifice to an animal,
with its charpente osseuse autour de lui. In the frankness
with which its functional members are confessed, joined
with the skill with which they are at the same time wrought
into adornments, reside largely the grandeur and the
impressiveness of the external aspect of a great Gothic
cathedral.

The general proportions of the exterior are sometimes
criticised. But it is often forgotten that hardly any of the
great early churches were completed according to the ori-
ginal designs; and that not one of them has come down
to us without having undergone considerable and often very
damaging alterations. The churches which were the most
nearly completed, and have suffered least from alterations,
are generally remarkable for justness and harmony of pro-
portions.

As illustration of the general external aspect two
examples may be taken—-one an early and the other
a later structure. The first is the Abbey Church of St.
Leu d’Esserent (Fig. 66), and the second is the Cathedral of
Reims (Fig. 67). Both exhibit parts which belong to
different periods of construction ; but these parts are, for the
most part, of admirable character, and they assist in forming
exceedingly grand and harmonious wholes.

In the view of St. Leu we have the apse, the apsidal
chapels, the eastern towers, and the choir, all of which date
probably from about 1170.2 We have also the nave—which
must have been completed before the close of the twelfth
century, or very early in the thirteenth—and one of the
western towers, which is a remnant of an earlier edifice.
With exception of the western tower, which is ill adjusted to
the reconstructed nave, the total composition is conspicuously
fine in its groupings and just in its proportions. It is, in
fact, one of the best remaining examples of the simple

1  Discours sur Etat des Beaux-Arts” in the Mist. Littéraire de la France
au Quatorzidme Sidcle. Par Le Clerc et Renan. Paris, 1865.

2 I judge of the date by the style of the design alone. It is, on the one
hand, so closely similar in character to the style of the eastern portions of the
neighbouring Churches of Senlis and Noyon as to warrant the belief that the
construction was not much subsequent to them in date ; while, on the other hand,
the style of the capitals of the interior is such as to indicate that they must have
been wrought subsequently to those of the choir of Paris, which was begun
in 1163.
 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 67.
CHAP. II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 121

 

grandeur and purity of style of the Gothic monuments of
the twelfth century. .

The general view of Reims presents a striking consistency
and harmony of parts which is equalled by that of few other
French cathedrals, notwithstanding that the total composition
comprises portions that were wrought at successive periods
from 1212 to the early part of the fifteenth century. The
earlier and later portions, with exception of the gable of the
transept, are hardly seen in the general view. The visible
portions of the choir, the transept, and the nave were, for
the most part, all built in the thirteenth century, after
1240, about which time the work was recommenced after a
delay that followed the construction of the lower portions of
the east end.!

These two examples afford an interesting comparison—
the one showing the unadorned condition of external
features which is characteristic of the time when structural
exigencies were first being successfully met, and the other
showing the richness of the full development—when the
edifice stands forth clothed in a vast wealth of appropriate
adornment. Each condition has its own proper charm ;
but there is something in the restraint, and even in the
severity, of the early structure which holds our admiration
almost more than the magnificence of the later one.

We have now, perhaps, examined enough of these
structural forms to have gained a fair understanding of
them, and of their animating principles. They were the
result of an unparalleled impulse which had its source in the
social improvement which marked the eleventh century.
The numbers of churches that were erected in the Ile-de-
France during the first half of the twelfth century is
astonishing. No other part of Europe can show anything
like it? And this activity continued and gathered force
for at least three-quarters of a century after 1150.

1 For further particulars concerning the dates of the different portions of this
cathedral, see Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Cathédrale, p. 315, et seq.

2 Although St. Leu is a church of moderate dimensions, while Reims is a
cathedral of the first magnitude, the comparison still affords a good illustration of
the primitive and the mature characteristics respectively. Among the larger
buildings of the time of St. Leu hardly any retain so much of their original
aspect.

3 A glance at the Carte des Monuments Historiques de France, indiquant les
Ecoles @ Art du territoire Francais pendant la premicre moitié du XII Siécle,
122 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

We have examined but a few (though we have examined
some of the most important) of the buildings of this remark-
able epoch; but in nearly all the rest we should find
substantially the same progress and the same leading
characteristics. The movement was general throughout the
region where it arose, though there was a promptness of
development in some localities that was not shown in others.
The spontaneous character of the movement is conspicuous
also as well as its general prevalence. All the elements
of. the new style were products of the soil on which it
grew, or of the immediately adjacent districts. Of imita-
tion of foreign developments there was none; there was
not anything elsewhere at this time to imitate. After the
beginning of the twelfth century every traditional element
of building was here subjected to a process of re-creation
which was not superficial but radical.

It will be seen that the foregoing summary of the
structural characteristics of French Gothic agrees with that
which was given of Gothic construction in the preceding
chapter. For, in fact, any correct definition of Gothic must
be derived from analysis of the buildings of the Ile-de-France,
as will, I think, plainly appear after we have examined
the contemporaneous architecture of other countries.

A constant characteristic of this French Gothic is that
structural and artistic principles go hand and hand in it.
It does not appear that two independent processes were
carried on in the minds of the designers—the one mechanical,
and the other artistic. Artistic qualities are so wrought into
the construction, have so little independent existence, that
we feel the two principles to be inseparable in this art. The
builders were artists; and they invariably wrought with a
steady regard for and sense of proportion and harmony, not
less than of mechanical propriety. I would especially
emphasise this, lest from this somewhat lengthened examina-
tion of its structural growth it should be in any measure
inferred that Gothic architecture was such a growth merely.

We have in this chapter followed with some fulness the
development of French Gothic from its inception to its

published by the French Government, shows this district thickly studded with
churches, while in the neighbouring provinces they were more or less sparsely
scattered.
II GOTHIC CONSTRUCTION IN FRANCE 123

 

maturity. We have found the first distinct indication
of the formation of a new style in the apsidal vaults of
Morienval, succeeded by vaults constructed on thoroughly
Gothic principles in the Abbey Church of St. Denis. We
have seen the development extended in the Cathedrals of
Senlis and Noyon. We have found in the Cathedral of
Paris every functional member complete, and the Gothic
system therefore fully developed, though more or less that
is unessential, preventing the perfect expression of the
Gothic spirit, still clings to it. We have next seen these
lingering remains of Romanesque art—chiefly the extensive
and massive wall enclosures—gradually eliminated, and
the Gothic spirit more thoroughly pervading every part
of the building in the early portions of Reims, in the
remodelled portions of Paris, and finally in the nave of
Amiens, where the transformation from the old style to
the new is for the first time wholly accomplished.

In France, then, the Gothic style is found germinating by
the beginning of the twelfth century in Morienval, has
accomplished its structural transition by 1163 in the design
for the choir of Paris, and has reached its fullest distinctive
perfection by 1220 in the design for the nave of Amiens.’

In the next succeeding chapters we shall see how far
and how early a similar novel system of building existed
elsewhere in Europe.

1 [ take the dates of the beginnings of Paris and Amiens as marking the steps
of progress indicated in the text, because the architects had unquestionably
matured their schemes, as to their general characteristics, before the works were
begun.
CHAPTER III
POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND

FEW instances of the constructive use of the pointed arch, or
of the employment of groin ribs in vaulting, occur in England
prior to the rebuilding of Canterbury Cathedral by a French
architect, which was begun in 1175. One instance, however,

 

 

 

FIG, 68,

occurs at an early date in Malmesbury Abbey, a building
which is nearly contemporaneous with St. Denis in France.
Here in the vaults of the aisles we have a distinct approach
to Gothic construction. These vaults, though simple in
form and ponderous in their parts, are yet certainly advanced
cnar. 11 POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 125

 

in character for their time. In them the principle of inter-
penetrating round vaults, the forms of whose arches are
necessarily determined by the forms of their surfaces, gives
place, in a measure, to that of an independent system of
arches which command the forms of the vaults. The diagram
(Fig. 68) will explain their character. It will be seen that
the pier arch and the transverse arches are all pointed,
and that the diagonals are semicircular. It will be seen,
too, that the crowns of the diagonals reach to a considerably
higher level than those of the transverse and longitudinal
ribs, and that consequently the vaults are, like early French
vaults, considerably domed, as in the section a, 6. The ribs
are much less developed in section than the ribs of the
vaults of St. Denis—the diagonal rib, c, being so shallow as
apparently to add little strength to the groins, and the
transverse ribs, d, being plain square-edged arches of little
projection.

It is evident that the central aisle was originally designed
for vaulting with quadripartite vaults, since a group of three
vaulting shafts rises from each pier capital. Theseshafts clearly
belong to the original construction, as may be seen (Fig. 69)
by their perfect adjustment with the imposts of the great
arcade, and by their being banded by the original triforium
string. They emphasise the divisions of the bays and give
a continuity to the vaulting system, like that which is
characteristic of Gothic design in France. Another feature
with a likeness to French design is the wall which shuts off
the triforium arcade, screening from view the timber roofs
over the aisle vaults. This arrangement was not followed
in the subsequent pointed architecture of England, where the
timbers of the aisle roofs are generally visible from the
pavement of the central aisle. In all other respects the
structure is strictly Norman-Romanesque in character. The
great arcades are supported by ponderous round columns,
the spaces between them being not quite equal in extent to
two of their diameters; hence the massiveness of the con-
struction is in striking contrast to the comparative lightness
of St. Denis. It may be noticed in passing that the hood-
moulding over the pier archivolts is an early instance of a
feature that afterwards became practically constant in the
pointed architecture of England. But this feature, whose
126 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

real function is to protect the parts beneath it from the
weather, is hardly appropriate to an interior.

The existing high vaults are of late English construction,
and are ill suited to the lower portions of the building. If
the originally intended vaults were ever built over the

 

 

 

 

   

 

 
 

 
   
 

a a i ‘ia “
il ba >

4 Me H

ie a
= ci / | |
al : o Ut ee

nl i Ih,
'

 

- !
. I ma eset

 

FIG, 69.

central aisle, the effect of the interior must have been both
grand and impressive, though the scale of the building is not
large.

Such a building might lead to the belief that a Gothic
development, though not a native one, had begun in England
almost as early as in France. But Malmesbury stands an
isolated instance, and there is no other contemporaneous
building in England like it. It is not, like St. Denis, a link
HI POINTED CONSTRUGTION IN ENGLAND 127

 

in a chain of progress. Its vaulting is an imitation of
French work. Nothing in the island leads up to it, and
nothing directly comes of it. The building is not even con-
sistent with itself as one really animated by a new principle
would be. The new form of vaulting does not, as at St.
Denis, influence other parts of the structure. Its Norman
builders were not thoroughly imbued with those structural
principles which led Suger’'s workmen to give such con-
sistency to every part of the French fabric.

The buildings which immediately follow Malmesbury
show less, rather than more, approach to Gothic principles.
The early Cistercian Abbeys of the north exhibit no new
principles. In them the pointed arch occurs, indeed, more
or less frequently in arcades and openings, but it is without
influence upon modes of vaulting, and without structural
consequence in the general system. Vaulting, when it occurs
in these abbeys, is often of a very primitive and even rude
sort. The aisles of Fountains Abbey (Fig. 70),’ which date
from about the middle of the twelfth century, are, for instance,
vaulted with a succession of pointed vaults without penetra-
tions,” which are carried on heavy transverse round arches
springing from the piers on the one side, and from corbels
projecting from the wall on the other. With exception of
the pointed form the construction of these vaults is sub-
stantially the same as that of the vaults of the aisles of the
Basilica of Constantine at Rome. The central aisle of
Fountains was neither vaulted nor intended for vaulting.
The interior of the nave consists merely of broad, bare, and
massive walls carried on heavy pointed arches, supported by
plain round columns, and pierced above with small openings.
There are no triforium openings, and there is nothing whatever
of new structural principle involved in any part. In Kirkstall
Abbey, which is of about the same date, the aisle vaults are
groined, and have a full system of ribs—those which bound
the compartments being pointed. The arches of the pier
arcade are pointed, and are of three orders, and the piers
are composed of grouped members answering to these orders.

1 T take this figure from Sharpe’s Architectural Parallels.
2 It may not be generally understood that a vault without penetrations is a
vault not crossed by another vault. The vault referred to in the text differs from

a plain barrel vault only in having a pointed arched, instead of a round arched,
section.
128 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

No central vaults ever existed, and the design above the pier
arcade is the same as at Fountains. It is simply heavy
Norman work with pointed arches substituted in some places
for round ones.

Thus far in England, though the Cathedrals of Senlis and
Noyon were now building across the Channel, there is nothing
more advanced towards Gothic. But on the contrary, even

‘
u
| Soman

AVS W suc
ho eq ‘
y e sgt

3 ‘

 

 

 

 

FIG. 70.

later than this time, such important works as the Galilee of
Durham,’ the naves of Peterborough and Ely, and many
other buildings, were constructed in the unmodified Norman
style. No important structural change extending through
a whole edifice is manifest in England till William of Sens
begins that rebuilding of the choir of Canterbury to which I
have referred. And even this building, though a very beau-

1 The Galilee of Durham is usually classed, by English writers, as transitional.

But in structural principles it is Norman of the most primitive type, notwithstand-
ing the slenderness of its columns.
It POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 129

 

tiful and important one, is not—owing perhaps largely to the
fact that its designer was hampered by the necessity of pre-

 

 

     
     
  
   
  
    
  
   

peril

 

=

 

 

+e
aT rts oat et

PSR

 

SE

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

te

 

 

CZ ; a il
ie \ H | i i
ae TE a
I Hh Ly | Hl
a TE eae

FIG, 71.

serving and working intothe new edifice portionsof the previous
Norman fabric—so frankly and fully Gothic as the choir of
K
130 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

Paris, which had been designed more than a decade before.
{ This choir of Canterbury (Fig. 71) is the real beginning of
what Gothic there is in the pointed architecture of England.
From it, as the main source at least, is derived what is com-
monly known as the Early English style. It is in five bays,
and is vaulted with one quadripartite and two sexpartite com-
partments. These vaults are provided with transverse and
diagonal ribs, but are without longitudinal ribs. The transverse
ribs only are pointed. The vaulting shafts correspond in
number with the ribs to be carried—there being three in the
main group and but one in the intermediate pier. The
single shaft in the intermediate pier was probably derived
from Sens, where the longitudinal rib shaft is carried on
the clerestory ledge, rendering a single support for the inter-
mediate transverse rib all that is necessary. We shall pre-
sently see that this single vaulting shaft subsequently became
frequent in England, where, with little constructive propriety,
it is made to carry the three ribs of quadripartite vaults.
The vaulting shafts at Canterbury rest on the capitals
of the ground-story piers, which are alternately round and
octagonal columns. The pier arches are pointed and of two
orders of square section, such as are characteristic of con-
temporaneous design in France. The triforium, in this
portion, consists of pointed arches of two orders carried on
monolithic shafts. The clerestory is in two planes, divided
by a passage way. The inner plane is pierced by three
pointed arches—a larger central arch with one lesser
arch at each side,—which together nearly fill the space
enclosed by the vault. The outer plane is pierced by a
single obtusely pointed arch. This form of clerestory, with
round arches in place of pointed ones, is of Norman origin,
as may be seen in Durham Cathedral and elsewhere. With
more acutely pointed arches it subsequently became the
characteristic form in the so-called Early English style.
Though the constructive system of this choir is as a
whole less complete than that of contemporaneous buildings
in France—having a very undeveloped buttress system,—it is
yet internally a very beautiful and an almost strictly Gothic
structure ; but it is altogether an importation from the
Continent, and in no sense a native development. No
monument of like importance, and none whatever of the

SS al
MI POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 131

 

same character, had before been erected in England. Its
novelty struck the minds of all who beheld it with wonder
and admiration.’

It was natural that such a building should excite emula-
tion, and the lesson which it taught bore fruit in some of the
important erections which quickly followed it. Among the
earliest of these were the more easterly portions of the same
cathedral, the east end of Chichester, and the choir and east
transept of Lincoln. After the completion, by William of Sens,
of the choir and a portion of the east transept of Canterbury,
the master, having received injuries in a fall from the scaffold-
ing, relinquished the work and returned to France. He
was succeeded by another William, said to have been an
Englishman.

It is difficult to distinguish with precision the beginning
of the work of the second William. His whole work was, for
the most part, a mere carrying-out of the original design of
William of Sens. A few round abaci occur in the crypt
and on the east side of the transept, which are probably the
work of the second William ; everywhere else the square
abaci and the mouldings of the original design are retained,
as well as the French forms of pointed arches.

The Cathedral of Chichester was, like Canterbury, origin-
ally a Norman structure of the end of the eleventh century.
It was extensively damaged by fire in the year 1186, and
immediately thereafter repairs were begun which involved the
entire rebuilding of the two easternmost bays (Fig. 72)? At
the same time the whole church, including these two bays,
was vaulted with quadripartite vaults having transverse and
diagonal ribs, but no longitudinal ribs, which last are usually
wanting in the early pointed vaults of England. These ribs
interpenetrate at their springing, and thus are gathered upon
a single round abacus which covers a triple group of capitals.
They receive no support from the lower piers, but their
triple vaulting shafts, which are slender and closely grouped,
are sustained by corbels placed just above the capitals of the
lower piers. The lower pier (section, Fig. 73) consists of a

1 See the account of the rebuilding of this choir by the Monk Gervase in
Willis’s Monograph on Canterbury Cathedral. London, 1845.

2 I copy this and the following figure from Willis’s Architectural History of
Chichester Cathedral, Chichester, 1861.
132 GOTAIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

central round column of coursed masonry, surrounded by
four widely detached monolithic shafts, which are adjusted

 

FIG, 72.

to the arch orders of the ground - story only. We have
here an early instance of that want of structural continuity
which is a marked characteristic of pointed architecture in
III POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 133

 

England.’ An instance of a compound pier, none of whose °
members are directly employed in the support of the vaulting,
never occurs in the Gothic of France. Another defect of
this pier of Chichester is that of the great distance at which
the lesser shafts are placed in re-
lation to the central column, which
destroys that compactness of the

group which is essential to strictly
Gothic supports. The compound C)
capital, too, which is in idea the C) ‘

same as that of the pier at the
west end of the nave of Paris—
described in the last chapter—
necessarily shares this want of
compactness, and thus the whole
pier compares unfavourably with the French example.

The pier arcade is round arched and of two orders, the
triforium consists of a round arch in each bay encompassing
a sub-order of two pointed arches carried on clustered shafts,
and the clerestory is substantially the same as that of
Canterbury. Externally there is a shallow buttress against
the clerestory wall, which is reinforced by a flying buttress
of a purely French type, perhaps the earliest instance of a
fully developed flying buttress in England.

The characteristics of this building are thus mixed. It
is not, like Canterbury, a French design, but it is apparently
the work of Anglo-Norman architects who adopted certain
features of the growing French style, and naturally modified
them according to their own tastes, but failed to perceive
their functional connections and structural logic. Yet, not-
withstanding the want of structural consistency, there is a
good deal of beauty in this work.

Almost immediately after Chichester (probably about
1190) were begun the deservedly famous choir and the east
transept of Lincoln Cathedral. In this beautiful building

FIG, 73.

1 Sir Gilbert Scott, in his Lecteres on the Rise and Development of
Medieval Architecture, vol. ii. p. 142, speaking of the development of the
system of receding arch orders, says: ‘‘ This gives us also our clustered columns,
which are, in fact, the mere decoration of the receding orders ofthe piers.” It is
true that the clustered column in England is usually nothing more than this ; but
in true Gothic the grouping of members in the pier has reference primarily to the
vaulting and not merely to the arch orders.
134 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

there is manifest a curious mingling of foreign’ and Anglo-
Norman characteristics” It is, in the main, an Anglo-
Norman modification of that portion of Canterbury which
was designed by William of Sens. Bishop Hugh, during
whose episcopate the work was executed, was a Frenchman
by birth and early training ; and his architect, Geoffrey de
Noyers, though perhaps, as has been affirmed, born on
English soil, was in all probability, as the name indicates, of
French or Norman extraction. However this may be, the
plan of the edifice—especially that of the original east end
—is distinctly French ; and French characteristics, modified
by Anglo-Norman taste, prevail throughout. In general, the
foreign influence governs the construction, while the Anglo-
Norman influence appears in the decorative details. Struc- /
turally, there is no other building in England that exhibits —
so much of Gothic character except Westminster Abbey,
which is rather a French than an English design.

The original eastern termination of this choir was
destroyed to make room for the existing Presbytery. It
was apsidal, with an apsidal aisle and three apsidal chapels.*
Each arm of the transept had two apsidal chapels on its
eastern side, three of which remain unaltered, and the
fourth, the north chapel of the north arm, has recently been

1 Parker, in his book entitled Az Sntroduction to the Study of Gothic
Architecture, and some other English writers have advanced the utterly
untenable theory that the choir of Lincoln is purely English work, showing no
trace of foreign influence. Such a theory is not worth serious consideration in
view of the facts regarding the state of England and of native English arts at
this time.

2 I say Anglo-Norman rather than English. For whatever part native
Englishmen may, at this time, have taken in architectural works, there can be no
doubt that all such works, when not, like the choir of Canterbury, wholly
conducted by Frenchmen, were mainly directed by Normans, or by men of
chiefly Norman descent. The architecture itself makes this clear enough.
Substantially, everything in it which is not distinctly French may be traced to
the early and contemporaneous Norman work both in Normandy and in England.
There are, indeed, certain minor peculiarities of design which may be attributed
to native influence. Native workmen were doubtless largely employed, though
certainly for the most part in subordinate capacities. Moreover, the fusion
between the two races, which hy this time had made considerable progress, would
naturally tend to produce men of mingled genius, whose work would partake
of both Norman and English characteristics. And such work we actually find
in the choir of Lincoln and in other early pointed buildings in England.

3 The plan of this apse was recovered during the last century when the
pavement of the Presbytery was taken up for repairs. A partial excavation made
in December 1886 in the south aisle of the Presbytery again laid bare a portion
of the old foundation.

\

\
J
ml POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 135

 

restored after having been elongated in the form of a
rectangle (Fig. 74). Westward of this transept the choir is
prolonged to the extent of four bays, and is terminated by a
second transept—a construction which, with exception of a
portion of its eastern side, is a work of the first quarter of
the thirteenth century.

 

Lincoln Cathedral is vaulted throughout. The vaults of
the choir are curious and even awkward in form; they
are difficult to describe clearly in words, but the plan, Fig. 75,
shows the arrangement of their ribs; and the elevation, B,
Fig. 78, gives the form of the longitudinal arch which is
also curious. It will be noticed that the lateral cells are
set obliquely, so that they do not meet each other in the
centre of the compartment. But in principle they are
substantially the same as ordinary quadripartite vaults,
each compartment being complete in itself. The rib system
includes a longitudinal ridge rib, probably the first instance
of the introduction of this structurally useless member which
subsequently became an almost constant feature of English
vaults. The longitudinal arch is not provided with a rib ;
but in place of it there is merely a slender moulding. This
longitudinal arch springs from the same level as the
transverse and diagonal arches, and hence the vaulting
conoid is spread out over a considerable extent of wall (its
136 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

middle section being nearly square) instead of being concen-
trated, as in French vaulting, upon the pier.

The upright supports of these vaults consist of a single
vaulting shaft against each pier,
upon the capital of which the
ribs are all gathered. This vault-
ing shaft descended to the pave-
ment, forming one of the members
of the compound pier of the
ground-story." The lower piers
vary in design, but are alike in
general principle. The typical
form is that of a central octagonal

column of coursed masonry, having

\ four of its sides hollowed. Against

\ these hollowed or channeled sides

are grouped respectively four

x slender monolithic shafts carrying

the ribs of the central vaults, the

ribs of the aisle vaults, and the

sub-orders of the pier arches.

The whole system is shown in

the section, Fig. 76, through one
bay of this choir.

Unlike the pier of Chichester before noticed, this pier of
Lincoln has a functional relation to the vaulting similar to
that of the westernmost pier of the Cathedral of Paris,
though in its proportions and in its details it is very
different. It is constructively like a French pier throughout
its whole height, having a buttress (a, Fig. 76) incorporated
with it from the level of the triforium. This buttress is
reinforced by an arch, J, thrown across the triforium, and a
flying buttress, c, over the aisle roof; the united pressures
of the central vault, the aisle vault, the triforium arch, and
the flying buttress, being met by the great outer buttress, d,
against the respond pier of the aisle. This buttress, like
nearly every other part of the structure, is French in general
form, and Anglo-Norman in decorative detail.

 

 

 

 

FIG, 75.

1 At present these vaulting shafts are carried on ill-designed corbels inserted
in the wall above the imposts of the lower arcade. This damaging alteration
was made in the fourteenth century, when the space formerly occupied by these
shafts was wanted for the existing stalls.
ll POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 137

 

At the transept crossing the piers show the influence of
Canterbury most unmistakably. They are, in fact, structurally

 
 
 

v~- 82.43 To upper sre of vatilt nce

 

 

FIG. 76.

identical with the corresponding piers in the last-named
building,— except that the Lincoln piers contain two shafts
138 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

(a, in A, Fig. 77) that have no functional office. With this
exception they consist, respectively, of a central column sur-
rounded by detached monolithic shafts, each one sustaining

tN

!
dy ee
Th x .

CULT

Lays
a

|=

 

 

 

 

 

 

A
\
If

 

 

 

FIG. 77.

a rib of the vaulting. These shafts are in two superposed
orders—the first having their capitals at the springing of
the ground-story arches, and the second having bases which
1It POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 139

 

rest upon these capitals and capitals at the springing of
the vaults. But while at Canterbury (B in the same figure)
the bases and capitals are of purely French type—the capitals
having square abaci and Corinthianesque foliage, and the
bases square plinths, those of Lincoln are of the newly intro-
duced Anglo-Norman form—with round abaci, and what
English writers call “ stiff-leaved ” foliage, and round plinths.
The influence of Canterbury is shown also by the single
vaulting shafts of the choir vaults ; but in the use made of
them the want of a fine sense of structural consistency on
the part of the Anglo-Norman builders is obvious. At
Canterbury, where the vaults are sexpartite, the single vault-
ing shaft is only employed at the intermediate pier, where it
has but a single rib to sustain; while in the quadripartite
vaults of the choir of Lincoln it is employed at every pier,
and has to support three ribs.

The ground-story arches are obtusely pointed and of
two orders. The triforium openings consist of coupled
pointed arches, each arch embracing a sub-order of two lesser
pointed arches carried on clustered shafts. These arches are
not screened off by a thin wall of masonry from the triforium,
as are the arches of Malmesbury, but they open into it,
exposing to view the timbers of the aisle roofs. This
exposure, as I have before remarked, is common in English
churches. The clerestory is of the same type as that of
Canterbury—a type which is peculiarly Norman and may
be seen not only in Durham Cathedral, but even in the
Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen, where the two planes ot
masonry with triple openings in the inner plane occur, the
only difference being that the Norman examples have but
one opening in the outer plane, are more ponderous in con-
struction, and have round arches and short thick shafts.
Fig. 78, A and B, elevations of the clerestories of the
Abbaye-aux-Dames and of the choir of Lincoln respectively,
will illustrate this relationship.

The effect of this choir was doubtless greatly damaged
by the destruction of the original clever. The much over-
praised angel choir is not an appropriate termination for the
design, and affords no adequate compensation for the loss of
the apse of Geoffrey de Noyers.

( The choir of Lincoln is considered by English writers as

d
;
140 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

the first distinct example of an edifice in the so-called “ Early
English” style, and as a product of purely English genius.’
It is certainly one of the few buildings in England which
approach nearly to Gothic. It contains all the essential parts
of a Gothic edifice ; but they are so treated that a strictly
Gothic result is hardly reached. That the builders did not
possess a clear apprehension of the structural principles of
the new style is manifest in many points. Gothic forms
are used by them in an imitative rather than in an inventive
way. For instance, there is a want of compactness in the
lower piers, especially in those piers of the transept which

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

ea ee Jy. 2
abs |] ates]
Al 4 4
Ws] ht —
——
3 B
FIG, 78.

have the much-admired crockets on the angles of their
central members. A pier whose component parts are
thus widely detached, fails to conform to the principle of
Gothic building which demands the utmost concentration
of supports. The forms of the vaulting conoids, in spreading
out so widely upon the clerestory wall, are a still more signi-
ficant indication of the want of clear apprehension of Gothic
principle ; and the ponderous arches thrown across the tri-
forium in place of a second flying buttress are yet another.
Contemporaneous with Canterbury and Lincoln is the
Church of St. Mary’s, New Shoreham; its ground-story,
according to Sharpe, dating from 1175, and its upper
? «St. Hugh’s choir of Lincoln Cathedral is the earliest building of the pure
Gothic style free from any admixture of the Romanesque that has hitherto been

found in Europe or in the world,” says Mr. Parker.—Jrtroduction to the Stadly of
Gothic Architecture, p. 102.
II POINTED CONSTRUCTION 1N ENGLAND 141

 

portions from 1190 to 1210. The ground-story piers
are of massive Norman proportions, and, like those of the
choir of Canterbury, are alternately round and octagonal
columns. Their bases have the square plinths that are
common in French design of this epoch ; but instead of the
square abacus, almost universal in France, the capitals have
round and octagonal abaci in conformity with the respective
forms of the piers. The pier arches are pointed, and the
walls are unbroken by vaulting shafts, the vault supports
having no connection with the ground-story, but starting
from the triforium level. Thus, though it is more than
thirty years later, this ground-story is less advanced toward
Gothic than that of Malmesbury Abbey (which, in many
respects, it strikingly resembles), where the vaulting shafts
rest on the lower piers. From a corbel at the triforium
string rises, on each pier, a group of three vaulting shafts
whose clustered capitals have abaci formed by the clerestory
string, which projects at each group so as to cover them.

' The vaults are quadripartite, with their ribs all springing
from the same level, so that their pressures are not com-
pactly gathered against the pier, but are diffused laterally
over considerable spaces of wall. The clerestory has in
each bay one small pointed opening through its massive wall.
The triforium openings differ considerably one from another.
The two easternmost bays have single openings, each
consisting of a cusped pointed arch carried on shafts engaged
with the jambs which are of plain square section. These
openings do not more than half fill the spaces between the
piers. The bays farther westward have coupled pointed
openings in two orders, the sub-order being curiously and
clumsily massive.

Conspicuous instances of a peculiar and extensive class
of early pointed buildings in England are the Abbey Churches
of Byland and Whitby. The pointed arch prevails through-
out these buildings, except in the openings of the aisles of
Byland and in the first order of the triforium of Whitby,
where the arches are round. But these buildings have no
vaults and were evidently not intended for vaulting, though
shafts similar to vaulting shafts rise, from corbels situated a
little below the triforium string, to the top of the wall.
These shafts are thus only decorative features employed
142 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

precisely as were the engaged columns in the early arched con-
structions of the Romans, and the buildings are throughout,
notwithstanding their pointed arches, the same in principle
as those of round arched Romanesque design. They con-
sist merely of massive walls with timber roofs over their
central aisles; hence there are no lateral pressures calling
for a Gothic buttress system, and they have no organic
framework in which their strength resides.

A characteristic example of early pointed Norman
design is that portion of the choir of Ripon Cathedral which
was erected during the episcopate of Roger, Archbishop of
York, some time between 1154 and 118 I. This structure was
apparently designed for vaulting, as a group of five vaulting
shafts rise from the capitals of each of the lower piers, and
are terminated at the level of the clerestory string by capitals
in apparent preparation for a full system of vaulting ribs.
But the scheme appears to have been changed when this
level was reached, and a clerestory was added with a straight
cornice, a single shaft being carried up from the grouped
capitals of the vaulting shafts to the top of the wall. Unless
this be an alteration, some form of timber roof must, there-
fore, have covered this choir from the first. With exception
of the vaulting shafts there is no approach in this building
to Gothic constructive forms, though in common with the
abbey churches just mentioned, and many other contempo-
raneous edifices, the pointed arches of its pier arcades and
other openings give the interior a superficial appearance of
Gothic. The outer openings of Ripon are small and round
arched like those of Durham; the walls are massive, and
are provided externally with shallow pilaster strips instead
of buttresses.

It will be seen that the buildings already noticed
are very diverse in character, though in all of them the
pointed arch is more or less generally employed. In some
of them this arch is used structurally in portions of the
edifice, as in the aisle vaults of Malmesbury. In others
its structural use is more general, and a correspondingly
functional system of supports is connected with it, so that,
for the most part, a really Gothic character pervades the
work, as in the choirs of Canterbury and Lincoln. But
in the larger number the pointed arch is used, for the most
1II POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 143

 

part, only in arcades and single openings, while other Gothic
features are introduced without functional use.

This lack of structural unity exhibited by the pointed
architecture of the latter part of the twelfth century in
England is in marked contrast with the consistency of
structural principle everywhere exhibited at the same time
in the architecture of France. It shows that there was no
such consistent development in the architecture of England
as there was in that of France at this time. The pointed
arches and other Gothic features in England, with few excep-
tions, were due to direct continental influence, but were
merely ornamental modifications of structurally unmodified
designs; and even this ornamental modification was by
no means as yet universal. For contemporaneously with
Canterbury and Lincoln were built the great naves of such
important churches as Ely and Peterborough,! in which the
round arched and heavy walled Norman art remains sub-
stantially unchanged. Even the aisle vaults of the nave of
Peterborough, though provided with transverse and groin
ribs, are in other respects essentially Norman construc-
tions. The pointed arch is nowhere employed in them,
and their workmanship is heavy and inelegant. Had there
been anything in England at this time corresponding with
the architectural movement of the native schools of lay
builders in France, it would have been impossible that such
vaults as these, to say nothing of the nave with which they
are joined, should be constructed half a century after the
vaults of St. Denis, and while the choir of Lincoln was
building in the near neighbourhood.

The failure among the architects in England to com-
prehend the true principles of Gothic building becomes still
more marked in the thirteenth century, as the so-called
Early English style advances, and more still, as it passes
into the Decorated or Geometrical. An examination of a
few typical buildings of this period will illustrate this fact.
Among the most important and the finest of the earlier
class is the nave of Lincoln, erected between 1209 and
1235. Already in this structure are the vaults encumbered
by numerous superfluous ribs,—ribs which have no necessary

1 The nave of Ely was not completed before 1174, and that of Peterborough
was built between 1177 and 1193.
144 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

function. The employment of such ribs appears to have
had a singular fascination for the English builders at this
epoch,—a fascination which gathered strength as the native
taste asserted itself more and more, until, in the perpendicular
style,—the first style of architecture that can properly be
called English,—it became predominant.

In these vaults of the nave of Lincoln there are six such
ribs in each vaulting compartment—namely, four ¢zercerons,
@ in the plan, Fig. 79, and two /zernes, 6 in the same figure.
The longitudinal arches are round, and spring from a level not
much above that of the springing of the transverse and dia-
gonal ribs, in consequence of which the section of the vault-

 

  

5

 

 

 
 

 

 

FIG. 79.

ing conoid, at the level a, in A, Fig. 80, is nearly square, as
shown at B in the same figure. And hence here again the
vault thrusts are not gathered upon the pier in a strictly
Gothic manner. It will be also seen in the section B, Fig. 80,
that the ribs of these vaults are so arranged as to give a
convex curve to a portion of the vaulting conoid. This
peculiarity marks an early step in the direction of the so-
called fan vaulting system which subsequently became so
conspicuous a feature of English pointed design. The rib
system is mainly supported by the wall, which it penetrates,
rather than by the vaulting shafts. These vaulting shafts
consist of three very slender and closely grouped members
rising from corbels placed just above the capitals of the
lower piers; they are thus, like the vaulting shafts of
Byland and Whitby, more decorative than structurally
III POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 145

 

necessary features.

The grouping of members in the lower

piers has reference to the arch orders and to the vaulting

of the aisles only, the high
vaults having no connec-
tion with them ; these piers
are of three varieties, whose
sections are given at A, B,
and C, respectively, in Fig.
81. The small detached
shafts of A and B are in
two monolithic sections,
and are bonded with the
pier by a band at their
junction. The engaged
shafts of the section C are
built up in courses with
the main body of the pier.
These are indeed pretty
sections, and the actual
piers are objects of much
beauty, but their want of
connection with the vault-
ing is a structural defect
which among others ex-
cludes this nave from the
category of strictly Gothic
erections.

h >
a i
ipa

      
        

pe
Le

j

i
il

KR

iy

fy.

ee
Pike
a
!

mJ

 

FOFFTF
Sy

 

FIG. 80,

The clerestory is again of the general Anglo-Norman

FIG, 81.

type which retains a good deal of solid wall beneath the

arch of the vault.

Both it and the triforium differ from
L
146 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

those of the choir in their proportions and in their orna-
mental details only. :

All the arches of this interior, except those of the
windows of the aisles, have hood-mouldings which add to
the effect of subdivision of the arch orders—an effect that
was pleasing to the Anglo-Norman taste even as early as
the time of the construc-
tion of the archivolts of
Malmesbury. The vaults
of the aisles are in five
cells as are those of the
choir also, there being a
half intermediate trans-
verse rib on the wall side.
This half-rib is carried
by a monolithic detached
shaft resting on a corbel
placed just above the
string-course which runs
along the wall at the level
of the window sills. The
main transverse ribs of
the aisle vaults are carried
by responds consisting
of five closely grouped

SOOO .
SESS SSS

Is

bes

 

    
     
 

 

 

 

TH ‘ : ie
ae ia Sel monolithic shafts; and a
= TM He 7M 7
oe re 7 WANT
Th ss ANY haees Fas aes
i Uriah “TWN € wall space beneat
ee why the window string.
iT a The buttress system
nim 2 be is, like the internal vault-

ing system, largely want-
ing in structural completeness and functional efficiency.
The clerestory wall is unbroken externally by pier but-
tresses. It has a continuous arcade of alternate groups
of three wide arches, which open into the nave, and three
narrow arches which are blind. The central blind arch
in each group occupies the place of a pier, and into it the
head of the flying buttress abuts, with the effect, to the
eye, of piercing the wall. The level of the abutment is but
little above the line where the aisle roof meets the wall, and
I POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 147

 

the very slight pier buttress—which rises through the roof to
the intrados of the abutting arch—is hardly noticed in a
general view of the structure (Fig. 82). A comparison of
this clerestory with the nearly contemporaneous clerestory
of the nave of Amiens (Fig. 44) affords an instructive
illustration of the difference between Anglo-Norman and
Gothic construction in this
portion of an edifice.

The Cathedral of Salis-
bury is commonly considered
as exhibiting the early Eng-
lish style in its purest form,
and it is therefore an import-
ant building for comparison
with the new architecture of
the Continent. The struc-
ture was begun in 1220,
contemporaneously with the
nave of Amiens, and the
two buildings may be taken
as fairly typical of the
respective styles. The
nave of Salisbury is roofed
with quadripartite vaults of
greater simplicity than those
of the nave of Lincoln. Its
rib system contains none
but functionally necessary
ribs, and in this system, as
well as in the forms of the
vault surfaces, there are
many points of likeness to
French vaulting. The most important of these is that
which results from the forms of the longitudinal arches,
which rise for some distance in a line more nearly
vertical than is common in England, and give something of
those twisted surfaces that characterise more truly Gothic
structures. Fig. 83, a perspective view of one of the vaulting
conoids, will illustrate this. In this vaulting the longitudinal
arch is provided with a more pronounced rib than is usual in
buildings of this class. An important structural defect will

 

 

 

 
148 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

be noticed in the absence of upright supports for the longi-
tudinal ribs; these ribs have no visible supports whatever,
but merely die against the vertical portions of the vault
surface. Of connection between the vaults and the lower
stories of the structure there is less than in any vaulted

   
  
 
  

An

Lf NG

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

AE

ie
—<

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

[|
f=

 

 

 

a

a =

 

 

FIG. 84.

building that we have yet noticed—the vaulting shafts
resting on corbels situated far above the springing of the
triforium arches. There are thus no continuous upright
members embracing even two of the stories; and there
would be hardly less structural continuity from the pavement
if these vaults were carried on corbels at their springing.
The ground-story and the triforium are merely two super-
I POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 149

 

posed arcades entirely unconnected with each other by any
vertical members. The triforium string forms a cornice to
the ground-story which is continuous from one end to the
other of the nave. The interior system is thus better adapted
to a timber roof than it is to a Gothic vault. The clerestory
is walled in, as is usual in England, and is lighted (Fig. 84)
by the customary triple openings. It is hence, in common
with most others in the island, in marked contrast with the
clerestories of France, in which, by this time, no wall what-
ever remained beneath the arch of the vault. This shows
how the wall was clung to in the architecture of England,
and how the openings remained merely windows in walls ;
whereas, in the architecture of France, the structural idea of
windows gives place to that of entire voids between the
arches and their supports. However large these triple
windows in the Anglo-Norman clerestory may be, and they
are at Salisbury about as large as they can be, there remains
a vast structural difference between such a clerestory and
one like that of Amiens, where the longitudinal rib of the
vault and the archivolt of the opening become, as we saw
in the preceding chapter, one and the same member. The
triforium consists of a very obtusely pointed arch of three
orders encompassing two lesser arches, each again embracing
two still smaller ones. The encompassing arch is so depressed
as to ill accord with the more acute forms of those with
which it is associated, and its sides are so slightly curved
that an angle is formed at the springing, repeating the
same awkward peculiarity of the clerestory. The great arches
of the ground-story, like the other arches in general, are
equilateral—that is to say, the centres of their curves are in
the angles of the bases of equilateral triangles, and are thus
situated at the points of springing. This form of arch, or a
form closely similar, generally prevails in France, and is also
very common in England—as in the Chapel of the Nine
Altars at Durham, the Presbytery of Ely, and in many
of the abbey churches, such as Tintern, Bridlington, Netley,
Rivaulx, Whitby, Byland, Kirkstall, and others. But the
distinctively Anglo-Norman type is rather the lancet form,
the centres of whose curves lie beyond the points of spring-
ing—-as in the smaller arches of the nave of Lincoln,
and the pier arches of Westminster Abbey. The arch
150 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

sections are rounded in accordance with the usual Anglo-
Norman custom, and the archivolts are everywhere provided
with hood moulds. The lower piers are plain round columns
of coursed masonry, with which are grouped four slender
monolithic shafts, the whole forming a compound member,
whose parts correspond with the orders of the superposed
arches,

The buttress system of Salisbury is very imperfectly
developed, nothing more than a shallow pilaster strip ap-
pearing externally. Beneath the aisle roof a flying buttress
is brought to bear upon the wall at the springing of the
vaults, which aids in resisting, though it does not wholly
bear, the lateral pressures, these being largely overcome by
massiveness of construction in the walls.

It will thus be seen that Gothic principles are, at most,
but very imperfectly embodied in Salisbury. There is, in
the structure, no continuous pier reaching from the pave-
ment to the cornice, no well adjusted and externally ap-
parent buttress system, and consequently no complete and
functional framework. It is essentially a walled building
which, though not so ponderous in effect as that of Durham,
is yet, in principle, notwithstanding its pointed arches, its
multiplied mouldings, and its slender shafts, little different
from it in structural character.

Perhaps the next English cathedral of importance, —
though it is not a building of the first magnitude, is that of
Wells, whose nave and transepts, erected during the episco-
pate of Bishop Jocelin (1206-1242), are contemporaneous
with the naves of Lincoln and Salisbury. In the nave of
Wells we have a repetition of some of the peculiarities
which have just been noticed in that of Salisbury, while
it exhibits some other features that depart still more
widely from Gothic principle. Here, as at Salisbury, the
vaults are, indeed, of true Gothic form, but the vaulting shafts
descend but little way below the clerestory string, and thus
the bays are undivided by continuous upright supports.
The triforium is an unbroken arcade of narrow openings
extending along the whole length of a massive wall. The
piers and pier arches are excessively ponderous, though
their effect is lightened by numerous subdivisions into
shafts and mouldings. The buttress system consists, again,
POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 51

Ill

 

Its strength resides in its heavy walls

of concealed flying buttresses and external pilaster strips.
Thus with Wells as with Salisbury there is no real skeleton

to the building.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG, 85.

I

as much as does that of any Romanesque structure.
have likened Salisbury in point of structure to Durham.

Wells is in some points strikingly like an even earlier
Norman building—that of the Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen.

This likeness is partially illustrated by Figs. 85 and 86—
152 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

portions of the interiors of Wells and the Abbaye-aux-
Dames respectively. It will be seen that the triforiums are

Me ay as
| fl ingiyf ft LN Z
Bis Sy Maife kf] x YN \\ A
KLIS i) LA J) A\\ \\ Zz
: ; vA
Ww ee

 

RTPA
9

: Ne '

i
AND Sy SQ
VN a toe

 

 

 

 

 

almost identical, both consisting of a series of narrow
arched openings in heavy walls, without encompassing arches
qi POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 153

 

gathering them into groups. In both cases the imposts are
continuous—that is to say, there are no capitals nor mould-
ings at the springing of the arches,—and even the sections
and the roll mouldings on the edges of the jambs and arches
are the same. If the drip-moulds were removed from the
arches of Wells, the only difference between the two examples
would be that the one has round and the other pointed
arches; but the Abbaye-aux-Dames is not, like Wells,
devoid of continuous supports. It has shafts rising from
the pavement to the springing of the vaults and dividing
each of the three stories into bays. It is in this important
respect much more like a Gothic building. The lower piers
and pier arches are, moreover, actually lighter than those of
Wells, though they have fewer subdivisions, and the in-
dividual parts are therefore more massive. It may, indeed,
be said that the piers of the Abbaye-aux-Dames are more
like Gothic than they may at first seem, while the piers of
Wells are a good deal more Romanesque than they seem.
Between the buttress systems of the Abbaye-aux-Dames
and Wells there is no essential difference, though the two
buildings are at least a century and a half apart in date.
Both have their flying buttresses concealed beneath the aisle
roof, and both display only pilaster strips externally.

In external aspect the nave of Wells closely resembles
this early Norman building; the difference consisting in
little more than the substitution, in the openings, of pointed
arches for round arches. The same is equally true of most
other early English structures. The triple arches of the
clerestory, the grouping of openings in the west end, and the
great lanterns at the crossing of nave and transept—features
which have been generally regarded as peculiarly English
—are all derived from this Norman art of the Continent.
So plain, indeed, is the identity of characteristics, that one
has only to make the comparison in order to perceive that
the early pointed architecture of England is essentially a
Norman product, and that it is, at most, very imperfectly
Gothic.

Few early pointed buildings in England are any more
Gothic in principle than those already noticed. The choir
of Ely, the choir and smaller transept of Worcester, the
great transept of Lincoln, the choir of Chester, the transept
154 GOTAIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

of York, which has’ no vault, but in place of it a wooden
imitation of one, and other similar buildings, present sub-
stantially the same characteristics. Westminster Abbey is
an exception, and is, after the choir of Lincoln, the most
Gothic structure in England, having a complete and con-
tinuous vaulting system, including a Gothic system of
buttresses.

Nor are Gothic principles carried out more fully in the
later structures of the thirteenth century in England. Of
these later structures one of the most famous is the
Presbytery of Lincoln which dates from about 1270. Its
vaults have, in addition to the full system of functional ribs,
two tervcerons in each compartment. The ribs which span
the central aisle spring from a level a little above midway
between the triforium and clerestory strings, while the
longitudinal rib springs from the clerestory ledge. There
is, therefore, something of Gothic form in the lower portion
of the vaulting conoid, which is gathered against the wall
in a vertical line for several feet from the springing, and
presents, accordingly, somewhat twisted surfaces. Five small
and compactly grouped vaulting shafts carry the five greater
ribs, but these ribs so interpenetrate at their springing as to
become greatly reduced in bulk, and consequently in the
numbers of their mouldings. Of these mouldings the terceron
is reduced to one member, the transverse rib to one and
parts of two others, and the diagonal rib to two. The
adjustment of the shafts to this group is peculiar. The two
lateral shafts, instead of carrying each a separate rib, carry
each one moulding of the same rib—namely, the diagonal ;
while all that remains of the transverse rib and the éercerons
together is carried by the central shaft. Hence, though the
number of shafts corresponds to the number of great ribs in
the vault, yet there is no really functional relationship
between them—that is to say, each rib does not, as in
French-Gothic, find its own independent support in the shaft
group.

The upper parts of the vaults of this Presbytery are less
like those of true Gothic form than are the lower portions.
They approach more nearly to the character of simple
intersecting vaults of pointed section. Their ridges are
almost, if not quite level, and their surfaces are hardly at all
ly POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 155

 

domed—the courses of masonry having parallel joints, and
running in nearly straight lines from rib to rib. The
vaulting shafts are as usual stopped upon corbels not far
below the triforium string; and the larger members of the
lower piers are consequently again arranged with reference

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 87.

 

to the arch orders only, while very slender shafts are inserted
between the larger ones, for which there are no correspond-
ing members in the archivolt. Here, then, once more, as
“almost constantly in Anglo-Norman pointed architecture,
the employment of structural members was largely governed
by decorative motives without a logical regard to functional
consistency.

The clerestory of the Presbytery is a variation of the
earlier pointed Norman type, and consists of four open arches
surmounted by tracery in each plane—the inner plane having
156 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

in addition two lesser blind arches, one in each of the wall
spaces on either side. The triforium and lower arcade differ
only in decorative treatment from those of the nave and
choir (Fig. 87).

Externally there is no pier buttress whatever, not even
a pilaster strip, either above or below the head of the
flying buttress. In place of it is a broad space of wall,

 

 

 

 

 

 

with two tall niches in its surface, between which the flying
buttress is brought to bear (Fig. 88).

The nave of Lichfield, which must be nearly con- -
temporaneous with the Presbytery of Lincoln, differs in many
points from the buildings already noticed, though in structural
character it is not essentially different. Its vaults exhibit
the peculiarity of having no transverse ribs; but they have
tiercerons, \ongitudinal and cross /zernes, and a surface rib in
each lateral cell. The springing of the longitudinal arch
Il POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 157

 

and of the great ribs is at the same level—which is that
of the clerestory string,—and there is, therefore, no narrowing
of the lower part of the vaulting conoid upon the line of the
clerestory buttress, such as is found in true Gothic.

The vaulting shafts, however, which are but three in
number, though there are six ribs to carry, start from the
pavement, and are unbroken in their ascent to the springing
of the vaults. Their continuity gives a degree of Gothic
expression which is not very common in England at this
time, though at a later period it became more frequent, as
at York and Winchester.

The clerestory of Lichfield is noticeable among clere-
stories in England, as having in each bay but one opening
which nearly fills the space beneath the longitudinal rib of
the vault. The form of this opening is the peculiar one of
an equilateral triangle with segmentally curved sides.

There is no need of further or more detailed considera-
tion of the forms of piers and buttresses, for these in England
are never structurally complete and never exhibit anything
like consistent development. There is hardly such a thing
in the country as a continuous pier, all of whose parts
are functionally adjusted at once to the arcades and to the
vaulting, nor am I aware of an example of an entirely
logical and well-adjusted buttress system ; much less is there
evidence of any experimental or inventive development of
these members.

From what has already been said it will be seen that in
England the mode of enclosure, in the pointed architecture of
the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, is substantially the same
as in the round arched Norman style. Massive walls,
pierced with comparatively small openings, continue for the
most part, throughout this period. The openings are usually,
indeed, larger than they were in the older style, and they
are perhaps more generally, and more closely grouped, so as
to give a larger proportion of opening to that of wall; but
in hardly any case does the wall wholly disappear and a
vast glazed opening take its place. It could not, indeed, be
otherwise, for the Anglo-Norman pointed structure has no
such sustaining skeleton of piers and buttresses as would
render safe the entire suppression of the walls. It was not
until after the middle of the thirteenth century that openings
158 GOTAIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP. III

 

became large enough to require dividing members and to
call for the use of tracery. And when they did become so,
and when tracery was employed, the opening still remained
really a window through a wall. When the grouped lancets
of the east end were replaced by one great mullioned and
traceried opening, some truly magnificent designs were indeed
produced, of which that of the Presbytery of Lincoln is perhaps
the grandest ; yet still are these great windows generally
mere openings in walls. Rarely, if ever, in England do
the rib of the vault and the archivolt of the aperture
come one and the same member, as they do in Amiens
Cathedral.

Such are the structural characteristics of early pointed
architecture in England in so far as concerns the longi-
tudinal bays. The east ends in this architecture are usually
square, perhaps because the constructive difficulties of the
apsidal form were deemed too formidable, or, perhaps, from
an acquired preference derived from the widespread example
of the great Cistercian churches.

Not many east ends remain in their original form ; but two
important ones—those of Ely and Lincoln—have come down
to us. They date, respectively, from the first and from the
second half of the thirteenth century, and they afford a
sufficient idea of such structures generally. In both of these
buildings the eastern enclosure corresponds with the internal
division into a wide and high central aisle and two narrower
and lower side aisles. The divisions are, in each case, marked
by boldly projecting buttresses, and the central compart-
ments are surmounted by gables which follow the lines of
the timber roofs. In other respects the two examples differ
considerably. That of Ely (Fig. 89) has, in its central
compartment, three tiers of grouped lancets—three tall ones
of equal height in the lower tier, five shorter ones of
graduated heights, following the line of the arch of the
vault, in the second tier, and three still shorter ones of
equal height, flanked on either side by a lower blind arch,
in the third tier. The lower tier embraces nearly the
combined height of the ground-story and the triforium, the
second tier is on the clerestory level, and the third occupies
the lower portion of the gable, and lights the space above the
vaults beneath the timber roof. The lateral compartments
 

 

 

 

era

Pas

 

FIG. 89.
160 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP. III

 

have been so remodelled that their original forms cannot be
precisely determined; but if the summits of their walls
corresponded with the lines of the aisle roofs, as appears
probable, there is enough beside to show that it must have
been one of the most beautiful fagades in England.

The east end of Lincoln (Fig. 90) retains its side com-
partments in their original form. Their lower portions
contain each one wide mullioned and traceried window,
above which is a blind arcade of five arches, and over this
again is a gable having no connection with the aisle roofs,
but rising above them as an entirely useless and merely
decorative feature. The central compartment has two great
pointed openings, one above the other. The lower one of
these is the great window to which I have already referred,
and the second is a lesser, though still a very large window,
lighting the space over the vaults.

In addition to the east ends of Ely and Lincoln, that of
Salisbury, which also retains its original form, may be
mentioned as affording another illustration of that want of
unity and logic of design and construction which so largely
characterises this architecture. In this case the walls of the
three compartments, into which the facade is divided by
buttresses, are carried up to an equal height, where they are
surmounted by a cornice supported by a corbel table ; and
above this are three gables, one over the central compartment,
and smaller ones over the lateral compartments. These last
are, of course, merely false decorative features, the aisle roofs
being far below them.

Transept ends, where there are transept aisles, are
enclosed in substantially the same way as are the east ends.
Where there are no transept aisles, as in the east transept
of Lincoln, there are, of course, no vertical divisions in the
facade. Where there is but one transept aisle, as in the
west transept of the same building, there is but one such
division. The transept fagade has sometimes a wheel window
at the clerestory level, as at Lincoln, and sometimes it has
such a window in the gable, as at York and Beverley. A
very beautiful early one filled with plate tracery, is that of
the north arm of the west transept of Lincoln ; and there is
a fine one, of bar tracery, in the south transept of York;
but the wheel window was never in England developed to
 

 

5 ie Bia RR

 

 

FIG. go.
162 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE . CHAP. III

 

the proportions or to the magnificence that it attained across
the Channel.

The western fagade is in England, as a rule, both in-
appropriate as a termination of the building, and ill arranged
as an independent architectural design. Very few early ones
remain. The west facades of the greater number of the
larger churches—such as York, Canterbury, Beverley, West-
minster, and others—were built at later epochs than the
main body of the edifices to which they are attached. The
most important existing fronts of the thirteenth century
are those of Lincoln, Salisbury, Wells, and Peterborough.
That of Lincoln (Fig. 91) consists of a vast arcaded screen,
unbroken by upright divisions, with a level cornice termin-
ating its multiplied horizontal lines. A gable rises through
the middle of this cornice, and stair turrets at each angle
are crowned with conical pinnacles. A.great pointed arched
recess! in the centre reaches almost to the cornice, and is
flanked by two lesser round arched recesses. In each of
these recesses is a round arched doorway giving access to
the nave and aisles respectively. Behind this great screen,
and quite independent of it, rise two lofty square towers with
angle turrets. This facade exhibits four different styles of
architecture. The great recesses (except the arch of the
central one) and the lower parts of the towers are early
Norman, belonging to the original edifice, which was dedicated
in the year 1073; the portals are very rich and beautiful
late Norman insertions of about 1140; the rest of the
great screen is of pointed design and was probably com-
pleted before 1235; while the upper portions of the towers
are in the perpendicular style. It is thus, from an historical
point of view, one of the most interesting facades in Europe,
but as an architectural combination it is one of the least
admirable. Of structural Gothic character it has nothing
whatever, and as a termination of a three-aisled building
it is far less appropriate than the Romanesque facade of the
Cathedral of Pisa, whose richly arcaded design it remotely
recalls, For in Pisa the fagade follows the form of the
building which it terminates, while at Lincoln there is no
conformity of the one with the other.

Almost equally unrelated to the building is the west front

* The arch was originally round.
 

wvbis
iy

aTIEELEE
EET
eb

bee!

 

wl yl
Fy ait
Wil

Wi Tidlain
Foo oy
we

Terre

 

 

‘nl
wi

ne
Hi
| 4

 

 

 

 

FIG, 91,
164 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

of Salisbury, which is again a mere false screen, with a level
cornice cut in the middle by a gable, and with square turrets
at the corners. These turrets are crowned with heavy and
projecting cornices above which rise octagonal pinnacles, for
which last the forms of the square substructures are in no
way prepared. At the four corners of the squares, which
are left uncovered by the pinnacles, are set diminutive
pinnacles similar in form to the larger ones. A less con-
structive or graceful arrangement than this, especially when
taken in connection with the projecting cornices, could
hardly be devised. This fagade has, however, the merit
of being divided by buttresses into compartments corre-
sponding with the nave and aisles, and hence the horizontal
lines are neither so continuous nor so pronounced as at
Lincoln.

A different, though still a singularly defective design is
that of the fagade of the Cathedral of Wells. It consists of
a central portion in three compartments, divided by buttresses,
with two vast towers, one on either side forming two com-
partments more. The central portion embraces both nave
and aisles of the building, while the towers project north
and south beyond the walls of the aisles. This, especially
as the towers are not completed above the rest of the
facade, gives a vast total width of front, for which the builders
in England seem to have had a singular predilection. The
screen-like character, though on account of the strongly
accented vertical lines of the buttresses less pronounced here
than at Lincoln, is still obvious. The upper portions of the
aisle compartments are false walls rising above and masking
the aisle roofs, and their level cornices of course contradict
the lines of these roofs. The central compartment is sur-
mounted by a rectangular mass of wall which has no more
relation to the roof of the nave behind it than the walls of
the lateral compartments have to the roofs of the aisles.
The portals of English churches are in general strangely
diminutive, and those of Wells are especially ineffective as
features in the total design. The other openings also of
this fagade (with exception of three long windows in the
central bay) are, like those of Lincoln and Salisbury, very
small in proportion to the extent of wall. They are, in
fact, little more than loopholes which, were it not for the
111 POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 165

 

rich arcading that lightens the effect, would give this portion
of the building very much the aspect of a fortress.

Hardly better is the west facade of Peterborough. It is
again an entirely false screen rather than a front appropriate
to and conformed with the building. The three vast recesses
have not, as they have at Lincoln, any correspondence with
the proportions of the nave and aisles which they terminate.
Being of equal height, and the narrow one being in front of
the wide central aisle, while the wide ones fall in front of the
narrow side aisles, they wholly contradict these proportions,
and they make a very unhappy architectural group as well.

Thus, as a rule, the west front in England has little
approach to Gothic character. It is, on the contrary, a
massive erection, whose details are largely mere surface
decorations unrelated to the real structural scheme. There
are exceptions, however, among which may be noticed the
western facade of Ripon Cathedral, which was constructed
during the first half of the thirteenth century. Here the
towers are the true terminations of the aisles, and the three
internal divisions are marked externally by continuous, though
shallow buttresses. There is a low central portal and two
lesser portals, all gathered into the central compartment, and
consequently all opening into the nave. This central com-
partment is crowned by a gable in conformity with the form
of the roof, and it is pierced by two tiers of five lancets.
The design, as a whole, is therefore appropriate, and in this
respect offers a rare exception among early buildings in
England.

In the early pointed architecture of England western
towers are less common and less imposing than those of
early Gothic buildings in France. But the Norman feature
of a vast tower at the crossing of nave and transept, seldom
adopted by the French Gothic builders, was perpetuated in
England. There is provision for such a tower in nearly
every church of importance in the island; but in many cases
it exists either as a mere beginning, or as it was erected
at a comparatively late period in the perpendicular style,
as at Worcester, Gloucester, Canterbury, York, and other
churches. I do not know of any remaining completed
tower of the early pointed epoch; but the truly magnificent
central tower of Lincoln, dating from about the middle of
166 GOTAIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

the thirteenth century, retains its original form up to the
level of the cornice. It consists (Fig. 92) of three stories
above the cornice of the nave; an octagonal stair turret
rises against each of its
four angles, whose sheer
ascent gives an ex-
tremely majestic expres-
sion to the structure.
The stories are finely
proportioned in their
heights, and the middle
one, which is the first
that rises clear of the
nave roof, is admirably
designed as a base for
the bell story. In this
middle story are no
openings except a few
very small and narrow
ones like loopholes ; but
the walls are enriched
by a blind arcade of five
shafted arches. In the
upper story, on each side,
are two great lancets

 

    
   
  
   
    
 
 

 
 
 
 

 
   

 

i AWA surmounted by gables,
i Ah aE TS i aT, and subdivided by mul-
AY | | oT) "lions into two lesser lan-

AY 4 All AM a Me) cets, all having traceried
Aw ay /, 2
\W BW yf) heads. This tower is
WW ea), i
ll

byany other in England;
and it is certainly one
of the grandest and
most beautiful towers
in Europe.

Spires were hardly constructed at all in England during
the twelfth century, and on a large scale they appear to have
been rarely erected during the entire early pointed period,
Large existing spires, like that of Salisbury, are, for the most
part, not of earlier date than the fourteenth century. Ona

Wy hardly equalled in beauty
UI POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 107

 

smaller scale a few spires remain dating from the thirteenth
century, of which that of Ringstead Church, Northants,
erected about the middle of the century,! is a good example.
The management of the transition from the square plan
of the tower to the octagon of the spire is, in such con-
structions, very admirable, and it is, I believe, peculiar to
England. Instead of starting the octagon immediately from
the square base, a four-sided pyramid is interposed which
interpenetrates with the octagon. The design is both con-
structively good and artistically agreeable.

Before closing our examination of the pointed archi-
tecture of England we must notice the general plan and its
relation to the elevation, in which points this architecture
varies widely from that of France. Besides the difference
of the rectangular east end, the Anglo-Norman church differs
from the French church in usually having two transepts,
one at each end of the choir. Eastward of the east transept
is the presbytery, which is generally as long as the choir,
and beyond this again is often a lady chapel. These parts,
in addition to the long nave, give the building an enormous
length, the effect of which is greatly enhanced by the com-
parative lowness of the elevation—a lowness which is pre-
judicial to good proportion, and which contrasts strikingly
with the soaring proportions of the French Gothic churches.
The chief impression received from the Anglo-Norman
interior is that of a prolonged architectural vista ; while the
external aspect presents a long, low range of gabled roofs
and buttressed walls, whose outlines are broken by the pro-
jecting transepts, and by the towers of the west end and of
the crossing.

This great length and proportionate lowness may have
resulted in some instances from chance, and in some
from timidity. From chance, in the addition, at successive
epochs, of parts that were not contemplated in the original
projects, and from timidity, on the part of builders who were
not remarkable for constructive daring, in raising and support-
ing wide vaults at a considerable altitude. But a predilection
for length was a peculiarity of the earlier Norman builders,
and this predilection may naturally have survived in their
successors. ‘| The Norman nave of Winchester, for instance,

1 According to Mr. Parker the date of this church is circa 1260,
168 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

contained twelve bays, that of St. Albans contains thirteen
and that of Norwich fourteen, while in France the nave
of the Cathedral of Paris, which is one of the longest, contains
but ten bays, that of Chartres contains but) nine, and that
of Amiens but six. As to the comparative heights, it may
suffice to say that the choir of Lincoln measures, from the
pavement to the crowns of the vaults, about twenty-two
metres, while the nave of Amiens measures forty-two. It
must be said, however, that vaults in England are sometimes
a little higher than those of Lincoln choir, while in France
none except those of Beauvais are higher than Amiens,
though almost all are much higher than those of Lincoln.
The vaulted polygonal chapter-house is a_ structure
peculiar to England. It is usually octagonal, as at Salisbury
and York. At Lincoln the plan is decagonal. The chapter-
house is vaulted on a system of ribs which spring from a
clustered central shaft, and from single shafts situated in the
angles of the enclosing walls. What may be approximately
described as a pointed annular vault, interpenetrated by
pointed cells, is thus sustained. The openings in these
structures have often a more Gothic character than those
of the church edifice itself. At Salisbury, for instance, the
whole space beneath the vault cell on each side of the poly-
gon is taken up by the opening. The internal effect of these
structures is very pleasing, but they present no principles
that are materially different from those which we have
already considered. The same want of constructive logic
that we have noticed in the pointed architecture of England
generally is still often apparent. For instance, at Salisbury
the central column consists of a main body and eight
attached monolithic shafts, with an octagonal abacus to its
grouped capitals. Upon this abacus sixteen vaulting ribs—
namely, the transverse ribs and the half-ribs which reach
to the intersection of the groins of the intersecting cells—
converge. The plan of the rib group at the impost is thus
a sixteen-sided polygon, which does not adjust itself well to
the octagonal abacus of the column; and the consequence
is that the ribs fall alternately upon a sustaining shaft and
upon one side of the abacus over an intercolumniation.
This structural defect is just the reverse of that which was
noticed above in relation to the pier (A, Fig. 77) at the
I POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ENGLAND 169

 

crossing of the choir and transept of Lincoln. In that case
shafts were introduced which had nothing to support, while
here are vault ribs with no shafts to carry them.

The almost total absence of vaulting in the smaller
village churches of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries in
England is as noticeable as is the prevalence of vaulting in
the small churches of France. Such examples as St. Mary
le Wigford at Lincoln, Corringham near Gainsborough in
Lincolnshire, and many others, consist of nave and aisles
separated by arcades of pointed arches, usually of two simply
bevelled orders, supported on clustered columns, whose
members are adjusted to the arch orders, and enclosed by
plain walls with small splayed and pointed windows and
timber roofs. They are often very charming in both internal
and external aspect, but constructively they have no Gothic
character.

It must now, I think, be apparent that the early pointed
architecture of the Middle Ages in England is, with few
exceptions, totally different in its nature from that of the
same period in France; and that in constructive principle
it differs little, if at all, from the Norman- Romanesque,
of which it is substantially but a decorative modification.
I shall, in the concluding chapter, give further réasons for
supposing it to be in the main really Norman rather than
English.
CHAPTER IV

POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMANY, ITALY, AND SPAIN

I.— GERMANY

POINTED forms in architectural design were not adopted in
Germany at so early a period as they were in England, nor
was their progress so rapid after they began to be em-
ployed. In fact, so far as regards structural modifications
the pointed arch had little effect here until the fully
developed Gothic of France began to be imperfectly copied
about the middle of the thirteenth century.

Germany possessed, in the twelfth century, a Romanesque
architecture which, especially in the important buildings
along the Rhine, was of a very admirable character, and
with it the people were apparently content. This archi-
tecture was derived from that style of Northern Italy which
had been developed under the Lombard influence out of
the older round arched styles, and it was hence largely a
German art. It was therefore natural that the country
should be slow to yield to the influence of the Gothic
movement, notwithstanding that this movement was active
in its near neighbourhood and among a people with whom
it had intimate relations. During the early Gothic develop-
ment in France the German art of building remained wholly
unchanged. Even so important an edifice as the Cathedral
of Speyer, the erection of which was contemporaneous with
that of the choir of the Cathedral of Paris,’ was constructed
in the almost unmodified Romanesque style. The central

The existing Cathedral of Speyer was, according to Forster, begun im-
mediately after a fire which had in 1159 destroyed an earlier edifice.
cHap.iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMAN\ 171

 

aisle of this church, for instance, is vaulted with round
arched quadripartite vaults in square compartments, each
compartment embracing two bays of the side aisles, in
accordance with the form that
had been established in Lom-
bardy. These vaults have
transverse ribs of square
section, but they have no
groin ribs. The piers are
square in section, and have
single engaged shafts which
start from the pavement, and
which, in the main piers,
carry the transverse ribs, and
in the intermediate piers carry
the first order of the lower
clerestory arches. In each
double bay there are two
large clerestory windows, the
crowns of whose arches rise
very little above the spring-
ing of the vaults, and thus a
wide space of wall is left
between them and the arch
of the vault, while high up in
the middle of this wall is a
third but very small window.
There are no triforium open-
ings, and the aisles are lighted by small windows high in
their walls. Fig. 93,1 a geometric elevation of one bay, will
illustrate the internal structure of this church. There is an
apse at each end of the building—an arrangement peculiar
to Germany—covered with a semi-dome ; and at the crossing
of the nave and transept is an octagonal dome on pendentives.

In the Cathedral of Bamberg, built near the end of
the twelfth century, the vaults assume the pointed form, and
are provided with light groin ribs. They are still, however,
in square compartments—one bay of the nave (Fig. 94)
embracing two bays of the aisles. The ground-story arches

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 93.

1 This figure, and those following as far as number 100, with exception of
Fig. 98, are copied from Forster.
GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

172

 

also are pointed, and the piers are square, with edge shafts
answering in form to the moulding of the archivolt. The
triforium space is a vast surface of plain wall without
openings, and there is no
string-course to mark the
division between the tri-
forium and the clerestory.
Externally the clerestory
has neither buttresses nor
pilaster strips, and the
windows of both aisles and
clerestory are small, plain,
and round arched. In plan
this church, also, retains
features that are almost
| peculiar to the German-
Romanesque, namely, an
apse at each end, so that
the main entrance is at the
side.

In the Cathedral of
| Magdeburg, begun in1212,
| the pointed arch replaces
| the round arch throughout.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

This building has been

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

man imitationof the Gothic

 

 

 

 

 

Ll

 

of France; but its likeness

to French design is rather
apparent than real, though its apse, in plan and elevation,
bears some marked points of resemblance to the French
type. The vaults of the nave are constructed on Gothic
principles so far as concerns their rib systems; they are
quadripartite in oblong compartments, though the piers
and the transverse ribs are on the alternate principle—that
is to say, they are alternately massive and slender. The
building would thus seem to have been originally intended
for sexpartite vaulting, or perhaps rather—since the inter-
mediate pier has no connection with the vaulting—for
quadripartite vaults in square compartments, in accordance
with the usual German form. The main pier has a

FIG. 94.

considered as the first Ger- |
IV POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMANY 173

 

continuous group of vaulting shafts rising from the pave-
ment; but this pier is not compact and well developed—
its main body being merely a strip of flat wall. In fact,
the nave may be considered as separated from the aisles by
plain walls, pierced on the grounds-tory by a row of wide
pointed arched openings, and in the clerestory by narrow
ones. There are no openings in the triforium, and exter-
nally, though there are pier buttresses of considerable pro-
jection, there are no flying buttresses. The Gothic system is
thus by no means carried out in this building, though in date
it is nearly contemporaneous with the Cathedral of Amiens.

The nave of the Cathedral of Limburg on the Lahn,
which was consecrated in 1235, has much more structural
Gothic character than either of the preceding buildings. It |
too, however, exhibits some inconsistencies, and retains many |
of the peculiarities of the German-Romanesque. The
interior of this building, in the disposition of its piers, the
mode of its vaulting, and the divisions of its stories, bears
such strong likeness to that of the nave of Noyon as to
justify the inference that its designer was directly influenced
by that building. Like Noyon it has a vaulted triforium
gallery and a second triforium consisting of an open-shafted
arcade. All the lower openings have the pointed arch,
but, as at Noyon, the clerestory openings are round arched.
A peculiarity of the sexpartite vaulting of this building is
that the springing of the intermediate transverse rib is situ-
ated at a higher level than that of the main ribs. This rib
and the branches of the longitudinal ribs which are grouped
with it are carried on three short and slender shafts, which
are supported by a single shaft rising from the triforium
ledge (Fig. 95). This raising of the point of springing is a
logical arrangement, since the doming of the vaults brings
the crowns of the intermediate ribs much higher than those
of the main ribs; but the single shaft, stopping on the
triforium ledge, is not so logical, as I have already remarked
in connection with its frequent use in England. With this
exception, however, this nave is very largely Gothic in
character, especially since the main pier is reinforced by

1 In France the same result is sometimes reached, as at Paris, by stilting the
intermediate rib; but it is more common to employ a more acutely pointed arch,
as at Laon.
174 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

a good flying buttress of the early French form over the
aisle roof, supplemented by a second one under the roof.
In the aisles and in the triforium gallery the tenacity with
which the German builders
held on to their Roman-
esque traditional methods
of construction is singularly
marked. In these parts of
the building the vaults have
no Gothic rib systems —
the groins having no ribs,
and the transverse ribs
being of the heavy Roman-
esque type. The external
character of this edifice is
very far from Gothic. The
openings are few and small,
and in them the round arch
mingles with the pointed
arch. As the nave com-
prises but two double bays,
two of the main piers are
naturally abutted by the
transept and tower walls
respectively, and thus but
one flying buttress is neces-
sary, that which is brought
to bear upon the central
main pier, There are no other buttresses of any kind on
this portion of the building, either on the walls or on the
towers ; but against the vaults of the apse flying buttresses,
like those of the nave, are brought to bear.

Even after the middle of the thirteenth century such a
building as the Cathedral of Freiburg, which was completed
in 1270, is still very imperfectly Gothic, though it has a
continuous vaulting system, including a system of flying
buttresses. Its vaulting conoids are not narrowed against
the pier, and the pier itself is not distinctly developed above
the ground-story. The triforium space is, in each bay, an
unbroken wall surface, and the clerestory opening occupies
but a portion of the space between the piers.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 95.
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMANY 175

The nave of the Cathedral of Strasburg, too, begun in
1277, though more consistently Gothic in character, is far
removed from Gothic in the design and adjustment of its west
end, which shall be more particularly referred to a little /
farther on.

In the Kreuzkirche at Breslau (Fig. 96) the pointed arch
is employed exclusively, though the design differs widely from
French models. This edifice was completed as it now exists

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

FIG. 96,

before the close of the thirteenth century, and it affords a
good illustration of the distinctively German taste at this
period. The vaults of the nave are in square compartments,
while those of the aisles, which are of equal height with the -
nave, are so curiously and awkwardly mixed in form as
to be difficult to describe in words. They may, however,
be understood by reference to the illustration (Fig. 96 dcs),
a plan of one bay as given by Forster. The vault ribs
spring from corbels, and the piers are therefore entirely
devoid of vaulting shafts. They are of rectangular section,
176 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

and have no capitals, the impost being continuous. The
walls are plain and unbroken save by tall narrow lancets,
one in each bay of the
aisles. Externally there
are buttresses of con-
siderable projection
which rise, with four set-
offs, to the wall cornice.
In the chief monu-
ment of German medi-
eval art, the Cathedral
of Cologne, the Gothic
, structural system is, in-
deed, complete. The
great French models—
Amiens and Beauvais,
which directly prompted
the erection of this build-
ing—were closely fol-
BIG. 96 bis. lowed as regards their

mechanical principles.

The vaults have all the functional ribs that are peculiar to
France, and their cells exhibit those twisted surfaces which
generally distinguish Gothic vault construction." The up-
right supports are functionally designed, compactly grouped,
and are continuous from the pavement, while a complete and
logical system of buttresses is brought to bear upon the
vault thrusts. But Cologne is a late construction, the greater
part of it dating from the fourteenth and subsequent centuries.

 

 

 

Even the choir, the oldest part, was not begun till 1248, ’

and it was not consecrated till 1322. It is in no sense a
development of anything German, but is, in its structural
system, strictly an importation from France. It is a copy
made.in a spirit, not so much of appreciation as of emulation.
It shows a faithful study and an intelligent apprehension of
the mechanism of Gothic, but it reveals no inventive freedom,
no spontaneous exercise of native genius. In the whole
range of pointed architecture in Germany there is no

1 Mr. Fergusson, /éstory of Architecture in all Countries, vol. ii. p. 62, speaking
of Cologne Cathedral, says: ‘* We find it with all the defects of French vaulting
—the ribs are few and weak, the ridge undulating, the surfaces twisted, etc.”
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMANY 177

 

evidence of any new growth out of the borrowed forms ;
but just as in England some of the features of French
art, modified by Anglo-Norman taste, were ingrafted upon
the Norman- Romanesque without materially changing its
structural character, so in Germany were the same features,
modified by local taste, ingrafted upon the Romanesque of
the country with little change in its structural character,—an
instance like that of Cologne, where a structural system,

 

FIG. 97.

radically different from the native one, is fully carried out,
being exceptional.

One class of church buildings is, however, peculiar to
Germany—that, namely, in which the three aisles are carried ¢
up to an equal height, as in the Kreuzkirche at Breslau just
mentioned. Of this class are the Church of St. Elizabeth at
Marburg, St. Sebaldus at Nuremberg, St. Mary at Miihlhausen,
and others. It would be difficult to produce a more ill-propor-
tioned figure than the cross section (Fig. 97) of such a build-
ing presents. The only parallel to it is, I believe, that which
is afforded by the grouping of the west portals of the Cathedral

N
178 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

of Peterborough in England. An arrangement of this kind
is not to be found in France, the nearest approach to it
being found in some of the churches of Southern Gaul and
of Poitou, as in the Cathedral of Poitiers (Fig. 98),’ where,
though the side aisles are so high that there is no clerestory
to the nave, yet they are enough lower than the nave to
secure an agreeable proportional relationship of the parts.”
In St. Elizabeth, which dates from about the middle of the

 

FIG, 98.

thirteenth century, though the building consists of but one
story, the walls are divided externally into two stories, each
of which is pierced with a row of windows. It is hardly
necessary to say that such a violation of expressional integ-
rity is distinctly opposed to Gothic principles.
In regard to facades, east ends, transept ends, and towers
1 This figure is copied from Viollet-le-Duc.
2 In a few exceptional instances something similar occurs, on a small scale,
in the Ie-de-France—as in the village churches of Vernouillet and Feucherolles
(Seine-et-Oise)—figured in M. de Bandot’s Zyiises de Bourgs et Villages. Paris,

1867.
IV POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN GERMANY 179

 

and spires in Germany there is no need of prolonged remark.
The west fagade retains, for the most part, its Romanesque
features until after the middle of the thirteenth century, and
the changes that were afterward introduced did not, save in
a few exceptional cases like that of the fagade of Cologne,
result in anything that can be properly called Gothic design.
One of the best and grandest early pointed west ends
is that of the Cathedral of Limburg on the Lahn. It con-
sists of a central compartment corresponding to the nave,
flanked by square towers which terminate the aisles.
The central compartment is divided into three stories, ex-
clusive of the gable, which correspond with the internal
divisions. It is a perfectly logical as well as a picturesque
fagade, but, notwithstanding the pointed arches that are
mixed with the round ones in its openings, it has no real
Gothic character. In St. Elizabeth of Marburg the same
general scheme assumes a more Gothic expression by the
addition of strongly-marked buttresses, pointed openings with
tracery, and tall stone spires.

In the Cathedral of Strasburg the west facade has in its
horizontal divisions no correspondence whatever with the
building of which it is the front. It is, for the most part, a
false screen, though, in so far as concerns the ground-plan,
the central compartment and the towers are the true ter-
minations of the nave and aisles respectively. Of the
three stories of the central compartment the uppermost
one rises from a level above the apex of the timber roof of
the nave.

The west end of the Cathedral of Cologne is of fourteenth
century design, and most of it is of even much later con-
struction—the south tower, which was completed only as high
as the bell story in 1437, having been, at that time, its most
advanced portion. Though for the most part logical enough
in general arrangement, the hard rectilinear character of its
details is in striking contrast to the subtle beauty of the early
French art, to which it owes every good quality that it
possesses.

The east end—in-the German pointed style is. usually
apsidal, either a semicircle or a polygon, in imitation, more
or less_ direct, of the French chevet, as at St. Elizabeth of
Marburg and Cologne. A curious earlier form is that of

a
180 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

Limburg, where the choir is covered with one sexpartite
vault, the eastern half of which is on a semicircular plan,

 

FIG, 99. FIG, 100,

and the elevation of the hemicycle consists of three bays
like the longitudinal ones, with exception of their curved
plan.

Transept ends are apsidal, as at St. Elizabeth of Marburg,
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY 181

 

or square, as at Limburg and Cologne. They present no
peculiarities of structure that call for particular remark.
German west towers of pointed design differ in no im-
portant structural points from French towers, except that the
earlier examples, like those of St. Elizabeth, retain larger

wall spaces, and are hence more largely Romanesque. fees

ment. It is not a roof at all, but is a mere skeleton of
fanciful open stonework, as at Strasburg, Freiburg, and
Cologne. Earlier stone spires in Germany are often, if not
always, ill adjusted to the towers from which they rise, as at
Breslau (Fig. 99), where the base is square, while the section
becomes octagonal at a short distance above the base, the
transition being managed as in a chamfer. Moreover,
the square of the spire is too small for that of the tower, and
the: cornice and parapet which surmount the. tower break
that continuity which is essential to Gothic structure and
expression. Still more unsatisfactory is the adjustment of
the spires of St. Elizabeth of Marburg (Fig. 100), where
the square tower is surmounted by a truncated octagonal
pyramid with unequal sides, crowned by a parapet within
which—its base not nearly covering the area on which it
rests—rises an octagonal spire, whose sides are all set
obliquely to the sides of the substructure. The pinnacles
on the angles of the tower do not agree in form with the
buttresses which they surmount, and the whole arrangement
is thus conspicuous for abrupt transitions which are objection-
able, both from a structural and from an artistic point of view.

I].—ITALY

During the twelfth century Gothic architecture had no
marked influence upon Italy. The Church of S. Andrea of

Vercelli, which is said to have been begun in 1219, gives .

evidence, in its Gothic vaulting system, of transalpine
influence ; but it is an exceptional instance, and it was not
before the middle of the thirteenth century that Italy
began really to yield, in some measure, to the taste for
pointed design which had become so general in the north of
Europe. The monastic orders in Italy continued to take a
prominent part in building for a much longer time than
182 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

north of the Alps; and in the middle of the thirteenth
century the Dominicans and Franciscans were instrumental
in introducing into the country a variety of pointed archi-
tecture that was chiefly derived from German sources, and
which continued largely to conform to German models.

One of the earliest of their buildings is the Church of St.
Francis of Assisi, which was completed in 1253. In form
and principle of construction this church is very little like a
Gothic edifice! The building is in two stories—an upper
and a lower church—the one distinct from the other. The
lower church is, in fact, a crypt; though there is a second
crypt, of small proportions, beneath it. St. Francis is built
against a hillside, and the pavement of the lower story is,
toward the north, on a level with the ground without, so that
it could be conveniently lighted, and reached by a sloping path
to the portal on the north side. The upper church is in one
story without aisles, with a transept across the east end, and
an apse of segmental form. The vaults, like those of the
same period in Germany, are quadripartite in square compart-
ments. They are provided with transverse and diagonal
ribs, but are devoid of longitudinal ribs. All the vaulting
arches spring from the same level, and hence the lateral cells
have not the forms which secure that concentration of thrusts
which distinguishes Gothic. There being no aisles, there
are, of course, no piers; but the vaults are supported by
shafts, five in a group, which rise against the walls, unbroken
from the pavement to the springing of the arches. Narrow
pointed windows, one in each bay, and each divided by a
mullion, are the only openings. The apse has a Gothic
vault and traceried openings; but the general character
and aspect of the building, especially of the exterior, is
little removed from that of a Romanesque structure.

Another example of these pointed monastic edifices is
the important Church of Sta. Maria Novella in Florence,
which was founded in 1278. Like St. Francis of Assisi
and many other Italian churches, it has a transept across the
east end, but instead of an apse it has a rectangular eastern
arm which is used as the choir. The nave is provided with
side aisles, and the structure is vaulted throughout. In

1 Though M. Ramée, in his Hist. Géndrale de P Architecture, Vol. ti, pe 112,
says: ‘Elle est dans le style ogival pur de France.”
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY 183

 

common with nearly all other so-called Italian Gothic
churches the piers of Sta. Maria Novella are so disposed
as to produce square vaulting compartments in the nave,
and oblong ones in the aisles. Here again (and we shall

 

FIG. Iot.

find it invariably so in Italy) all the arches of the vaults
spring from the same level. The transverse and diagonal
arches have strong ribs, but the longitudinal arches are
without ribs. There is no triforium, and the crowns of all
the arches of the pier arcades reach far above the level
of the springing of the vaults. The clerestory opening
184 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE

CHAP,

 

is but a small circle far up near the crown of the arch
of the vault. No adequate buttress system is apparent

   
   

 

  

RY
SHEN

NE LP Ail
N{- il f

I: “ff tat |
: ae: Sse
Te ule
uu Apis aN Sa
a AU x Ls \ Ne
RS UG

Tea:

tet

 

 

 

 
   
 

   
    

 

 

 

 

i
\

   

 

 

    
       
 
   
    
  
  
    
 

 

 

 

 

 

 

f
Mh

ah

|
|

 

FIG, 102,

externally, and yet the vaults are not tied by iron rods
as they generally are in Italy, where the buttress is never
developed on the outside beyond the form of a pilaster
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY 185

 

strip of greater or less projection. But an examination of
the structure above the vaults of the aisles reveals the
existence of powerful abutments in the form of solid walls
built upon the transverse ribs, and reaching up to the rafters
of the timber roof (Fig. 101). A deep pilaster buttress rising
against the clerestory wall, and a similar one reinforcing the
wall of the aisle, augment the stability of the structure.
This certainly cannot be called Gothic construction, but the
hidden wall over the aisle vault is practically a flying
buttress, though an exceedingly clumsy one, and there is
therefore something approaching the principle of Gothic in
it. I know not how far this mode of hidden abutment may
be carried out in Italian pointed buildings generally, but the
presence of the iron tie in many cases shows that the stone
abutments, if they exist, are not adequate. It may be added
that the piers of Sta. Maria Novella are light for an Italian
edifice, and are thoroughly functional in form and adjust-
ment to the superstructure (Fig. 102).

Perhaps the next Italian pointed building of importance |
is the Franciscan Church of Sta. Croce at Florence, which
was designed towards the close of the thirteenth century. '
It consists in plan of a broad nave with side aisles, a
transept across the east end with square eastern chapels,
and a polygonal apse of five sides. The apse and chapels
only are vaulted, all the rest of the structure being covered
by open timber roofs. The roofs of the aisles are a series
of gables, set with their ridges perpendicular to the axis
of the nave. These roofs rest upon walls carried on trans-
verse arches of stone, and as the feet of their rafters abut
each other, they are not trussed. There is of course no
triforium, and the pier arches reach high up into the aisle
gables. The piers are simple octagonal columns of coursed
masonry, with bases and capitals of corresponding form.
The archivolts are of two orders of plain square section.
Shallow pilasters rise in the nave, one from each of the pier
capitals, to the cornice of the wall. At the level of the
sills of the clerestory lights a narrow passage way, carried
on corbels, runs around the whole interior. This passage
way rises in a flight of steps, on each side, to pass over
the great arches of the transept. The windows are tall and
narrow with pointed arches, divided by mullions into two
186 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

lights, each with a circle above. There is one such window
in each bay of the aisles and of the clerestory. The vault
of the apse has a Gothic character, but its ribs are stopped
upon corbels, below which are plain walls pierced by tall
mullioned lancets, one in each bay. Well-developed but-
tresses rise against the external angles of this apse, and the
walls between them terminate in gables. The walls of the
aisles and clerestory are furnished with the usual pilaster
strips. The construction of Sta. Croce is thus of the
simplest kind, involving few other principles than are ex-
emplified in an ordinary barn. With exception of its apse
there is nothing Gothic about it, and were it divested of its
frescoes by Giotto and Gaddi—which indeed make it one of
the most impressive interiors in Europe—it would become a
singularly bald and uninteresting edifice.

The cathedrals of pointed design in Italy, no less than
the monastic churches, show how little of Gothic spirit, or of
sympathy with Gothic design, there was in the Italian genius.
Of these cathedrals Siena and Orvieto are among the most
important and characteristic. They differ little, however
from other vaulted pointed buildings in Italy except in
general proportions, and in their peculiar western facades
which shall be noticed presently.

/ The great crowning monument of Italian pointed archi-
tecture is the Cathedral of Florence. In this building are
exhibited at once most of the merits and the defects of the
Italian style. Of the structure begun by Arnolfo at the
close of the thirteenth century nothing remains externally
visible. And even of the interior it is doubtful whether
any part of his work was left after the remodelling to which
the building was subjected in the fourteenth century. In
plan this building consists of a nave and aisles, with apsidal
projections north and south forming a kind of transept, an
eastern apse, and a vast central octagonal space surrounded by
these several parts. The piers, according to the usual custom
in Italy, are so disposed as to divide the nave into square
compartments, and the aisles into oblong ones. In elevation
there are as usual but two stories, though the height of the
central vault is but about ten feet less than that of Cologne.
The pier arches are enormously high, reaching nearly to the
great corbelled gallery which, like the little gallery in Sta.
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY 187

 

Croce, passes entirely around the interior just below the
springing of the vaults. The piers have the section shown
in Fig. 103, of which the members @ and @ are the supports of
the transverse and diagonal ribs from which they derive
their sections. The vault supports
are thus complete and continuous
from the pavement, and this con-
stitutes the principal merit of the
design, which in other respects is
not only far from Gothic in principle,
but is, in some important points,
singularly illogical. The want of
logic is seen, for instance, in the
elevation of the piers (Fig. 104).
Not only are there no true bases
or capitals to these piers—they being merely banded
at the bases and at various levels above with groups of
mouldings,— but the most prominent groups of these
mouldings, those which take most nearly the forms of
capitals, are situated neither at the springing of the great
arches nor at the springing of the vaults. They are, on
the contrary, placed at considerable distances below these
points,—the piers rising through them to the springings,
where they are again merely banded by smaller and more
simple groups of mouldings. The vaulting arches are all
pointed, but only the transverse and diagonal arches have
functional ribs, the longitudinal arches being provided with
mouldings only. These arches all spring from the same level,
and the forms of the vaults are hence not at all Gothic.
The arch sections are square, as is usual in Italy; and the
pier arches are provided with hood moulds which break
around the pier. These are, however, rather survivals of the
top mouldings of the classic Roman archivolt than true hood
moulds like those of the North. The openings are small
everywhere. In the aisles and in the apses they are narrow
lancets—one in each bay—and in the clerestory they are
small circles. Notwithstanding that the building is vaulted
throughout, and that the vaults are of very wide span,
there are no external buttresses other than shallow pil-
asters. The lateral pressures are sustained by enormous
strength of wall, aided by the usual iron ties. It is uncertain

a

a

FIG. 103.
188 - GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

whether it was a part of Arnolfo’s design to cover the
octagon with a dome; but no part of the
existing dome nor of the existing east
end is of his construction. Domical
apses, too, may have been originally in-
tended,! and the existing arrangement
and construction may be substantially
like the original scheme, though on a
much larger scale. It is perhaps need-
less to say that there is nothing what-
ever of Gothic character in any part of
this east end. The enormous buttresses
required to support the dome are, for the
most part, internal, as in ancient Roman
constructions ; and the dome itself is, of
course, a feature which, on account of its
continuous thrusts, is constructively far
removed from Gothic.

Another important, though a late
example of Italian pointed design is that
of S. Petronio of Bologna, which was
founded in 1390. The scale of this
building is gigantic, though of the original
project the nave and aisles only were
executed. The internal system is closely
similar to that of the Cathedral of Florence.
The piers have nearly the same form and
section, and the bases and capitals have the
same general character of mouldings rather
than of bearing members. The capitals,
however, have the merit of being properly
placed at the springing of the arches
and vaults respectively. The only other
features in this building which call for
special notice are the solid buttresses that
rise through the aisle roofs, and are carried
on walls built over the transverse ribs, as
in S. Maria Novella. It is curiously in

 

FIG, 104.

1A fresco in the Spanish Chapel of S. Maria
Novella, which has domical apses, has been supposed to afford an illustration of
the church as it was designed by Arnolfo ; but this is now considered doubtful.
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY 189

 

keeping with the Italian cenatewetive spirit thus to employ
a massive and inert member in this situation, in place of the
Gothic flying buttress.

It may be worth while to notice several smaller and earlier /
buildings, such as Sta..Anastasia of Verona, the Church of —
the Frari in Venice, and S. Martino of Lucca, which present
some points of difference from the prevailing types.

The Church of Sta. Anastasia of Verona, begun in
1260, differs from the vaulted churches already noticed, in
having no continuous vaulting system, its lower piers being
plain round columns. It has also the peculiarity of a very
small circular opening in the triforium. In the Church of
the Frari at Venice, which was designed by Niccola Pisano
about 1250, the ground-story piers are likewise plain round
columns, from whose capitals the vaulting supports rise in
form like those of Florence and S. Petronio, consisting of a
broad pilaster in each pier to carry the transverse rib, and
small lateral shafts for the diagonals. S. Martino of Lucca,
the upper portions of which date from about 1308, is ex-
ceptional in having a fully developed triforium arcade of the
Northern type. The arches of this triforium are round,
however, as are also those of the pier arcade.

The typical pointed Italian fagade is designed with little
regard to the form of the building except in its lateral divisions,
which usually answer to those of the nave and aisles. Such
facades as those of Siena (Fig. 105), Orvieto, and S. Croce
of Florence have steep gables over the nave and aisles re-
spectively, while the roofs behind them are all of low pitch.
More logical fagades are those of St. Francis of Assisi and
the Cathedral of Prato, where, in the one case, the single-
aisled interior is faced by a plain wall which follows the
form of the section of the building, and in the other the
front corresponds with the three-aisled interior in an equally
truthful manner, the lateral divisions being marked by pro-
jecting buttresses.

A peculiar and yet a characteristic fagade is that of
the very small Church of Sta. Maria della Spina at Pisa,
where two acute gables, embracing the whole width of the
church, are surmounted by a third less acute one which cuts
their sloping sides in a highly awkward manner. ‘Gables in
a facade are naturally and properly understood to be the
 

 

 

\\
\ \
AY
] "
\\
\\

 

 

 

 

FIG. 105.
cHaP.iIv. POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY Ig

 

terminations of gabled roofs, and from the gables in this
case it would appear that the building was divided into two
aisles, each covered by a gabled roof, and that a third |
gabled roof rose between them, covering their inner sides—a
very curious arrangement certainly, yet one that the facade
plainly suggests. Attentive scrutiny, however, discloses the
fact that none of these forms have any relation whatever
with the roof of the building, which is a single low trussed
gable of the ancient basilican type, whose outline may be
traced in part behind the false gables of the facade. The
building is not divided internally at all, but consists of a
single broad aisle beneath the spreading roof. The rich
canopied pinnacles which surmount the gables and the
angle pilasters are purely decorative features set up in a
thoroughly childish fashion, and the doors with flat lintels
surmounted by low segmental arches have as little affiliation
with Gothic design as it would be possible to devise. It is
true that this fagade is not a design of one epoch, but is
made up of parts that were wrought at different times from
1230 to 1304.1 It is, however, none the less a fair illustra-
tion of the Italian constructive inaptness in pointed design.

The east end of the Italian church, which is sometimes
rectangular, as at Siena, but is more commonly polygonal,
as in the Frari in Venice, is always a heavily walled
structure, though its effect is occasionally lightened by the
introduction of large windows, divided by mullions and
tracery. Its roof is sometimes a portion of a polygonal
dome, as at Florence, and sometimes consists of a nearly
true Gothic vault, as at Sta. Croce. The apsidal aisle
never occurs, and the apse is never provided with really
Gothic buttresses.

Transept ends are usually square with plain walls, as in
S. Maria Novella, though the apsidal form occurs, as we
have seen, in the Cathedral of Florence.

The towers of the Italian pointed style do not differ in
structural character from those of the Lombard-Romanesque,
from which they are derived. They are rarely incorporated with
the church edifice, and they never form parts of the western
facades as similar towers do north of the Alps. At Prato

1 Les Monuments de Pise, p. 99. Par M. Georges Rohault de Fleury. Paris,
1886.
192 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

the tower, a particularly fine one, rises through the wall of
the south aisle close to the west transept ; but generally, as
at Florence, the tower is placed at a little distance from the
west fagade. In form it is a simple storied
edifice, rising without set-offs to a consider-
able height, and crowned either with a low
pyramidal roof of timber, as in the Duomo
of Florence and in that of Prato, or
with a stone spire, as at S. Maria Novella
(Fig. 106), and at the Badia in Florence.
The magnificent campanile of the Floren-
tine Duomo, though in many respects
unique, may yet be taken as characteristic
of these buildings generally. It consists
of five stories of finely proportioned heights,
with octagonal buttresses at the angles
reaching from the pavement to the coping.
The openings are exquisitely proportioned
with pointed arches, and are divided by
mullions and tracery. These openings
increase in magnitude in the successive
stories, the highest one of all being of vast
proportions for Italy, and one of the most
beautiful windows in the world. The walls
are crowned by a deep and rich cornice,
carried on corbels, and continued around
the buttresses. In place of the low roof
which now surmounts it, a spire, probably
much like that of S. Maria Novella, is said
to have been originally intended. But this
tower, though a consistent and beautiful
structure, can hardly be called a Gothic
one.

The Italian poverty of structural in-
vention is especially marked in those
towers of Northern Italy which are crowned by octagonal
lanterns. Of these the tower of the Scaligeri at Verona
(Fig. 107) and that of S. Andrea of Mantua are con-
spicuous examples. In these erections no attempt whatever
is made to prepare the square base for the superposed
octagons; but, on the contrary, the walls are finished

 

FIG. 106.
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN ITALY 193

 

with a heavy cornice, within which the lantern rises ab-
ruptly. .

The windows of Italian pointed buildings are always
small, usually very small; when large
enough for subdivisions, they are pro-
vided with mullions, above which are
pierced tympanums, or simple geometric
tracery. Both the pierced tympanum
and the tracery seem to occur at all
periods during the continuance of the
style, and they sometimes appear to-
gether in the same building, and
apparently of the same date, as in Sta.
Croce of Florence, two of the aisle
windows of which are shown in Fig.
108. Of the two forms that of the
pierced tympanum is rather the more
frequent, being variously modified by
cuspings and featherings, and often
very richly subdivided, as in Or San
Michele of Florence.

The portals of these buildings present
no important peculiarities except in the
placing of their sculpture, which shall
be referred to further on.

There is little more of importance
to notice regarding the structural prin-
ciples of Italian pointed buildings. Throughout the whole
length and breadth of Italy, so far as the pointed influence
extended, which was, with few exceptions, not far south
of Naples, the same general characteristics prevail, the same
_ lack of real Gothic principles may be remarked. The only
conspicuous exception is that of the almost purely German
Cathedral of Milan, which is, however, in many respects, but
a travesty of Gothic. From the time of the building of St.
Francis of Assisi to that of the building of S. Petronio of
Bologna, a period of nearly a century and a half had elapsed
without bringing about any material departure from the
structural principles of Roman antiquity. Structural inven-
tion in architecture was, as a general thing, not a gift of the
Italian genius in the Middle Ages.

0

 

FIG, 107,
194 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

After the fourteenth century the pointed style in Italy
fell rapidly into disuse. This was a natural result of the
Renaissance movement, which in architecture was ushered
in by Brunelleschi’s dome to the Cathedral of Florence, and
by his design for the Church of S. Lorenzo, in which the

Ai

FIG, 108.

 

basilican scheme with the classic column and entablature
was re-established. Henceforth in Italy the structural forms
and decorative motives of the Roman antique were to supply
the elements of architectural design ; and the arts of medi-
eval Christendom were to be regarded as obsolete and even
barbarous.

III.—Spain

In Spain, during the second half of the twelfth century
and the beginning of the thirteenth, an interesting class of
buildings was erected, in which the pointed arch occurs in
the vaulting and in the main arcades, but which neverthe-
less remains strictly Romanesque in character—that is to
say, these buildings are massive structures in which there is
never any Gothic concentration of vault thrusts, nor any
Gothic system of buttresses. Characteristic features of these
buildings are the dome on pendentives at the crossing of
nave and transept and the semicircular apse vaulted with a
semi-dome. In some cases, however, the dome at the
crossing gives place to a quadripartite vault, like those of
French Gothic churches, and the vault of the apse assumes
the form that is peculiar to the French chevet. The piers
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN SPAIN 195

 

are, for the most part, intelligently designed, and consist of
square members grouped with reference to the transverse
ribs of the vaults and to the ground-story archivolts, accom-
panied by engaged shafts to support the sub-orders, where such
occur, and sometimes to support the diagonal vaulting ribs.
These piers frequently exhibit the peculiarity of coupled
engaged shafts to carry a single rib or arch order. The main
ribs and archivolts are of plain square section; and are
usually, though not always, of two orders. The clerestory
is low with heavy walls pierced by small and usually round-
arched windows. The triforium space is narrow and without
openings. These features appear in the old Cathedral of 4
Salamanca, the Cathedral of Tudela, the Abbey Church of
Veruela, the Cathedral of Lérida, and many others.

At the same time another and smaller class of buildings
were erected with barrel vaults, strengthened by projecting
transverse ribs over their central aisles, and with open
triforium galleries. Examples of this class are the Cathedral
of Santiago and the Church of S. Isidoro at Leon.

It will be seen that these two classes of buildings exhibit
characteristics that belong to various localities on the French
side of the Pyrenees. The dome on pendentives over the
crossing is characteristic of the style of Auvergne and its
neighbourhood, as in the Churches of St. Stephen of Nevers,
and Notre-Dame du Port at Clermont-Ferrand, as well
as of the great Romanesque churches of the Rhine. The
barrel vault with transverse ribs is also a feature of the
style to which the Church of Notre-Dame du Port belongs.
The quadripartite vaults in nearly square compartments are
conspicuous in the early twelfth century architecture of
Burgundy, though the rib systems with which, in Spain,
these vaults are furnished belong to the style of the Ile-de-
France. The composition of the pier, the absence of triforium
openings, and the square arch section are, like the square
compartment, chiefly Burgundian, while the coupled vaulting
shafts are from Poitou, as may be seen at Fontevrault.

It thus appears that the early Christian architecture of
Spain was by no means of local growth, but that it was
almost wholly the result of influences derived from Gaul.
And such influences may be naturally accounted for by the
incoming at this period of the Cistercian order, bringing
196 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

with them, as they did into other countries, the traditions
and tastes of France. Interesting and even admirable as
this early architecture of Spain is, it does not, as I have said,
belong to the true Gothic style. Nevertheless, certain
portions of some of these buildings are Gothic to a con-
siderable degree. Such churches as Veruela and Leérida,
for instance, possess in their chevefs and vaulting ribs much
likeness to Gothic. And in some cases even the dome
at the crossing—a feature which ordinarily, on account
of its continuous thrusts, is far removed from Gothic
principle — exhibits something of Gothic character, by
being constructed on the principle of the vault of the
French chevet, as in the Cathedral of Tarragona. These
are, however, exceptional features which do not change
the general character of this architecture. Gothic in principle
it certainly is not, even in its internal arrangements, while
externally, in the entire absence of buttress systems, it has
no Gothic expression whatever; nor does it show any signs
of growth. Its various elements were imported ready-made,
and the style is substantially the same from beginning
to end.

Nothing different appears in the Christian architecture
of the country till about the second quarter of the thirteenth
century, when the complete Gothic of France was taken as
a model in the great Cathedrals of Burgos, Toledo, and Leon.
The appearance of these buildings can be explained only on
the assumption that they were, for the most part, directly
copied from the nearly contemporaneous buildings of France,
with more or less assistance from Frenchmen. Mr. Street
supposes? that they were designed, and perhaps even
built, by Frenchmen almost exclusively. I can, however,
hardly agree with this view, because they exhibit certain
peculiarities that are not strictly Gothic—peculiarities
such as men not fully imbued with Gothic principles,
but habituated to the modes of design that had formerly
prevailed in Spain, would naturally introduce. For instance,
in the choir of the Cathedral of Burgos, which was
begun in 1221, one year after the commencement of
Amiens, the clerestory is almost as heavily walled as that

1 Some Account of Gothic Architecture in Spain, p. 422 and elsewhere. By
George Edmund Street, A.R.A. London, 1869.
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN SPAIN 197

 

of a Romanesque building. The opening is merely a
window not more than half-filling the space between the
piers, whereas, as we have seen, in the developed Gothic

     
  

   
    
 

z . SY : .
== FH SNe
= == = SET, NS .
= A (~ \ ~. b at
i a er ae =SSS be La
—— — RNS

   
 
   
     
   
 

=

 

eA
MDOT:

——|

Sean ( a 8
7 OMe roa TZ

FIG, 109.

of France, the clerestory opening is an intercolumniation
rather than a window in a wall. Moreover, externally, in
this same building there is no pier buttress, and con-
sequently the heads of the flying buttresses are received
198 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

directly against the face of the wall (Fig. 109)* just
as they sometimes are in England, as in the Presbytery
of Lincoln. The framework of Burgos is thus incomplete
by the omission of one of the most important members, and
the clerestory wall is therefore necessary to the stability of
the structure. The clerestory of the inner apsidal aisle of
Toledo is walled in even more completely, its openings being
mere small circles, one in each bay.?

In the nave of this building, however, the clerestory is
perfectly Gothic, since the opening fills the whole space be-
neath the vault. At Leon, also, according to Mr. Street, it
did so originally, though it was subsequently found necessary
to partially wall-up the opening, in order to strengthen the
piers, which had begun to show signs of weakness.

It is true, as Mr. Street remarks,’ that in a climate like
that of Spain the large openings that are peculiar to Gothic
would be unsuitable; but this is equivalent to saying
that Gothic architecture is unsuitable in such a climate.
And hence, as well as for other reasons, the pointed
architecture of Spain is not Gothic with absolute strictness.
Nevertheless, it must not only be admitted that such buildings
as Burgos, Toledo, and Leon, though not of Spanish origin,
are Gothic in the main, their vaults having the Gothic con-
centration upon the piers, the internal vaulting systems being
completely developed, and their vault thrusts being met by
systems of flying buttresses ; but it may, I suppose, be said
also that they are among the grandest edifices of the
world.

A more detailed consideration of the forms of vaults,
the composition of piers, the adjustment of flying buttresses,
and the modes of enclosure, is unnecessary, as the Gothic
of Spain in the thirteenth century follows more closely
than the pointed architecture of any other country the

1 This figure is copied from Street’s Gothic Architecture in Spain.

2 It is true, indeed, as we have seen in the second chapter, that walls remain,
to some extent, in the clerestories of early Gothic buildings in France; but in
these cases they are but survivals in a growing style which soon entirely frees
itself from them. Moreover, though portions of wall still remain for a while, the
pier is, at the same time, completely and independently developed, so that the
wall might be removed without danger to the building. “But when these Spanish
churches were erected the perfect example of Gothic construction had been
furnished in the French buildings, and the walls which they retain are incon-
sistent with developed Gothic principles,

3 Some Account of Gothic Architecture in Spain, p. 112,
Iv POINTED CONSTRUCTION IN SPAIN 199

 

structural principles of France. Nor, in a style in which
there is so little either of original invention or of local modi-
fication, do we need to consider in particular the forms of
fagades or of towers and spires. These, in so far as they
belong to the original constructions, are little different from
similar features in France. The west front of the Cathedral
of Burgos, for example, exhibits the French scheme up as
high as the foundations of the spires, except that the wall of
the ground-story is unbroken by buttresses, and that above
this story the wall is set back at some distance, so that the
top of the lower wall forms a ledge from which, flush with
its outer face, the tower buttresses rise. The spires are of
later date; and are of the German open-work design like
that of the spires of Freiburg and Cologne.
CHAPTER V
GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE

HAVING examined the larger structural features of Gothic
and other pointed architecture, we may now examine the
forms of the lesser members—such as capitals, bases, string-
courses, arch-sections, and tracery. The profiles which these
members assume are determined largely by functional exi-
gencies, though in their development the exercise of artistic
feeling was so intimately connected with obedience to these
exigencies that the elements of functional fitness and
artistic expression can hardly be separated. I shall not,
therefore, attempt to consider them separately.

We have already, in the course of the second chapter,
had occasion to notice some of the conditions which partially
determined the forms of the capitals in the great piers of
Paris, Chartres, Reims, and other churches. We may now
take up the further consideration of their development, more
especially with regard to their profiles.

The Roman and the early Romanesque builders did not
consistently recognise the mechanical function of the capital
as a member by means of which a bulky load may be safely
and agreeably adjusted to a slender column. In the arcades
of many Roman buildings the superincumbent load at the
impost does not exceed in diameter the diameter of the
sustaining column, as is shown in Fig. 110, a shaft with its
capital and load, from the palace of Diocletian at Spalato.
In this case the capital is comparatively useless, since the
load would be almost as well adjusted to the column with-
out its interposition. But in Christian Roman buildings
usually, as in the gallery of Sta. Agnese at Rome, the
CHAP. V GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 201

 

load (Fig. 111) does exceed in diameter the thickness of
the column, and the capital thus becomes a_ structural
member of great import- 4

i |b

Ii ill iy

    

ance, providing, in its ex- rth hh
panded upper surface, a MH Heyl li | hi il
secure bed for the load. it oe

In France after the jit i!
eleventh century the tend- i AM ny
a

 

 
  
    

   
 
 

|

 

  
  

     

 

 

ency to diminish the thick-
ness of the column in
proportion to that of its
load became constant, and
the development of the
capital into a more and
more spreading form neces-
sarily followed. The degree
of expansion given to the
capital varied considerably
according to circumstances.
Where monolithic shafts of
compact stone could be
obtained, it was found that
these might be made very
slender, and yet be strong
enough to bear all the
weight that could be
gathered upon a widely
spreading abacus. The
frank carrying out of this principle led to the production of the
distinctly Gothic type of capital, which finds one of its earliest
illustrations in the round portion of the choir of the Cathedral
of Senlis. This capital (Fig. 112) is interesting, moreover, as
showing the Gothic form already developed, while the sculp-
tured ornamentation remains purely Romanesque. Thus
these smaller members agree with the larger ones in exhibit-
ing structural before ornamental change. The column which
carries this capital is a monolith, Where the columns
are not monolithic, but are built up of coursed masonry,
their diameter is naturally greater in proportion to their
height, and the. capital is proportionately less expanded.
The intermediate piers, for instance, of both the nave and the

  

FIG. I10.
202 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

choir of Senlis are round columns built up in courses, and
are consequently much heavier, and have much less spreading
capitals than the one represented in Fig. 112, as may be
seen in the elevation of the bay given in Fig. 18, p. 45.
The piers of the Cathedral of Paris are of the same form
as the intermediate piers of Senlis, and their capitals

   
 

| sl
ih * i |
RD a

    

FIG. III.

also are not much expanded. In the triforium of the choir
the shafts which carry the sub-orders of the arches are
comparatively slender monoliths, and their capitals (Fig. 113)
are much more spreading ; while in the triforium of the nave
the shafts are still more slender and the capital (Fig. 114)
is very much expanded.

Another principle which apparently governs the forms of
these capitals, though one that is subject to exceptions, is
that the thickness of the abacus is in proportion to the
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN: FRANCE 203

 

spread of the capital. Thus in Fig. 114, where the expansion
of the capital reaches about its maximum, the thickness of
the abacus is equal to nearly half its total height. In Fig. 113,
where the capital is not so spreading, the abacus is not so

at

i a :
My :

 

FIG. 112,

thick. The capitals of the triforium of Laon (Fig. 115) have
about the same spread as those of the choir of Paris, and
the thickness of their abaci is in about the same proportion.
But in the massive and but slightly expanded capitals of
the ground-story columns the abaci are comparatively thin.*

1M. Viollet-le-Duc, s.c. Abague, says that the thickness of the abacus was
made greater or less according to the height at which the capital was placed—near
the ground it being thin, and higher up thicker; but this statement does not

seem to be entirely correct. It is true, indeed, that the more massive and less
spreading capitals, being those of the ground-story, usually have the thinner abaci.
204 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

 

FIG. 113.

But in capitals of the same magnitude and the same form there seems to be no
systematic difference in the thickness of the abacus whatever its location may be.
The abaci of the capitals in the canopies of the buttresses of the fa¢ade of Paris,
for instance, are, though comparatively low down, relatively as thick as those on
GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 205

 

 
   
 
 

 

   

4
fl

     
 

4 Hw

 

FIG. II4.

the higher level of the triforium within, while those of the pinnacles of the apse
of Reims are very thin; but the thickness is in both cases in conformity with
the principle stated in the. text—the capitals of the buttresses of Paris being of
the spreading form, while those of the pinnacles of Reims spread but little.
206 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

The constructive principle involved is, of course, that the
slightly spreading: capital presents no projections that are
not abundantly strong for the weight with which they are
charged, while those of the more spreading form would be
more or less weak—in
appearance, if not in
reality —if the weight
of their charge were not
supported by a thick
abacus. It must be ad-
mitted that this principle
does not always strictly
hold, for in the Cathedral
of Senlis the spreading
capital of the sanctuary
has an abacus which,
though thick, is not
much if at all thicker in
proportion than those
of the less spreading
capitals of the choir and
nave. Senlis is, how-
ever, a very early build-
ing in which the principles of the Gothic system were not
yet carried out in every detail.

In Gothic architecture the abacus and the bell are
usually wrought out of one stone, and the astragal is always
worked upon the capital itself instead of being worked upon
the shaft according to the ancient mode. The profile of the
capital thus includes both of these members.

The abacus was usually square in plan until nearly the
middle of the thirteenth century, except in the case of
compound capitals—like those of the great western piers
of the Cathedral of Paris—where the centre portion is round.
The plan of the abacus is, of course, determined by the
form of the load which it has to carry. As the arch
sections were, for the most part, square during the early
Gothic period, the plan of the abacus was also square. But
when, in the more advanced Gothic, the mouldings of the
archivolt give a polygonal section, the plan of the abacus
assumes a polygonal form in conformity with it. as in the

 

FIG. IIS.
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 207

 

triforium of the nave of the Cathedral of Amiens. The
round abacus hardly occurs in France, though it is found in
Normandy, before the fourteenth century; it is, therefore,
not a feature of the strictly Gothic style.

The profiles of abaci are of considerable variety, yet they
are always comparatively simple.
Starting from the idea of the simply
bevelled stone of the eleventh cen-
tury, as in St. Aignan of Senlis (Fig.
116), the mouldings of the early
Gothic abacus are of slight projec-
tion, as in St. Evremont at Creil
and the cathedral at Senlis (Fig.
117,a@and 8), and gradually become
more salient, as in the triforium of
the nave of Paris (¢ d, e¢, and f in
the same figure). These mouldings
are rarely, if ever, of uniform profile
throughout an entire building, nor even throughout any
considerable portion of a building. Though the same
profile may be often repeated, yet there will usually be
found several forms in the abaci of any extended arcade.
Thus in the north triforium of the nave of Paris, where there
are in all fourteen capitals, the four different profiles
exhibited in Fig. 117 occur. Of these, counting from the
transept, the profile ¢ occurs in the first, second, third, fourth,

Z \ F&A & s
’
a é ¢

d f

 

®

FIG. 117.

and eighth; the profile @ in the fifth, sixth, ninth, and tenth ;
the profile ¢ in the seventh ; and the profile fin the eleventh,
twelfth, thirteenth, and fourteenth. Where the same form
is repeated there is always more or less variety in the
proportions of the parts—the mouldings having evidently
been chiselled with the free hand rather than with rigid
mechanical precision.
208 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

The upper member of these mouldings retains the square
profile till well on in the thirteenth century, when it some-
times assumes a variously curved profile, as at Amiens
(Fig. 118), where A and B
are profiles of abaci from
the west front and from
the triforium respectively.

The profile of the bell
of the capital is, in Gothic
design, a fine Corinthian-
esque curve almost without
exception. Of the capitals
of the ancient orders—the

A RB Doric, the Ionic, and the
Bigs a8: Corinthian—only the latter
influenced to any extent the
art of the Middle Ages. Derived from the Roman type, the
Corinthianesque capital of the Romanesque builders was, in
the best examples, an improvement upon its prototype;
while in the hands of the Gothic artists it was still further
modified and refined in profile. This form is one that
admits of almost endless minor changes which adapt it
perfectly to all the varied conditions which Gothic capitals
have to meet. The circular form of the bell is adjusted to
the square of the abacus by projecting crockets, which have
the additional function of augmenting the strength of the
angles of the abacus, as in Figs. 113 and 114. The French
Gothic capital, taken as a whole, is certainly a most
admirable object ; but it is in the early period of the style
that we must look for the finest examples. In these alone
is perfect structural adaptation joined with the highest and
most temperate grace. The French capitals of the latter
part of the twelfth century are quite unmatched by anything
of their kind that has been produced in any age.

It does not fall within the scope of this work to follow
the later transformations of the Gothic capital; but it may
here be remarked that in the course of the thirteenth century
certain modifications of its form were made which, though
not improvements on the earlier forms, were yet largely
necessitated by changed conditions, and were at first produc-
tive of results that have much interest and merit. These
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 209

 

modifications were consequent upon the change that was
wrought in the profiles of the archivolts and vault ribs from
the square to the polygonal section.

Arch sections of other than square form had sometimes
been employed from the earliest times. But these forms, as
we shall presently see, were very simple and did not lead

2 AP AM tine oe
Rainy
gigi i

    

 

    

4 ; ie . bi

Fade

ily,
ihe

FIG. 19.

to any change in the form of the abacus. But now that
more complicated mouldings were being introduced, and the
arch section was becoming polygonal in its general outlines,
the form of the abacus was made to correspond with it.
The bell remained substantially unchanged, but the absence
of the far-projecting angles of the abacus removed the
reason for the supporting crockets, and though crockets
continued to be introduced, they now became more orna-
P
210 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

mental than structural features, and were often placed, not
under the angles of the polygonal abacus, but under its
alternate sides, as in Fig. 119, a capital from one of the
chapels of the choir of Amiens. It is true that the crocket
had always been largely ornamental in its purpose, and that
associated with those under the corners of the abacus which
were functional there had usually been others that had not
any functional office, as in Fig. 113 ; but the general expres-
sion of the leading lines was always in sympathy with the
form of the capital regarded as a working member. This
expression was largely retained in the earliest and best
capitals of the polygonal form, but in later examples the
crocket became an extravagant and unmeaning excrescence.
The forms of bases are

hardly less interesting than

those of capitals. The Gothic

base, as we have before seen,

is always some modification

of the Attic base of antiquity ;

but the Gothic shaft having

to carry more weight, in pro-

portion to its size, than the
classic column, and_ being
more subject to chances of

lateral displacement, required
a firmer and a stronger base.
The round ancient base rest-
ing on its stylobate without
the interposition of a plinth,
or with a plinth of shallow
proportions, suited perfectly
well the simple conditions of
classic construction ; but the
Gothic base had to be both
deeper and more spreading.
For if a heavily charged

 

 

slender column, under con-
ditions which expose it to
the chance of more or less disturbance of its equilibrium,
be placed upon a thin plinth, some rupture of the plinth
may follow. But by the interposition of a second stone of

F1G, 120,
Mi GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 211

 

considerable thickness the pressure is more diffused upon
the lower member, and a footing which is assuring to the
eye, as well as really secure, is obtained. Gothic bases are,
therefore, in most cases composed of at least two superposed
members. Very fine early examples of such bases occur
in the nave of Senlis (Fig. 120), in the choir of Paris
(Fig. 121), and in many other buildings. The functional

 

 

FIG. I2I.

propriety of these profiles could hardly be surpassed, while
for beauty of line and proportion they are unsurpassed by
thosé of any other age or style.

A conspicuous feature of these bases is the angle spur
shown in Figure 121, which occurs in a great variety
of beautiful forms during the whole early Gothic period.
Though it can hardly be said that this feature has
a really constructive function, it nevertheless has an im-
212 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

portant functional expression, giving the lower torus an
apparent grasp of the plinth, and thus adding to the appear-
ance of stability as well as to the variety
and grace of the member.

The base, like the capital, is made
more spreading in proportion as the shaft
is smaller; and the bases of the slender
shafts of triforiums and other small arcades
are often among the most exquisite objects
which the genius of the Gothic artists
produced. Of such bases none are finer
than those of the triforium of the nave of
the Cathedral of Paris, of which Fig. 122
is a profile, and Fig. 123 a perspective
view. It will be noticed that the angle
spur on the nearest corner (unhappily
broken) differs from those on the other
corners, and affords one of the many
instances of the variety which characterises
the spirit of Gothic design.

Early in the thirteenth century the plinth was diminished
in magnitude, so that the lower torus overhung its sides, and

FIG. 122.

     

i

ul

  
 
   

the corners were sometimes cut away, as in Fig. 124, a small
base from the choir of Soissons ; and sometimes the plinth
was wrought into the form of an octagon, as in the engaged
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 213

shafts of the westernmost piers of Paris (Fig. 125). In these

 

FIG, 124.

cunt CL
ee

    
   

  
   
 

 

! 2
ALS Ae
ae ees = Ns

LLLP /)11)\\
foi)

 

       

  

cases the angle spur necessarily disappears, and with it the
finest form of Gothic base.
214 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

The development of the profiles of string-courses in
France constitutes one of the most interesting branches of
our subject. The string-courses of the eleventh century were

LZ LLL oe
: Z Lj

FIG. 126.

always simple, and nearly always retained the flatupper surface
that had been characteristic of classic mouldings, being
either bevelled or very simply moulded beneath. The
profiles (Fig. 126) from the small Church of Nogens-les-

:
E ; .
Z
Z 2

FIG. 127.

  

Vierges, near Senlis, sufficiently illustrate their character.
In the earliest transitional buildings the same forms were
retained, as at a, Fig. 127, a profile from St. Evremont at Creil,
where the string is carried on corbels. But the early Gothic
i GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 215

 

builders soon perceived that this form of moulding was not
suited to the stormy Northern climate. They saw that the
flat upper surface, by affording lodgment for snows, and by
causing an incessant spattering against the walls in times of
rain,! was objectionable and must be avoided. Accordingly
on the exterior of the choir of the Cathedral of Senlis the
profile 4, Fig. 127, was employed,” in which, to the profile a,
of St. Evremont, a steep slope was added, and the flat upper
surface was done away with. This must be one of the very
first instances of the steeply sloping form ; and it is, perhaps,
the first step in the development of the distinctively Gothic
drip-moulding. It is true that the sloping upper surface
was not altogether unknown before this time. It occurs, for
instance, on the buttresses of the Church of Morienval, as at
¢, Fig. 1273; but before the middle of the twelfth century it
is exceptional, and is never developed to anything like the
extent that is exhibited in the profile from Senlis.

Early in the thirteenth century great additional changes
were made in the profile of the string
—changes by which it was gradually
brought to the highest degree of per-
fection, both functional and artistic.
One important function of the string-
course is to prevent excessive washing
of the walls and other parts of a facade
by heavy rains. In order effectually
to do this it must be so formed as to
throw off water quickly and completely.
The form 6 of Senlis, though much
better than the form a of St. Evremont,
is still very imperfectly adapted to this
function. For over such a moulding a
great deal of water may trickle back-
wards and be conducted upon the walls
beneath, there being nothing to ab- Rie. 738!
solutely cut it off But the improved
form of the thirteenth century (Fig. 128, the profile of the

1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Bandeau, p. 105.
2 This string is not now visible from the exterior, it having been removed, in the
course of subsequent alterations, from those portions of the wall which are still

exposed to view. But in the space over the vaults of the more recently constructed
chapels on the south side of the choir, east of the old sacristy, portions of it still remain.
216 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

cornice of the Cathedral of Paris) is admirably adapted to
shed water quickly and thoroughly. In this profile we have
the typical form of the Gothic drip-moulding, in which the
steeply sloping upper surface is associated with a deeply
undercut hollow, the salient edge between the two effectually
cutting off the drip and preventing any backward movement
of the water over the lower surfaces of the moulding, and
thence upon the wall beneath.

Towards the end of the twelfth century the sloping
surface was sometimes given to the upper member of interior
strings, whether in a spirit of conformity with the
changed form that had been adopted in outside
mouldings, or for other reasons, it is, of course,
impossible wholly to determine. Perhaps the
earliest instance of an interior moulding of this
form is that of the triforium string of the nave
of the Cathedral of Paris (Fig. 129). The slope
has not, of course, the same razson d’étre here
that it has when the moulding is exposed to the weather ;
but it still is not altogether without reason, for the projecting
edge of the flat-topped moulding hides a considerable portion
of the members which come im-
mediately above it,! as shown in
Fig. 130, where the portion 4 ¢ of
the superstructure is concealed
from the eye at a Whereas, if
from the point ¢, the moulding is
sloped off so as to bring its surface
nearly parallel with the usual line
of vision, as in the triforium string /
of Paris, nothing is concealed ; but /
this makes the profile a little too /
much like an exterior drip-mould /
to permanently satisfy the nicely
discriminating sense of the Gothic
builders. And hence, in the nave
of Amiens, the triforium string is
managed in a different way. The
principal members that are apt to be cut off from view by
the projecting moulding are the bases of the shafts of the

} See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Bandean, p. 105.

FIG. 129.

 

FIG. 130,
¥v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 217

 

triforium arcade. In the nave of Paris these bases are quite
out of sight from the pavement, notwithstanding the slope
that is given to the string-course. This is, however, largely
owing to the fact that they are very low and spreading, and
could hardly be better seen if the string
were entirely removed. At Amiens, how-
ever, both string and bases are better man-
aged. The string here is in two courses,!
the lower member of which (Fig. 131)
reassumes the earlier flat-topped profile,
but the upper member is sloped so as to
reveal the bases of the shafts to one looking
from below along a more steeply inclined
line of vision than would otherwise show
them. But owing to their great height
above the pavement these bases would still
be largely hidden were they not raised on
stilted plinths, which give them a very
awkward appearance when viewed from
their own level, but which, when foreshortened as they are to
the eye viewing them from below, become entirely agreeable
in form. In this string profile the character of the drip-
mould is avoided by the setting of the upper member at a
little distance back from the edge of the lower one, and by
the avoidance of undercutting in the hollow beneath. Thus
in the ideal Gothic, which the nave of Amiens may be
taken to typify, there is a difference founded in reason
between internal and external string profiles.

It may be remarked in passing that the true Gothic
cornice is never supported by a corbel table—the form of the
lower member giving a continuous support to those more
projecting. But in Norman pointed design, as in the
Cathedral of Rouen, it frequently appears.

In the sections of vault ribs and archivolts there were
not the same functional exigencies to provide for; but in
architecture the exigencies of the eye are hardly less imper-

 

FIG. 131.

1 In strictness, perhaps, the lower member only is the real string. In fact, a
string-course can hardly with propriety be said to consist of more than one
course. Yet the upper member here occupies the same place as the string of
Paris, and its association with the lower member is such that the two become
practically one. The lower member alone, however, is visible from the pave-
ment.
218 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

ative than those of a mechanical nature. And it will be
found on examination that the requirements of the eye are
admirably felt and skilfully met in these arch mouldings.
The characteristic forms were developed early, and little
material change was made during the period through which

—

PO he

FIG. 132.

 

 

the style continued in its integrity. The square transverse
arches of Romanesque vaults, like those of Poissy (a, Fig. 132),
were heavy in appearance, and were little improved by the
chamfer that was sometimes given them, as in the proflle 4,
in the same figure, from Morienval. In the apsidal aisle of
St. Martin des Champs at Paris some interesting examples
occur, in which the sections differ one from another, as at
c,d,ande. These are apparently so many experiments made

bd OS

a b

FIG. 133.

with the object of lightening the effect of these heavy ribs
and of producing profiles which should be more varied and
agreeable to the eye. In the transverse ribs of St. Denis
a vast improvement was made, and one of the most charac-
teristic Gothic profiles was fully established. The section a,
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 219

 

Fig. 133, square in general outline, has its edges softened
by roll mouldings, and the profile is further developed
by curving the line from the roll out to the soffit. This
curve is struck from a centre which is obtained by Jetting
fall a vertical line from the centre of the roll to its circum-
ference, as shown in the figure. The line from the roll to
the upright face of the arch is also inclined to that face
instead of being at right angles with it, as it usually was
in early profiles, and thus the flat surfaces are greatly
lessened, and the effect of the whole is materially lightened.

The diagonal ribs were at first of a different profile.
In the apse of Morienval they were simple three-quarter
rounds, as at a, Fig. 134. In St. Denis the form was
changed to that shown at 4 in the same figure; while at

2 OBY

FIG. 134.

Senlis this form was made more pleasing, and the rib was
at the same time made stronger, by bringing the curves to-
gether in a more acute point, and by separating the two
members of the rib by a sunk fillet, as at « A defect?
which resulted from the association of this form of the
diagonal with the form a, Fig. 133, of the transverse rib, as
at St. Denis, was that the round member of the one was
heavier than the round members of the other. Whereas, for
good proportion—since the diagonals are lighter than the
transverse ribs,—it ought to be just the other way, or
certainly the rounds of the transverse rib ought to be at
least equal in the magnitude to the round of the diagonal.
At Paris this defect was avoided by giving the same
profile—that of a, Fig. 13 3—to both diagonals and transverse
ribs. The round mouldings of the smaller ribs were thus
naturally made smaller than those of the larger ones, and
1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Profil, p. 506.
220 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

good proportion was secured. At Laon the ill proportion
exhibited by St. Denis was partially avoided by the em-
ployment of the profile 4, Fig. 133, for the transverse rib, and
the profile d, Fig. 134, for the diagonal; but the result is
very imperfect. The diagonals are
still disproportionately heavy. In the
apsidal chapels of Senlis the profile c,
Fig. 134, of the diagonals is associated
with the profile, Fig. 135, for the trans-
verse ribs. But though this tranverse
rib, by its great lower round, secures
proportion, it is a comparatively clumsy
and inelegant form, and was not much

FIG. 135. employed after the middle of the

twelfth century.

At Amiens the rib loses the square section by the simple
addition of a larger round member to its under side, as at a,
Fig. 136; and this may be taken as the perfected Gothic
vault rib. The profile is admirable both functionally and
artistically. The added member augments the strength to
bear downward pressure, which is the chief pressure that the
rib has to sustain, and makes it safe materially to reduce
the width. From this results great lightness of effect, which

ill

FIG. 136.

 

 

is further increased by the deep hollows that separate the
round members. A fine harmony of parts is secured by the
similarity of rounds and hollows, a subtle proportionate
relationship by their varied magnitudes, and effective con-
trasts by the sharp edges of the fillet on the face of the
lower round and the projecting and re-entering angles
above. On such a, moulding the light brings out an
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 221

 

exquisite effect of varied half shades, which are admirably
set off by the telling darks of the deeper recesses.

At Amiens this profile is employed for both transverse
and diagonal ribs; and these ribs being of different magni-
tudes, and the parts of each

being of appropriate scale,

good proportion is estab- Co
lished in the total effect, as

itis with the different profile

in the Cathedral of Paris.

The rib profile of Amiens
was widely adopted, and
was not materially altered during the best period of Gothic
art, though in its proportions and in minor details it varied
in different buildings. The profile 4, Fig. 136, from the
Cathedral of Beauvais, for instance, illustrates one of these
variations. A comparatively unusual and certainly not a
graceful modification of the square section is that shown at c,
Fig. 136, from the small Church of Villeneuve sur Verberie
(Oise). From about 1225 the square section fell into disuse
in vault ribs, though it was still employed in the great
ground-story arcades, as at Amiens and Beauvais.

The form of the Amiens rib led to a corresponding
adjustment of the supporting capitals. When, in early
Gothic vaults, the diagonal ribs had been of the section
shown at «, Fig. 134,
the arrangement of
the sustaining abaci
was that shown in
Fig. 137, from the
triforium of Senlis.
With the employ-
ment of the square
section for all the
ribs the arrange-
ment became like
that in the Cathedral
of Paris, Fig. 22, p. 56. But with the new rib profile of
Amiens the lateral abaci were again, as at Senlis, set even
with the wall, while the central one assumed the diagonal
position, as in Fig. 138.

 

 

 

FIG. 137.

FIG. 138.
222 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

The only remaining members whose profiles call for
examination are mullions and tracery. These are very
simple in outline. The earliest form of mullion—a, Fig. 139,
from St. Leu d’Esserent '—is a plain column of stone simply
bevelled both outside and inside. This form is very appropriate
in connection with the plain pierced tympanum of St. Leu;
but in connection with true tracery, and as a part of an
open framework, whose function is to support the glass of
an opening through which as much light as possible must
be allowed to pass, it is not a good form. The strain upon
a mullion is in one direction only—that which is exerted by

b

FIG. 139.

the force of winds pressing inwards,—it accordingly requires to
be deep in this direction. But in order that it may as little
as possible obstruct the passage of light, it ought to be as
narrow as it consistently may. In fact, the conditions which
it has to meet are substantially the same as those which
have determined the forms of the members of an ordinary
window sash. These conditions were fully recognised by
the designer of the tracery of the apsidal openings of the
Cathedral of Reims, and the mullion section 4, Fig. 139, from
those openings,’ established the typical Gothic form, the
principal modifications of which were such only as the
exigencies of more complex tracery called for. The

1 This profile was drawn by eye, and is only approximately correct.
2 The profiles 4 and c in this figure are taken from Viollet-le-Duc.
v GOTHIC PROFILES IN FRANCE 223

 

openings of Reims have but one mullion each, and all the
tracery that branches out of it has the same _ section.
But in the great openings of the clerestory of Amiens
there are three mullions, the central one of which naturally
requires to be stronger than the others, and its section is,
as shown at ¢, Fig. 139, an amplification of the profile
of the lateral mullions, whose section is given within
the larger one. The three round members of the central
mullion are carried out in the main tracery bars which
branch from it, while the single round of the smaller
mullions suffices for the tracery to which they give origin.
There was little change wrought in this profile until, in the
declining Gothic, sharp and multiplied arrises took the place
of the rounds,

We have now examined the most characteristic profiles
of the several members in which mouldings occur. The
variations in proportion, in number of parts, and in the
character of curves, are very great, no two profiles being
ever quite the same, and yet, during the best period of
Gothic, the leading types are few and simple, as well as
rational and beautiful.
CHAPTER VI

PROFILES OF THE TWELFTH AND THIRTEENTH CENTURIES
IN ENGLAND AND OTHER COUNTRIES

THE pointed architecture of England of the twelfth and
thirteenth centuries differs from the Gothic of France, in
the profiles of its subordinate members, such as capitals,
bases, cornices, etc. no less than in its larger structural
characteristics. This difference is manifest from the first,
and is constant except where, as at Canterbury, the profiles
are of French workmanship or design.

In considering these profiles we may begin with those
of capitals. Among the earliest as well as the best
capitals of the type of which I have already spoken as
peculiar to England (in which the round abacus’ takes the
place of the square) are those of the east transepts of the
Cathedral of Lincoln, and among the finest of these are
the capitals of the triforium of the north arm, of which
Fig. 140 is an illustration. This capital, though it lacks
those qualities which distinguish the finest French examples,
is of a character which certainly exhibits much to admire.
In its main mass it is well formed as a member connecting
the slender shaft with its heavy load. The Corinthianesque
profile of its bell is at once functional and graceful. The
round abacus, a form which agrees better than the square
with the arch sections employed, presents no overhanging

1 This form of abacus occurs in some purely Norman buildings, as in South-
well, Gloucester, and Malmesbury ; but in Norman buildings generally the square
abacus was employed. The general prevalence of the round form in early
pointed buildings is, perhaps, one of the results of the Anglo-Saxon influence,
which seems to have been stronger in the modification of details than in that of
structural forms.
cH.vI PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 225

angles requiring support from crockets. Instead of crockets,
therefore, a continuous series of shallow projections, carved
into vigorous leaf forms, is carried with graceful art around

 

FIG. 140.

the bell, just under the abacus, affording that apparent
support which the eye requires. Under the conditions
involved a more admirable outline than that of the bell of
this capital could hardly be devised.

Q
to
td
on

GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

The same general type is, with many beautiful minor
variations, carried out in most of the capitals of Bishop
Hugh’s choir and transept, especially in the wall arcades of
the ground story. But associated with them are a few
others of curiously different and ill-agreeing character. Of
these Fig. 141 affords an illustration. In this capital the

 

FIG. I41.

round abacus is joined to a bell of thoroughly French design
-—as may be seen by comparing it with Fig. 113 in the
preceding chapter,—in which crockets of considerable projec-
tion, but having little connection with the abacus, take the
place of the more appropriate supporting leaf forms of the
former example. These capitals are interesting as affording
evidence of the employment of French workmen in com-
VI PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 227

 

 

FIG. 142.

pany with the more numerous Anglo-Normans and English,
and as showing their efforts to adapt their own peculiar
228 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

modes of design to the local type characterised by
the round abacus; but the result is awkward and un-
satisfactory. Associated with the round abacus, especially,
as in this case, a round abacus of small proportionate
diameter, the heavy crockets are meaningless, and spoil the
profile of the bell. These crockets are, however, in them-
selves very beautiful. Their refined execution is in marked
contrast with the singuiar coarseness of execution exhibited
by the native sculpture ; and with a square abacus, in con-
nection with which such crockets were originally designed,
nothing could be finer. Capitals of this distorted French
type are curiously mingled with those of the local character
in nearly all the arcades of this early portion of Lincoln
Cathedral. In the south triforium the entire groups of
the first and second bays, counting from the west, are
composed of them, while the widely different Anglo-
Norman work elsewhere generally prevails. Other capitals
in these arcades are still different. They have crockets
arranged as in the preceding example, but differing from
the French work entirely in design and execution. They
are apparently local imitations of the French type; one
of them, from an early portion of the west transept, is shown
in Fig. 142. This form of capital, with exaggerated crockets,
as in the next figure but one, came at length to be very
widely employed in the early pointed architecture of England.
Fig. 143 exhibits another type of frequent occurrence. It is
a modification of the type shown in Fig. 140, but hardly an
improvement, since the ornamentation is excessively re-
dundant, having the appearance of a wreath entwined around
the bell, whose profile it too much hides. Yet as compared
with the later forms of capitals in England it has the merits
of comparative compactness, temperance, and considerable
beauty.

The tendency to excessive redundance of ornament in
capitals became very strong before the middle of the
thirteenth century ; and this peculiarity, quite as much as
the use of the round abacus, characterises the later forms of
the so-called early English style. Fig. 144, a capital from
the arcade of the north choir screen of Lincoln, is a fair
instance of this phase of design; though others might be
chosen, as, for instance, some of those of the west facade of
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 229

 

 

FIG. 143.

Wells, which exhibit even more extravagant forms. The
crockets, wandering far out from the bell, and nowhere
230 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

connected with the abacus, show a singular defect of archi-
tectural and artistic aptitude on the part of the native
English designers who were by this time, apparently, gaining
ascendency.

 

FIG. T44.

Of still different character are the nearly contemporaneous
capitals of the transept and eastern end of the nave of Wells
Cathedral. Though wrought by a local school, whose influence
did not, I believe, extend beyond Glastonbury, yet these
VI PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 231

 

capitals cannot be overlooked in any just survey of the
art at this time in England. Their characteristics, of which
Fig. 145 exhibits an illustration, differ widely from anything
at Lincoln or elsewhere with the exception of Glastonbury
itself, Much in them recalls French work, though they
are very different from the French capitals of Lincoln.
The polygonal abacus, supporting angle crockets, and certain

is

    
  
   
 

(h ul

a

   

il

   

nine

(ih i ho
i (HN,
HA | HA Hl i i

   

  

it ; ‘Gi

  
 

    
   

      

 
   
        
  
  

ia i

:

  

Me
| fi in|

iis

 

Hil
a
FIG. 145.

peculiarities of detail and execution, are conspicuously
French ; while the excessive projection of the crockets is
an English characteristic.

A very common type of capital in England in the
thirteenth century is that which is simply moulded without
any foliate sculpture, as at Westminster Abbey, Salisbury,
Beverley, Southwell, and many other churches. It is rarely
a capital of good profile, and there is often no well-marked
division into bell and abacus. It consists largely of a series
ill related of mouldings of various profiles and dimensions,
which look as if they might have been turned out on
23

5

GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

a lathe.

Fig. 146, a capital from the triforiurn of Beverley,

sufficiently illustrates this class. Such capitals give to the

5

 

FIG. 146.

interiors in which they occur a bald,
hard, and uninteresting effect.

The profile of the abacus in
England has, with few exceptions,
all of its members, except the lower
one, rounded. The upper member,
whether in the interior or on the
exterior of the building, has usually
more or less of the character of a
drip-mould, as at A, Fig. 147, from
the west transept of Lincoln. An-
other characteristic profile is B, in
the same figure, from the choir screen
of Lincoln. Exceptional profiles,
showing French influence, are C and
D, from Glastonbury and Wells re-
spectively. The astragal in England
has usually either the profile shown in
Fig. 143, or that shown in Fig. 144,

rarely the varied profile of France.

The profiles of bases in the early style are usually like
those of the French Gothic in exhibiting various modifica-
tions of the ancient Attic type. They are, however, as at

A

 

| |
3

FIG. 147.

D

A, Fig. 148, frequently composed of a larger number of
members than were common either in ancient times or in

the Gothic of France.

Less refined in outline than French

bases—their rounds being often nearly segmental curves
rather than finely varied ones—they are very spreading in
form, and their hollows are excessively deep-cut. The pro-
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 233

 

files B, in the same figure, from the nave, and C, from the
Presbytery, of Lincoln, are illustrations of some of the best

|

{

TF

‘
3B
FIG. 148.

forms ; while such poor outlines as A, Fig. 149, from the choir
of Ely, B and C, from the triforium of the nave of Lincoln,

A B Cc D E
FIG. 149.
D, from the triforium of the choir of Hexham, and E, from the

clerestory of the choir of Whitby, are not uncommon.
The square plinth, like the square abacus, is unusual in
234 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

England. The lower member of the base is commonly
round in plan, and of the superposed courses of which the

|
|

4
P

=a

re

A FIG, 150. B

base is made up, one or more are usually moulded, as at A,
Fig. 150, from the aisle of the choir of Lincoln, and B, in the
same figure, from the choir
of the Temple Church in
c London.
pe The square plinth being
omitted, there was, of course,
no place for the angle spur,

s, a and the base in the early
sem

he “a “iim iil pointed architecture of Eng-
qian land lacks, in consequence,
on it aan Mt that perfect expression of
aya a firm foothold, which is so

marked in the bases of the
French Gothic. In a few instances, however, where square

plinths occur, as in the north porch of W ells, the angle

 

fs

 
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 235

 

spur is found; but in this porch it is curiously (though
very appropriately, since these bases rest on a ledge which
is above the eye) placed upon the under side of the torus, as
shown in Fig. 151.

The characteristic profile of the string-course in this
architecture is made up almost exclusively of curves, as at
a, Fig. 152, from the choir of Lincoln. The principle of the
drip-mould is partially carried out, but not with such com-
pleteness as in the external strings described in the last
chapter. The want of steepness in the watershed, its curved
outline, and the incision near the lower edge, interrupting the

 

FIG, I52.

flow of water where it ought to flow quickly, are certainly not
appropriate characteristics. These defects, together with
the absence of a sharp under edge to cut off the drip, make
this profile far less functional than the common French type.
Many variations are met with in strings of this same general
character, of which J, in the same figure, from Glastonbury,
is an example, while often associated with such profiles are
others of almost purely French character, as c, from the
clerestory of the choir of Lincoln. At Wells, in the
mouldings at the level of the impost of the arch over the
central portal of the west facade, these two types are
curiously brought together, as at d, in the same figure.

In the Gothic of France the corbel table is, from the
earliest times, omitted. But in England this feature of the
236 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

Romanesque style is retained through the whole of the
thirteenth century, appearing conspicuously in Salisbury, in
the Presbytery of Lincoln, and in many other buildings.

Internal string-courses do not much differ in profile from
those of the exterior, except that the drip-stone form is not
always so fully developed in
them. A characteristic early
example is that shown at ¢,
Fig. 152, which is the string
at the level of the window
sills in the aisle of the choir
of Lincoln. The drip form,
however, frequently occurs, as
at f, the triforium string of
the same choir.

In arch mouldings the
Anglo-Norman architects dis-
played a singular predilection
for multiplicity of members
varying in profile and sepa-
rated from each other by deep
hollows. In this way a con-
siderable effect of lightness
was given to arches that were
really very massive. Even
in the most purely Norman
buildings in England, such as St. Albans, Norwich, Romsey,
Ely, Peterborough, and others, the fondness for multi-
plicity of parts in arch sections is shown by the em-
ployment of at least three orders in the main arches,
and these orders are not uncommonly again subdivided.
This multiplication of orders naturally led to the circular
impost section, to which the round abacus was not seldom
adjusted, as at Southwell (Fig. 153). And in the early
pointed style the round section was soon introduced into
each separate order by new arrangements of the rounds,
hollows, and fillets, into which these orders were subdivided.
One of the distinctly Anglo-Norman peculiarities of arch
mouldings appears for the first time, so far as I know, in the
hollow which is given to the soffit of the sub-order of the
pier arcade in the nave of Malmesbury Abbey (Fig. 154).

 
     
    
  
   

   

: NK nithagghy N
oat Ae ‘at
y Ws \ \

at a

E
=

 

ok

de!

    

Jeol]
LU

 

ie 3

vn Doel

4
A

FIG. 153.
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 237

 

This type is amplified in the arch mouldings of St. Mary’s
Church, New Shoreham, and is further developed in the

FIG, 154.

pier arches of the choir of Lincoln (Fig. 155)! In the
nave of the same building the arch moulding becomes

FIG. 155.

richer by the addition of a third order, and each order now
assumes an almost perfectly segmental outline.

1 I would emphasise the resemblance of the arch mouldings of Lincoln to
those of Malmesbury, because it has been erroneously affirmed by Mr. Parker
and others that the choir of Lincoln is 9 purely English building in which no
traces of Norman influence appear.
238 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

The practically endless variations of arch profiles
which characterise this style need not be examined further,
as they consist merely in unessential changes of details.
They are, for the most part, merely fanciful, and rarely show
any fine artistic qualities. The minute subdivisions and the
frequent introduction of narrow fillets, which became con-
stant by the middle of the thirteenth century, produce a
hard and linear effect unpleasing to an eye that has become
accustomed to the simple and appropriate profiles of the
Continent. The greater simplicity of the mouldings in
Bishop Hugh’s choir at Lincoln is in agreeable contrast with
the subdivided contours of the mouldings in the presbytery
of the same church; with which the comparison is easily
made, since both may be viewed from the same position.

The profiles of vault ribs are not materially different
from those of other arches. In the choir of Lincoln the
principal ribs of the aisle vaults are almost identical in
section with the sub-orders of the pier arches. In this same
choir, however, another profile (Fig. 156) occurs which, if it be
a part of the original construction, is of curious interest, as
exhibiting a character much like that of the vault ribs of
Amiens and Beauvais. The
likeness to these French ribs
is in the large round and filleted
lower member. This member
does not, I believe, appear in
France before 1220, and if the
rib of Lincoln be a part of the
original construction it fur-
nishes an instance of its earlier
use in this building. If this
be so, it is not impossible that
the corresponding profiles in
France were derived from Eng-
land. Indeed, it is altogether
probable that there was after
the twelfth century, in matters of detail, more or less reaction
of the art of the island upon that of the Continent, As the
French appear to have derived their first ideas of sexpartite
vaulting from the Normans, they would naturally continue to
profit by whatever new features might be devised in either

FIG. 156.
vit PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 239

 

Norman or Anglo-Norman art; but whatever they borrowed
they recreated and improved. This rib profile of Lincoln is,
comparatively, not a fine one. The sharp re-entering angles
where the lower fillet joins the round, the absence of re-
entering angles as foils to the curves in the composition of
the rounds and hollows, and the meaningless drip members
above, render it far inferior as a piece of artistic design
to the exquisitely simple and graceful profile of Amiens. It
is, however, perhaps, more likely that the vaults in which
these ribs occur were reconstructed at a later epoch, and that
the profile of the rib was then imitated from French examples.
This profile is not, I believe, found elsewhere till consider-
ably later, as in the nave and presbytery of the same church,
where this lower filleted round is employed in all the ribs.

The difference of spirit between the works of the French
Gothic architects and those of the Anglo-Normans is thus
manifest hardly less in the respective treatment of mouldings
than in modes of construction. Where the French architect
kept his orders few, and his arch mouldings simple, con-
fining his chief enrichment mainly to the sculpture of the
capitals, the Anglo-Norman multiplies his orders, and
subdivides them into wearisome lines, while he is often
content to treat his capitals in the same way, denying them
the enrichment of sculpture, and thus offering no relief to
the endless linear elaboration. And this multiplicity of
arch lines is still further increased by the invariable employ-
ment of hood mouldings with profiles, in the interior no
less than on the exterior, of the drip-stone type.

In such ways the Anglo-Norman lack both of the sense
of functional fitness and artistic beauty is almost con-
stantly displayed. The architects of the island never
perceived that the lightness and multiplicity of parts in the
Gothic style are natural and unsought results of a peculiar
constructive system, and not at all mere decorative peculiari-
ties ; but regarding the effect of lightness and multiplicity
as an end to be sought, they cut up their really heavy piers
and arches into an unnecessary, and, as we have seen, often
illogical, profusion of small members.

In Germany it appears that during the twelfth century
no material changes in profiles were made. Capitals retain
240 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

the peculiar forms of the German-Romanesque, in which the
cushion type, in great variety of outline and proportion,
mingles with a type which more or less recalls the Roman-
Corinthian, as at St. Godard’s Church, Hildesheim, the
Abbey Church of Konigslutter, and many others, while
string mouldings retain the flat upper surface of ancient
design. The Cathedral of Magdeburg, which exhibits pro-
files dating from various epochs from early in the thirteenth
century to the close of the fifteenth, may, together with the
Cathedral of Cologne, sufficiently illustrate the characteristics
of such details in German art. The tenacity with which

 

 

 

 

FIG. 157.

the Germans held on to Romanesque traditional forms is
shown at A, Fig. 157, a capital from the choir of Magdeburg,
while something of the nature of the early changes which
they wrought on French Gothic types is shown at B in the
same figure. These are not altogether bad profiles, though
they are distinctly inferior in expression and in grace, not
only to French, but also to the best Anglo-Norman types,
such, for instance, as that shown in Fig. 140. The profile of
the abacus of the capital (A, Fig. 157) is that of an in-
verted Attic base, which, in this pronounced form, is hardly
an appropriate one for an abacus, because the projection
of the upper moulding is too great to give a good line of
support. However little the outline of the abacus may have
to do with the real strength of the member, it is important
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 241

 

that its general outline should possess an expression of
strength—such as a more continuous slope, like that of the
French profile, gives. The characteristic base of this epoch
(Fig. 158)? is equally far from showing a good form. It has
none of that subtle relationship of parts
which gives to the bases of the French
Gothic their appropriate and beautiful
character. The equal depths of the scotia
and lower torus violate the laws of pro-
portion, while the excessive projection of
the upper torus gives an unpleasantly
heavy effect.

— Ee I will not attempt to exhibit any con-
soy reer siderable number of examples of capitals
i) and other profiles of the mediaeval build-

ings of Germany. The _ distinctive

peculiarities of these profiles were of
late development, and do not come out with distinctness
earlier than the middle of the thirteenth century. At this
time in the choir of Cologne they appear fully developed.
They depart widely from the best
French models, though they recall in
some degree the characteristics that
were introduced in the declining
Gothic of France, from which they
are doubtless largely copied. But
they even exaggerate the defects of
the late French examples, and add
new eccentricities that appear to be
wholly German. Figure 159,? a
capital from the triforium of this
choir, illustrates one of the most
common types in which the bell is in
reality little more than a continuation
of the shaft itself. The true capital in
this case is, indeed, largely the abacus
alone. Whatever appearance of expansion there is below
the abacus is mostly given by the sculpture. The astragal
is in effect but a band about the shaft, and the sculptured

     
 

  

FIG. 158.

 

FIG. 159.

1 Figures 157 and 158 are copied from Forster.
* Figures 159, 160, and 161. are copied from Boisserée.

R
242

GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

ornament forms no part of the real profile; every charac-
teristic of a functionally expressive capital is wanting. The

 

FIG. 160.

 

cylindrical form of the shaft above the astragal, in
place of a well-shaped bell, is not always so visible
as it is in this instance, but it nearly always exists,
though it may be more completely covered by the
foliage, which sometimes gives the aspect of a better
formed capital. The base profile (Fig. 160, from
one of the main piers) conforms more nearly with
the base profiles of the French Gothic.

The pier archivolts (Fig. 161) have much the
character of those of the later Anglo-Norman archi-
tecture—the salient members having fillets, and
being separated by excessively deep hollows,—
giving a linear effect like that of the corresponding
mouldings of the Presbytery of Lincoln. As at
Lincoln, too, these mouldings are so arranged as to
give a round or polygonal section. In the nave
of the same building the archivolt is furnished with
a richly crocketed hood moulding. In fact, in arch
mouldings, and perhaps in other details, the archi-
tecture of England seems at this time to have
influenced the art of Germany.

The profiling of cornices and other external strings is
largely of French origin, but it is considerably modified by

the German taste, and shows
a peculiarly hard character
unlike that which any other
style exhibits.

The profiles of the pointed
architecture of Italy are very
diverse in character. No
generally recognised prin-
ciples seem to have governed
the designer in their produc-
tion. In manycases, especi-
allyin capitals and bases, the

FIG. 161,

profiles of the French Gothic are closelyapproached, while often

they are as widely departed from.

In his more independent

productions in this field the Italian designer displays little
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 243

 

inventive aptitude, but follows an apparently capricious
fancy with singular disregard of functional needs, and
not seldom in violation of all principles of grace and beauty.
As might naturally be expected, his native classic bent
more or less constantly displays itself, though in the
pointed architecture of Italy neither Gothic nor classic
principles are ever consistently adhered to.

For illustration of the types of capitals and bases, which
have the most Gothic character, we may take those of the

      
 

\
ih Mn

Sin ae He

 
      
  

 

  

— iy
' "I j

\ a Hl

“ih :
4

 

FIG, 162,

nave of Sta. Maria Novella in Florence. Fig. 162 is a group
of capitals of one of the lower piers on the south side; they
are used only for those members of the pier from which the
arches of the lower story spring—the vaulting shafts of the
high vaults being continuous in their ascent. Such a group
would hardly be out of place in France, though the pro-
jection of the lower range of ornaments breaks, rather
more than it would in France, the profiles of the bells.
The capitals of the piers of Sta. Croce are, in this respect,
better in outline ; and very fine ones of almost pure Gothic

 
244 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

type occur on the small shafts of the exterior of the
Church of the Spina in Pisa, as well as in many other
churches, But capitals of very inferior character are fre-
quently met with. Perhaps the least admirable types to be
found in Italy are those of the Cathedral of Florence which
are sufficiently illustrated in Figure 104. As I have before
remarked they are hardly capitals at all, but are rather

3

A ; B Cc
FIG. 163.

sculptured mouldings surrounding the pier below the impost
level, where neither capital nor mouldings have any proper
place.

Italian bases are almost as various in form as the
capitals. The profile (A, Fig. 163), that of the base of: the
pier in Sta. Maria Novella, is almost of the French variety of
the Attic type; and bases of still more French character,
especially in connection with small shafts, sometimes occur
vi PROFILES IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 245

 

in the Italian pointed style; but the great pier bases are
rarely as good as these of Sta. Maria Novella. They are
often, indeed, of very unsatisfactory form. The profile B,
Fig. 163, for instance, from the Cathedral of Florence, is
almost as poor as the capital of the same pier just
noticed. This base, like the capital, consists of a mere
series of mouldings, and no distinct and well-formed footing
for the body of the pier is provided. It is true that the
straight line, a 4, in this profile projects a little beyond the
face of the pier above, giving somewhat the effect of an
enlarged base, but the enlargement is too slight to be readily
appreciated by the eye. In the profile C in the same figure,
from the base of one of the piers of Sta. Croce, this straight
line is advanced considerably beyond the face of the pier,
and the character of a base is thus in greater measure
secured.

Arch mouldings in the Italian pointed architecture do
not exhibit a great variety of profiles. They have, in fact,
the simplest profiles which occur in this style. Interior
arches are almost without exception perfectly square in
section, and without subdivisions or adornments of any
kind. They are in some cases, as in Sta. Croce, in two orders
—the one advancing but little beyond the other; and some-
times, as in the Cathedral of Florence, a simply bevelled
hood moulding is added. Where more than one order occurs
their very slight projection gives an effect like that of the
fascie of the ancient architrave rather than of the arch orders
of the styles of the North.

Italian vault ribs are commonly bevelled, but they are
rarely otherwise adorned. The diagonal ribs of the
Cathedral of Florence, however, have the section shown in
Fig. 164, where the use of the cyma recta is one of the many
indications of the hold which classic features had on the
minds of the builders at this time in Italy. It is always
observable that the use which the Italians made of these
classic elements was never inventive, as it was with the
Gothic architects. They are often associated with elements
which differ greatly from those of classic design, but they
themselves remain unmodified.

The outside cornice is generally of classic profile ;
but it is not unfrequently carried on a corbel table, and
246 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP. VI

made to support a parapet, as in the Cathedral of Florence.
Other strings conform no less to the classic types, anything
like a drip-stone being of rare occurrence in Italy.

 

FIG, 164.

It is not necessary to examine in detail the profiles of
the pointed buildings in Spain; they are, of course, mainly
Gothic. But, like the whole structural system, they are
French rather than Spanish. What minor, local modifica-
tions of outline a thorough examination of them would
reveal, I know not, but such modifications, if they exist, are
certainly unimportant.
CHAPTER VII
GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE

THE fact that during the twelfth century a remarkable
school of sculpture was developed in the Ile-de-France, in
connection with the Gothic art of building,—a school in some
respects far in advance of all others of the Middle Ages—has
not received the attention it deserved from students of the
history of art. Modern writers, following Vasari, have so
generally regarded the revival of the arts as having originally
taken place in Italy, and the names of Pisano and Cimabue,
as the pioneers of revival, have become so fixed in our minds,
that we are naturally unprepared (so far as our knowledge
is derived from the literature of the subject) to find that a
no less remarkable revival had place in the west of Europe
a hundred years before the great Italian awakening.

Attention has indeed been called by Flaxman,! and more
recently by Cockerell,” to the fact that the facade of Wells
Cathedral stands as a witness to the existence of an advanced
school of sculpture in Western Europe contemporaneous with
the art of Niccola Pisano; but the significance of this fact
has made but little general impression. And neither Flax-
man nor Cockerell appears to have recognised the further fact
that nearly a hundred years before the date of the sculptures
of Wells a school of sculpture existed across the Channel
which had produced works at St. Denis, and at Chartres, of
even greater merit.

The earliest schools of sculpture on this side of the Alps
were those of Southern Gaul, where, more than elsewhere in

1 In his Lectures on Sculpture, 1829.
2 Tconography of the West Front of Wells Cathedral.
graphy
248 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

the west, the ancient civilisation had retained its life and
vigour. Here the country was thickly covered with Roman
monuments including sculptures which, coarse and unskilful
as they for the most part were, afforded models, in some
measure characteristic, of ancient styles and modes of treat-
ment.

But the productions of these schools abundantly show
that other sources of instruction and inspiration were also
open to them in the works of Byzantine art—an art which,
in its best forms, was of a far more living and potent
character than the provincial Roman art.

The principal examples of Byzantine design eteied to

  

FIG, 165.

the artists of the West were the manuscript illuminations and
the carvings in ivory, that were possessed in considerable
numbers by the great monastic establishments, especially
those of Cluny and its dependencies, which were the active
centres of artistic production in the early Middle Ages.

Of these manuscripts many are still preserved in the
National Library of Paris and elsewhere; and the miniatures
with which they are profusely adorned are worthy of attentive
examination. These miniatures afford a very different notion
of Byzantine art from that which is derived from the writings
of Vasari, from the formalised productions of the school of
Mount Athos, or even from the splendid mosaics of Venice
and Ravenna. They exhibit little of the stiffness, inelegance,
and want of life and movement that are commonly conceived
vir GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 249

 

to be characteristic of Byzantine design. In fact, they often
display a remarkable degree of grace, action, and expres-
sion. Figs. 165 and 166, from a Greek manuscript of the
tenth century,’ will illustrate their qualities of design, though
much of their beauty is lost by the absence of the colouring.
The student of Greek art will hardly fail to perceive in these
diminutive figures” some features that are of distinctly Hellenic
origin. The influence of such works as these upon some
of the early schools of Southern and Central Gaul, and
afterwards upon the more Northern schools, will upon
comparison become clearly apparent.

The degree of what may be properly called classic feeling
and skill in design that was sometimes reached in these early
schools is shown, for instance, in the sculptures upon the
lintel of the Church of Notre-Dame du Port at Clermont-
Ferrand, which date from the end of the eleventh century,
and of which Fig. 167 is a single figure of remarkable beauty.

But the schools of art south of the Loire were not
progressive; they hardly displayed any powers of original
invention—they had little independent vitality. They were
essentially imitative schools—they gave birth to no important
developments ; and after the twelfth century they gradually
passed into decline.

North of the Loire, however, the case was different. In
Burgundy the Abbey of Cluny, in the early part of the
twelfth century, maintained schools of art in which sculpture,
though still largely bound by former conventions, gave
evidence of a new impulse derived from a fresh observation
of nature. Of this sculpture the Abbey Church of Vézelay
and the Cathedral of Autun afford, in the archivolts and
tympanums of their portals, characteristic examples.

These schools of the South and of Burgundy, with
perhaps also in some measure the schools that then existed
along the Rhine, were the chief sources of stimulus and
guidance to the early sculptors of the Ile-de-France.

In this latter region the conditions for the growth of a
school of art were, by the beginning of the twelfth century,
exceptionally good. And not only was the character of the

1 National Library, Paris, MS. No. 64.
2 Figs. 165 and 166 are reproduced of the exact size of the originals.

3 With a few exceptions, perhaps, as in the case of one branch of the school
of Toulouse. See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Sculpture, pp. 125, 126.
250 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

race, as we have before noticed, peculiarly fitted for artistic
pursuits, and the conditions of climate also such as would
naturally favour the development of a new art, but the very
geological formation of the country was such as to meet all
the requirements of this new art, both artistic and constructive.
As Greece had her Paros and Pentelicus, and Italy her

 

  

it lr

Sige MN

VIG. 167.

uw un jm jr
ii vt magi nih iii

          

Carrara, so had France, in the basins of the Seine and Oise,
among other materials, her beds of /ias cliguart, a stone of
fine grain and strong substance, easily cut, and suitable for
slender shafts or delicate carving.

Of figure sculpture in the Ile-de-France we have few
examples of an earlier date than the second quarter of the
twelfth century. But from 1140 there are remains which
show, associated with the imperfections peculiar to an
immature art, a grace and mastery of design, a truth and
tenderness of sentiment, and a fineness and precision of
chisel touch, that are unparalleled in any other schools,
vil GOTAIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 251

 

save those of ancient Greece and the later schools of
Italy.

Among the first of these works are the sculptures of the
west portals and the portal of the
north transept of the Church of St.
Denis. In the portal of the transept
are life-sized, full-length, figures of
kings—one against each shaft of the
jambs, which disclose merits before
unknown in Northern Europe. At
first sight these sculptures may not
impress the beholder.as much superior
to those of the schools of the South ;
but on further study and comparison
their superior qualities will be mani-
fest to a discriminating eye. If they
be compared, for instance, with the
famous statues of the cloister of St.
Trophime at Arles (Fig. 168), which
are at least half a century later in
date, the remarkably early advance
of the schools of Paris and its neigh-
bourhood will be strikingly apparent.
In Fig. 168 it will be noticed that,
notwithstanding the fine classical cast
of the draperies, there is much of the
rigid character that is peculiar to the
formal types of Byzantine design.
Traces of Byzantine convention in
treatment of drapery are clearly
apparent, especially on the breast,
where folds are indicated by simple
incised lines on a surface but very
slightly, and by no means truthfully,
modelled. In the heads and hands
there is a degree of angularity anda
tendency to model in planes which
bespeak a comparatively rude art. In
Fig. 169, a statue from the portal of the transept of St. Denis,
these defects do not appear. In the heads and extremities
there is no block-like clumsiness; the surfaces are finely

 

FIG. 168.
252 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

and naturally modelled ; the brows are delicately arched ;
the features carefully and truthfully
formed ; the hair and beard softly
massed and subdivided into orderly
locks, as in a fine Greek coin. There
is no undue elaboration or attempt
to give the hard stone a look of
real hair; but as far as the material
would naturally allow the sculptor
has suggested it. With special care
and tenderness has he wrought the
mouth, the thin, gently compressed,
lips, the light parted moustache, and
the well-formed chin. The drapery
is as simple and severe in its lines
as is that of the preceding figure ;
but there is a superior grace of
arrangement in the folds, and al-
though the work is wanting in the
freedom and skill of later produc-
tions, there is no trace of Byzantine
convention in its modelling. Al-
together this figure, which dates
probably from about the middle of
the twelfth century, distinctly mani-
fests a new and high order of genius.
And it fully indicates those traits
which afterwards became so con-
spicuously characteristic of the
French Schools, and to which they
owe their pre-eminence,—the dis-
position to profit by tradition, and
at the same time to draw fresh
materials from living nature.

The statues of the west front of
the Cathedral of Chartres are prob-
ably of a little later date. J They
are more severely architectural in
character than the figures of St.
Denis; but they are not rigid like the sculptures of St.
Trophime/f In execution they are remarkably refined and

 

FIG. 169.
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 253

 

beautiful. The heads display a variety and life-likeness that
plainly indicate the close observation of
nature. Each one has an air of veracity,
as if it were an individual portrait.’ The
treatment of hair and beards is perhaps
even less formal than in the preceding
example, and in drapery the modelling
of folds is true, though it retains a good
deal of archaic character. In fact, these
statues are far from the stiff and im-
mobile things which they are often
thought, by inattentive observers, to be.
Their severe restraint and exaggerated
elongation are largely of definite archi-
tectural purpose, and not wholly the
result of incapacity on the part of the
carver to give them a more natural
freedom and movement. This is evident
from the qualities which they exhibit,
notwithstanding their sternly conven-
tional treatment. Within the limits fixed
by his conditions the artist has managed
abundantly to show his skill as a life-like
and graceful designer. Take, for instance,
the example, Fig. 170. Although stand-
ing erect, and facing forward, the upper
portions of this figure are not wholly want-
ing in ease and apparent power of move-
ment. Observe the positions of the arms,
and compare them with the arms in Fig.
168. How natural and capable of move-
ment they appear when thus compared!
For beauty of changeful curves the head
and hair are especially noticeable. The
easy fall of that portion of the mantle which
crosses the throat, the true modelling of the
drapery over the breast and arms, and the
careful rounding of the lifted hand and
fingers, though hardly comparable to the HIGe 179s

 

 

 

1M. Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Scalpture, p. 118, calls attention to this veracity
and remarks upon the distinctly Gallic types presented by these heads.
254 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

work of Donatello or Ghiberti, are scarcely inferior to that
of their Italian predecessors. The restraint of the figure is
apparently self-imposed in obedience to the demands of its
architectural position. The rigidity of the example from St.
Trophime appears, on the other hand, to be inherent in its
nature.

It is worthy of notice that the medieval architect did
not employ the human figure in the manner of a caryatid.
The ranges of statues, which form such conspicuous and
characteristic features of the vast receding jambs of the
portals of French churches are placed each against a shaft
which bears its archivolt. To make the figure itself an
architectural support would not be in accordance with the
rational spirit of Gothic art.1 Nor, in true Gothic, are
statues set in niches in walls. For in Gothic the wall spaces
are small and contain no more substance than is necessary,
leaving nothing to spare for recesses. The places occupied
by the statues in the buttresses of the Cathedral of Paris
are not niches; they do not diminish the mass of the
buttress ; they constitute really nothing more than decorative
forms of set-offs. The true set-off is the level ledge from
the corners of which shafts rise to support the sloping water
table, thus forming a canopy within which the statue is
placed. Nor can the canopies of the pinnacles of buttresses,
in which statues occur, as at Reims, be properly termed
niches. The nearest approach to niches in pure Gothic are
those spaces between the mouldings of the archivolts in which
canopies are set over statues, as in the portal of the Virgin at
Paris. It is only after the beginning of the decline of Gothic
that real niches occur,as in the facades of the transepts of Paris.”

Sculptured statues in Gothic art are thus so far in-
dependent of the construction as not to have any real
mechanical office, and yet they are not independent in expres-
sion as are the statues placed in niches of walls in Roman and
Renaissance buildings. They are, especially when occurring

1 It is true that corbels are often carved into the forms of crouching
figures, as at Amiens; but these are on a small scale, and are never treated like
the caryatid, where the weight rests on the head.

° The real niches that occur in the gable of the central portal of the west front
of Bourges are exceptions to the general rule. See Viollet-le-Duc, s.2. Ache,
p- 414, ef seg.
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 255

 

in the jambs of doorways, strictly in harmony with the con-
struction—so much so, indeed, that they seem to be a
necessary part of the composition. In no other style has
the union, it may even’ be said the fusion, of the structural
and ornamental elements been so perfect.

The conventional restraints of such sculpture in the
twelfth century were severe; though still, as we have seen,
it was not wanting in much expression of life. But the
artists of the early thirteenth century were able to add
more freedom to statues in the same positions without
overstepping the bounds of architectural subordination.
Before we pass on to the consideration of such works, how-
ever, we must examine a few other examples of the art of
the twelfth century.

Besides the jambs and archivolts the tympanum and
lintel presented, within easy view, admirably protected fields
for the exercise of the sculptor’s art,—fields where architectural
restraints, though still imperative, were less narrow. Here
was place, for sculptured composition embracing many
figures in free action, embodying some scriptural story or
religious legend.

Among the earliest remaining examples of such com-
positions are those of the tympanum of the portals of the
west front of St. Denis, and the tympanum of the south
door of the west front of the Cathedral of Paris, which last
formed part of the earlier works wrought under Maurice de
Sully! which were destroyed to make room for the present
facade. The preservation of this work, and its incorporation
with the new edifice, speak well for the generous recognition
of merit in the works of their predecessors, by the artists
of the early thirteenth century. In these sculptures the
qualities already noticed as characterising the early art of
the Ile-de-France are conspicuous. A new spirit animates
the old forms, and a corresponding increase of technical skill
is manifest, though some of the older conventions of modelling
and treatment are still naturally pronounced.

Of all the remaining works of this class which were
executed in the twelfth century, those of the lintel of the
Cathedral of Senlis are of surpassing beauty. They are

1 See the /tinéraire Archéologique de Paris, par M. F. de Guilhermy, pp.
68, 69.
256 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

two in number, the lintel being divided into two parts by
a central shaft. The subjects are respectively, the Death
and the Resurrection of the Virgin. The composition on the
spectator’s left, representing the death, is so much mutilated
that it cannot be fairly judged of. But the one on the right,
(Fig. 1:71), representing the resurrection, though sadly broken
in parts, is yet fairly complete as a whole. It is not easy to
find terms in which to speak of so beautiful a work. In
sentiment and grace it is equalled by few works of any school
or period. And the archaisms of treatment which it exhibits,

 

 

 

FIG, 171.

like those in the subsequent masterpieces of Giotto, which
the composition in many points resembles, do but enhance
its charm.

It is an instructive fact, not, perhaps, often enough com-
mented upon, that the works of art in which the expression is
most simple and sincere are in every school usually those of
early masters, who have but imperfectly attained command
of the means of expression. With the full attainment of.
technical skill there almost invariably comes a baneful degree
of sophistication. Compare, for instance, Giotto’s fresco of
the Death of St. Francis with Raphael’s Transfiguration ; or
Carpaccio’s St. Ursula with Titian’s Assumption. :

In this lintel of Senlis there is at once a spiritual beauty

 
vit GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 257

 

and a natural expression in the eager group of welcoming
spirits as they press forward, wing softly crowding wing, to
aid the awakening soul. No self-consciousness is there, no
ostentatious gesture, no vain display of curving plume, or
studied fold of garment. All the angelic attendants are
absorbed in joyful ministry to the rising spirit, and each
figure holds its place in a group of marvellous beauty.

In composition of lines and masses the design is equally
beautiful. There is a fine system of continuous, radiating,
and encompassing curves in the wings and drapery; as well as
an artful sympathy of position in the bodies, and repetition of
masses in the placing of the heads. It would be difficult to
point, in the whole range of plastic art, to a figure of more
subtle beauty than that of the angel on the left, who stoops
forward to support the shoulder of the Virgin—a figure
which is at the same time adroitly employed by the artist
to balance, by an opposing form, the rest of the composition.
As in all noblest art, it is here evident that the artist’s mind
was encumbered by no merely theoretic ideal of beauty.
No canonical type of head, hand, foot, or general form, is
exhibited. The types are natural, varied, and simple.
Individual parts, when taken by themselves, display no
fanciful or conventional character. The charm of the work
depends upon fundamental qualities of design; upon a
graceful relation of forms, extending from the arrangement
of the broad masses down to that of the least details. So,
too, it was in the older art of Greece. It is the same
principle that gives to the Harpy Tomb and to the Leu-
cothea of the Villa Albani a kind of beauty that is wanting
in the art of Scopas and Praxiteles. And so it was again
with the subsequent works of the early Italian designers.
The polished, but conventional types of form which belong
to later developments of Italian art, and which Vasari has
done so much to popularise, do not appear in the arts of
Italy before the time of Raphael. The types of Giotto, of
Angelico, and of Massaccio, were caught directly from the
familiar men and women around them; but with such
materials these masters, like those of France in the twelfth
century, knew how to produce designs of exalted beauty.

I do not mean to imply that imperfections of form are
necessary to the best art, or that more perfect forms than

Ss
258 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

those of the earlier masters might not be employed with
advantage, had the artist skill to produce them. More
perfect forms were attained and employed by Praxiteles and
by Raphael. But the integrity of feeling which was exhibited
in the works of the early masters was lost before such
command of form was reached. In the later art of Raphael,
as compared with the earlier arts of Italy, more is lost in
expression than is gained in form. ,

The plastic art of France in the twelfth century does
not exhibit any of those superficial attractions which appear
at a later date; but it is little inferior to that of any other
time or school in expression and essential grace. And of
such art there is hardly a more admirable work than
this lintel of Senlis. In execution it is no less excellent
than in design and sentiment. Wrought in a firm, close-
grained stone—which takes a finish almost equal to that
attainable in marble—every mass is finely modelled, and
every detail is crisply cut.

The number of works of this epoch remaining is limited.
The most extended, if not in all respects the most noble
impulse in the art of figure sculpture, was yet to come.
The foregoing examples will serve to show the state of
development that had been reached in the Ile-de-France,
before the great facades of Paris, Amiens, and Reims had
come into existence.

Of the cathedrals that were begun in the twelfth century,
few were completed so far as to include their facades before the
thirteenth. The vast wealth of statuary which adorns these
buildings is, for the most part, subsequent to the year 1200.

Gothic sculpture of the early thirteenth century develops
into forms that are less cramped by imperfect technique, and
that bear fewer traces of former conventions, than the works
of the preceding century. Taught by the example of the
earlier schools, imbued with the traditions of Byzantine design,
but knowing how to reject its unessential peculiarities, and
with increasing proficiency in execution, the artists of the
Royal Domain began to give freer play to their own observa-
tion and imagination, and to produce works of art which, in all
but sentiment—in which the works of the twelfth century
cannot be surpassed,—remain unrivalled among the pro-
ductions of the Middle Ages.
vu GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 259

 

The portion of the Gothic building where figure sculpture
is chiefly displayed is the western facade, though other
parts of the exterior are also more or less profusely adorned
with figures. In a cathedral of the first order, such as
Paris, Chartres, Amiens, or Reims, there are altogether many
hundreds of sculptured figures. Gathered principally within
the widely splayed portals, there is often, in addition, as at
Paris, Amiens, and Reims, a row of colossal statues just
above them extending across the entire front. And beside
these there are figures under canopies of the buttresses, as
well as gargoyles, and grotesque creatures projecting from
the cornice, or ranged upon the parapet.

Of all the great facades that of the Cathedral of Paris is
the most important in point of sculpture. Begun in the
very first years of the thirteenth century, it exhibits the finest
work of the French carvers during the entire first quarter of
that century. No other church, not even that of Amiens,
affords so fine a display, notwithstanding that a great part
of it has perished by violence. Of its three great portals
nearly all the sculptures of the tympanums and archivolts
remain substantially unimpaired. The north door is the
earliest, dating from about 1205,) it being here that the
erection of the facade was commenced. The sculpture
of the tympanum is thus in date not long subsequent to that
of Senlis; but in point of freedom and skill in the
rendering of form there is a marked advance. This
tympanum is divided horizontally into two compartments.
In the upper compartment is represented the coronation
of the Virgin, and in the lower compartment (Fig. 172)
her entombment. Such skilful treatment of form and such
beauty of modelling had not before been seen since the
classic times of antiquity. The remarkable likeness to
certain qualities of Greek art here exhibited is both notice-
able and instructive. This does not result from imitation ;
for original Greek art was, of course, not known to the
carvers of the time, and the likeness is not superficial (as
it would be in imitative art), but fundamental. It came
rather through the free study of nature, which, with men

1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Porte, p. 421. Guilhermy, /éindraire Archéologique
de Paris, says, p. 24, that the west facade was not begun till near the end of
the episcopate of Pierre de Nemours (1208-1219).
260 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

constituted like the medizval artists of France, and disciplined
as they were by the Greek traditions that had come through
the Byzantine channel, naturally led to results having much
in common with those that had before been reached in a
similar way by the Greeks. Not, however, that the medieval
outlook into the world of nature, or the medizval apprehen-
sions of beauty, were the same as those of the Greeks.
They were, of course, in many respects so widely different
that in some aspects of the matter we might almost conclude
that there was nothing in common between them. The
Greek demanded physical beauty. In drawing his material
from nature he rejected all that was not outwardly beautiful.

Sy BA aan PANGT

CANCION SON

  

 

FIG. 172.

Selection with him was an inborn principle and a constant
habit. The mediaeval French artist, on the contrary, saw
the beauty that may coexist with imperfection; and, although
he also exercised a spirit of choice, this spirit was of a more
penetrative nature, and had a correspondingly wider range.
But in understanding of the form chosen, and in apprehension
of just that treatment of it which the ends of plastic art
demand, there was the closest similarity between the Phidian
sculptors and those of the Ile-de-France in the thirteenth
century. It is this which gives the likeness to Greek art
that we recognise in the sculpture of the portal of the
Virgin; but it is only in form that this tympanum is of
such high excellence. The expression of the lintel of Senlis
is by no means equalled in this design.
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 261

 

Rather finer in spirit, as well as in quietness and breadth
of treatment, are the sculptures, representing the Last
Judgment, of the tympanum of the central doorway.
Indeed, there is hardly another tympanum of the time in
which such charming sculpture so happily embosses a field
of stone. Viewed broadly its effect as an enriched surface
is most admirable. Taken in detail there are, in this design,
figures of unusual beauty in which fine form and execution
are displayed with remarkable temperance and _ grace.
Most noticeable, for instance, are the majestic angel in
the central compartment, who holds the balance for
weighing souls, the figures in the upper compartment,
on the right and left of the Saviour, who hold the instru-
ments of the passion, and, for their freedom of movement,
which yet is enough restrained to accord harmoniously with
the general quietness of the whole design, the figures rising
from the graves in the lower compartment. In comparison
with these the figures of the Judgment in the tympanum of
the central doorway of Amiens are coarse in conception
and treatment. In such comparison these last impress the
beholder rather as hasty, though grand and impressive,
sketches in stone than as finished sculptures.

Passing to the works of the second half of the thirteenth
century, we have an elaborate example, dating from about
1257, in the door of the south transept of this same cathedral.
It may be noticed in passing that constructive propriety is
not strictly observed in this doorway. The archivolts are
not sustained by shafts and capitals, but in place of shafts
four slender mouldings rise, without imposts, to the crown of
the arch. In this and other respects this portal belongs to
a class of constructions which at this epoch first introduced
the elements of decline into Gothic architecture. And in
addition to this the statues which adorn these jambs are now
placed in the niche-like intercolumniations, and have a
degree of independent character which is in contrast to the
stern architectural submission of the statues of the earlier
times.

The subject of the sculptures in this tympanum is the
history of St. Stephen. They contain much beautiful
carving—figures of life-like freedom, technical excellence,
and refined finish; but the design is somewhat scattered,
262 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

and the action a little confused. The sculptor, moreover,
has become in a measure conscious of his art; and mingled
with thought of his subject there is an apparent desire to
display his skill. To the mind of the spectator is suggested
something akin to the feeling produced by a ¢adleau vivant.

Returning now to the consideration of statues ranged
against the jambs, or placed upon the dividing pillars! of
the doorways, one of the finest of the early part of the
thirteenth century is the statue of the Virgin upon the
dividing pillar of the south door of the west front of the
Cathedral of Amiens. As I have already remarked, the
artists of the early thirteenth century were able to give more
freedom and natural modelling to such figures than had been
the case with those of the preceding century, and yet to
maintain in them a strictly architectural character. In this
Virgin of Amiens the archaisms of Chartres and St. Denis
give place to a more natural treatment. The head is well
set, the features are regular and perfectly cut, the wimple
falls in graceful lines upon the shoulders, the pose of the
body is unconstrained, though very quiet, and the simple
draperies are cast into easy folds. Few examples of
medieval art exhibit more calmness, or more sweetness
of expression.

More strikingly graceful and queenly in bearing, though
still temperate in conception and treatment, is the statue
(Fig. 173) of the Virgin in the portal of the north transept
of Paris. In the earlier Gothic statues, as a rule, the weight
of the body rests equally on both legs, keeping the shoulders
level, and producing a formal cast of draperies, as in Figs.
168, 169, and 170; but now, as in this figure, an easier
posture is assumed. Resting mainly on the left foot, the
lower part of the body is thrown slightly to the left, while
the right knee is naturally a little bent, the right arm
and shoulder a little lowered, and the head inclined a
little to the right. The subtle mingling of simple nature
and skilful art in this statue is especially shown where
a portion of the mantle is cast over the left arm, and
falls vertically in a heavy fold to the foot of the figure.

1 After the eleventh century the principal portals of great monastic and
cathedral churches were commonly divided into two openings by ¢raumeaiwx, or
pillars of stone, affording place for sculpture, which consisted usually of a statue
with more or less subordinate carving,
vil GOTAIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 263

 

A line is thus obtained of twofold value in its sympathy
with the upright lines of the architecture, and as a con-
trast enhancing the beauty of the
curves. This, or some kindred
artifice, is indeed as old as the
history of sculpture, having been
employed, in one form or another,
in innumerable draped statues of
antiquity. But it is here employed
with a spontaneous sense at once
of beauty, and of truth to nature,
without any approach to affecta-
tion, and hence with admirable
effect.

If we now pause to consider
what had by this time been accom-
plished, and reflect that in Italy
Giotto was yet unborn, that the
sculptures of St. Denis and the
west front of Chartres antedate,
by nearly a century, the art of
Niccola Pisano, and that a con-
siderable time was yet to elapse
before Italy should produce a
figure equal in beauty and per-
fection to this Virgin of the tran-
sept of Paris, we can hardly fail
to be impressed with a new sense
of the remarkable character of the
Gothic schools of France, which {ii
at this early date had reached so
high a state of development.

) This Gothic sculpture is further
( remarkable as being the first art & ee
) which the world had seen in which gy’ “py,
expression as a motive predomi- ¢... |. on
nates over form. It can, perhaps, " “— ,
hardly be said that the sculpture Paice
of Greek antiquity was always wanting in expression ; but
“it is generally true that such expression as it had was sub-
ordinated to the quality of corporeal beauty. By expression

 

 
264 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

I mean more or less indication in face, movement, or attitude,
of some thought or emotion. We may not be always able
to read the intended thoughts or feelings with precision ;
but we are, in the best Gothic sculptures, impressed with a
sense that the minds of the personages represented are in
some way definitely exercised. And often we can divine
almost with certainty the nature of the thought or emotion
with which the artist endeavoured to animate his figures,
What we have seen in the lintel of Senlis is but a con-
spicuous instance of what is in some measure apparent in
most of the works wrought by Gothic hands.

And this development of expression as the chief motive
of the art is, indeed, the natural outcome of the medizval,
as compared with the ancient, genius of the Christian as
opposed to the pagan idea of humanity. In the arts of
the earlier ages of Christianity this characteristic hardly
appeared, perhaps because the requisite skill to produce it
was wanting. Gothic sculpture was, indeed, the first Christian
art to attain the technical advance required to enable it to
become a medium of varied expression.

But though the expression of character was the leading
motive of Gothic sculpture, it does not follow that bodily
beauty was ignored by the Gothic artists. The production
of such beauty was distinctly one of their aims, yet,
since in the Gothic ideal physical perfection did not count
for everything, many imperfections were admitted into a
composition, and skilfully subordinated to a general scheme
of beauty. The idea that this art was generally animated
by an ascetic spirit which was incompatible with beauty
is a misconception. The Christian doctrine of self-abnega-
tion did not, with the lay artists of the Ile-de-France,
at all preclude the joyful contemplation of all that was
regarded as becomingly fair; and though, in the repre-
sentation of terrestrial beings, beauty was often associated
with deformity, the illustration of conceptions of the
supernatural led often to the production of very exquisite
types of beauty. But the mediaeval motives were so
different from those of pagan art that there could be little
likeness between the respective forms produced. The Chris-
tian sentiment naturally excluded everything that savoured
of bodily charm alone; it demanded a fitting modesty
vu GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 265

 

and sobriety ; and it, as a rule, admitted the clothed form
only.

The representation of physical beauty being, with the
Gothic carver, subordinated to the purpose of enforcing the
idea that the soul is more than the body, and of illustrating
the doctrine of the salvation of the soul by goodness of life,
and the loss of the soul by evil life, it was necessary that
beings and things not beautiful should enter into his com-
positions. The evils that beset the lives and tempt the souls
of men had to be in some way set forth, no less than the
good things which he is permitted to enjoy. The unhappy
lot of the wicked had to be figured as well as the felicities
of the good. Hence conspicuous elements in Gothic sculp-
ture, especially after the beginning of the thirteenth century,
are the monstrous and the grotesque. Elements which, in
true Gothic—though sometimes, perhaps, introduced in a
playful spirit,—have, in the main, a serious purpose. And
these elements have a value apart from their moral signifi-
cance, as affording contrasts to the forms of beauty.

The Romanesque imagery—consisting of those fantastic
creations of animal life which reflected something of the
Roman mythology, combined with forms originating in the
grotesque imagination of the Northern races—was soon
rejected by the Gothic artists, and in its place motives for
ornament were employed which were mainly derived from
plant forms.

In the early Gothic the representation of imaginary
creatures was, for the most part, confined to the symbolic
animals described in the Bible, such as those seen by St.
John in the Apocalypse. Instances of these occur on the
tympanums of the central doorways of Chartres, Le Mans,
and elsewhere. These symbolic creatures were employed
as signs of the four Evangelists, but gradually other
imaginary creations were introduced, until finally the animal
life of the Gothic edifice became more extended in range
than that of the richest Romanesque building had been.
But during the twelfth century this range was not great.

In the thirteenth century, however, a new fauna was
created, which derived much, perhaps, from the old con-
ceptions, but which had also so much that was new as

1 See Viollet-le-Duc, s.v. Animaux, p. 20.
266 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

to constitute a different class from what had preceded.
A popular belief had long existed in the symbolic character
of animals and imaginary creatures ;' and as symbols
of human qualities, both good and evil, they were now
wrought, for encouragement or for warning, upon the stones
of the sacred edifice. A further purpose of this fauna, joined
with that of the flora, and with the vast range of human life,
both natural and supernatural, was that the Gothic edifice
might form a compendious illustration of the known world
of creation, imagination, and faith.

A remarkable quality of the grotesque creations of
Gothic art is the close and accurate observation of nature
which they, no less than the images of real things, display.
However fabulous the imaged creature may be, the materials
out of which he is made are derived from nature. Whether
it be vertebra or claw, wing or beak, eye or nostril, throat
or paw—every anatomical member displays an intimate
familiarity with the true functional form, and an imaginative
sense of its possible combinations with other members.
Take, for instance (Fig. 174), one of the grotesque creatures
which play among the leafage under the hood-mould of the
archivolt of the portal of the Virgin in the Cathedral of
Paris, or one of the gargoyles of the lateral facades, or of the
terrible beasts and demons of the parapet of the west front,
and see with what vitality it is imbued.

And besides functional truth there is always a subtle
and highly ornamental play of lines and surfaces in these
fanciful creatures. There is, too, in early Gothic a com-
parative restraint of posture and movement in this animal
life, as in everything else. Contorted forms and extravagant
writhings belong mostly to the times of the declining
Gothic, when such extravagance appears in obedience to the
demands of jaded sensibilities.

With the figure sculpture of French architecture is
associated a rich profusion of carved leafage which, inwrought
with the leading structural members of the building, softens
and enriches its rigid lines, hard angles, and blank surfaces,
with a beauty akin to that which clothes the hardness of the
framework of the earth.

1 See the AfManges a’ Archéologie of Cahier and Martin, tome i. p. 106,
et seq.
VI GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 267

 

The carved ornaments of the Romanesque builders had
been, for the most part, derived from ancient conventional
designs as exhibited in Roman and Byzantine art. In
France these motives had been wrought over and modified,

a

Wy

\
AN
\

at
SN

\
SX
Ws

 

FIG, 174.

sometimes clumsily, and again with much ingenuity and even
lively fancy, but with little real invention. Fresh motives,
however, appear at an early date—the inspiration of nature
transforming the conventional elements, and soon imparting
to them a living expression of a kind peculiar to Gothic art.

The Cluniac sculptors of Burgundy appear to have been
268 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

the first to break away, in some measure, from lifeless
traditions in the carving of leafage. The capitals of the
porch of Vézelay, begun in 1132, and those of the nave of
the nearly contemporaneous Cathedral of Autun, distinctly
exhibit, in the acanthus-like foliage with which they are

 

FIG. 175.

adorned, the fresh influence of nature, while, at the same time,
they retain a large measure of the old conventional character.
But it was reserved for the artists of the Ile-de-France to
develop the art of foliate sculpture in complete emancipation
from the old and outworn conventions.

In the capitals and other carved members of the early
transitional buildings of France two leading types of Roman-
VIL GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 269

 

esque ornament appear—the interlacing patterns of mingled
Byzantine and Norman origin,and theconventional Corinthian-
esque leafage. To these may be added a third, of less
frequent occurrence after the beginning of the new style of
architecture, consisting of figures and grotesque animals.
The interlacing patterns, incapable of further and more
living development, soon fell into disuse. The ornament
consisting of figures and animals was also soon abandoned.
But the Corinthianesque leafage naturally lent itself to those
amplifications and transformations which the suggestions of
nature soon prompted the French carvers to effect.

 

FIG. 176.

The earliest remaining instances of ornament in which
the influence of nature is apparent occur in the choirs of the
Cathedrals of Noyon and Paris. The capitals of the great
columns of the sanctuary of Noyon (Fig. 175) may not
appear to exhibit a very striking likeness to nature in their
broad and simple leaf-like forms ; they are, indeed, but refine-
ments upon a characteristic early Norman type, like Fig.
176, from the Abbaye-aux-Dames, in which the expression
of nature is not strongly marked. But the qualities of line
and surface, which render them superior to the Norman
example, are qualities derived from nature. The vigorous
curves and fine surface flexures which they exhibit are with-
270 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

out parallel in the older carvings wrought by workmen who
derived none of their inspiration directly from living things.

The Norman example appears to be a rude simplification
of the Roman-Corinthianesque type—-a simplification in
which the subdivisions of the acanthoid leaves are omitted.
The Noyon capital has a superior grace and beauty, and
shows something of the best qualities of the ancient leaf
forms, though its immediate prototype is the Norman rather
than any ancient example.

This Corinthianesque type of capital became at once the
leading type in Gothic architecture, and almost countless
varieties of it were wrought in the Ile-de-France during the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries. The outline of the leaf was
soon changed from the form A, Fig. 177, which is that of

 

FIG. 177.

the Noyon capital, to the form B, one more in conformity
with the ancient acanthoid leaf C. Fine examples of the
simpler types of such capitals occur in the triforium of the
nave of Senlis (Fig. 178), in St. Julien-le-Pauvre, at Paris,
and in other early churches.

In none of the earliest capitals does the influence of
nature do more than give a new and more vital beauty to the
curves and the modelling of motives that are, in all their
parts, derived from ancient forms; but very soon the
more direct study of nature leads to further changes. The
naturalistic elements extend beyond mere abstract lines,
and include something of specific forms. Thus in the
triforium of the choir of Paris the crockets of certain capitals
(Fig. 113) terminate in unfolding leaflets which, though of
a severely conventionalised character, are yet unmistakably
drawn freshly from the fields. This sculpture dates from
the third quarter of the twelfth century, and the same
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 271

 

motive is often repeated, but never without some change.
The triforium of Paris alone exhibits a wide variety of
designs in its capitals—-some of them retaining more of the
older characteristics, but nearly all showing something of the
new spirit that was at this time so strongly animating the
art, from the largest structural forms down to the smallest
ornamental details.

 

FIG. 178.

In the nave of the same building the influence of nature
is still more distinctly marked. In the triforium, which
dates from about I190, are capitals which may be con-
sidered as marking the culminating point of Gothic art in
both sculptural beauty and structural form. The general
type (Fig. 114) is so varied that no two capitals in the arcade
are in all respects alike. I have already’ referred to the
variety of the profiles of the abaci of these capitals. The
variety in the foliate ornament is still greater. The crockets,

1 Page 207.
272 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

of which five examples are given in Fig. 179, are of exquisite
beauty. The inspiration of nature has, in these designs,
completely taken the place of traditional motives. No mere
recasting of old types could ever result in the production of
forms like these. The unfolding leaves of the field or forest
could alone supply the elements.

But it required genius of a high order to lay hold of
these elements without, at the same time, becoming entangled
in a myriad of details that were unsuitable to the purposes
of architectural sculpture. To simplify nature, and yet to
retain what is most expressive, to bring out in sculpture the

 

FIG. 179.

full value of what nature suggests, and at the same time to
preserve a strictly lithic and architectural expression, is some-
thing that has never been done, before nor since, so perfectly
as it was done in the art of the French sculptors of this time,
as we see it in the triforium of the nave of Paris, and in a
few other monuments of the same class. The Gothic carver
of this time never imagined that he was called to emulate
with the imperfect means of art the infinite complexity of
nature. To win applause by imitative dexterity was not
his aim; but to catch a new grace from expanding bud or
broad leaf-outline, his fancy and his eye were ever ready,
and his hand ever skilful.

In this sculpture is always manifest the feeling with
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 273

 

which the work was done—a feeling of delight in
natural beauty as exhibited in the least forms of vegeta-
tion no less than in the forms of men and animals; and
this feeling appears now in its fulness for the first time in
the history of the arts. The ancient regard for lower nature,
as far as the witness of art attests, was far more limited and
was subordinated to interest in the human form. Special
attention to the beauties of vegetation, or any definite ex-
pression of delight in them, will, as a general rule, be sought
for in vain in the arts of antiquity. Antique foliate orna-
mentation is usually cold and formal in its studied curves
and surfaces; but in this Gothic foliage a warm sympathy
with every varying beauty of living form is constantly
apparent.

It is interesting to notice that the plant forms first em-
ployed for ornamental motives were those of springtime—the
opening buds and newly-formed leaves of familiar plants,
fern, arum, hepatica, plantain, and many others. It was
both natural and appropriate, that this spring herbage, more
than anything else, should stimulate the fancy of men in
whose hands the Gothic style was growing; for in the
leafage of spring there is an expression of living energy
that accords, as nothing else could, with the vital spirit of
the new art of building.

To his subtle feeling for nature and wise acceptance
of the limitations of art, the French carver joined the highest
excellence of execution. The skilfulness of his hand was
not the least of his qualities; and it was employed by him
as fully in foliate as in figure sculpture. The skill and
delicacy of hand exhibited in the work of a great artist have
a noble fascination, arising from the feeling and intelligence
which direct every touch. The finest sculpture, like the
finest painting, is always delicately wrought. The ornaments
of the capitals and archivolts of the portals of Paris, for
instance, are cut with a delicacy equal to that of the frieze
of the Parthenon, or the shrine of Orcagna.

The fine characteristics of the art are exhibited in the
capital, Fig. 114, in which the carver’s sympathy with nature,
his power of abstraction and adaptation, and his skill
in execution, are fully manifest. The Corinthianesque
motive is still clearly apparent, though the entire form has

T
274 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

become modified and the ornament changed. The orna-
mentation consists of four great compound leaves rising
against the bell, one under each angle of the abacus, with
four lesser leaves in the intervals. The grooved mid-ribs
of the greater leaves terminating in crockets form
vigorous springing curves which, rising from the astragal,
seem by their inherent energy to support the corners
of the abacus. The forms of the leaves are simple, each
consisting of a central member with a five-lobed leaflet on
each side of it. In outline they are full of the spirit of
nature without direct imitation of real leaves, and though
symmetrical in form and arrangement, they are not rigidly
so. In Gothic art symmetry is never absolute, as in a
geometric figure. It always exhibits irregularities which
give to every part of the form treated a living expression.
In modelling this ornamentation presents surfaces which
afford pleasant gradations of light, while the deep depres-
sions and intervals produce effective lines and spaces of
vigorous shade; there is no deep cutting anywhere, nor
any excessive projections; the form of the bell. is strictly
preserved and clearly apparent; no unmodelled masses
nor unfinished contours anywhere appear—every ridge
is smoothly rounded, and every furrow carefully hollowed.
This extreme refinement of finish does not always appear in
Gothic sculpture, though it is characteristic of the best.
In the Cathedral of Paris, in the parts that belong to the
early thirteenth century, it appears everywhere.

As we approach the west end of the nave of Paris there
is a marked increase of direct likeness to nature in the
foliate ornamentation, until the limit of naturalism con-
sistent with architectural fitness is almost overpassed in the
Chapel of the Catechists in the South Tower. Here, in the
south-east angle, the vaulting shaft has a capital (Fig. 180),
in which actual forms are represented with close approach to
exactness. It is hard to qualify our admiration for so beauti-
ful a work, but certainly this ornamentation is not, so much
as that of the former example, an integral part of the capital.
It has somewhat the effect of real leaves laid up against
the bell. The undercutting is so deep that a look of de-
tachment is produced which impairs the solid, monumental
expression so desirable in a capital. The leaf repre-
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 275

sented is apparently the same as that which supplied the
motive for the capital of the triforium, but in place of the
treatment whereby the foot-stalks of the leaflets there become

     
   

  

   

    

Nt
i

Nps

FIG, 180.

    
 

mere mid-ribs in broad lobate leaves, the independent foot-
stalks are here given, and are wrought with almost natural
slenderness, the stone being deeply cut away on either side
of them. But apart from this momentary and partial forget-
276 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

fulness of monumental exigencies in enthusiasm for natural
beauty, this sculpture, as much as any other in the building,
exhibits the peculiar merits of the best work of the time.
Among capitals which, though less finely wrought, show
great beauty and variety of naturalistic design, are those of
the Cathedral of Laon, of which Fig. 115, from the triforium
of the south transept, is one of the most characteristic. The

  
  
 

te
“aust }

 
 
 

‘a,
Hid
Wich.

     

FIG, 181,

variety of beautiful designs to be seen in this triforium
almost exceeds that of all other churches except Paris. They
invariably show a keen enjoyment of nature, and wonderful
skill in the adaptation of naturalistic motives. The types are
quite distinct from those of Paris, but they are hardly inferior
to the finest of those which that cathedral presents,

Passing to the foliate sculpture of other members, the
running leaf patterns of the archivolts of the facade of Paris
are conspicuous examples of the very finest. A portion of
vu GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 277

 

one of these is shown in Fig. 174; and Fig. 181 is another
bit of great excellence.

In the triforium string-course (Fig. 182), and the cornice
of the exterior of the nave (Fig. 182 d¢s), of the Cathedral
of Amiens, the compound trefoil ornament is noticeable
for its beauty of outline, which is natural and ornamental
at once, while its finished and exquisite modelling, to which
no words can do justice, renders it especially worthy of
study. When we come to examine the foliate sculpture
of other countries, we shall find this among the most
instructive examples for comparison. The finished hollowing

ARMOR ENERO a

ition wis ue

   

maT

aR

a eae : : 2 ELHM. 4

FIG, 182.

of the lines which mark the larger veinings, and the
refined modelling of surfaces, are in strong contrast to
what is generally found elsewhere than in France. Every
leaf is full of living expression, and throughout the entire
length of the string there is no repetition, no formality of
design. The dull reproduction of formal patterns, such as
are often met with in more recent design, finds no counterpart
in the art of the Gothic schools. A further quality of this,
and of all other fine ornament, is the orderly and sequent
arrangement of even the smallest details, as in the bunches
of berries that alternate with the leaves of this string-
course. It will be seen that the berries fall into regular
series, following the spiral arrangement around the support-
ing stem which is characteristic of nature. We have here
278 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

another illustration of that kinship to Greek art which
this sculpture shows in so many other points. Such order
as this appears, indeed, under an almost infinite variety of
forms, and it is sometimes but obscurely manifest; but in
one way or another it is a constant law alike of organic
nature and of good art. In Greek and Gothic art it is in-
variably conspicuous.

Such are some of the leading characteristics of French
foliate sculpture. Its finest types, illustrated by the capitals
of Paris and the string-courses of Amiens, hardly appear after

rireece,

su ihneygpeee 22

  
     

ONL Ling

MUTT 7

ri MNO reyes,
ww wD “ay

    

j HA Phat

   

         

FIG. 182 d7s.

the second quarter of the thirteenth century. From this
time onwards the direct imitation of nature becomes too
much the artist’s aim, and architectural adaptation is more
and more lost sight of A few illustrations of the change
from the one condition to the other may afford a better
understanding of the qualities which characterise the finest
types.

Fig. 183, a portion of a string-course from Noyon, shows
in a marked degree the tendency to over-naturalism which
had set in by the middle of the thirteenth century. There
is great beauty in this design, and its execution is ex-
cellent, but it has lost the architectural appropriateness that
characterises the strings of Amiens. A proper sense of
VII GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 279

 

the abstraction, in treatment of nature, which the material
demands was wanting in the mind of the carver. The close
relation, too, which had formerly existed between structural
members and their carved ornaments, soon ceased under
the naturalistic treatment that was now coming into vogue.
In Fig. 119, p. 209, a capital from one of the chapels of the
choir of Amiens, for instance, the leaf ornament which adorns
the lower part of the bell has no expression of integral rela-
tion with it. It is merely a leaf applied to the surface. It
does not rise from the astragal in sympathy with the form of
the bell, enriching its surface, and harmonising with its outline.

   

tt ya tly tame HY a 5 ar biNea TES peter. Meye Sy me Se ae
“Raa iii PAAR
E.H.M.
FIG. 183.

The bell is treated as an independent surface, a consider-
able portion of which is entirely unoccupied by the orna-
ment, and the independence of the leaf is further empha-
sised by the imitative treatment of its foot-stalk, which
shows, at its base, the natural enlargement, and the portion
of clinging fibre which adheres where a leaf is torn from
its parent stem.

Other instances of misadaptation and over-naturalism
marking departure from the best types of Gothic sculpture,
are those of the leaf ornaments upon the lower portions of
the twisted shafts of the porches of Chartres. And finally,
as among the still more pronounced examples of over-
naturalism which occur before the time of what may be
called debased Gothic (such as some of the capitals and
280 GOTAIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

cornices of Nevers exhibit), we may notice the delicate
running ornaments (Fig. 184) in the archivolts of the Porte
Rouge of the Cathedral of Paris.

There is thus a marked difference between the adapted
naturalism which gave life to early Gothic ornament, and

 

FIG, 184.

the imitative naturalism which marks the decline of Gothic
art.

How, it may be asked, are we justified in ascribing to this
early Gothic ornament such supreme merit? Why is it, if
the influence of nature adds anything of value to art, that
direct and complete imitation, so far as possible, is not good ?
VIT GOTHIC. SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 281

 

‘How can there be-any such thing as over-naturalism in
sculpture? What, more precisely, is meant by the expression
architectural fitness so frequently made use of in these
pages? The answer was shortly given in Chapter I. p. 23,
where it was remarked in substance that the conventions of
ornament grow out of obedience to the inherent conditions
of architecture and the materials of which buildings are
wrought. A true artist in ornamental sculpture is known
by his ready recognition of these conditions, and by his
unqualified and willing acceptance of them.

. A stone leaf, for instance, he feels must be confessedly
of a stony character; and rather than lose anything of
this appropriate character, he will not in his carving
approach anywhere near to an imitative rendering of natural
forms and details. All deep undercutting and all finer
veinings he instinctively omits. He has to regard, more-
over, what will be the effect of his work upon the eye when
viewed, as an architectural feature, at a greater or less distance.
Hence, by mere obedience to these and other conditions
which govern the art, ornamental sculpture becomes unlike
nature, though it may owe its highest beauty to elements
derived from the woods and fields. It is from just regard
to all the conditions involved, and not from any arbitrary
purpose, that the conventional character of Gothic sculpture
results.

In Chapter I. the quality of breadth was mentioned
as among the leading characteristics of Gothic sculpture.
This ought to be emphasised, for there is no quality to
which more of the impressiveness of such sculpture is owing.
Multitudinous as are the details which enter into the design
of any great cathedral front, there is rarely any scattered
effect in the total impression. An harmonious relationship
of mass to mass, from largest things to smallest, is main-
tained. Such breadth is, indeed, a fundamental quality
of all good art ; but its manifestation is perhaps more remark-
able in Gothic architecture than in any other, because of the
multitude of subdivisions through which it has to find
expression.

The attainment of this breadth by the Gothic designers
is the more remarkable in view of the individual freedom of
the vast armies of men who were employed upon the
282 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

medieval buildings. Of this freedom there is evidence
enough in the work itself. The range of invention in
the designing of figures and ornaments is, in any given
building, far too wide to have been compassed by any single
mind. There was, of course, a master builder, or architect,
whose general directions were followed, but there was no
individual who, like a modern architect, strictly determined
every detail.

The conditions were all different from those of modern
times. The bands of laymen, by whom these great buildings
were wrought, and who, at this period, went about from
place to place wherever important architectural works were
to be undertaken, had, in the first instance, been trained
in the monastic art schools. In these schools they had
learned not only their craft, but also how to work together
for common ends. There existed among them a strong
esprit de corps; and each individual in the fraternity felt
the ardour, the pleasure, and the freedom in his work that are
inspired by mutual confidence and a common enthusiasm.
So perfect was the concord of feeling, so imbued were all
the members with the general principles of the art, that
individual freedom had no tendency to produce insubordina-
tion in design.

The art schools of the Middle Ages were such in the truest
sense. Nothing akin to modern academic methods existed
in these schools. They were strictly schools of practice,
where the novice learned his art by taking part, according
to his capacity, in the actual construction and adornment of
buildings. He was, of course, taught by his seniors such
general principles as had been acquired by tradition, or
derived from experience ; but fresh experiment ever afforded
fresh instruction to both pupil and master. A great public
monument in progress formed naturally and unconsciously
a true school of art. And so far as concerns artistic pro-
duction no other kind of school has yet proved of much avail.

One conspicuous element of effect in the sculpture of
the Middle Ages is now entirely lost, and hence the
aspect of even the best preserved examples remaining is
very different from that which it must have originally
displayed. The colour with which these sculptures
were formerly enlivened has wholly disappeared, with
VI GOTHIC SCULPTURE IN FRANCE 283

 

exception of some faint traces in sheltered portions
which serve to show that colour was, beyond question, ex-
tensively employed. Such traces remain in the portals of
Senlis, Paris, and many other churches. But although
colour was undoubtedly employed, there is nothing to
indicate that it was carried to the extent of producing any
imitative effect. The patches of colour still to be seen show,
on the contrary, that it was employed merely to afford a
pleasant play of quiet hues such as might relieve the
monotony of the uniform stone and satisfy the medizeval
craving for colour harmonies. It is impossible that any-
thing more than this should have been accomplished ;
for the art of painting was not, at this time, enough developed
to admit of realistic treatment! Judging from the character
of this painting, the colouring of the sculpture must have
been very simple. The heads, hands, and feet were of
a uniform yellowish-white, the cheeks and lips being
slightly reddened. In the eyes a pale blue or brown
colour may have been given to the iris, the pupil being
black. Hair and eyebrows were black, brown, or golden ;
and draperies were of various hues, mostly red, blue, and
purple, with white and black, while ornaments, as jewels and
embroideries, were gilded. Foliage and animals were coloured
in a purely conventional way, as in the ornamental borders
of illuminated manuscripts, without regard to the colouring
of nature. Such naturalistic colour treatment as that of the
sixteenth-century choir screen of Amiens Cathedral was not
only impossible, but it would have greatly offended the
taste of the early Gothic sculptors.

Certainly no correct conception of the original colouring
can be formed by reference to any of the styles of painting
that have been practised since the thirteenth century.

1 See the Chapter on Gothic Painting and Glass-Staining.
CHAPTER VIII

SCULPTURE OF .THE TWELFTH AND THIRTEENTH
CENTURIES IN ENGLAND AND OTHER COUNTRIES

IN the architecture of the twelfth century in England figure
sculpture is rarely met with, and where it does occur it is of
an extremely rude and inexpressive sort, though it exhibits
some architectural merits derived from the traditional
principles that were common at this time to the whole of
Europe. The French custom of enriching the portals of
churches with figure sculpture was not generally followed in
England. The difference, in this respect, which is shown
by the contemporaneous western portals of the Church of St.
Denis and Lincoln Cathedral holds all through the Gothic
period.

Among very early examples of figure sculpture in
England is the band of bas-reliefs which extends across that
portion of the west front of the Cathedral of Lincoln which
was erected under Remigius about 1090. This sculpture
(a group from which is shown in the rude sketch, Fig. 185),
though coarse in execution and wanting in expression, has,
nevertheless, a good deal of that merit which secures archi-
tectural effectiveness. The same architectural character
appears in the later and richer sculpture which occupies
the tympanum of the so-called Priors Gateway at Ely, but
as compared with contemporaneous work in France the
sculpture of Ely is singularly coarse and ungraceful.

Hardly anything of greater importance occurs until
towards the middle of the thirteenth century, when suddenly,
in the west front of the Cathedral of Wells, we get one of
the richest assemblages of sculptures ever gathered into an
CHAP, VIII SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND, ETC. 285

 

architectural monument. These sculptures of course differ
widely from the earlier ones just mentioned. They appear
to have been wrought by an insular and even a local
school, yet one that must have
had acquaintance, and perhaps
connection, with the schools of
the Continent. A good deal
that is admirable appears in
these figures, though they fail
to show either the artistic
power, or the fineness of exe-
cution that characterises the
Gothic sculpture of France.
Unlike proper Gothic sculpture,
this sculpture has little relation
to the structural forms of the
building. It is not an auxiliary
the place and dimensions of
which are determined by the
architectural scheme. It does
not naturally fit itself into the ©
leading members of the struc-
ture. The jambs, archivolts, tympanums, string-courses, and
set-offs of the buttresses are everywhere crowded with arcades
and panellings which form canopies and frames for its especial
display. The structure exists for the sake of the sculpture,
and it is, as we have before seen, but a vast screen, having
no logical connection with the main building which supports
it. In order to enlarge the space for the sculpture the door-
ways are reduced in size even beyond the usual contracted
dimensions of doorways in England. The springing of the
archivolts of the central portal is below the level of the base
mouldings of the wall, and the capitals of the jambs are
within easy reach of the hand. Every relation of ornament
to structure, such as is peculiar to Gothic, is disregarded.
Yet the sculpture itself is both grand and impressive,
and it sometimes attains considerable beauty. It differs
primarily from the sculpture of the Ile-de-France, in being
more exclusively naturalistic. That is to say, the idea of
nature, as a leading motive, seems to have had a larger place
in the mind of the artist than was the case with the French

 
286 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

designer, while a disciplined artistic power is less apparent.
But though more exclusively naturalistic in conception than
French sculpture, the rendering of
forms is not more true to nature.
It is not so true. The modelling of
draperies, for instance, in the so-called
statue of Christiana (Fig. 186) is much
less true to the folds of real drapery
than is the modelling of the draperies
in the contemporaneous statue of the
Virgin in the doorway of the north
transept of the Cathedral of Paris;
and yet the whole air of the figure is
naturalistic rather than ideal. In
truth and skill of modelling even the
sculptures of Chartres and St. Denis,
which are a century earlier in date,
surpass these of Wells. Observe, in
Fig. 186, the flat surfaces, sharp
edges, and unnatural lines of the
draperies on the breast and arms, and
the stiff and awkward forms of the
arm and hand. Stiffness and awk-
wardness, arising from want of skill,
are not, indeed, in early art incom-
patible with a great deal of beauty
and with fine sentiment. In the early
} art of France such defects are some-
if} times apparent ; but this sculpture of
Wells is not early. It dates from
the mid-thirteenth century—the time
of the highest development of Gothic
sculpture—and for that time it is
strangely primitive and unskilful as
compared with the art of France.
Yet for simplicity of motive, veracity
of conception, and monumental gran-
deur, this sculpture certainly de-
serves to hold an eminent place in the art of the Middle
Ages. It bears somewhat the same relation to the sculp- _
ture of France, that the painting of Velasquez has to \

 

 

 

FIG, 186,
vur SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 287

 

that of Titian. It is vigorous and noble, but rarely to
the same degree refined and beautiful. The workman-
ship is comparatively coarse and sketchy, and far removed
from the delicacy of French carving. The best parts
of these statues are the heads, which, for the most part,
more finely wrought than other parts, display much
individual character. They are apparently real portraits of
living men, and as such possess an interest independently of
that which their other qualities give. Taken as a whole, this
sculpture of Wells lends an unique impressiveness to the
facade with which it is associated ; and, faulty as both are,
they constitute a monument which must always rank among
the grand achievements of art.

Perhaps the sculpture next in importance in England is
that of the Presbytery of Lincoln, which dates from the
second half of the thirteenth century. Within this building
the spandrels of the triforium are enriched by figures of
angels in high relief, from which the structure is commonly
known as the Angel Choir. The situation is a bad one for
the display of the work. The sculpture is so high above the
pavement as to be seen with difficulty, both on account of
its distance, and because the width of the aisle is not suffi-
cient to allow it to be viewed otherwise than very obliquely.
The light, too, falling from the opposite clerestory, is, for
each relief, directly in front—the worst light possible for the
exhibition of form. This sculpture, though important as
occupying a conspicuous position in one of the most elaborate
of Anglo-Norman pointed buildings, has, I think, no consider-
able merit, notwithstanding that it has been extravagantly
praised.’ Several of the figures appear to be symbolical,
though their precise meaning is uncertain. Most of them are
represented as playing on musical instruments. The south
door of this presbytery—which has more of the character of
a French Gothic doorway than is common in England—has
in its tympanum more effective sculpture, though it is too
much mutilated to admit of a satisfactory judgment of its

1 Mr. Cockerell, in the Appendix to his A/onograph on the Sculpture of tWells,
says: ‘The sculpture of the angel choir is displayed (séc) with most admired
learning and taste, and may not only challenge, in these respects, the works of
sculpture or painting of any country in the thirteenth or succeeding century,
but will possibly be found to establish a priority of merit in the English school,
hitherto little suspected.”
288 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

original merits: Among the statues placed against the
buttresses of the same cathedral, those of Edward I. and
Elenor his Queen are noticeable for graceful composition and
monumental character. I am not aware that there is any
other architectural sculpture of importance in England dating
from the thirteenth century. Of the statues which once
adorned the west front of Lichfield not one remains, while
those which occupy the niches high up in the spandrels
and gables of Peterborough are too far out of sight to be
judged of.

The rare employment of figure sculpture in connection
with architecture, together with its inferior character
when employed, mark no less distinctly than the structural
characteristics already examined the wide difference which
exists between Anglo-Norman and Gothic art.

The comparative lack of artistic gift exhibited by the
figure sculpture is again strikingly manifest in the Anglo-
Norman foliate carving. Though examples of much beauty
sometimes occur, there was little, in the early pointed archi-
tecture of England, of that growth of beautiful types under

 

FIG. 187.

the influence of that regard for nature which so strongly
marked the early Gothic carving of France. In many
instances the observation of nature is, indeed, apparent ;.
but a general movement characterised by a consistent,
varied, and skilful adaptation of natural forms, and leading to
vil SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 289

 

a new and living style of ornament, hardly had place in
England. The early types in the island are conventionalised
in a very different way from that in which French types are
conventionalised. Anglo-Norman convention is artificial ;
it manifests a lack of sensitiveness to the finer characteristics
of nature. Traditional elements—those which in the twelfth
century were common in textile fabrics and painting, as well
as in sculpture—were retained with less modification than
they received in France. A carved lintel, now built into
the wall of the north transept of Southwell, exhibits a tradi-
tional trefoil (Fig. 187), which will be recognised as agreeing
in character with the commonest motive in so-called early
English foliage. Of these traditional elements the Anglo-
Norman designers made varied use, but such invention as
they exercised never quite eliminated their artificial character.
The so-called stiff-leaved foliage of the early times gives
little evidence of a refined artistic sense modifying the con-
ventional prototypes.

It is noticeable that the earliest foliate sculpture in
England is the best, and among the finest examples are
those of the capitals of Bishop Hugh’s choir and transept at
Lincoln. Of these none are better than that shown in Fig.
140, p. 225. Yet, notwithstanding its real beauty, the
trefoil ornament of this capital exhibits some of the peculi-
arities that are constant in the early foliate sculpture of
England, and which I have characterised as artificial. It
will be noticed, for instance, that the mid-rib is a flat-sided,
sharp-edged member, and that the edges of the leaflets
are also sharp and hard; these peculiarities will be more
clearly apparent in Fig. 188, where C is the form of the section
through AB. This fillet-like treatment of leaf-ribs, stalks,
and leaf-edges is unpleasing to the eye of a beholder who is
familiar with the delicate rounding of such details in the
sculpture of the Continent; yet, in contrast with the circular
abacus and moulding profiles, it sometimes has good effect,
though in itself it is an ugly mode of treatment whose
hardness will be keenly felt on comparison with such work
as that shown in Fig. 182, p. 277. To conventionalise
naturally—to derive beauties of form from natural things,
and while holding on to all that are compatible with
the nature of stone and the exigencies of architectural

U

‘
290 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

effectiveness, to avoid all that is incompatible, was not
generally in the Anglo-Norman genius. When he did
not conventionalise artifi-
cially the island sculptor
copied nature too closely,
as, at a later period, in the
over-naturalistic carvings
of the Chapter-house of
Southwell. I must not,
however, seem to affirm
that the foliate sculpture
of early pointed archi-
tecture in England was
always devoid of the ex-
pression of natural beauty.
At first it had a great
deal of such expres-
sion. The ornament, for
instance, of the capital,
Fig. 140, p. 225, is, not-
withstanding the artificial
peculiarities which I have
criticised, exquisite
in expression of the
spiral twist charac-
teristic of living
vegetation, of the
springing leaf out-
lines, as they follow each other around the bell, and bend
gracefully against the moulding of the abacus. There are
many other beautiful varieties of ornament on the capitals
of the early choir and transept of Lincoln in which an equal
feeling for nature is manifest ; but this feeling does not long
survive in the schools of England, and its expression, even
in the best examples, is always joined with those artificial
peculiarities just noticed.

After the first quarter of the thirteenth century artificial
characteristics become more conspicuous, and expression
of beauty caught from nature is less apparent. A good
illustration of the first steps of change is afforded by the
leafage of the capitals of the triforium of the nave of the

 

 

FIG, 188.
vil SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 291

 

same building, of which Fig. 189 is an example. Here the

! i | i
| i

 

foliage takes the form of crockets, which are largely in-
dependent of the abacus. Its lines are still in a measure
292 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

graceful and suggestive of the energy of vegetable growth,
but the fillet-like ribs are unpleasantly multiplied, and the
leaf-stalks, instead of dying away softly into the mass of the
bell—as in the earlier capital of the east transept,—are
equally salient and flat-sided down to the astragal. Of the
fine surface modelling which the earlier foliage exhibits,
there is scarcely any in this foliage of the nave.

In the local and exceptional school of Wells sculpture of
peculiar beauty and natural expression is met with, in which
a mingling of Anglo-Norman and French characteristics is
apparent. The excessive projection of the crocket (Fig.
145) is Anglo-Norman, while the fine surface modelling
and the delicate rounding of leaf-stalks and ribs, unlike
anything usually met with in England, is French. The
graceful, flowing, and thoroughly vital lines, the fine composi-
tion of curves and arrangement of masses, give these capitals
remarkable beauty, though the extravagant salience of their
crockets injures their expression as functional members.

The carving of imaginary and grotesque creatures,
though by no means uncommon in England, was, like other
sculpture, less general than in France. Nevertheless, ex-
amples enough occur to show that a lively fancy and a
vigorous executive skill were often exercised in their produc-
tion. Among the best carvings of this kind were, apparently,
those of the buttresses of Bishop Hugh’s choir of Lincoln.
Very little, however, remains of them.

On the whole, sculptural enrichment in the pointed
architecture of England presents no parallel whatever to
that of France. To the builders of the island sculpture was
not an indispensable element of design. Hence the many
important churches—Beverley, Salisbury, and Westminster
Abbey among them—in which sculpture is almost altogether
absent. The employment of the naked moulded capital,
whose monotony is so conspicuous in these and many other
buildings, bears witness to this, and. bespeaks an imperfect
conception of the Gothic idea. The great Gothic Cathedral,
with its marvellous organic structure and its vast wealth of
associated sculpture, has really no counterpart in England.

In Germany, as in England, comparatively little use
was made of figure sculpture as a conspicuous architectural
vit SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 293

 

adjunct. No ranges of statues adorn and animate the upper
stories of the German fagades; nor, in general, do they
flank the great portals. The figure sculpture which in some
instances occurs in these portals was mostly copied from
French models, and it naturally partakes of the character
that sculpture in France had assumed in the later Gothic
epoch when the German copies were executed. The famous
statues of the Cathedral of Strassburg, for instance, have a
sentimental expression, caught from the later sculptures of
France, joined with a realism that is more peculiarly German.

To the general absence of figure sculpture in connection
with architecture even the Cathedral of Cologne affords no
marked exception. The statues ranged in the jambs of its
portals and against the faces of its buttresses give the
ground-story, indeed, much the appearance of a French
Cathedral; but above the ground-story level the structure
is unadorned with sculpture save that of crockets and
finials. Of the figure sculpture of the ground-story little
need be said, as it is entirely of post-Gothic workmanship,
and partakes rather of the character of the art of the
Renaissance than of that of the Middle Ages.

For the distinctively German types of foliate sculpture we
may take those capitals of the choir of Cologne which date
from about the middle of the thirteenth century. Of
these capitals, Fig. 159, p. 241, presents a fair example.
It will be seen that the leafage has little architectural
character, but that the over-naturalism, which belongs to
the late foliate sculpture of France, reappears here with
increased distinctness. All expression of sympathy with
the functional office of the capital is wanting. This
capital itself, as before remarked, is little more than a con-
tinuation of the shaft, and around it the elaborately wrought
leafage is, with no inventive grace, entwined. If the late
capitals of England are extravagant in artificial foliation, these
of Germany are trivial in their naturalism, and remarkable
for lack of monumental expression.

In Italy there was no figure sculpture of importance
before that of Niccola Pisano—that is to say, not until
considerably after the epoch of the most splendid develop-
ment of Gothic sculpture in France. And when it became
294 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHar.

 

important it was, from the first, different in character
from the sculpture of the North. It was different primarily
in being the production of individual sculptors working
independently, rather than of a school or guild. The name
of the sculptor of almost every important statue or bas-reliet
in Italy is known ; and even in cases of doubtful authorship
the question, usually, is merely between one well-known
master and another. To the great companies of workmen
who, in France, wrought together for a common end—each
one content to do his best work without thought of individual
fame—there was hardly any parallel in Italy. And being
an individual product, the work of the sculptor in Italy was
naturally more independent of architectural connection than
that of the Gothic sculptor had been. It never had such
relationship with architecture as had existed in the French
Gothic. The Italian regarded it rather as something to be
particularly displayed than as a mere architectural auxiliary.
Hence in Italy, statues, instead of being ranged in groups
and connected with structural members, are put in isolated
places; they are set in niches, or under corbelled canopies
which have no constructive purpose—as in the facade
of the Spina Chapel at Pisa,—or they are employed as
finials to gables, etc., while reliefs are commonly carved
upon broad wall surfaces, as at Orvieto and in the Cam-
panile of Florence. Thus, though often effectively placed,
sculpture in Italy never becomes so intimately and consist-
ently associated with the building as to form an_ integral
part of it.

In this sculpture two quite distinct elements curiously
mingle—the one that of expression, approaching in character
the expression of Northern Gothic, and the other formal,
resulting from study of the Roman antique. Of these two
elements, sometimes one and sometimes the other predomi-
nates, according to the individual genius of the artist. For
instance, in the famous, though, as I think, much overrated
sculptures of the pulpit of the Baptistery of Pisa, by Niccola
Pisano, the inspiration of Roman models is clearly manifest
in the treatment of forms, while of natural expression there
is little. In the art of Niccola the spirit of the Renaissance
is already manifest, and the Gothic spirit is, for the most
part, wanting. The figure of the vigorous young athlete,
vat SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 295

 

called La Forza, which is placed against one of the angles
of this pulpit, exhibits, in its pose and anatomical modelling, a
purely classic motive which is far removed from Gothic feeling.
And it is worthy of notice that the classic elements in this
work differ widely from the classic elements that are
present in French Gothic sculpture. In the one case they
are imitative, in the other they are innate. In the one
case they are superficial, in the other they are essential.
The principles of ancient art were, indeed, no less familiar to
Niccola than they had been to the Gothic carvers—they
were probably more so,—but he did not, it would seem, in
these sculptures of Pisa, work so much from his native
instincts as from a spirit of conscious emulation of models
that he ‘had seen and admired. A passion for excellence
of form, as displayed in these models, was apparently
the ruling passion of the artist's mind. In the reliefs
of the panels the characteristics of that Roman art, which
was itself but a formal imitation of the Greek, is no less
strongly marked. In the grouping and execution of these
figures the sculptor has given us little of his own. He
has followed his models closely. Not only are the types
largely Roman, but even the peculiar conventions of
treatment, in draperies and other details, are equally so.
The redundance and artificiality of Roman design are
reproduced with curious exactness. It is not, perhaps,
strange that the Roman work, with which he was brought in
contact, should so strongly have appealed to him. In com-
parison with the contemporary native art the carvings of
the Greco-Roman Sarcophagi in the Campo Santo exhibit
great superiority in the forms ; but it seems a little remarkable
that an Italian in the thirteenth century should have been so
far carried away with admiration of this ancient art as to
allow so little of what was peculiar to mediaeval Italian genius
to express itself in his work. One looks in vain, in these
reliefs by Niccola, for those refinements of conception and
treatment which mark the works of his immediate successors.
It is only in the rendering of animal life—in the beasts
which support the pillars of the pulpit—that a living and
original faculty is clearly apparent.

Few other early Italian sculptors were so strongly in-
fluenced by Roman art. The reliefs of Giovanni Pisano at
296 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

Orvieto are very different from those of Niccola at Pisa.
In expression and in conception of form they approach
more nearly to Gothic art. A strong influence of nature
and a sense of beauty are apparent in them, and they
exhibit little evidence of direct reference to ancient models.
The same may be said of the panels of the Campanile in
Florence, attributed to Giotto and Andrea Pisano. These
reliefs differ in merit one from another. In mastery of the
figure and refinement of execution few of them equal the
best French sculpture of the early part of the thirteenth
century ; but some of the figures, as, for instance, the
standing one in the relief which represents the art of weaving,
are of unusual beauty.

After the Pisani the architectural character of sculpture,
which is considerable in works like those last mentioned,
gradually disappears until the later masters—Ghiberti,
Donatello, Lucca della Robbia, and others—develop the art
independently, and inaugurate the era of isolated statues on
pedestals, movable busts, and medallions, which occupy so
large a place among the works of art of the Renaissance.

Of foliate sculpture Italy produced little in the thir-
teenth century that is remarkable as compared with that
of France. In the fourteenth century, however, there
was much imitation of the work of the Gothic carvers of
the North, and many rich designs were wrought which are
remarkable for delicacy and beauty. The leaf sculpture of
the door jambs of the Cathedral of Florence affords specimens
of the best Italian work of this sort. The fig, the oak, and
‘the ivy are there represented with almost Gothic feeling, and
with true Italian refinement. But these carvings, though
not wanting in architectural effectiveness, are rather over-
naturalistic in treatment. The just mean between the
architectural and the naturalistic was hardly ever reached
by the Italians; they either cling too tenaciously to ancient
conventions in ornament, or else they become too imitative
in following nature. The close imitation displayed in the
foliate ornament of Ghiberti’s gates is but an extreme in-
stance of the tendency that is generally apparent in Italian
carving which deals with natural foliage.

In Venice, however, some admirable examples of foliate
sculpture occur, of which the older capitals of the Ducal
vit SCULPTURE IN ENGLAND & OTHER COUNTRIES 297

 

Palace—-especially those of the lower arcade, on the side
toward the Piazzetta—are among the finest in the world.

There was never any important development of sculpture
in Spain. The statues that adorn some of the Gothic
churches in that country were, like the architecture itself,
copied without genius from the sculpture of France.
The figures of the portals of the Cathedral of Santiago,
which are said to date from the close of the twelfth century,
are among the most important, and are, according to Mr.
Street, really fine. But the employment of such sculpture
was not general even in the great Gothic buildings. The
facade of the Cathedral of Burgos, for instance, has no figure
sculpture whatever.

Foliate sculpture in Spain is no more original or
important than that of the figure. The capitals and
string - courses of the Gothic buildings exhibit French
motives with little modification. The design of the cornice
of the choir of Burgos, for instance, might have been taken
directly from Paris or Amiens, as might also those of the
capitals and bases which adorn the angles of the buttresses.
CHAPTER IX
GOTHIC PAINTING AND STAINED GLASS IN FRANCE

THOUGH colour was employed on many parts of the Gothic
building, enlivening sculpture, and relieving plain surfaces by
various ornamental patterns, the art of figure painting now
became much less conspicuous and much less general than it
had been, and than it still continued to be in the structures
which were erected in those parts of Gaul which lay mainly
outside of the region of the Gothic movement.

Yet wall painting was still more or less practised in
the Ile-de-France, and some notice of this painting is there-
fore necessary to complete our study of the Gothic style.
Unhappily no examples of wall painting in strictly Gothic
buildings have been preserved uninjured, and such scanty
and mutilated remains as those, for instance, in the transept
of Noyon, and those in the wall arcades of the Sainte
Chapelle at Paris, are insufficient to afford a clear under-
standing of their original character. But illuminated
manuscripts of the time are abundant and well preserved,
and from them, rather than from the almost obliterated
examples of painting that are occasionally met with on the
walls of churches, we may derive illustrations of this art.

Its character, as exhibited in these manuscripts, shows
a very primitive state of pictorial development. Hardly
more than the most elementary qualities of outline and
colour are displayed; and these are, of course, ornamental
rather than representative in motive. The drawing ex-
hibits a curious mingling of archaic rudeness’ with
much skill and freedom of line. In fact, as regards
delineation of the figure and easy expression of move-
cHaP. IX GOTHIC PAINTING AND STAINED GLASS 299

 

ment, the French painters developed a skill by the be-
ginning of the thirteenth century that was not attained in
Italy till its close; yet joined with this skill the conventions
of immaturity are everywhere conspicuous. The modelling
of form is very imperfect. Saliences are indicated convention-
ally by paling the colour, while depressions are expressed by
deepening it. Of natural effects of light, or even of indica-
tion of the direction from which light falls, there are none
whatever, nor is there any expression of cast shadows. Flesh
is rendered of a creamy-white, with slight reddening of
cheeks and lips. The features are drawn in with fine lines
of brown or black, and a frank outline describes every con-
tour, whether of general form or of detail. In the twelfth
century the outline is brown, and both figures and back-
grounds are generally light in tone, while in the thirteenth
century the outlines become black, and backgrounds and
figures become more intense in hue—possibly through the
influence of the brilliancy of the stained glass which was
coming into more general use than ever before.

Usually in the thirteenth century the backgrounds are
quite flat, and they are generally either of an ultramarine
blue or of a brownish-red. In some cases, as in Fig. 190,
from the Life of St. Denis,a manuscript of 1252 in the
National Library of Paris, figures are represented with no
ground under their feet. No correct expression of different
planes of distance, or of perspective, is attempted. Where
one figure has to be represented behind another, the farther
one is but partially drawn, like the farther horse in this
illustration, which is represented without legs. The whole
character of the work is thus essentially conventional and
decorative, yet it is often both tender in expression and
beautiful in design, and it rarely fails, in its various
quarterings, to exhibit a fine harmony of colour combinations.

This painting is, of course, largely derived from the
traditional art that had, from the earliest times, been
cultivated by the various religious orders of Europe. But,
unlike sculpture, which, as we have seen, was also largely
derived from the same sources, it failed to develop new
principles or characteristics of importance. Technically it
remained for the most part stationary all through the Gothic
period, owing, doubtless, to the fact that the main artistic
300 GOTHIC ARCAITECTURE CHAP.

 

impulse of the time and the locality operated in the
direction of an architectural development which was not
favourable to the special development of painting.

In the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries painting as an
art in France advanced rapidly under the influence of the
example of the early Italian schools. But this painting had
no connection with that Gothic architecture with which we
are concerned.

 

|

 

 

 

SN
TTT
CALETA TCC

FIG. 190,

Gothic painting in France was thus of a very primitive
and conventional kind, though it was not ill adapted to its
purpose as associated with architecture How far its
conventions and archaisms were the mere imperfections of
immaturity, and how far they may have resulted from a
sense of architectural fitness, I do not attempt to decide;
but, judging from what was at the same time accomplished
in sculpture, it would seem that had painting received equal
attention in the Gothic scheme, its severer conventions would
soon have given place to a more developed style.

It was not, however, in the field of painting proper, but
in that of stained glass, that chromatic design, in Gothic
architecture where the great openings afforded ample
IX GOTHIC PAINTING AND STAINED GLASS 301

 

field that was denied to painting, reached its most splendid
development.

Though simpler styles of this art had been practised
earlier, in its full development it is peculiar to Gothic archi-
tecture. Small window openings were often filled with
coloured glass in early Christian times. But the production
of intricate designs, including rich patterns and figures, and
the elaboration of them with details drawn with a pencil
and afterwards burnt in, began in the Romanesque period,
and was perfected in the early Gothic.

The inherent limitations of this art are indeed of such
a nature as to confine its development within narrow lines.
The material resources of the artist were limited to sheets
of glass variously coloured while in a molten state by the
use of metallic oxides. These sheets were cut up into the
required shapes, and the pieces were fitted together, mosaic-
fashion, to form the main design, while this patchwork of
colour was supplemented by the very simplest delineation and
rudest modelling by means of a pencil charged with a neutral
pigment. It is plain that only a most conventional kind
of art could be produced by such means. Yet with
these materials the medizval artist was able to work without
embarrassment, and in the many examples of his skill which
still remain we may see that he was no less unerring in his
judgment, and constant in his obedience to the principles
involved, than were, in their respective departments, the
stonemasons and the sculptors.

The task of the designer in stained glass was, on the one
hand, to subdue the light and give a comfortable sense of
enclosure, and, on the other, to produce brilliant harmonies
of translucent colours, and to add such pictorial interest
as the conditions controlling his art would permit. The
fundamental difference between this art and the art of wall
painting is, of course, that in the one case light passes
through the design everywhere, while in the other it falls
upon its surface only. This difference separates the two arts
by an impassable gulf. With wholly transparent media those
scenic effects, which are dependent upon a greater or less
development of light and shade, are impossible. In all
arts the true designers willingly submit to the limitations
which the nature of their materials imposes, and in no art
302 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

have these limitations been more strictly observed than in
that of stained glass in the Middle Ages. In stained glass
proper not only is colour necessarily employed in an almost
strictly heraldic manner, but the conventions of line are
of necessity peculiar. The main outlines of objects are not
outlines only, they are also the framework of metal which,
while following the contours of forms, has, at the same time,
to perform the function of a sash, and hold in position the
small bits of glass of which the design is made up. These
lines formed by strips or bars of metal are therefore of
necessity coarse beyond any used in even the most conven-
tional wall painting. Within the great lines of the lead
framework the artist does, it is true, give with the pencil
more or less delineation of the finer details of his figures.
By applying his neutral pigment either heavily or lightly,
and by scratching out lights with the point of a sharpened
stick, he can even get considerable gradation in his modellings.
But in a general or distant view such elaboration counts for
little, and he has to depend mainly for his effect on the
coarse general outlines and the patches of flat colours.
These peculiarities, growing out of the nature of the
materials employed, are not properly to be regarded as im-
perfections, but as conventions marking the limitations of
the art. And even the archaisms of drawing which char-
acterise the figures represented (and which do not grow
out of the material conditions, but are largely the im-
perfections of undeveloped graphic skill) accord so well with
the unavoidable conventions that we can hardly conceive
of their being changed with good effect.

The art of designing in stained glass would seem to be
incapable of real development beyond the conditions that
were reached in the Middle Ages. The more modern attempts
to give it a wider range, by introducing a more pictorial
character, bespeak an imperfect recognition of its inherent
principles. In the twelfth century the various resources of
overlaying and fusing, by means of which the colours are
gradated and blended somewhat as in the art of painting
proper, and which have been extensively practised since the
fifteenth century, were wholly unknown, and would hardly
have been welcomed.

In the apsidal chapels of the Church of St. Denis are
IX GOTHIC PAINTING AND STAINED GLASS 303

 

some fragments of stained glass dating from the middle
of the twelfth century; and the Cathedral of Chartres
retains, in almost perfect condition, some magnificent speci-
mens of a somewhat later
date in the same century.
Among these last is the well-
known Jesse window, which may
be taken as an example of the
best work of the time, or indeed
of any time, for this art hardly
advanced in any respect after
the twelfth century, though it
retained its high character nearly
to the end of the century follow-
ing. Fig. 191, a figure from
this window, will afford an illus-
tration of its character. The
design is produced, for the most
part, of pure pot-metal, while
white glass is introduced here
and there to heighten the effect
in draperies and in ornaments.
Each piece of glass is of one
even colour, another piece has
to be inserted wherever a differ-
ent colour is wanted, and each
separate piece is encompassed
by its sustaining framework of
lead. On various parts of the
design thus wrought out of many
small fragments the necessary
details are drawn with the brush
charged with the neutral pig-
ment. By this means a simple
suggestion of shading is given,
though nothing like real modelling is ever, at this epoch,
approached. The figures are small, rarely more than two
and a half or three feet high, and the separate pieces of
glass, of which the design is composed, are rarely more than
six inches in greatest dimension.

The Cathedral of Chartres is almost unique in its wealth

 

FIG, IgI.
304 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP. IX

 

of medizval glass, nearly all of the original work of the
twelfth and thirteenth centuries remaining in place, and, for
the most part, in good condition. Though a fragile form of
art, stained glass is, if undisturbed by accident or violence,
one of the most permanent. But, unhappily, either accident
or violence has despoiled the greater number of French
cathedrals of the greater part of their ancient glass.
Chartres, however, singularly fortunate in retaining its magni-
ficent jewel-like window-screens, exhibits in its internal
aspect, more than most other medizeval churches, the effect
that it originally had.

Among other remaining examples of Gothic design in
stained glass are the three magnificent roses of the Cathedral
of Paris—those of the transept, and that of the west
end, dating from the middle of the thirteenth century.
Other fine examples of about the same epoch, though
much restored at different times, are the windows of the
Sainte Chapelle, and some of those in the Cathedrals of
Bourges and Reims. As a general rule the effect of the
French interior is now much injured by the extensive
prevalence of modern gvrisazlle, or, still worse, by wretched
modern painted glass, in which the pictorial idea assumes
an undue prominence, and the natural conventions and
beauties of glass are lost.
CHAPTER X

PAINTING AND STAINED GLASS IN ENGLAND AND OTHER
COUNTRIES

ALTHOUGH during the twelfth and early thirteenth centuries
the art of painting on the walls of churches, and of other-
wise employing colour in architecture, was extensively
practised in all the countries of Europe, yet there was
nothing in other countries of essentially different character
from that which was produced in France. The tenderness
of sentiment and elegance of design which give charm to
the works of French genius were not, indeed, equalled in
other countries; but in general principles the art was the
same all over Europe until the close of the thirteenth
century, when, in Italy, the great movement set in which
ultimately led, in that country, to the highest developments
of painting.

The earliest pictorial art in Italy was posterior to
the epoch of strictly Gothic building in the North. But
being associated with the early pointed architecture of the
country, the beginnings of this art form properly a part of
our subject.

Italian painting exhibits from the first, qualities which
are hardly met with in the same degree of advancement in
the Gothic of the North. Though the outline remains
distinct it is less prominent than in France, and the marking
of details is more delicate and finished. The elements of
chiaroscuro and perspective, though very slightly and im-
perfectly suggested, are nevertheless present from the first.
In fact, a more pictorial treatment is everywhere manifest.
Moreover, an increase of skill in design and of elaboration

ox
306 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

in treatment marks the individual character of the work ;
but it is not in technical points alone that the superiority
of early Italian painting is apparent. The grace and
sentiment of French design are often exquisite, but are
less constant than in the work of the early Italian painters.
The art of Cimabue at the close of the thirteenth century
shows an improvement upon the severe conventions of
French painting in the delicate gradations and pencillings
which give a new touch of nature to flesh and to draperies ;
while the works of Giotto display the higher qualities of
original genius, together with the imperfections which
belong to an art in which entire mastery has yet to be
acquired.

Among the earliest examples of medizval wall painting
in Italy are those of the Church of St. Francis of Assisi.
The architecture of this church is, as we have seen,
essentially different from the Gothic; without its paintings
the interior effect would be bald in the extreme. The
large wall spaces, the absence of great expanses of
brilliantly coloured glass to offer trying competition with
the quiet tones of fresco, and the sufficiency of subdued
light, rendered this building as inviting to the medizval
painter as-a well-prepared canvas is to a painter of modern
times. But unlike the modern painter on movable
canvas, the medieval Italian, called to paint upon the
walls of churches, had constantly forced upon his mind
the monumental purpose of his art—an habitual reference
to which naturally develops the grandest characteristics of
painting. This purpose led him to regard his wall space asa
field to be embellished with colour, and although he had also
a didactic and representative intention, yet he instinctively
felt that everything else must be subordinated to a decorative
scheme. His panel had primarily to be divided into fields
of colours, whose arrangements should produce bright and
harmonious effects which should be pleasing to the eye when
regarded without reference to any pictorial design. But,
in addition to this ruling ornamental motive, the intention of
telling a story through a life-like rendering of figures and other
objects was constant in his mind. The scenic representation
at which he aimed was in no degree antagonistic to decorative
effectiveness. In fact, as a general principle, there is far less
x PAINTING & STAINED GLASS IN ENGLAND, ETC. 307

 

antagonism between what is decorative and what is scenic
in painting than is sometimes supposed.

The essential elements of decorative effect and of
pictorial truth are to some extent even dependent the one
upon the other. For instance, the preservation of local hues
throughout the great masses of a design, by the avoidance
of neutral shading, which truth to nature demands, secures
at the same time the full decorative value of every colour
field. The medizval Italian always preserved his local hues,
both from a habit of pictorial veracity, and from a true
decorative instinct. Hence the wall painting of Italy in
the Middle Ages was as decorative and monumental in
character as that of the Northern Gothic, while it became
much more developed and beautiful as painting.

From the time of Cimabue to the time of Botticelli, the
decorative idea ruled everything else in pictorial design.
The constant habit of painting on walls gave something of
a monumental character to even small panel pictures, and
to this is largely due their essential beauty. To a certain
extent, indeed, all good painting has the decorative character
of monumental art. That is to say, a basis of harmonious

1] think that M. Viollet-le-Duc, in his article Peddie, errs greatly in
maintaining that the principles of pictorial and of decorative art are opposed
the one to the other. I do not find that any such antagonism has apparently
been felt to exist between them in the minds of the greatest painters of the past,
whose art has been at once decorative and pictorial in purpose.

M. Viollet-le-Duc, on p. 61 of his article, refers to the arts of the Egyptians
and Persians as illustrating the true principles of decorative art, and to the works
of painters like Titian and Rembrandt, as illustrating those of pictorial art.
But the author fails to recognise the fact that the art of Titian, like that of
every great colourist, is in certain fundamental principles of design allied very
closely to the more purely decorative arts of Egypt and Persia. The more
commonly appreciated pictorial qualities of Titian’s painting constitute but a
small part of his art, which is strictly based upon principles of colour 1elations
similar to those which give charm to the work of the Persian weaver. The
author’s objection to all pictorial treatment on the ground that the perspective
which it involves calls for a single point of view, and is not only not architect-
urally effective, but is even injurious to architectural effect, is, I think, urged too
strongly. The eye naturally makes large allowance in this regard. Very
rarely are any pictures viewed from the precise point for which their per-
spectives are calculated ; but if only the broad colour masses are fine and well
disposed, a picture will always be broadly effective in its decorative qualities,
however it may be viewed. ;

How far, in painting, natural modelling, chiaroscuro, and perspective are
compatible with the best architectural effectiveness I do not attempt to determine.
But certainly the line between what is decorative on the one hand, and what is
pictorial on the other, cannot properly be so sharply drawn as it is by M. Viollet-

le-Duc.
308 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

design underlies all other qualities in the works of great
painters. Mere life-like figure painting is not, in the best
sense, art at all. But so long as the idea of beautiful
design governs, all the qualities required for the representa-
tion of nature may be carried very far, with good effect,
even in decorative wall painting. In the medizval Italian
schools scenic representation (though always subordinated
to monumental exigencies, and never pursued in the
modern manner) was ever being advanced farther and
farther. In fact, the progress that was made in these
schools, from the time of Cimabue to the time of Raphael,
was a progress in truth of rendering almost altogether.
In fundamental principles of design the art of Giotto is not
inferior to that of any subsequent painter in Italy. It is
in little more than skill of drawing and modelling that
the art of Raphael, for instance, surpasses that of Giotto.
Pictorial treatment may undoubtedly be carried too far
for monumental effect; and though the limits of such
treatment in wall painting may be difficult to define with
precision, it may safely be said that it is always carried too
far when mere representation becomes the leading motive
of the painter. With the medieval Italians it was never
carried to this extent. The monumental idea was always
dominant. In the frescoes of the Church of St. Francis
of Assisi this was conspicuously so. The elements of
representative painting are here so slightly developed as
to remove the work but little in character from that of the
Northern Gothic. In general effect it produces little other
impression than that of a bright colour embellishment,
though attentive examination reveals many subtleties of
development that Gothic painting hardly ever exhibits.
It is the same with the frescoes of the Spanish Chapel in
Florence, and even with the paintings by Ghirlandajo in the
choir of Sta. Maria Novella, though the pictorial skill in these
last is much further advanced. In Giotto’s frescoes in Sta.
Croce the modelling of flesh and draperies is often re-
markably natural, while those of Massaccio in the Carmini,
and those of Lippi in the choir of Prato, are highly and
exquisitely elaborated.

It is true, however, that medixwval wall painting in
Italy, while always monumental in character, was treated
x PAINTING & STAINED GLASS IN ENGLAND, ETC. 309

 

as an important independent mode of expression as well
as an architectural adjunct. Hitherto its technical and
pictorial qualities have chiefly occupied the attention of
connoisseurs of painting, and far too little respect has
as yet been paid to its no less important architectural
purpose, without a recognition of which its complete
character cannot be understood. The spirit of the Re-
naissance—from which we have largely derived our habits
of thought in matters of art—was that of a time of severance
of the arts which in earlier times had always been intimately
associated ; and the disposition to regard painting too
much as an independent art of expression has made it
difficult for the critics of the Renaissance and of recent
times to comprehend it in its relation to the other arts of
the Middle Ages.

In stained glass there were no peculiar styles either
in England, Germany, Italy, or Spain. The use which
in Romanesque times had everywhere been made of this
mode of filling in apertures continued in each of these
countries during the Gothic period. In many cases fine
examples of Gothic glass design were executed, especially
in England and Germany, but they were always more or
less directly copied or imported from France. Good
examples in England occur in Canterbury and Lincoln
as well as elsewhere; but nowhere save in France was
there, in this art, an active spirit of original invention, nor
was there anything in the character of the architecture to
stimulate its production. In England, as we have already
seen, the east end of the church alone had an opening on
a really large scale; and even here several narrow lancets
often took the place of the single large opening.
CHAPTER XI
CONCLUSION

THE foregoing examination and comparison of the pointed
architectures of the different countries of Europe will be seen, I
think, to afford a serviceable, though it be not an exhaustive
illustration of the peculiar nature of Gothic architecture,
and to throw light upon its origin. The true nature of this
architecture has not been generally understood, mainly because
the fact was not recognised that its distinctive characteristics
were not arbitrary inventions but were based on principles
deduced from practice, and determined by the laws of
mechanics governing the structure. Our examination of
these principles reveals the existence of a great class of
buildings which display a perfectly distinctive character, and
are confined, for the most part, to one closely circumscribed
region. In this region a logical growth, from the earliest
germs, of the principles of Gothic art may still be traced.
Elsewhere we find buildings, in all cases later in date of
erection, which exhibit many apparently kindred features,
but which, in hardly any case, completely display in their
structure the same distinctive system, and in many cases do
not display it at all. In France, and in France alone, is the
system complete and the development apparent. There
alone are the successive steps of change spontaneous and
connected, and there only does the inventive spirit of the
builders manifest the character of a general movement.

And what the architecture itself shows is borne out by
the inferences which the respective conditions of the different
countries, in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, naturally
suggest. In France, as I have before remarked, the ethno-
CHAP. XI CONCLUSION 311

 

logical character of the people was such as to render them
the most artistic race of Northern Europe, while their social
and political conditions were most favourable to artistic pro-
duction. The force of natural aptitude, the spirit of national
unity as well as of communal independence, and the com-
parative freedom from ecclesiastical restraints, were all highly
conducive to the exercise of that artistic genius which,
during the period in which Gothic architecture was developed,
was passing from the clergy to the laity. And in addition
to all this the native rock-beds furnished better materials
for building than were generally accessible elsewhere.

In England at this epoch the conditions were very
different. Prior to the Conquest no architecture on a great
scale existed, though there were the elements of a style
which might, doubtless, in time have grown into importance.
By the Conquest the progress of this art was naturally
checked, and was for some time held in abeyance by the
fact that the conquerors took care to place a prelate or an
abbot of their own race at the head of nearly every diocese
and monastic institution. No admixture of complementary
elements gave to the people what their purely Teutonic
nature lacked in the direction of artistic aptitudes. The
Norman infusion, after it really took place, did much; but
the Norman race was itself too near of kin to introduce such
new elements as were required for a fresh life of art.

After the oppression of the conquerors had in a measure
ceased, and the fusion of the two races had so far proceeded
as to remove the old distinctions between Normans and
English, and produce somewhat of commen national feeling,
the conditions for the growth of a national art were still far
less auspicious than they were in France. No free com-
munities like those of the Continent existed. The Commune
in England had not the same character and meaning that it
had in France. It was not, as in France, a great centre
of independent life, where the arts might naturally become
the enthusiastic concern of large bodies of laymen working
in the municipal employ. Ecclesiastical corporations and
private individuals alone, under the Crown, held in England
the powers that in France were possessed by the Communes?
Hence the cathedrals here did not generally spring up as

1 Freeman’s Vorman Conquest, vol. v. ch. xxv.
312 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP,

 

central objects in active towns; but they were placed often
in more or less out-of-the-way places, and in connection
with monastic establishments. Salisbury, Wells, Ely, Peter-
borough, Worcester, Canterbury, and many others remain to
this day surrounded by little more than country villages ;
while even York and Lincoln arose in connection with the
Bishops’ sees rather than with the towns in which they
were situated. The spirit of popular enthusiasm of which
the Abbot Haymon writes,’ had no counterpart in
England. Building was here much more exclusively in
charge of the clergy, regular and secular. Among them,
indeed, there was often no lack of zeal. Bishop Hugh of
Lincoln is said to have assisted with his own hands in the
erection of his splendid choir; and record is not wanting
of many other similar instances. But no general popular
activity in connection with the building of churches, like that
which prevailed in France, was called out.

The architecture of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries
in England differs, therefore, from the Gothic of France in
being largely of foreign rather than native origin, and in
being ecclesiastical rather than popular.

Yet the native genius was by no means wholly or
permanently inactive. It was rather quickened and improved.
It did not, however, exercise itself independently, but it was
acted upon by that of the foreign settlers, and in turn it
reacted upon them. This reaction was in fact so strong
that Norman art, which was chiefly developed on English
soil, became widely different from what it would have
become had the Conquest never taken place, and had its
development been confined to the duchy of Normandy.
But the English influence upon Norman art was not so
much fundamental as superficial. It affected the details
alone rather than the structural principles of building. And
of both Norman and Anglo-Norman art it must be said
that they would never have become what they did
had not French influence been exerted upon them. The
Normans in Normandy had so far assimilated French
ideas and feelings as to have become almost Frenchmen.

1 The well-known letter of the Abbot Haymon, of St. Pierre sur Dive,
written in 1154, gives a most striking account of the religious enthusiasm which
possessed all classes of people, and the material assistance which they voluntarily
rendered towards the progress of the church edifice.
XI CONCLUSION 313

 

They had, in their arts, imbibed as much of the French
spirit as was possible to the Northern nature ; under French
influence they had learned to build, and they came with
their growing arts into England, where by degrees they
mingled, in character, in customs, and in arts, with the native
race much more completely than they had mingled with the
French.

For two hundred years after the Conquest the dominant
elements in architecture were decidedly Norman. The
Cathedral of Salisbury, the nave and transept of Wells, and
the Presbytery of Lincoln, among others, are substantially
Norman buildings, differing, as we have seen, from buildings
of the earlier Norman style in little more than the substitu-
tion of pointed arches for round arches, and in the modification
of ornamental details. This architecture cannot, therefore,
be properly called English. It is strictly an Anglo-Norman
architecture.

Of the two elements, English and Norman, which mainly
constitute the English race, the English has, in the long run,
proved the stronger ; and it has, since the thirteenth century,
held the ascendant in arts no less than in institutions. The
character, however, that has been impressed upon architecture,
since this ascendency became active, is by no means so
admirable as that which it had before. The perpen-
dicular style, which alone, since the Conquest, is entitled to
be called, in the restricted sense, an English art, is certainly
neither Gothic, nor at all comparable in merits to the
architecture which it superseded.

In Germany the conditions in the twelfth century were
far less favourable than even in England to the formation of a
style like the Gothic. The grand Romanesque architecture
of the country was, in the main, a native style, and fairly well
suited to the conditions of climate and of taste. The
Germans showed little disposition to change radically this
style, and had little need to do so. The inventive genius of
the people was naturally less quick than that of the French ;
and no event, like the Norman Conquest of England,
occurred to infuse foreign ideas, and stimulate to new artistic
enterprises. Under these circumstances the Gothic of
France had, for a long time, little effect on the architecture
of Germany. And when finally it did begin to have effect,
314 GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE CHAP.

 

it was rather as a model which it seemed desirable to
copy, than as an influence quickening new invention.

Whatever may have been thought of the pointed archi-
tecture of Italy, few have supposed that there was ever any
original development of the Gothic style in that country,
The large infusion of foreign blood through the various
incursions of the Northern races had been absorbed into
purely Italian veins. Italian tastes, traditions, and needs
were all favourable to the ancient forms of building, which
were their natural inheritance; and in the revival of the
arts, after the stagnant period which followed the downfall
of the ancient civilisation, it was not only natural that
the Italians should have recourse to these ancient forms,
but that they should permanently retain a preference for
them.

The Italians of the Middle Ages were never constructive
builders. The Romanesque architecture of Italy (excepting
always the semi-Teutonic Lombard- Romanesque) was not
an organic style. The Cathedral of Pisa, for instance,
though subtle in its proportions, and beautiful in its details,
is almost as childish in construction as a house of toy-blocks.
Its superposed colonnades are without organic connection ;
and its whole system is one that could give rise to no
further developments. A comparison of Pisa with the
nearly contemporaneous Cathedral of Durham will show
how widely the Italian Romanesque system differs from that
rudimentary organic system which contained some of the
most potent germs of the Gothic style.

There can certainly be no question, on the score of
social or political conditions, with regard to an original
development of Gothic art in Spain. The Christian civilisa-
tion of the country was, from the time of the Moorish
invasion, far too warlike and unsettled to admit of such
development, even had the ethnological constitution of the
race been favourable. Of all the nations of the West the
Spanish, in the Middle Ages, were the least advanced in
those conditions of political and social organisation, and of
intellectual and moral life, which favour the development of
the fine arts.

It does not, then, from historical considerations, any
more than from those which the buildings of the different
XI CONCLUSION 315
countries themselves suggest, appear that Gothic architecture
arose cither in England, Germany, Italy, or Spain; but
everything points clearly to France as the locality of its

origin, and the only locality of its full and distinctive
development.
INDEX

-\BACUS, its adjustment to the load im-

posed upon it, in 13th cent., French
work, 61-67 (cuts); its thickness
proportioned to the spread of the
capital, 202 ; Viollet-le-Duc’s theory
in relatoin to this, 203; square in
plan until the middle of 13th cent.,
206; becomes polygonal as_ the
archivolt mouldings become poly-
gonal in section, 206, 209 ; round
rarely occurs, 207; profiles, 207 ;
the profiles vary in the same build-
ing, 207; profile of upper member
becomes curved, 208 (cut) ; adjusted
to the character of the ribs, 221.

Of the cath. of Amiens, 75, 221 (cut),
triforium of the nave, 207, west
front and triforium, 208 (cut) ;—of
Chartres, nave, 74;—ch. of St.
Evremont in Creil, 207 (cut) ;—
cath. of Paris, 221, choir and nave,
61-66 ‘(cuts), canopies of the but-
tresses of the facade, 204, triforium,
205, western piers, 206, triforium of
nave, 207 (cut) ;—cath. of Reims,
pinnacles of the apse, 205 ;—ch. of
St. Leu d’Esserent, nave, 72 ;—
cath. of Senlis, 206, triforium, 221
(cut) ;—ch. of St. Aignan in Senlis,
207 (cut) ;—cath. of Soissons, piers
of the choir, 66-67 (cut).

English, generally round, 224 ; square
in the local style of Wells and
Glastonbury, 231; all its members
generally rounded in profile, 232
(cut) ;—in Canterbury cath., 131;
—-ch. of St. Mary, New Shore-
ham, 141 ;—Salisbury chapter-house,
centre column, 168 ;—Wells cath.,
231 (cut).

Amiens, cathedral—the crowning glory
of Gothic art, 74 ; length and height,
of the nave, 168 ;—abacus, 75, 221
(cut), of the triforium of nave, 207,
of the west front and triforium, 208
(cut) ;—Apse, 96, 97 (cut) ;—Ap-
sidal chapels, ror ;—bases of the
triforium, 217 ;—buttresses, 83 (cut),
84 ;—capital of a chapel of the choir,
209 (cut), 210, 279 ;—Clerestory,
gi ;—cornice of exterior, 278 (cut) ;
—fagade, 108, 11x (cut), of the
south transept, 102 ;—impost, 221
(cut) ;—mullions of the clerestory,
223 (cut) ;—piers of the nave, 64 ;—
pinnacles, 84;—rib sections, 220
(cut), rib profile compared with
Lincoln, 238 ;—sculpture, 23, of
central doorway, 261, of the south
door of west front, 262, of the
triforium string-course and exterior
cornice, 277 (cut), 278 (cut) ;—
string-course of the triforium, 277
(cut) ;—transept, 102 ;—triforium,
gi ;—triforium string, 216 (cut) ;—
vaulting system, 74, 75 (cut), vault-
ing of the apse, 96, 97 (cut) ;—
Virgin of south door of west front,
262.

Andrea Pisano, sculptures of the cam-
panile of Florence, 296.

Angel choir, of Lincoln Cathedral, 139,
154-156 (cuts), 287, 313.

Anglo-Norman architecture. Sce English
pointed architecture.

Animals, imaginary, in Gothic sculpture,
265.

Apertures. See Wall openings.

Apses, comparative study of, in French
Gothic buildings, 92-101; semicir-

German, 240. cular form, characteristic of French
Norman, usually square, 224. churches, 92;—of the cath. of
See also Capitals. Amiens, 96, 97 (cut); Bourges, 95 ;
Aisles, apsidal. See Apsidal aisles. Chartres, 95, 96 (cut); Laon, 92;

 
318

INDEX

 

Noyon, 92, 93 (cut); Paris, 94
(cut) ; the ch. of St. Remi at Reims,
96-99 (cut); St. Denis, 92; the
cath. of Senlis, 92.

German, commonly at both ends of the
nave, 171.

Italian, 191 ;—of the’ch. of St. Francis
of Assisi, 182; the cath. of Florence,
186; the ch. of Sta. Croce of Flor-
ence, 185, 186.

See also East end.

Apsidal aisles, difficulties in vaulting, 98 ;
of the cath. of Paris, 100 (cut) ; of
the ch. of St. Leu d'Esserent, ro
(cut) ;—absent in Italian pointed
buildings, 191.

Apsidal chapels, in French Gothic build-
ings, 100; of Lincoln cath., 134
(cut).

Arcades, in the Gothic facade, 103.

Arch, structural principle of, 6, 9;
monolithic, 6; offset, 6.

Pointed, properties of, 15 ; obviates
difficulties in vault construction, 16 ;
first employed constructively by the
monastic builders, 29, in the chs. of
St. Denis and Morienval, 33.

Arches, pier. See Pier arches,

Arch mouldings, 217; the change from
square to polygonal section affects
the character of the capital, 209.

English, multiplicity of members in
Anglo-Norman work, 236; hard
and linear effect, 238.

German, 242; resemblance to Anglo-
Norman forms, 242.

Italian, 245.

Architectural style, secondary differences
of, 7.

Architecture, its principles primarily con-
structive, 6; forms a part from
function not significant, 6; religious
architecture has always preceded
secular, 29; general conditions
under which the art was practised in
the Middle Ages, 282.

Arles, cloister of St. Trophime, sculpture,
251 (cut).

Art schools of the Middle Ages, 282.

Assisi, church of S. Francis, has little
Gothic character, 182; interior, 182;
facade, 189 ; frescoes, 306, 308.

Autun, cathedral, sculpture, 249; capi-
tals of the nave, 268.

Auvergne, its architectural style, 195.

BAMBERG, cathedral, its plan retains
many German-Romanesque features,
171; vaulting system, 171, 172
(cut) ; an apse at each end, 172.

Bases, Gothic, 210-213; beauty of
profile, 26; a modification of the
Attic base, 210; how adapted to

 

Gothic construction, 210 ; composed
of at least two members, 211; their
angle spur, 211; proportioned to
the size of the shaft, 212; the plinth
diminished in size, 212,

Of the cath. of Amiens, triforium, 217 ;
—Paris, choir, 211 (cut), triforium of
the nave, 212 (cuts), engaged shafts
of westernmost piers, 213 (cut) ;—
Senlis, nave, 210 (cut), 211 ;—
Soissons, choir, 212, 213 (cut),

English, of more members than the
French, 232 (cuts); the plinth,
233;—German, 241 (cut), 242
(cut) ;—Italian, 244 (cut).

Basly, church, tower, 113.

Beauvais, cathedral, height of choir, 168 ;
apsidal chapels, 1oz; rib sections,
221 (cut); vaults of the choir, 68,

76.
Church of St. Stephen, 51.

Beverley minster, transept fagade, 160;
capitals, of the triforium, 232 (cut) ;
absence of sculpture, 292. .

Bologna, church of S. Petronio, interior
and vaulting system, 188.

Bourges, cathedral, source of its style,
60; has no transept, 102 ;—apse,
95; apsidal chapels, rot; glass,
304; niches over central portal,
254; piers and vaulting shafts, 59 ;
vaults, 68; vaulting of the apse,

95-

Breadth, importance of, in sculpture,
281.

Breslau, Kreuzkirche, a good illustration
of contemporary German taste, 175;
vaulting, 175-176 (cuts) ; nave and
aisles the same height, 177 ; spire,
r8r.

Bridlington, abbey, pier arches, 149.

Britton, on Gothic architecture, 3.

Burgos, cathedral, modelled after the
French Gothic, 196; heavy walls
of the clerestory, 196; buttresses,
197 (cut); facade and spires, 199;
cornice of the choir, 297; absence
of figure sculpture on the facade,
297.

Burgundy, its architectural style, 195.

Buttresses, effect of the introduction of
the pointed arch, 17; general char-
acter in Gothic buildings, 19 ; tri-
forium vaults served for, in the earlier
buildings, 48; comparative study
of, in 13th cent. French architect-
ure, 77-84 (cuts); ill adjustment
of the abutment in the early work,
80; first attempt to make them an
ornamental feature, 82; develop-
ment of the pinnacle, 83; internal
construction of, 112.

Of the cath. of Amiens, 83 (cut), 84;
INDEX

319

 

—Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen, 13,
14 (cut), 17, 153 ;—Abbaye-aux-
Hommes at Caen, 104, 105 (cut) ;—
cath. of Chartres, 82, 83 ;—ch. of
St. Martin at Laon, 77 (cut) ;—cath.
of Noyon, 50, 81 (cut) ;—cath. of
Paris, 53, 112 ;—ch. of St. Germain
des Prés at Paris, 80, 82 ;—cath. of
Reims, apse, 83 (cut), 84 ;—ch. of
St. Remi at Reims, 79, 82 ;—ch. of
St. Leu d’Esserent, 78-80 (cuts) ;—
cath. of Senlis, 48, 106 ;—cath. of
Soissons, choir, 82.

Flying, become an external feature,
17; rudimentary form, 12; the
earliest instance in England, 133.

English, earliest instance of the flying
buttress, 133; never structurally
complete and well adjusted, 157;—
of Chichester cath., 133 ;—Durham
cath., 14, 17;—Lincoln cath.,
choir, 136 (cut), nave, 146 (cut),
presbytery, 156 (cut) ;—Salisbury
cath., 150 ;— Wells cath., 150.

German; none in the cath. of Bam-
burg, 172;—the Breslau Kreuzkirche,
176 ;——Cologne cath., 176 ;—cath.
of Limburg, 174 ;—cath. of Magde-
burg, 173.

Italian; of the ch. of S. Petronio in
Bologna, 188 ;—cath. of Florence,
187, 188 ;—ch. of Sta. Croce of
Florence, 186 ;—ch, of Sta. Maria
Novella of Florence, 183 (cut), 184.

Roman, 10.

Romanesque, 11 (cut), 12 (cut).

Spanish ; absence in Spanish pointed
buildings in the early 13th cent.,
196; of the cath. of Burgos, 197 (cut).

Byland, abbey church, Early English in
form, but Romanesque in principle,
I4; pier arches, 149.

Byzantine art, its influence traced in the
sculptures of St. Trophime at Arles,
251 (cut).

Byzantine illuminations, exhibit much
grace and expression, 248 (cut);
influence on Early French sculpture,

249.

CAEN, Abbaye-aux-Dames, its structure
compared with Wells cath., 152 ;—
capitals, 269 (cut); clerestory, 140
(cut) ;— vaulting system and but-
tresses, 13, 14 (cut), 17, 152 (cut) ;
—vaults, 51.

Caen, Abbaye-aux-Hommes, source of
its style, 9 ;—-facade, 104, ro5 (cut) ;
—piers, 40, 42 (cut) ;—vaults and
buttresses, 12, 13 (cut), 39.

Canterbury, cathedral, its choir the source
of the Early English style, 130; the
work of William of Sens and of

 

English William, 131; its influence
traced in Lincoln cath., 134, 137,
139 ;—abaci, 131;—capitals of
vaulting shafts, 139 (cut) ;—clere-
story, 130;—glass, 309 ;—piers of
the choir, 130, at transept cross-
ing, 138 (cut);—tower, 165 ;—
triforium, 130 ;—vaults and vaulting
shafts of the choir, 129-131 (cut) ;—
vaulting shafts at transept crossing,
138 (cut),

Capitals, 200-210 ; beauty resulting from
functional form, 25; sense of func-
tion and beauty in their profiles,
26.

Gothic, 200-210; distinguished from
Roman, 200; function, 201; develop-
ment into a more spreading form,
201; proportioned to the diameter
of the shaft, 201; the thickness of
the abacus proportioned to the
spread of the capital, 202; Viollet-
le-Duc’s theory in regard to this,
203; the abacus, bell, and astragal
of one piece, 206; profiles, 206
(cuts) ; influence of the Corinthian
order upon, 208; crockets, 208-
210; modifications during the 13th
cent. the result of changes in
the arch mouldings, 208; adjusted
to the character of the ribs, 55,
221; influence of nature traced in
the development of the leafage, 270 ;
exemplified in the triforium of the
nave of Paris, 273; naturalism
carried almost too far in the chapel
of the catechists, 274 (cut).

Of the cath. of Amiens, chapel
of the choir, 209 (cut), 210,
279 ;—Autun, nave, 268 ; Abbaye-
aux-Dames at Caen, 269 (cut) ;—
Laon, triforium, 203, 206 (cut),
276;—Noyon, choir, 268 (cut), 269;
—Paris, vaulting shafts of choir
and nave, 55-57 (cuts), westernmost
pier of nave, 65-66 (cut), piers, 202,
triforium of the choir, 202, 204
(cut), 270, triforium of the nave,
202, 205 (cut), 271, 272 (cut),
chapel of the catechists, 274 (cut) ;—
Reims, 74;—-ch. of St. Denis,
choir, 37 ;—ch. of St. Leu d’Esse-
rent, nave, 72 ;—Senlis, choir, 201,
203 (cut) ;—triforium of the nave,
270 (cut);—ch. of St. Aignan in
Senlis, 207 (cut) ;—ch. of Vézelay
(porch), 268.

Moulded, 231, 292.

English, 224-232, 289-292; the abacus
round, 224; admirable character of
many of the earliest English capitals,
224; evidences of French influence,
226; crockets become heavy and
INDEX

 

meaningless, 228; redundance of
ornament in the later forms, 228 ;
the local style of Glastonbury and
Wells, 230; the moulded form
without foliate sculpture, 231, 292;
profiles of abacus, 232; astragal,
232; foliate sculpture of, 289 ; arti-
ficiality increases after the middle of
13th cent., 290,

Of Beverley minster, triforium, 232
(cut) ;—Canterbury, 139 (cut) ;—
Lincoln, 139 (cut), triforium of choir
and eastern transept, 224-228 (cuts),
north choir screen, 228-230 (cut),
choir and transept, 289, triforium of
the nave, 290 (cut) ;— Wells, west
fagade, 228, transept and eastern
end of nave, 230, 231 (cut),

German, 239-242; persistence of
Romanesque forms, 240; abaci
poor, 240; eccentricity of later
forms, 241; over-naturalism and
lack of functional character, 293 ;—
of Cologne, choir, 293.

Italian, 243-244;—of the cath. of
Florence, not true capitals, 187,
188 (cut), 244;—ch. of Sta, Agnese
in Rome, gallery, 200, 202 (cut) ;—
palace of Diocletian at Spalato, 200
(cut) ;—ducal palace in Venice, 297.

Roman and Romanesque, not always
functional members, 200.

Spanish, 297.

See also Abacus ; Profiles ; Sculpture.

Carte des Monuments Historiques de
France, 60, 121.

Carter, on Gothic architecture, 3.

Cathedrals, the spirit which gave rise to
them, 27; organisation of the work-
men, 282; cath. building in France
and England, 311.

Caumont, his misconception of Gothic
architecture, 5.

Cérisy-la-Forét, church, triforium, 87.

Chamant, church, spire, 113, 114 (cut).

Changes in medizeval work, traces of
the former condition frankly left, 90.

Chapels, apsidal. See Apsidal chapels.

Chapels, transept. See Transept chapels.

Chapter-house, of English cathedrals, 168.

Charles VIII, of France, influence of, on
architecture, 2.

Chartres, cathedral, apse, 95, 96 (cut) ;-—
apsidal chapels, tor ;—buttresses,
82, 83 ;—glass, 303 (cut) ;—nave,
its length, 168 ;—porches, 102 ;—
sculpture, 25, of west front, 252,
253 (cut), of the tympanum of
the central doorway, 265, of the
porches (leaf ornaments), 279 ;—
spire, 115 (cut) ;—transept, ro2 ;—
vaulting system, 72-74 (cut), of the
apse, 95, 96 (cut).

 

Chester, cathedral, the choir not true
Gothic, 153.

Chevet. See Apse.

Chichester, cathedral, vaulting system and
piers, 131-133 (cuts); buttresses,
133; mixed character of its style,
133.

Christian art and pagan art, difference of
motive, 264.

Church buildings, the centre of social
and communal interest, 2. See also
Cathedrals,

Cimabue, 305.

Cleremont-Ferrand, church of Notre-
Dame du Port, 195; sculpture, 249,
250 (cut).

Clerestory, in early Gothic buildings, 69 ;
result of the enlargement of the
openings, 91; in two planes charac-
teristic of the Early English style,
130; characteristic Norman type,
139 ;—of the cath. of Amiens, 91 ;
—-the Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen,
140 (cut) ;—Noyon, 50, 87 ;—Paris,
85 (cut), 88, 90;—ch. of St. Leu
d’Esserent, 87 (cut), 88 ;—Soissons,
choir, 88.

The English type contrasted with the
French, 149 ;—of Canterbury cath.,
130 ;—Chichester, 133 (cut) ;—
Durham, 130;— Lichfield, 157;
Lincoln, choir, 139, 140 (cut), nave,
145, presbytery, 155 (cut) ;—ch. of
St. Mary, New Shoreham, 141 ;—
Salisbury, nave, 149.

Of the cath. of Freiburg, 174 ;—Lim-
burg, 173, 174 (cut) ;—Speyer, 171
cut).

Of the cath. of Florence, 187 ;—ch. of
Sta. Croce of Florence, 185 ;—ch.
of Sta. Maria Novella of Florence,
184 (cut).

In Spanish pointed buildings, of the
early 13th cent., 195, 196 ;—of the
cath. of Burgos, 196 ;—Leon, 198 ;
—Toledo, 198.

Cluny, abbey, influence on art, 249;
character of the leafage sculpture,
executed by its workmen, 268.

Cockerell, on the sculpture of Wells,
247; on the angel choir of Lincoln,
287.

Colfs, J. F., on Gothic architecture,
5) 9-

Cologne, cathedral, its structural system
not German, but an importation
from France, 176; Fergusson on its
defects, 176;—base profiles, 242
(cut) ;—capitals, 240, 241 (cut), of
the choir, 293 ;—east end, 179 ij—
facade, 179;— sculpture, 293 ;—
spire, 181; vaulting system, 176.

Colour employed in Gothic sculpture, 282.
INDEX

321

 

Columns. See Piers ; Vaulting shafts.

Columns, engaged, in Roman buildings,
It,

Communes, French, influence on national
life, 311.

‘‘Congrés Archéologique de France,”
Report on the Abbey Church of
Morienval, 33.

Convention in Gothic sculpture, 23.
Corbel table, not employed in true Gothic,
217; common in England, 235.

Corbels, figure sculpture in, 254.

Corinthianesque leafage adopted and
developed by the early Gothic, 208,
269.

Cornice, never supported by a corbel
table in true Gothic, 217; of the
cath, of Amiens (exterior), 278 (cut).

Italian, 245.
See also String-courses.

Corringham, church, 169.

Creil, church of St. Evremont, abacus, 207
(cut) ; string-course, 214.

Crockets of Corinthianesque capitals,
208; become simply ornamental
features, 209 ; finally an unmeaning
excrescence, 210; specially beauti-
ful in the triforium of Paris, 272
(cuts); its excessive projection
characteristic of English work, 292.

DECORATIVE and pictorial art, 306;
Viollet-le-Duc on the antagonism
between, 307.

De L’Orme, stimulated the Renaissance
movement in France, 2.

Dijon, church of Notre-Dame, source of
its style, 60; piers and vaulting
shafts, 60,

Domes, absence of Gothic principles in,
188; in Spanish pointed buildings,
194, 196; on pendentives, character-
istic of Auvergne, 195.

Doming of vaults, 17, 125.

Drip mouldings, Gothic, 215.

Durham, cathedral, the Galilee, its struc-
tural principles Norman, not transi-
tional, 128; compared with the
cath. of Pisa, 314 ;—clerestory,
130 ;—pier arches of the chapel of
the nine altars, 149 ;—-vaults and
buttresses, 14, 17.

Ear Ly English architecture. Sce English
pointed architecture.

East end (of churches), English, 158-
160;—of Ely cath., 158 (cut) ;—
Lincoln, 160 (cut) ;—Salisbury, an
instance of want of unity and logic
of design, 160.

Of German chs., usually apsidal, 179.
Italian, always heavily walled, 191 ;—
of the ch. of St. Francis of Assisi,

 

182 ;—ch, of Sta. Croce at Florence,
185 ;—ch, of Sta. Maria Novella in
Florence, 182.

See also Apse.

Ely, cathedral, its Norman nave contem-
porary with Canterbury and Lincoln,
143; choir, not true Gothic, 153;
east end, 158 (cut) ;—bases in the
choir, 233 (cut);—piers of the
transept, 63;—pier arches of the
presbytery, 149 ;—sculpture of the
Prior's gateway, 284.

Engaged columns, in Roman buildings,

ITs

England, the conditions for the growth
of art less favourable than in France,
311; absence of the commune, 311 ;
the caths. originated in monastic
establishments, 312.

English architecture, in the time of Jones
and Wren, 3; Rickman on, 3; in
its earlier periods strictly an Anglo-
Norman architecture, 134, 153, 169,
313; influence of, on German archi-
tecture, 242; of foreign rather than
of native origin, and ecclesiastical
rather than popular, 312; French
influence on, 312; the English ele-
ment at last predominant in the per-
pendicular style, 313.

English glass, 309.

English perpendicular architecture, 313.

English pointed architecture, 124-169,
224-239; early use of the pointed
arch in Malmesbury Abbey, 124
(cut); in the Cistercian abbeys of
the north, 127; its Gothic elements
begin at Canterbury, 130 ; its char-
acter further illustrated by Chichester
cath., 131; Lincoln cath., 133; the
ch. of St. Mary, New Shoreham,
140; the abbey ch. of Byland and
Whitby, 141; Ripon cath., 142;
want of structural continuity in, 132,
143; the triforium usually open to
the aisle roof, 139; instances of the
vaulting shafts being used as a
decorative feature only, 141, 144;
employs the pointed arch, but other
Gothic features have no functional
use, 142; compared with contem-
porary French work, 143 ;—its char-
acter in the first part of 13th cent.,
143-154; illustrated by the nave of
Lincoln, 143, of Salisbury, 147, of
Wells, 150, and of other build-
ings, 153; employment of super-
fluous ribs, 143; use of hood
mouldings, 146; clerestory _ still
walled in, 149 ; characteristics of the
exterior, 153; still essentially a Nor-
man product, 153 ;—its character
in the later 13th cent., 154-157,
325) INDEX

 

illustrated by the presbytery of
Lincoln, 154, and the nave of
Lichfield, 156; decorative motives
frequently govern the employment of
structural members, 155; the piers
and buttresses never structurally
complete and functional, 157; char-
acter of the wall openings, 157;
east ends generally square, 158;
facades, 160-165; have little ap-
proach to Gothic character, 165 ;
towers, 165-166; general provision
for a tower at crossing of nave and
transept, 165; spires rare in the
early period, 166; general plan and
proportions of chs., 167; enormous
length, 167; vaulted polygonal
chapter - houses, 168; absence of
vaulting in the smaller village chs.,
169; substantially only a decorative
modification of Norman Roman-
esque, 169; profiles of mouldings,
224-239 ; capitals, 224-232; bases,
232-235; string-courses, 235; cor-
bel table, 235; arch mouldings, 236 ;
tib profiles, 238; probable reaction
on the art of the Continent, 238 ;
compared with French Gothic as to
mouldings of various kinds, 239;
lightness and multiplicity of parts
regarded as an end in itself, 239.
See also Sculpture, English.

English profiles, 224-239.

English sculpture, 284-292.

English writers on Gothic architecture, 3.

Expression in art, usually superior in the
earlier masters of a school, 256; the
chief motive of Gothic sculpture, 264.

Exterior, of French Gothic churches, 117-
121; the general proportions criticised,
11g; examples, the abbey ch. of
St. Leu d'Esserent, 11g (cut), the
cath. of Reims, raz (cut).

Of English churches, 153.

FACADES, Gothic, constructive principles
least manifest in, 103; analysis of,
103; a modification of Romanesque
forms, 108; the chief field for the
display of sculpture, 259 ;—of the
cath, of Amiens, 108, rrr (cut) ; the
Abbaye-aux-Hommes at Caen, 104,
105 (cut);—cath. of Paris, 108 (cut);
Reims, 110;—ch. of St. Denis,
106; cath. of Senlis, 106, 107 (cut);
-—ch. of Vaux-sous-Laon, 104 (cut).

Of English chs,, 162-165; few early
ones remain, 162; have but little
Gothic character, 165 ;—of Lincoln
cath., 162 (cut), 284; compared with
Pisa, 162 ;—Pcterborough, 165 ;—
Ripon, 165 ;--Salisbury, 164 ;—
Wells, 164, 285.

 

German, 178-179, 293.

Italian, have little regard to the form
of the building, 189 ; of the cath. of
Pisa, 162.

Of the cath. of Burgos, 199.

Of transepts. See Transept facades.
Fan vaulting, the first step toward, 144.
Fergusson, on Cologne Cathedral, 176.
Flaxman, on the sculpture of Wells, 247.
Florence, Basilica of San Miniato, roof, 41.

Cathedral, plan and vaulting system,
186; want of true capitals or bases
to the piers, 187, 188 (cut); vaulting
arches all spring from the same level,
187; hood mouldings a survival of
Roman style, 187; Arnolfo’s original
design, 188; the east end has no
Gothic character, 188, 191; transept
ends, 186, 191; tower, 192; capi-
tals, 188 (cut), 244; base profiles,
245 (cut); arch mouldings, 245;
ribs, 245; cornice, 245 ; sculptures
of the campanile, 294, 296, of the
door jambs, 296, of the baptistery
gates, 296.

Church of Sta. Croce, interior, 185 ;
roofs of the aisles, 185; vault of the
apse, 186; buttresses, 186; facade,
189; east end, 191; windows, 193,
194 (cut) ; capitals, 243; base pro-
files, 245 (cut); arch mouldings,
245; frescoes, 308.

Church of Sta. Maria del Carmine,
frescoes, 308.

Church of Sta. Maria Novella, vaulting
system, 182-185 (cuts); transept
ends, 191; tower, 192 (cut); capi-
tals, 243 (cut); base profiles, 244
(cut) ; paintings, 308.

Church of Or San Michele, windows,
193.

Spanish chapel, frescoes, 308.

Flying butresses. See Buttresses, flying.

Fontevrault, 195.

Form and expression in art, 257.

Fountains Abbey, nave, 127; vaulting
of the aisles, 127, 128 (cut).

France, artificial state of society at close
of 13th cent., 2; conditions under
which architecture was practised,
282, 310; the Communes, 311;
Abbot Haymon on the popular
enthusiasm, 312.

Freiburg, cathedral, imperfect Gothic
character, 174; spire, 181.

French architecture, 32-123; great ac-
tivity of, in the rath cent., 121;
of the Renaissance, 2.

French Gothic architecture. See Gothic
architecture.

French sculpture, 247-283.

French writers on Gothic architecture, 5.

Frescoes, See Painting.
INDEX 323

 

GABLE ofa Gothic nave, not the true roof,
103.

German pointed architecture, 170-181 ;
a later development than in France
and England, 170; its imperfect
progress illustrated by the caths. of
Bamberg, 171, Magdeburg, 172,
Limburg, 173, Freiburg, 174, and
Strasburg, 175, the Breslau Kreuz-
kirehe, 475, and the cath. of
Cologne, 176; French features in-
grafted on German Romanesque
without changing its structural char-
acter, 177, 313; chs. with all three
aisles the same height, 177; char-
acter of the facades, 179 ; east ends,
179; transept ends, 180; towers
and spires, 181; capitals, 239;
bases, 241; arch mouldings, 242;
influence of English architecture on,
242; the French Gothic slow in
affecting German Romanesque, 313.

German profiles, 239-242.

German Renaissance architecture, 3.

German Romanesquearchitecture, general
character of the vaults, 16; derived
from Lombardy, 170; its structural
character not essentially changed by
French influence, 177, nor quickly
modified, 313.

German sculpture, 292-293.

Germany, unfavourable conditions for
the development of Gothic art, 313.

Ghiberti, the gates of the baptistery of
Florence, 296.

Ghirlandajo, his paintings in the church of
Sta. Maria Novella, 308.

Giotto, 296, 305, 308.

Giovanni Pisano, his work shows little
reference to ancient models, 296.

Glass, stained. See Stained glass.

Glastonbury Abbey, abaci, 232 (cut) ;
string-course profites, 235 (cut).

Gloucester, cathedral, tower, 165; abacus,
224.

Gothic architecture, incorrect ideas con-
cerning, 1; the term applied in a
spirit of contempt, 1; Italian distaste
for, 1; an outgrowth and expression
of Northern genius, 2; decline of,
2, in France, 2, in England and
Germany, 3; revival of, in the 18th
cent., 3; its ‘essential principles
not understood, 3; English writers
on, 3; Colfs on, 5; French writers
on, 5; Viollet-le-Duc on, 7; differs
fundamentally from Romanesque, 7 ;
definition of, 7, 30; a system of
balanced thrusts, 8; earliest steps
toward, in Lombardy, 8; Roman-
esque elements retained in, 9; the
steps of the transition from Roman-
esque, 9, 97; summary of general

 

form and constructive features, 18 ;
plan, 18; vaults and ribs, 18; piers,
19; buttresses, 19; walls, 19; full
development only brought out by
three-aisled buildings, 19, 28; the
builders not governed by mathe-
matical formulas of proportion, 20 ;
painting and sculpture employed in,
21, 298; its truest form French,
26; decline after the early part of
the 12th cent., 27; earlier advances
made by the monastic builders, 28 ;
fuller development at the hands of
lay builders, 29; an architecture of
churches only, 29 ; close connection
with the thought and feeling of the
time, 30; develops first in the interior,
later in the exterior, of the building,
48, 97; structural changes precede
ornamental, 48, 201 ; its distinctive
characteristics not arbitrary inven-
tions, but based on principles, 310;
the system complete, progressive, and
original in France alone, 310, 315;
the condition of France and character
of the French favourable to its de-
velopment, 310; the conditions less
favourable in England, 311; the
conditions in Germany also unfavour-
able, 313; no original development
in Italy or Spain, 314.

French, 32-123, 200-223; limits within
which it is confined, 32; scantiness
of written records, 32; its earliest
monuments the chs. of St. Denis
and Morienval, 33; its principles
illustrated in the vaulting systems of
the caths. of Senlis, 38, 43, Noyon,
4g,'and Paris, 52, the ch. of Mantes,
57, the caths. of Laon, 58, Bourges,
59, and Sens, 59, the ch. of St. Leu
d'Esserent, 69, and the caths. of
Chartres, 72, Reims, 74, Amiens,
74, and Beauvais, 76; also in the
various members of the structure, the
piers, 61, buttresses, 77, pinnacles,
83, wall openings, 85, apses, 92, ap-
sidal aisles and chapels, 98, transepts,
roz, fagades, 103, spires, 113, and
general external aspect, 119; general
prevalence of the church - building
impulse, 121; spontaneity of the
movement, 122; union of structural
and artistic principles in,122; succes-
sive steps of its development, 123 ;—
its principles further studied in capi-
tals, 201, bases, 210, string-courses,
214,the sections of vault ribs,217,and
mullions and tracery, 222;—probable
reaction of Norman and Anglo-Nor-
man art upon, 238; the French Gothic
theonlycomplete, progressive, and ori-
ginal formof Gothic architecture, 310.
INDEX

 

324
In England. See English pointed
architecture.
In Germany. See German pointed
architecture.
In Italy. See Italian pointed archi-
tecture.
In Spain. Sce Spanish pointed archi-
tecture,

Gothic art, rudeness not characteristic
of, 20; a product of the fusion of
Northern and Southern blood, 20.

Gothic painting, 21, 298-300,

Gothic profiles, 26, 200-223.

Gothic sculpture, an integral part of
Gothic buildings, 21; vitality of,
22; compared with Greek sculpture,
22; its elements to be traced back
to antiquity, 22, 23; conventional
character, 23 ; traditional principles
of ornamentation retained, 23; or-
ganic life of, as compared with the
so-called revived classic art, 24;
imitative realisation not carried too
far,24; figure sculpture, 24; examples
of its subjection to the requirements
of architecture, 25; structural fitness
of and the resulting beauty, 25.

See also Sculpture, French Gothic.

Greek art, influence on French sculpture
through Byzantine illuminations, 249.

Greek sculpture. See Sculpture, Greek.

Grotesque, its place in Gothic sculpture,
265; its truth to nature, 266; its
restraint in early work, 266; in
English sculpture, 292.

Haynon, Abbot, on the popular enthu-
siasm for church building in France,
S12,

Hexham, abbey church, bases from the
triforium of the choir, 233 (cut).
Hildesheim, church of St. Godard, capitals,

240.

Hood moulding, inappropriate in the in-
terior of a building, 126 ; in Lincoln
cath. (nave), 146; in Malmesbury
abbey, 125; in Salisbury cath., 150;
—German, 242 ;—in the cath. of
Florence, a survival of Roman top
mouldings, 187.

Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, 134.

ILLUMINATED manuscripts, Byzantine,

248 (cut). =
French, of rath and 13th cents.,

furnish illustrations of the condition
of the art of painting, 298; con-
ventional and archaic, 299; back-
grounds flat, no perspective, 299 ;
the life of St. Denis in the national
library of Paris, 299 (cut).

Impost, influence of, on the form of the
abacus, 221. See also Abacus.

 

Interpenetration of ribs, 17; of mould-
ings, in the presbytery of Lincoln
cathedral, 154.

Italian architecture, founded on Greek and
Roman types, 1, 314; the Roman-
esque of Italy not an organicstyle,314.

Italian painting. See Painting, Italian.

Italian pointed architecture, 181-194;
introduced by Dominicans and Fran-
ciscans in the 13th cent. from
Germany, 182; illustrated by the
ch. of St. Francis of Assisi, 182,
Sta. Maria Novella in Florence,
182, Sta. Croce in Florence, 185,
the cath. of Florence, 186,5. Petronio
in Bologna, 188, and others, 189;
transept across the east end com-
mon, 182; vaulting compartments
of nave usually square, 183, 186;
vaulting arches all spring from the
same level, 183; buttress generally
a pilaster strip, 184, or carried on
walls over the aisles, 188; interior
elevation of two stories only, 186;
arch sections usually square, 187;
facades, 189-191 ; east ends, 191,
transept ends, 191, towers, 191; win-
dows,193; general lack of real Gothic
principles, 193; decline of pointed
architecture after the 14th cent., 194;
profiles very various in design, 242 ;
capitals, 243; bases, 244; arch
mouldings, 245; ribs, 245; use of
classic features, 245; cornice, 245.

Italian profiles, 242-246.

Italian sculpture, 293-2096.
ture, Italian.

Italian wall painting,
Painting, Italian,

See Sculp-

305-309. See

Jones, Inigo, his taste for the pseudo-
classic orders, 3.
Jumiéges, church, piers, 42.

KIRKSTALL Abbey, vaulting of the aisles,
127; pier arches, 149.
Konigslutter, abbey church, capitals, 240.

LANFRANC, 9.

Laon, cathedral, apse, 92 ;—capitals of
the triforium, 203, 206 (cut), 276 ;—
clerestory opening, 69 ;—piers, and
vaulting shafts, 58, of the nave, 66
(cut) ;—rib sections, 220 ;—spires
destroyed, 117 ;—transept, 102.

Church of St. Martin, 51; buttresses,
77 (cut).

Leafage in Gothic sculpture, 266.

Leon, cathedral, modelled after the French
Gothic, 196; clerestory, 198.

Church of 8. Isidoro, 195.

Lérida, cathedral, 195; its chevet and

vaulting ribs, 196.
INDEX

325

 

Lichfield, cathedral, vaulting of the nave,
156; clerestory, 157; sculpture of
west front, 288.

Liernes, 18; in Lincoln Cathedral, 144
(cut); in Lichfield cath., 156.

Limburg on the Lahn, cathedral, its like-
ness tothe cath.of Noyon,173; interior
largely Gothic in character, 173;
vaulting system, 173, 174 (cut);
Romanesque character of the aisles
and the exterior, 174; buttresses,
174; facade, 179; east end, 180.

Lincoln, cathedral, the choir and east
transept, 3133-140; character and
source of its style, 134; Parker's
theory that the choir is purely English
work untenable, 134; original ap-
sidal eastern termination, 134 (cut) ;
influenced by Canterbury, 134, 137,
139; the choir shows a near ap-
proach to Gothic, 140; the nave,
143-147; the presbytery or angel
choir, 154-156 (cuts), not an ap-
propriate termination for the design,
139; peculiar relation of shafts and
ribs in the vaults of the presbytery,
154; the presbytery substantially a
Norman building, 313; height of
choir, 168 ; Norman influence shown
in the arch mouldings, 237 ;—abaci
of west transept, 232 (cut), of choir
screen, 232 (cut) ;—aisles, 146 ;—
apsidal chapels, 135 (cut) ;—arch
mouldings, 237 (cut) ; bases of nave
and presbytery, 233 (cut), of tri-
forium of nave, 233 (cut) ;—but-
tresses of the choir, 136 (cut), of the
nave, 146 (cut), of the presbytery,
156 (cut);—capitals of vaulting
shafts, 139 (cut), of triforium of
choir and transept, 224-228 (cuts),
289, of north choir screen, 228, 230
(cut), of the triforium of the nave,
290 (cut) ;—chapter-house, 168 ;—
clerestory of choir, 139, 140 (cut),
of the nave, 145, of the presbytery,
155 (cut) ;—east end, 160 (cut) ;—
fagade, 162 (cut), 284;—glass, 309;
—piers of choir, 136-138 (cuts), 140,
of the nave, 145 (cut), of the
presbytery, 155;—-pier arches of the
nave, 149 ;—plinth from choir aisle,
234 (cut) ;—rib profile compared
with Amiens, 238 (cut) ;—sculpture
of the west front, 284 (cut), of the
presbytery or angel choir, 287, of
the south door of presbytery, 287, of
buttress statues, 288, of choir but-
tresses, 292 ;—string-course profiles,
235 (cut) ;—towers of west front,
162, central tower, 166 (cut) ;—
transepts, 135, not true Gothic, 153;
—transept facades, 160 ;—triforium

 

of choir, 139, of the nave, 145, of the
presbytery, 156 ;—vaulting shafts of
the choir, 136, at transept crossing,
138 (cut), of the nave, 144 ;—
vaulting system of the choir, 135-
140 (cuts), vaults of the nave, 143,
of the aisles, 146, of the presbytery,

I54.
Church of St. Mary le Wigford, 169.
Lippi, Filippo, frescoes in the cathedral of
Prato, 308.
Lombard architecture, the existing build-
ings not wrought by the Lombards,
8; a source of Norman inspiration
g; the origin of German Roman-
esque, 170.
London, Temple Church, plinth from the
choir, 234 (cut).
Westminster Abbey.
abbey.
Louis XVIII of France,
under, 2.
Lucca, church of S. Martino, triforium, 189.

See Westminster

architecture

MAGDEBURG, cathedral, its likeness to
French Gothic apparent rather than
real, 172; vaulting system, 172;
capitals, 240 (cut).

Malmesbury Abbey, compared with the
church of St. Denis and other French
buildings, 125; its construction not
a link in a chain of progress, 126 ;
vaults of the aisles, 124 (cut); of the
nave, 126; abacus, 224; arch
mouldings, 236 (cut).

Mans, Le, church of Notre-Dame du
Pré, roof, 41 ; sculpture of the tym-
panum of the central doorway, 265.

Mantes, church, piers and vaulting shafts,
57; clerestory opening, 69.

Mantua, church of S. Andrea, tower, 192.

Marburg, church of St. Elizabeth, nave and
aisles the same height, 177 (cut) ;
windows in two stories, 178; east
end, 179; facade, 179; spire, 181.

Masonry courses, in vaulting, 39, 53;
perfection of, in the rath cent., 48;
of buttresses, 112.

Massaccio, frescoes in the church of the
Carmini, 308.

Medizeval legends and literature a source
of inspiration to the cathedral
builders, 30.

Milan, cathedral, almost purely German,

193.

Church of S. Ambrogio, 8.

Monastic orders, their energy in building,
28; their schools for training in arts
and sciences, 28; introduce improve-
ments in construction, 28; limits to
the development of architecture in
their hands, 29; introduced the
pointed style into Italy, 182.
326

INDEX

 

Mondjelia, basilica, monolithic arches,
6.
Morienval, abbey church, the Gothic prin-
ciple first imperfectly exhibited here,
33; vaulting of the apsidal aisle, 33,
34 (cut), 35 (cut); tower roofs, 113
(cut) ; string on the buttresses, 215
(cut); rib section, 218 (cut), 219
(cut).
Mouldings, profiles of, in Romanesque
and Gothic buildings, 26, 200-246.
Arch. See Arch mouldings.
Base. See Bases.
Hood. See Hood mouldings.
Of mullions. See Mullions.
Rib. See Ribs.
String. See String-courses.
Mullions, Gothic, 222 (cut).

NATURE, influence of, on Gothic foliate
capitals, 270; tendency to over-
naturalism, 274; direct imitation of
marks the decline of Gothic sculp-
ture, 278; why it is not allowable,
281.

Naves of English and French cathedrals
compared as to length and height,
168.

Netley Abbey, pier arches, 149.

Nevers, cathedral, sculpture, 280.

Church of St. Stephen, 195.

New Shoreham, church of St. Mary, vault-
ing system and interior, 141 ; arch
mouldings, 237.

Niccola Pisano, 293; pulpit of the
baptistery of Pisa, 294; the classic
element predominates in his work, 295.

Niches for sculpture not employed in
early Gothic, 254.

Nogens-les-Vierges, church,string-courses,
214 (cut).

Norman architecture persisted in England,
after Gothic had developed in France,
128; its influence on the early
English architecture, 134; great
length of the churches, 167; character
of the English influence on, 312;
the French influence upon, 312.

Norman conquest, influence of, on Eng-
lish architecture, 311.

Norwich, cathedral, piers, 42; nave, its
length, 168.

Noyer, Geoffrey de, architect of Lincoln
Cathedral, 134.

Noyon, its commune, 49.

Cathedral, resemblance to Senlis, 49 ;
incongruity between vaults and piers,

54; compared with the cath. of
Limburg on the Lahn, 173 ;—apse,

92, 93 (cut) ;—apsidal chapels, ror;
arcades, 50;—buttresses, 50, of
the nave, 81 (cut) ;—capitals of the
choir, 268 (cut), 269; clerestory,

 

 

87 ;—mnave, 50;—painting in the
transept, 298 ;—piers, of the choir,
49, 63; of the nave, 50 ;—string-
course, 278 (cut) ;—transept, 102;
—triforium, 87;—vaults of choir and
transept, 38, of the choir, 49, of the
nave, 50, longitudinal arch, in the
choir, 68, vaulting of the apse, 93
(cut) ;—windows, 85.

OFFSET arch, 6.

Ornamental design, ancient principles of,
23. See also Decorative art.

Orvieto, cathedral, want of Gothic char-
acter, 186; facade, 189; sculptured
reliefs, 294; Giovanni Pisano, 296.

Ouestreham, church, vaults, 51.

PAGAN and Christian art compared as
to motive, 264.

Painting in Gothic buildings, 298-300 ;
its limitations, 21 ; less general than
in other buildings, 298; in the
absence of uninjured examples, its
character must be determined from
illuminated manuscripts, 298 ; con-
ventional and decorative, 299;
made no progress in connection
with Gothic architecture, 300; its
place supplied by stained glass, 300;
painting in other countries essentially
the same in character during 12th
and 13th cents., 305.

Italian, 305-309; the early work
(Cimabue and Giotto), superior to
the French in technical points, alone,
306 ; the wall painting of the ch. of St.
Francis of Assisi, 306, 308 ; the mon-
umental purpose of art constantly
before the mind of the painter, 306,
308; decoration his main object,
but pictorial design always united
with it, 306; Viollet-le-Duc on the
supposed antagonism between pic-
torial and decorative art, 307; the
two really in part dependent the one
on the other, 307; the progress in
Italian art an advance in truth of
rendering, not in design, 308; ex-
tent to which pictorial treatment can
be carried in monumental design,
308 ; medizeval painting has been
judged too much as an independent
art, instead of in connection with
architecture, 309.

Paris, cathedral, the old work still intact
to a great degree, 52; length of the
nave, 168 ;—abacus and the mem-
bers supported by it in choir and
nave, 61-66 (cuts), 206, abaci of
the canopies of the buttresses of the
facade compared with those of the
triforium, 204, abaci of the triforium
INDEX

327

 

of the nave, 207 (cut) ;—apse, 94
(cut) ;—apsidal aisles, roo (cut),
1o1 ;—bases in the choir, 211 (cut),
of the triforium of the nave, 212
(cuts), of engaged shafts of western-
most piers, 213 (cut) ;—buttresses,
53, 112 ;—capitals of vaulting shafts
in choir and nave, 55-57 (cuts), of
the piers, 202, of the westernmost
pier of the nave, 65-66 (cut), of the
triforium of the choir, 202, 204 (cut),
270; of the triforium of the nave,
202, 205 (cut), 271, 272 (cut), 273,
of the chapel of the catechists, 274
(cut) ;—clerestory, 69, 85 (cut), 88,
go ;—cornice or drip moulding, 215
(cut) ;—fagade, 108 (cut) ;—glass,
304 ;—impost, 221 ;—niches, 254 ;—
piers, 53, sixth pier of the nave, 62
(cut), 67 (cut) ; seventh or western-
most pier, 63 (cuts) ; portal of south
transept, 261 ;—rib sections, 219 ;
—sculpture, 25, of the south door of
west front, 255, of west facade, 259-
261 (cut), of portal of south tran-
sept, 261, of portal of north tran-
sept, 262 (cut), ofa hood moulding,
grotesque figure, 266 (cut), of the
archivolts of the facade, 266 (cut),
276 (cut), of the Porte Rouge, 280
(cut) ;—statues of the buttresses,
254 ;—tracery in clerestory, 85 (cut),
89;— transept, 102; — triforium
string, 216 (cut) ;—vaulting shafts
and piers, 53; intended for quadri-
partite vaults, 54-57 (cuts) ;—vaults,
52, repairs and changes in the 13th
cent., 86, vaults of the choir, 38, of
the apse, 94 (cut), of the apsidal
aisles, 100 (cut) ;—Virgin of north
transept portal, 262 (cut).
Church of St. Denis. See St. Denis.
Church of St. Germain des Prés, 51;
buttresses, 17, 80, 82; longitudinal
arch of vault in the choir, 68.
Church of St. Julien-le-Pauvre, capitals,
270.
Church of St. Martin des Champs, 32;
rib sections, 218 (cut).
Sainte Chapelle, 19; painting in the
wall arcades, 298; glass, 304.
Parker, on the style of the choir of Lin-
coln Cathedral, 134, 140.
Pavia, church of S. Michele, 8, 9; piers,
and vaults, 40 (cut), 41 (cut).
Perpendicular style, English, 313.
Perspective, in decorative design, 307.
Peterborough, cathedral, its Norman nave
contemporary with Canterbury and
Lincoln, 143; fagade, 165; sculp-
ture of west front, 288.
Piers, volume reduced in Gothic archi-
tecture, 18; general character in

 

Gothic architecture, 19; alternate
arrangement, 40-42; developments
in the 13th cent., 61; use of round
columns, 61; reinforced by engaged
shafts, 64; by detached shafts, 66.

Of the cath. of Amiens, nave, 64 ;—
Bourges, 59 ;—the Abbaye-aux-
Dames, at Caen, 153 (cut) ;—the
Abbaye-aux-Hommes at Caen, 40,
42 (cut);—the cath. of Chartres,
nave, 73 ;—the ch. of Notre-Dame
at Dijon, 60 ;—Jumiéges, 42 ;—the
cath. of Laon, 58, nave, 66 (cut) ;
—the ch. of Mantes, 57 ;—the cath.
of Noyon, choir, 49, 63, nave, 50 ;—
Paris, 53, intended for quadripartite
vaults, 54 (cuts), sixth pier from
transept in nave, 62 (cut), 67 (cut),
seventh or westernmost, 63 (cuts) ;—
the ch. of St. Denis, 76 (cut), choir,
37 ;—St. Leu d’Esserent, nave, 72 ;
—the cath. of Senlis, 43-47 (cuts) ;--
Sens, 60;—Soissons, choir, 66-67
(cuts).

English, never structurally complete
and functional, 157 ;—of Canterbury
cath., choir, 130, at transept cross-
ing, 138 (cut) ;—Chichester, 132
(cut) ;—Ely, transept, 63 ;—Lincoln,
choir, 136-138 (cuts), 140, nave, 145
(cut), presbytery, 155 ;— Malmes-
bury Abbey, 125 ;—the ch. of St.
Mary, New Shoreham, 141 ;—Nor-
wichcath. ,42;—Salisbury, nave, 150,
chapter-house, 168 ;—Wells, 150.

Of the cath. of Bamberg, 172 (cut) ;—
the Breslau Kreuzkirche, 175 ;—the
cath. of Magdeburg, 172—Speyer,
r7t (cut).

Of the ch. of S. Petronio in Bologna,
188 ;—the cath. of Florence, 187-
188 (cuts) ; the ch. of Sta. Croce,
185; the ch. of Sta. Maria Novella,
185 (cut) ;—the ch, of San Michele
in Pavia, 40 (cut), 41 (cut) ;—the
ch. of the Frari in Venice, 189.

In Spanish pointed buildings of the
early 13th cent., 195.

See also Vaults.

Pier arches, generally equilateral in
France and frequently in England,
149 ; the Anglo-Norman type lancet,
149. See also Piers.

Pilaster strip, in Romanesque buildings,
rx (cut).

Pinnacle on buttresses, evolution of, 83 ;
—of the cath. of Amiens, 81 ;—of
the cath. of Reims, 84 ;—of the ch.
of Sta. Maria della Spina, purely
decorative features, I91.

Pisa, the sculptors of, 294-296.

Cathedral, 28; fagade compared with
Lincoln, 162; sculptures of the
328

INDEX

 

pulpit, 294; no organic character
in its construction, 314.

Church of Sta. Maria della Spina,
facade, 189; its gables have no
relation to the roof behind, 191 ; in-
terior, 191; capitals, 244; statues, 294.

Plan, general, of a Gothic church, 18 ; of
English chs., 167.
Plinths. See Bases.

English, 233.

Pointed architecture, not necessarily a
distinct style, 7.

English, German, Italian, Spanish.
See English, German, Italian, and
Spanish pointed architecture.

French. See Gothic architecture,
French.
Poissy, Collegiate church, 32 ; rib section,
218 (cut).

Poitiers, cathedral, its aisles but little
lower than the nave, 178 (cut).
Portals, transept, 102; sculpture of, 254,
262 ; divided by central pillars, 262 ;
—of the cath. of Chartres, 102 ;—
Paris, south transept, 261 ;—Senlis,

106.

English, generally small, 164; of
Lincoln cath., 162 ;—Wells cath.,
164, 285.

Prato, cathedral, facade, 189; tower, 191.

Presbytery, of English churches, 167.

Private dwellings unpretentious under the
Gothic style, 2.

Profiles, Gothic, in France, 200-223.

English, 224-239; German, 239-242;
Italian, 242-246; Spanish, 246.

Pugin, on Gothic architecture, 3.

(JUINTINO, on Lombard architecture, 8.

RAPHAEL, 308.

Reims, cathedral, source of its style, 60 ;
date of construction, 121; external
aspect and proportions, 121 (cut) ;—
abaci of the pinnacles of the apse,
205 ;—buttresses of the apse, 83
(cut), 84;—facade, 110 ;— glass,
304 ;—mullions, 222 (cut) ;—pin-
nacles, 84, of the buttresses, 254 ;—
tracery of apsidal chapels, 89 (cut) ;—
transept, 102 ;—vaulting system of,
74;—windows of the apsidal chapels,
88, 89 (cut).

Church of St. Remi, likeness to the
cath. of Paris, 96 ;—apse, 96-99
(cuts) ;—buttresses, 17, 79, 82;—
triforium, 96;—wall openings,
96.

Renaissance, in France, 2; in England
and Germany, 3; the architecture,
not of the people, 3; a time of the
severance of arts formerly associated,
309.

 

Renan, on Gothic buildings, 118.

Ribs, development of, 14, 17; different
kinds of, 18; constructive ribs only
present in early 13th cent. French
work, 72; superfluous ribs general
in English buildings, 143. See also
Liernes, Tiercerons.

Diagonal, their profile, 219 ;-—longi-
tudinal, merged with the archivolt of
the window, 91; usually wanting in
early English work, 131; of Salis-
bury cath., 147 (cut) ;—ridge, usual
in English vaults, 135 ;—transverse,
wanting in the vaults of Lichfield
cath., 156.

Of the cath. of Amiens, 220 (cut) ;—
Beauvais, 221 (cut) ;—Laon, 220 ;—
the ch. of Morienval, 218 (cut), 219
(cut) ;—the cath. of Paris, 219 ;—
the ch. of Poissy, 218 (cut) ;—
St. Denis, 218 (cut), 219 (cut) ;—
the cath. of Senlis, 219 (cut), apsi-
dal chapels, 220 ;—the ch. of Ville-
neuve sur Verberie, 221 (cut).

In Spanish pointed buildings of the
early 13th cent., 195.

See also Vaults.

Rib profiles, Gothic, 55, 217-221; the
original square form softened by
roll mouldings, 218; relation of
transverse and diagonal, 219; the
perfected forms, 220 (cut) ; adjust-
ment of abacus to, 221.

English, 238 ;—Italian, 245.

Rickman, his .4¢tempt to Discriminate the
Styles of Architecture in England, 3.

Ringstead Church, spire, 167.

Ripon, cathedral, Bishop Roger's choir,
its Gothic appearance superficial
only, 142; facade, 165.

Rivaulx Abbey, pier arches, 149.

Roman sculpture, influence on the French
schools of Southern Gaul, 248; in-
fluence on Italian work, 295.

Roman vaults and buttresses, 10.

Roman walls, character of, 10.

Romanesque architecture, varieties of
style, 7; characteristics of, 15. See
also German Romanesque, Italian,
and Norman architecture,

Romanesque apse, 92.

Romanesque buttresses, 11 (cut), 12 (cut).

Romanesque capitals, 200,

Romanesque mouldings, 26.

Romanesque sculpture, See Sculpture,
Romanesque.

Romanesque vaults, difficulties of con-
struction over oblong compartments,
16 (cut) ; in apsidal aisles, 98.

Romanesque walls, rr.

Rome, Basilica of Constantine, 10 (cut).

Church of Sta, .\gnese, capital of the
gallery, 200, 220 (cut).
INDEN

Flavian amphitheatre, — constructive
principle of, ro (cut).
Roof of the church of Sta. Croce of
Forence, 185.
Rose windows. See Windows, Wheel.
Rosel, church, tower, 113.

ST. ALBANS, cathedral, length of the
nave, 168,

st. Denis, abbey church, origin of Gothic
commonly traced to this building,
33, 36 ;—apse, 92 ;—facade, 106 ;—
glass of the apsidal chapels, 302 ;—
piers and capitals of the choir, 37 ;—
rib sections, 218 (cut), 219 (cut) ;—
sculpture of west portal and north
transept, 251, 252 (cut), of tym-
panum of west portals, 255 ;—
triforium, 44, 91 ;—vaulting system,
76, vaults of apsidal and choir
aisles, 36, 37 (cut).

. Gabriel, priory of, vaults, 51.

. Germer, abbey church, triforium, 87.

. Germer, chapel, 19.

. Leu d’Esserent, abbey church, 51 ;
date of construction, 119; external
aspect, r1g (cut); compared with
the cath. of Reims, 121 ;—apsidal
aisles and chapels, roz (cut) ;—but-
tresses, 17, 78-80 (cuts) ;—clerestory,
69-70 (cut), 87 (cut), 88 ;—mullions,
222 (cut);—piers and vaulting shafts,
72%

St. Loup, church, tower, 115.

St. Vaast de Longmont, church, spire, 113.

Salamanca, cathedral, 195.

Salisbury cathedral, date of erection, and
comparison with French buildings,
I47; no structural continuity in the
interior, 148 ; Gothic principles very
imperfectly embodied, 150; absence
of sculpture, 292; substantially a
Norman building, 313 ;—buttresses,
150 ;—capitals, 231 ; — chapter-
house, 168 ;—clerestory, 149 ;—east
end, 160;—facade, 164 ;— piers,
150 ;—pier arches, 149 ;—triforium

o

LNW he
ae

oe

329

supplied stimulus and guidance to
those of the Ile-de-France, 249;
favourable conditions in the Ile-de-
France, 250; character and ex-
amples from the r2th cent., 250-
258; statues neither employed as
caryatids nor placed in niches, 254 ;
yet a part of the architectural com-
position, 255; the sculpture of this
period at its best in the lintel of the
cath. of Senlis, 255-257; sculpture
of the early 13th cent., 258; un-
rivalled in all but sentiment, 258;
comparison with Greek art, 259,
263; the second half of the 13th
cent., 261; expression of thought
and emotion the chief motive of
Gothic sculpture, 263; physical
beauty aimed at also but subordi-
nated to moral ends, 264 ; the place
of the monstrous and grotesque, 265;
Romanesque imagery early rejected,
265; animal forms introduced, 265 ;
their truth to nature and orna-
mental quality, 266; leafage, 266;
Romanesque leafage designs dis-
carded for capitals except the Corin-
thianesque, 269; the influence of
nature traced, 269; the best Gothic
capitals of the last quarter of the
rath cent., 271; quick sympathy
with nature, 273; the special plant
forms employed, 273; skill in execu-
tion, 273; the best qualities shown
in the triforium of the nave of Paris,
273; naturalism carried almost too
far in the chapel of the catechists,
274 (cut); running leaf patterns,
276; orderly sequence without for-
mality, 277; over-naturalism domi-
nant after the middle of 13th cent.,
278; why direct imitation of nature
is not appropriate in sculpture, 281 ;
importance of breadth, 281; use of
colour, 282; its classic element com-
pared with the same in Italian work,

295.
of the nave, 149 ;—turrets of west Of the cath. of Amiens, 23, south door

front, 164 ;—vaulting of the nave,
147 (cut), 148.

Santiago, cathedral, 195; statues of the
portals, 297.

Scott, Sir Gilbert, on Gothic architecture,
57 on the stilting of the longitudinal
arches in clerestory vaults, 69.

Sculpture, French Gothic, developed in
the Ile-de-France a century before
the Italian revival, 247, 263; the
earliest schools in Southern Gaul
influenced by Roman and Byzantine
work, 247; their classic feeling,
249; their want of original inven-
tion, 249; these southern schools

 

of west front, 262;—the cloister
of St. Trophime at Arles, 251
(cut) ;—the cath. of Autun, 249 ;—
Chartres, west front, 252, 253 (cut),
leaf ornament on porches, 279 i—
the ch. of Notre-Dame du Port of
Clermont-Ferrand, 249, 250 (cut) ;—
the cath. of Paris, south door of west
front, 255, West facade, 259-261
(cut), portal of south transept, 261,
of north transept, 262 (cut), gro-
tesque figure of a hood moulding,
266 (cut), archivolts of the facade,
266 (cut), 276 (cut), of the Porte
Rouge, 280 (cut) ;—the ch. of St.
330

INDEX

 

Denis, west portals and north tran-
sept, 251, 252 (cut), tympanums of
the west portals, 255 ;—cath. of
Senlis, 25, lintel, 256 (cut) ;—the
ch. of Vézelay, 249. See also Gothic
sculpture.

English, 284-292; rare in the rath
cent., 284; early examples of figure
sculpture, 284; 13th cent. figure
sculpture of Wells, 284; its want of
relation to the structure of the build-
ing, 285; more naturalistic but less
true to nature than the French, 286 ;
want of delicacy and refinement,
287; the angel choir of Lincoln,
and other figure sculptures, 287 ;
foliate sculpture, 288; its artificial
conventionality, 289; foliate sculp-
ture of Bishop Hugh's choir and
transept in Lincoln, 289; much
expression of natural beauty in spite
of artificial peculiarities, 290 (cut) ;
sculpture of the nave inferior, 290
(cut); Anglo-Norman and French
characteristics combined in the foliate
sculpture of Wells, 292; the im-
aginary and grotesque less common
than in France, 292; sculpture
almost wanting in many important
buildings, 292.

German, 292-293; general absence
of figure sculpture, 292; late Gothic
influence, 293; foliate sculpture
illustrated by Cologne, 293.

Greek, its likeness to nature, 22 ; com-
pared with French Gothic, 22, 25,

259, 263, 278; its influence on
Gothic, 23, 24; its influence on
Italian work, 295.

Italian, 293-297; its revival subse-

quent to the development of the
Gothic school in France, 247, 263;
the production of individual sculptors,
not of a school or guild, 294; want
of connection with architecture, 294 ;
mingling of Gothic and Roman ele-
ments, 294; the classic elements in
the sculptures of Pisa compared with
those in French Gothic sculpture,
295; the other Pisan sculptors, 296;
the isolated statues and busts of the
Renaissance, 296; foliate sculpture
imitated from the Gothic, 296.

Romanesque, its ornamental forms
derived from Roman and Byzantine
work, 267; its types of ornament
for capitals, 268.

Spanish, copied from French models,
297.

See also Capitals ; Gothic sculpture.

Senlis, cathedral, the interior Gothic, the

exterior Romanesque, 48 ;—abaci,
206, of the triforium, 221 (cut) ;—

 

aisle vaults, 47 ;—apse, 92 ;—apsidal
chapels, ror ;—bases of the nave,
21o (cut), 211 ;—buttresses, 48 ;—
capitals of the choir, Gothic in form,
Romanesque in ornament, 201,
203 (cut), of the triforium of the
nave, 270 (cut) ;—fagade, 106, 107
(cut) ;—impost, 221 (cut) ;— piers
and shafts, adaptation to the vault-
ing, 43-47 (cuts) ;—rib sections, 219
(cut), in apsidal chapels, 220 ;—
sculpture, 25, of the lintel, 256
(cut);—-spire, 115, 116 (cut) ;—
string-course of the choir, 214 (cut)
215 ;—triforium arches, 44 ;—early
vaults east of the transept, 38; those
of the aisle, 47 ;—windows, 85.

Church of St. Aignan, abacus, 207 (cut).

Church of St. Frambourg, clerestory
opening, 69.

Sens, cathedral, piers and vaulting shafts,
59, 130; source of its style, 60;
transept, 102.

Shaft, volume reduced in Gothic archi-
tecture, 18.

Sharpe, his Seven Periods of Church
Architecture, 4.

Siena, cathedral, want of Gothic charac-
ter, 186; facade 189, 190 (cut);
east end, Ig1.

Soissons, cathedral, bases in the choir,
212, 213 (cut) ;—buttresses of the
choir, 82 ;—clerestory of the choir,
88; piers of the choir, 66-67 (cut);
—transept, 102.

Southwell minster, abacus, 224 ;—arch
mouldings, 236 (cut) ;— capitals,
231 ;— sculpture in north transept,
289 (cut), of the chapter-house, 290.

Spain, its condition in the Middle Ages
unfavourable to the development of
the fine arts, 314.

Spalato, palace of Diocletian, capital,
200 (cut).

Spanish pointed architecture, 194-199 ;
still Romanesque in structure at
beginning of 13th cent., 194; charac-
teristics, 194; smaller buildings with
barrel vaults, 195; similarity to
certain French styles, 195 ; brought
in by the Cistercian monks, 195;
never Gothic in principle, 196; in
the second quarter of 13th cent. the
complete Gothic of France taken as
a model, 196-199; Street's theory
that the churches were built by French-
men, 196; influence of climate on
style, 198; profiles mainly Gothic,
246; not an original style, 314.

Spanish profiles, 246.

Speyer, cathedral, a Romanesque build-
ing, 170; its vaults, 170; nave,
171 (cut).
INDEX 331

 

Spires, in French churches, 113-117;

difficulties in adapting its octagonal

plan to the square substructure,

114; strengthened by squinches,

117; few large ones now remain,

t17;—of the ch. of Chamant,

113, «rq (cut);—the cath. of

Chartres, 115 (cut) ;—the ch, of St.

Vaast de Longmont, 113 ;—the cath.

of Senlis, 115, 116 (cut).

English, rare in early pointed archi-
tecture, 166; peculiarity of English
construction, 167.

German, 181; early ones ill adjusted
to the spire, 181.

Of the cath. of Burgos, 199.

Squinches, 117.

Stained glass, employment of, in Gothic
architecture, 21 ; effect on the char-
acter of window openings, 91.

French Gothic, 300-304; earliest ex-
amples, 301; its developed style
peculiar to Gothic, 301 ; limitations
due to the nature of the materials
employed, 301; distinguished from
wall painting, 301; the medizval
designer adhered strictly to the con-
ventions proper to his art, 302;
modern attempts to give the art a
wider range, 302; the glass of St.
Denis and Chartres, 303 (cut); other
examples, 304; nothing peculiar in
other countries, 309.

English, 309.

Statues, neither used as supports nor set
in niches in early Gothic, 254.
Stilting of the longitudinal arches of a
vault, 16; its real significance, 68 ;
of the longitudinal ribs in the cath.
of Amiens, 75 (cut), of Chartres, 73
(cut), of Noyon, 49; the expedient

unknown in Italy, 183.

Strasburg, cathedral, its imperfect Gothic
character, 175; facade, 179; spire,
181; sculpture, 293.

Street, on the Spanish pointed architec-
ture of the 13th cent., 196; on the
portals of the cath. of Santiago,
297.

String-courses, Gothic, 214-217 ; change
from the flat to the sloping form,
215; becomes a drip moulding,
215; interior mouldings, 216;
reason for the sloping form, 216 ;
—of the cath. of Amiens, triforium,
216 (cut), 277 (cut) ;—the ch. of St.
Evremont at Creil, 214 (cut) ;—of
Morienval, buttresses, 215 (cut) ;—
of Nogens-les-Vierges, 214 (cut) ;
the cath. of Noyon, 278 (cut);
Paris, drip moulding, 215 (cut),
triforium of the nave, 216 (cut) ;—
Senlis, choir, 215.

 

English, 235 (cuts) ;—lItalian, 246.
Style, architectural, 7.
Sully, Maurice de, his sculpture on the
west front of the cath. of Paris, 255.
Symbolism of animal forms in Gothic
sculpture, 266.

TARRAGONA, cathedral, its dome, 196.

Technical skill generally accompanied by
decline in expressional power, 256.

Tiercerons, 18 ;—in Lichfield cath., 156 ;
—in Lincoln cath., vaults of the
nave, 144 (cut), of the presbytery,
154.

Tintern Abbey, pier arches, 149.

Titian, the decorative elements of his
work as distinguished from the
pictorial, 307.

Toledo, cathedral, modelled after the
French Gothic, 196; clerestory of
apsidal aisle, 198.

Towers, of the Gothic facade, 103 ;—of
the Abbaye-aux-Hommes at Caen,
ro4, 105 (cut);—the ch. of Mo-

rienval, 113 (cut);—of St. Loup,
IIs.
Of English churches, 165 - 166;

general provision for a central tower
at crossing of nave and transept,
165 ;—of Lincoln cath., 162, 166
(cut).

Of German churches, 181.

Italian, seldom incorporated with the
church edifice, 191; a building of
several stories, 192.

See also Spires.

Tracery, development of, 88 ; necessity
of, in large windows, 91; in the
cath. of Paris, clerestory, 85 (cut),
89; Reims, apsidal chapels, 89
(cut).

Italian, 193.

See also Mullions, Windows.

Transepts, of French churches, 102; too
common in English chs., 167; of
Lincoln cath., 135.

Transept chapels, 102.

Transept ends, Italian, usually square,
Igl.

Transept fagades,
churches, 160.

German, 180.

Triforium, always enclosed by masonry
in French buildings, 91 ;—-of the
cath. of Amiens, 91 ;—the Abbaye-
aux-Dames at Caen, 152 (cut) ;—
the ch. of Cerisy-la-Foret, 87 ;—the
cath. of Noyon, 50, 87 ;—the ch. of
St. Remi at Reims, 96;—of St.
Denis, 44, 91 ;—of St. Germer, 87 ;
—the cath. of Senlis, 44.

Usually open to the roof of the aisle in
English chs., 139 ;—of Canterbury

to2; of English
INDEX

 

choir, 130 ;—Chichester, 133 (cut) ;
—Lincoln, choir, 139 ;—Malmes-
bury Abbey, 125 ;—the ch. of St.
Mary, New Shoreham, 141 ;—Salis-
bury, nave, 149 ;—Wells, 150 (cut).

Of the cath. of Limburg, 173, 174
(cut).

Of the ch. of S. Martino in Lucca,
189.

In Spanish pointed buildings of the
early 13th cent., 195.

Triforium string. See String-courses.

Tudela, cathedral, 195.

VAULTS, difficulties of construction over
oblong compartments, 16 (cut);
effect of the introduction of the
pointed arch upon, 16, 17 (cut);
always both stilted and domed in
Gothic, 17; general character of, in
Gothic buildings, 18; twisted sur-
faces of, 39; obliquity and irregu-
larity of surface, 52; of the first
half of 13th cent., 67; improved by
replacing the round longitudinal arch
by a pointed one, 68; the thrusts
concentrated on the piers by stilting
the longitudinal ribs, 69; apsidal
aisles, 98; first step toward fan
vaulting, 144; polygonal chapter-
houses, 168 ; generally absent in the
smaller village churches in England,

169.
Barrel characteristic of the style of
Auvergne, 195; in the smaller

Spanish buildings of the early 13th

cent., I95 ;—demi-barrel, 12 ;—
domed, 52 ;—quadripartite, contem-
poraneous with sexpartite, 51 ;

general use in the 13th cent., 68;
in square compartments, character-
istic of the Burgundian style, 195 ;—
sexpartite, 38; various modes of
support, 40-60; unusual in the 13th
cent., 68; peculiarity in the cath.
of Limburg, 173, 174 (cut).

Of the cath. of Amiens, apse, 96, 97
(cut) ;— Beauvais, 68, choir, 76 ;—
Bourges, 59, 68, apse, 95 ;—the
Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen, 13, 14
(cut), 17, 51;—the Abbaye-aux-
Hommes, at Caen, 12, 13 (cut), 39;
—the cath. of Chartres, nave, 73
(cut), apse, 95, 96 (cut) ;—Laon,
58 ;—the ch. of Mantes, 57 ;—of
Morienval, apsidal aisle, 33-35 (cuts) ;
—the cath. of Noyon, choir and
transept, 38, choir, 49, nave, 50,
apse, 93 (cut) ;—the ch. of Oucs-
treham, 51;--the cath. of Paris,
choir, 38, apse, 94 (cut), changes
and repairs in the 13th cent., 86,
apsidal aisles, 100 (cut) ;—the ch,

 

of St. Denis, apsidal and choir
aisles, 36-37 (cut), nave and choir,
76 ;—the priory of St. Gabriel, 51 ;
the cath. of Senlis, east of the tran-
sept, 38.

Of Canterbury cath., choir, 129-
131 (cut);—Chichester, 131 ;—
Durham, 14, 17 ;—Fountains Ab-
bey, 127, 128 (cut); Kirkstall
Abbey, aisles, 127 ; Lichfield cath.,
nave, 156 ;—Lincoln, choir, 135-140
(cuts), nave, 143, aisles, 146, pres-
bytery, 154;—-Malmesbury Abbey,
aisles, 124 (cut); nave, 126 ;—the
ch. of St. Mary, New Shoreham,
141 ;—-Peterborough cath., aisles,
143 ;—Salisbury, nave, 147 (cut) ;—
Wells, 150.

Of early German buildings, 171 ;—of
the cath. of Bamberg, 170, 171
(cut) ;—the Breslau Kreuzkirche,
175 ;—Cologne cath., 176 ;—Frei-
burg, 174;—Magdeburg, 172 ;—
Speyer, 171.

Of the ch. of St. Francis of Assisi, 182 ;
—the cath. of Florence, 187; the
ch. of Sta, Croce, apse, 186 ; the ch.
of Sta. Maria Novella, 183 (cut); the
basilica of San Miniato, 41 ;—the
ch. of Sta. Anastasia in Verona, 189.

Roman, Io.

In Spanish pointed buildings of the
early 13th cent., 194.

Vaulting shafts, employed as a decorative
feature only, 141, 144; coupled, in
Spanish pointed buildings, 195, in
Burgundy, 195;—of the cath. of
Amiens, 75;—Bourges, 59 ;—the
Abbaye-aux-Dames, at Caen, 153
(cut) ;—the cath. of Chartres, nave,
74;—the ch. of Notre-Dame at
Dijon, 60 ;—the cath. of Laon, 58 ;
—the ch. of Mantes, 58 ;—the cath.
of Noyon, 49 (cut) ;—Paris, 53, 55-
57 (cuts) ;—Reims, 74 ;—the ch. of
St. Denis, 76;—of St. Leu d'Es-
serent, nave, 72 ;—the cath, of Sen-
lis, 43 ;—-Sens, 60, 130.

Of Byland Abbey, 141 ;—Canterbury,
cath., choir, 129-130 (cut), at tran-
sept crossing, 138 (cut) ;— Chi-
chester, 131, 132 (cut) ;—Lichfield,
nave, 157;—Lincoln, chair, 136,
at transept crossing, 138 (cut), nave,
I44, presbytery, 154 ;—Malmesbury
Abbey, 125, 126 (cut) ;—the ch. of
St. Mary, New: Shoreham, 141 j;—
Ripon, choir, 142 ;—Salisbury, nave,
148 ;—Wells, 150 ;—Whitby .\bbey,
T4t.

Of the cath. of Limburg, 173, 174
(cut) ;—Speyer, 171 (cut).

Of the ch, of St. Francis of Assissi, 182.
INDEX

333

 

In Spanish pointed buildings of the

early 13th cent., 195.

Vaux-sous-Laon, church,
(cut).

Venice, church of the Frari, piers, 189 ;
east end, 1g1.

Ducal palace, capitals, 297.

Vercelli, church of S. Andrea, vaulting
system Gothic, 181.

Verona, church of Sta. Anastasia, vault-
ing system, 189.

Tower of the Scaligeri, 192, 193 (cut).

Verula, abbey church, 195; its chevet
and vaulting ribs, 196.

Vézelay, abbey church, sculpture, 249 ;
capitals of the porch, 268.

Villeneuve-sur-Verberie, ch., rib section,
221 (cut).

Viollet-le-Duc, on Gothic architecture, 7 ;
on the Greek elements in Gothic
sculpture, 24; on the piers and
vaults of the cath. of Paris, 54; on
the construction of buttresses, 112 ;
on the relation between abacus and
capital, 203; on the sculpture of
Chartres, 253; on the antagonism
between decorative and pictorial art,
307.

Vitet, on the cathedral of Noyon, 38.

Vitruvius, mathematical formulas of, 21.

facade, 104

WALLS, gradual reduction in Gothic
architecture, 18; general character
in Gothic buildings, 19, 85-92.

Roman, ro.
Romanesque, 11.

Wall openings, in Gothic buildings, 19,
85-92; grouped, 87; in English
pointed architecture, 157, 164;
English, compared with French,
149. See also Clerestory; Pier-
arches ; Windows.

Wall painting, 298-300 ; compared with
stained glass in the character of its
design, 301 ; Italian, 305-309.

Walpole, Horace, his interest in Gothic,

3.

Wells, cathedral, vaulting and structural
relations, 150 (cut) ; compared with
the Abbaye-aux-Dames at Caen,

 

51; external aspect, 153; the
sculpture contemporary with great
Italian sculpture, 247; nave and
transept substantially Norman struc-
tures, 313;—abaci, 232 (cut);
capitals of the west facade, 228, of
the transept and eastern end of nave,
230, 231 (cut) ;—facade, 164 ;—
plinths of north porch, 234 (cut) ;—
portals, 285 ;—-sculpture of the west
front, 284-287 (cut), compared with
French work, 286, foliate sculpture,
292 ;—String-course profiles, 235.

Westminster Abbey, pier arches, 149;
the most Gothic structure in Eng-
land, 154; capitals, 231 ; absence of
sculpture, 292.

Whewell, his No¢es on German Churches,

4.

Whitby Abbey, Early English in form,
but Romanesque in principle, rq1 ;
pier arches, 149; bases from clere-
story of choir, 233 (cut).

Willis, his Architecture of the Middle
Ages and Essay on Vaulting,
4; onthe stilting of the longitudinal
arch in clerestory vaults, 68.

Winchester, cathedral, length of the nave,
167.

Windows, dormer, in spires, 114.

Wheel, further developed in France
than in England, 160.

Of the cath. of Reims, apsidal chapels,
88, 89 (cut) ;—the ch. of St. Remi
at Reims, 96.

In English pointed architecture, 157.

Italian, 193 ;—of the ch. of St. Francis
of Assisi, 182 ;—the cath. of Flor-
ence, 187; the ch. of Sta. Croce,
185.

See also Clerestory ; Stained Glass ;
Tracery ; Wall openings.

Worcester, cathedral, the smaller transept
not true Gothic, 153; tower, 165.

Wren, Sir Christopher, his taste for the
pseudo-classic orders, 3.

YORK, cathedral, the transept not true
Gothic, 154; transept facade, 160;
tower, 165; chapter-house, 168.

THE END

Printed by R. & R. Crark, Edinburgh.
MESSRS. MACMILLAN & CO.’S PUBLICATIONS.

House Architecture. By J. J. Srevenson. With numerous
Illustrations. 2 vols. Royal 8vo, 18s. each. Vol. I.—Architecture. Vol.
II.—House Planning.

An Art Tour to Northern Capitals of Europe. By J.
BEAVINGTON ATKINSON, M.A. 8vo. 12s.

Historical and Architectural Sketches; chiefly Italian. By
EA. FREEMAN, D.C.L., LL.D., Regius Professor of Modern History in the
University of Oxford, Fellow of Oriel College, and Hon. Fellow of Trinity
College, Oxford. Illustrated by the Author. Crown 8vo. ros. 6d.

Subject and Neighbour Lands of Venice. By the same
Author. Being a Companion Volume to ‘Historical and Architectural
Sketches.” With Illustrations. Crown 8vo. Ios. 6d.

English Towns and Districts. By the same Author. A Series
of Addresses and Essays. With Illustrations anda Map. 8vo. 14s.

WORKS BY P. G. HAMERTON.
The Intellectual Life. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. tos. 6d.
Thoughts about Art. New Edition, revised, with Notes and
Introduction. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d.
French and English: a Comparison. Crown &vo. tos. 6d.
Human Intercourse. Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 8s. 6d.

NOW READY, AN IMPORTANT, CHOICELY ILLUSTRATED WORK.

PEN DRAWING AND PHN DRAUGHTSMEN ;
THEIR WORK AND THEIR METHODS.

A Study of the Art to-day, with Technical Suggestions. By Jos—EpH PENNELL.
With 158 Illustrations, of which 12 are Photogravures. The Illustrations
consist of Work by eminent English, Foreign, and American Artists. 4to.
4£3:13:6 nett.

* * The Edition is Limited to 1000 Copies, of which 500 have been secured for America.

A History of Miniature Art. By J. LumspEn PRroprert. With
numerous Illustrations. Super royal gto. £3:13:6.

*,* Also a Limited Edition, bound in Vellum, 44:14: 6.

Memoir of Peter de Wint. By WaLTER ARMSTRONG, B.A.
Oxon. Illustrated by 24 Photogravures from the Artist’s Pictures, Super
royal 4to. 31s. 6d.

Sketching Rambles in Holland. By G. H. Boucurton, A.R.A.,
and E. A. ABBEY. With numerous Illustrations. Fcap. 4to. 21s.

Sketches from a Tour through Holland and Germany. By
J. P. Mauarry and J. E. Rocers. With Illustrations by J. E. RoGers,
Extra crown 8vo. Ios. 6d.

Coaching Days and Coaching Ways. By W. Outram
TRISTRAM. With numerous Illustrations by HERBERT RaAILTON and HuGH
THomson. Extra crown 4to. 2Is.

Lectures on Art. Delivered in support of the Society for Pro-
tection of Ancient Buildings. By Recp. Sruarr POOLE, Professor W. B.
RICHMOND, E. J. PoynTER, R.A., J. T. MICKLETHWAITE, and WILLIAM
Morris. Crown 8vo. 4s. 6d.

Lectures on Art and the Formation of Taste. By Lucy
CRANE. With Illustrations by THomas and WALTER CRANE. Cr. 8vo. 6s.

MACMILLAN AND CO., LONDON.
MESSRS. MACMILLAN & CO.’S PUBLICATIONS.

 

Ancient Rome in the Light of Recent Discoveries. By
Ropo.tro Lanciant, LL.D. (Harv.), Professor of Archzology in the Uni-
versity of Rome, Director of Excavations for the National Government and
the Municipality of Rome, etc. With roo Illustrations. Small 4to. 24s.

“WORKS BY J. P. MAHAFFY, M.A., D.D.,
Fellow and Professor of Ancient History in Trinity College, Dublin,
and Hon. Fellow of Queen’s College, Oxford.

Social Life in Greece ; from Homer to Menander. Fifth Edition,
Revised and Enlarged. Crown 8vo. 9s.

Greek Life and Thought; from the Age of Alexander to the
Roman Conquest. Crown 8vo. 12s. 6d.

Rambles and Studies in Greece. With Illustrations. Third
Edition, Revised and Enlarged. With Map. Crown 8vo. tos. 6d.

A History of Classical Greek Literature. In 2 vols. Crown
8vo. gs. each. Vol. I.—THE Poers; with an Appendix on Homer by
Prof. Sayce. Vol. II.—THE PRosE WRITERS.

A Primer of Greek Antiquities. With Illustrations. 18mo. 1s.

Roman Literature in Relation to Roman Art. By Rev.
Rozerr Burn, M.A., Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. With numer-
ous Illustrations. Extra crown 8vo. 14s.

Cults and Monuments of Ancient Athens. By Miss J. E.
HARRISON and Mrs. A. W. VERRALL. Illustrated. Cr. 8vo. [Jv the press.

3 Fitzwilliam Museum, Cambridge.

Catalogue of Casts in the Museum of Classical Archeology.
By CHARLES WALDSTEIN, Litt.D., Ph.D., L.H.D., University Reader in
Classical Archeology. Crown 8vo, Is. 6d.

*,* Also an Edition on Large Paper. Small gto. 5s.

A Companion to School Classics. By James Gow, Litt.D.,
Master of the High School, Nottingham; late Fellow of Trinity College,
Cambridge. With Illustrations. Second Edition, revised. Crown 8vo. 6s.

The National Gallery: A Popular Handbook to. By Epwarp
T. Cook. With a Preface by JoHn Ruskin, LL.D., and Selections from
his Writings. Second Edition. Crown 8vo. Half Morocco, 14s.

*,* Also an Edition on Large Paper, limited to 250 Copies. 2 vols. 8vo.

Sketching from Nature. A Handbook for Students and
Amateurs. By TRIsTRAM J. ELLIS. With a Frontispiece and Ten Illustra-
tions, by H. Stacy Marks, R.A., and Thirty Sketches by the Author. New
Edition, Revised and Enlarged. Crown 8vo. 3s. 6d.

Our Sketching Club. Letters and Studies on Landscape Art.
By the Rev. R. St. JoHN TyRwititt, M.A. With an authorised Repro-
duction of the Lessons and Woodcuts in Prof. Ruskin’s ‘‘ Elements of Draw-
ing.” Fourth Edition. Crown 8vo. 7s. 6d.

4

 

 

Dilettanti Society’s Publications—

Antiquities of Ionia. Vols. I., II., and III., £2: 2s. each, or £5: 5s. the
set. Part IV., folio, half morocco, £3: 13:6.

An Investigation of the Principles of Athenian Architecture on the
results of a recent Survey conducted chiefly with reference to the optical
refinements exhibited in the construction of the Ancient Buildings at Athens.
By FRANcIs CRANMER PENROSE, Architect, M.A., etc. Illustrated by
numerous Engravings. New Edition. Folio. £7: 7s.

Specimens of Ancient Sculpture: Egyptian, Etruscan, Greek, and
Roman. Selected from different Collections in Great Britain by the
Society of Dilettanti. Vol. II. Folio. £5: 5s.

MACMILLAN AND CO., LONDON.
Sresss ee
srt

ze

 

Sots

 

 

 

 

pete te eee