.A?A 
 

 
 
 
 
FROM 
 
 THE EARLIEST PERIOD OF THE ART 
 
 TO THE PRESENT TIME, 
 
 ILLUSTRATED BY 
 
 COLOURED EXAMPLES OF ENTIRE WINDOWS 
 
 IN THE VARIOUS STYLES. 
 
 BY WILLIAM WARRINGTON. 
 
 LONDON: 
 
 PUBLISHED BY THE AUTHOR, BERKELEY STREET WEST. 
 
 M.DCCC.XLYIIL 
 
 [PRINTED BY J. B. NICHOLS 
 
 SON, 26, PARLIAMENT STREET.] 
 
h 
 
<-7 r S> <2/ <3 8 
 
 
 j>7 * 
 
 ADDRESS. 
 
 THE AUTHOR TO THE READER. 
 
 The present Work was commenced under views and circumstances totally different 
 from those which have attended its completion, and under the disadvantages of the Author's igno¬ 
 rance then of the capabilities of Chromo-lithography as applied to the representation of windows 
 of stained glass. In fact his idea at the time was rather that of attempting an experiment on a few 
 Plates which he happened to possess (in black outline only for Water-colouring), which were 
 generously subscribed by his patrons as a token of satisfaction with the several windows executed by 
 him for them, and with the view of recommending him to others. Under these circumstances, he 
 determined to try the effect of Chromo-lithography upon them, with a prospect of probably pub¬ 
 lishing them with a few pages of letter-press of a descriptive nature. Hence it is that this work is 
 illustrated with Plates from his own designs; for, finding himself encouraged in his undertaking, 
 and urged by the entreaties of many of his friends and patrons, he was induced to take a much 
 more extended view of the matter, not only in the number of Plates, but especially in the letter- 
 
 press, which in the first instance there was no intention of making so ample, or of enlarging into any 
 thing like a consecutive historical account of the art, or it might have been well and usefully illus¬ 
 trated from ancient works only. It is however still hoped that the present Plates may sufficiently 
 serve to explain any want of perspicuity in the letter-press. 
 
 The Author, although he feels that he may without impropriety affirm that the lithogra¬ 
 phers have been most indefatigable in combating many difficulties, and that much praise is due to 
 them for the admirable manner in which they have acquitted themselves, is yet bound to state that 
 this excellence has not been attained without much pains, cost, and trouble. To Mr. T. J. Rawlins 
 much credit is due for the ability with which he has so faithfully executed the Plates, he having for 
 the most part reduced the Drawings from the original Cartoons. 
 
 A Volume in continuation, with details at large from Ancient Authorities only, as con¬ 
 nected with all the different styles, will hereafter be published, consisting of Sacred Monograms, 
 Pinnacles, Bosses, Emblems, Quarrels, Chronograms, Diapers, Crockets, Rebuses, Heraldry, and 
 other Ornaments, with explanatory letter-press to each Plate. 
 
 The Author has much to regret his inability to comply with the desire of many of his 
 friends and patrons who wished for the insertion of their windows in the present work ; but, inde¬ 
 pendently of its having been extended much beyond his original intention, it was found absolutely 
 necessary to confine the Plates to such examples as had immediate reference to the letter-press, and 
 formed a sufficient variety of design for each style, so as to make the work as far as possible both 
 useful and instructive, rather than a mere record of his works, for which reason he has selected his 
 designs without reference to their dignity or importance, either in size or situation. The literary 
 
portion of this work (being the sole and unassisted production 
 
 business, behaving mainly devoted his time and energ.es towards to Z pLpicuity without 
 of his art,) will it is hoped be viewed with critrcal mdulgenoe, rts object be.ng p P 
 presuming to studied elegance of expression. 
 
 -•-“■ri-r.rrr.-r;: L“-;c»rsr: 
 
 themselves in many particulars, a des of ridiculing; a taste 
 
 admire in our ancestors what for some ^ ™ ^antique illumination of books, and even 
 for old-fashioned furniture, the old style of architectu , q ^ ^ letters< indicate the 
 
 the media.val but most reverential style of sacre raw ^ absur dities of ancient 
 
 beginning of a new movement, not a ; n the.r real for reformation cast 
 
 times, but a going back to pick up the goo P SUCC eeded in the follow- 
 
 2 cXc^r and^true consideration of Mediteva, Art, especiallyin th, the pnncpal branch of it, 
 his labours will not have been unrequited, nor Ins task regretted. 
 
PREFACE. 
 
 ThE revival of the ancient school of ecclesiastical decoration, to which so much attention 
 has of late years been devoted, on the part both of the public who demand and the artists who 
 supply it, has particularly influenced the art of Painting on Glass. The immense quantity of this 
 material which is annually manufactured in this country alone, and the rapidly increasing demand 
 for it, have rendered it a matter of the deepest importance that the true principles of the art should 
 be as far as possible thoroughly and generally appreciated. The consequences of the contrary bias of 
 public opinion, ignorance of the beauties, and apathy about the preservation, of ancient stained glass, 
 are sufficiently manifest in the miserable productions and general decay of the science in the last 
 half century. And the scarcely less deplorable consequences of the present state of feeling—zeal 
 for the art without sufficient knowledge of its details—are severely felt, both by the artists them¬ 
 selves and by the few really competent judges, who perceive that the best intentions are constantly 
 frustrated, and the most liberal gifts abused and perverted, by mistaken notions, or entire ignorance 
 on the part of the employers. 
 
 The great costliness, magnificence, durability, and almost unlimited capabilities of pictorial 
 and religious effect possessed by this, the highest department of decorative art, must satisfy all well- 
 disposed minds that nothing poor, faulty, and trashy should any longer be tolerated in our churches. 
 What is really good must now be distinguished from what is either merely showy, or positively bad 
 in effect or principles of composition. Moreover, that which is executed in the present may be the 
 example in a future generation. We have but a little ancient glass left in its original state; and, il 
 the greatest care be not taken of that little, we shall have much less a century hence : so that real 
 ancient models should be made available, and strictly followed in all modern works, if the fact now 
 admitted by all be worthy of consideration—that the true and only standard of excellence is the medi¬ 
 eval style of art. True it is that such a statement would have been deemed ridiculous twenty years 
 ago. It would have been said, that our improved knowledge of anatomy, of drawing, of perspective, ol 
 grouping, of effects, and the like, was so much greater than the ancient artists ever attained, that our 
 painting on glass must needs be better than theirs. The pseudo-professors of an art which they 
 did not comprehend thus proceeded on modern principles, never doubting that the success would 
 be commensurate with the plausible grounds of their theory. And what was the result ? Works so 
 bad, and so deficient in effects of colour and combination, that we look on the washy transparencies 
 of this school with unmixed regret at their ignorance and presumption. The reason of all this is 
 explained in very few words. People did not know that mediaeval glass-painting was entirely con¬ 
 ventional. They saw, indeed, that somehow or other an ancient Saint, with his unreal countenance, 
 his diapered nimbus , his quaintly proportioned members, and yet heavenly and devotional attitude— 
 the very ideal of holy contemplation and celestial portraiture ; that this form, with reclined head and 
 clasped hands, had infinitely more of character, if not of grace, than the comely and comfortable 
 form produced, on improved principles, by the modern pencil; yet no one could solve the mystery* 
 why it should be so. We now see that the ancient painters had the deepest knowledge of blending 
 and combining colours, and that this style of painting was not only in its delineation strictly conven- 
 
iv 
 
 tional, but was adapted to the materia.; in a word, that they did not wish to treat glass like canvas, 
 or any opaque painted surface. 
 
 The bad effects which are ever found to result from violation of true principles are undoubtedly 
 most conspicuous in the great mass of recent productions in this art. Caprice, self-con deuce reluct¬ 
 ance to follow, and a desire to lead and to stand at the head of the profession, have been fatal to the suc¬ 
 cessful practice of painting on glass. Few have cared to study, and fewer still minutely to copy, the 
 best ancient remains we possess; so that both knowledge and taste have been kept at the lowest 
 standard, and the judgment of the public has been perverted, rather than directed aright, by the 
 works of manv modern artists. 
 
 In making these remarks, the Author has felt himself called upon, for the sake of his profes¬ 
 sion, to state boldly and plainly some of the causes of recent failure in the art. Even though he 
 should seem to be at once disparaging his competitors, and setting forth his own works as models 
 of perfection, he is in reality very far from aiming at either of these invidious objects. Long and 
 anxiously has he waited, in the hope that some more able and eminent person would supply a want 
 which now seriously requires to be supplied. It is necessary to improve public taste, or the art 
 itself can never be generally improved. But it is by the production of good modern works that this 
 must principally be effected. Hence the Author has chosen to give a series of his own designs, 
 which have actually been executed by himself (knowing, as he does, that they are all composed on 
 the most rigid principles of ancient art), rather than to add to the number of illustrations of ancient 
 specimens which have from time to time appeared. 
 
 The confusion of the different styles, and a general neglect of the appropriateness of particular 
 symbols, as well as numberless violations of heraldic and pictorial laws, have been fatal to the success 
 of many modern works. It must always be remembered, that the style of glass-painting was adapted 
 to the style of window tracery; and that ornamental work, appropriated to the wavy lines of the 
 Decorated, may be very ill suited to the rigid perpendicularity of the Tudor, window. Again, the 
 filling up of a lancet-light may not suit the single compartment of a mullioned window; for size, com¬ 
 pleteness of design, style of canopy, dimensions, and grouping of figures, and a hundred other points, 
 must be observed. 
 
 The caprice and want of knowledge in the employer are too often found to overrule the really 
 correct views, and thwart the earnest wishes, of the artist, who thereby most unreasonably incurs a 
 responsibility which in reality attaches exclusively to the former. Artists are made to commit sole¬ 
 cisms against their wish and their sober judgment; and they must generally comply, or resign the 
 work. A morbid taste for pretty pictures, excessive colouring, and bright, glowing tints unsubdued by 
 a proper admixture of white glass; a taste for purely natural representations of humanity, instead of 
 the mystic poetry of conventional delineation and symbolism ; has gone far to deprave judgment and 
 retard the improvement of the art. But better things may now be looked for; and the Author has 
 had the temerity to bring these his humble efforts before the public, not for the purpose of invidiously 
 contrasting them with those of others—not for the sake of vaunting his own superior skill and talents 
 —but simply from a conviction of the necessity of some such undertaking, and with the earnest hope 
 that it may stimulate others to more successful exertion. 
 
 W. WARRINGTON. 
 
 London, 1848. 
 
V '-V’' . ■ 
 
HISTORY OF STAINED GLASS. 
 
 Sect. I. INTRODUCTION. 
 
 BuT little is known of the origin and early history of the Art of Painting on Glass, and of 
 the manufacture of the coloured material, either by antiquaries or practitioners, especially in Eng¬ 
 land, although in this country it has more continuously flourished than perhaps in any other. Still, a 
 good deal of information exists respecting it, distributed amongst various works, which only requires 
 some pains and judgment to reduce to something like a systematic arrangement. But no author 
 seems to have thought it of sufficient importance to trace it from its earliest efforts consecutively 
 through the ramifications of the variously succeeding styles* 
 
 As all the earlier masters took especial care that their designs should be in harmony with 
 and subservient to the architecture with which they were connected, the study of it in this view is 
 evidently of the deepest importance; and a chronological work on this subject, shewing by what feel¬ 
 ings they were actuated in the composition of those designs from time to time, seems at the present 
 day to be so necessary, that it is much to be wondered at that no able person has supplied a want, 
 which has been felt and acknowledged by all, and has naturally led to so many misconceptions as to 
 the ability and artistic knowledge of the earlier practitioners, as well as to so much ignorance of the 
 comparative merit of modem designs. This has been consequent upon a want of the means of care¬ 
 fully investigating the matter, and from the absence of any well digested standard by which the art 
 could be tested, and to which it could be progressively traced. 
 
 That stained glass is an almost indispensable accessory to all ecclesiastical edifices few will 
 deny: they are in fact incomplete without this instructive and harmonizing auxiliary; instructive, 
 because it presents to view those holy memorials which are so calculated to inform the mind and 
 attune it to devotion by portraying the miracles and sufferings of our Blessed Saviour, and the 
 events in the lives of the apostles, martyrs, and holy men who have devoted themselves to Christianity 
 —harmonizing, because it subdues and chastens the effect, as well as blends and softens the bold and 
 rugged outlines of architecture, by shutting out effectively the external world and the glare ot 
 excessive light; thus concentrating the mind as it were to one devotional purpose, and presenting 
 nothing to view but those holy symbols which engender sympathy and reverence. 
 
 There can be no doubt that, as from the earliest and most primitive times acts of heroic virtue 
 or devoted piety were held in sacred and reverential memory by all good and sincere Christians, so 
 they adopted every means in their power to perpetuate, by tradition or the representations of 
 material art, the lives of their most revered and holy predecessors. Hence the symbols and mono¬ 
 grams of the founders of their faith, the painted and sculptured portraits of its propagators and pro¬ 
 fessors, became endeared to their minds ; and these were the recognised means of fixing indelibly in 
 their memories the objects of their esteem both in present and past times. And hence material art 
 
 • The only work which has yet appeared with any pretensions to be a complete treatise on the varieties in the styles of painted glass, 
 is that lately published in 2 vols. 8vo. “ An Inq.dry into the Difference of Style observable in Ancient Painted Glass, by an Amateur,” an 
 excellent book in its way, but still deficient in the scientific knowledge which none but a practitioner can possess. 
 
HISTORY OF STAINED GLASS. 
 
 became gradually the exponent of the doctrines of religion, and men exercise t eir m ° s c0 s m 
 mate skill in portraying Scripture scenes, and even in bringing the invisible eings 
 
 world within the scope of human apprehension. 
 
 How much therefore are we indebted to those holy men who have devote t lemse ves to t le 
 erection of such magnificent edifices to the glory of God, which are still the wonder and a miration 
 of this scientific age, dedicating them in honour of the saints and martyrs whose lives, mnac es, 
 devotion, and acts of goodness, they have endeavoured thus to perpetuate in the least perishable 
 materials, stone, stained glass, and brass. They have furnished us with innumerable sculptuies, 
 monuments, storied windows, tapestry, and illuminated manuscripts, without which we could not 
 have known, nor even conjectured, the perfection to which mediaeval art attained. 
 
 In executing the great works of antiquity, all seem to have been animated with one mmd and 
 purpose; the architect, the mason, the carver, the painters, decorators, glass-stainers, and engravers, 
 had clearly but one feeling towards one grand result, object, and purpose. This must be our con¬ 
 clusion from those works which are still remaining, and which are left to us by a sort of chance. 
 How would this conviction be confirmed if there were still remaining all that has perished, through 
 time, neglect, and wilful destruction; for we cannot peruse these remains without feeling that they 
 are the continuous and connecting links from time to time, which bind together Christians and 
 Christianity of the past and the present; we cannot look at them and their progressive embellish¬ 
 ments without knowing, feeling, and concluding that these things are the very germs, the very seed, 
 of art, the groundwork of that civilization which we are now enjoying. If so, is it not incumbent 
 on us to do likewise for our posterity, since the saints and martyrs of the Church cannot be less 
 worthy of honour and memorial now than they formerly were ? Shall we, whilst we hesitate not to 
 erect statues, monuments, and memorials to heroes, warriors, and statesmen, fear to commemorate in 
 the decorations of our churches the lives of those who have at once been the servants of God and the 
 benefactors of mankind ? Shall we, whilst we scruple not to embellish our prayer-books and scrip¬ 
 tures with illustrative pictures, shudder with a morbid feeling in doing honour to great and worthy 
 men, by using every means in our power to teach the young and the ignorant, ocularly as well as 
 orally, to follow their example ? 
 
 Having then endeavoured to show that it is not only unobjectionable to decorate our sacred 
 edifices by every means in our power, but that it is our duty to do so, both for commemorating the 
 good and for holding them up to the imitation of others, and not less so, as a contribution to civiliza¬ 
 tion, by the inculcation of taste ; we proceed to observe, that the greatest care and pains ought to be 
 taken, that whatever is to be done should be done correctly. And under whose judgment and con¬ 
 trol can ecclesiastical works of art be so fitly placed as that of the clergy, who have the care and 
 formation of our minds, and have so much influence over the tastes of our youth ? How carefully 
 ought they to study the pure and correct examples of our forefathers, whose works were so well con¬ 
 sidered, so intrinsic in their merit, so consummate in their details! How much dilapidation and 
 mistaken improvement has taken place, to the detriment and destruction of ever-to-be-lamented 
 works of art and devotion, by churchwardens and others (who could not be expected to know better), 
 is too evident, and this too while our spiritual pastors were seemingly unconscious of the value of 
 the works entrusted to their care. Happily, from the deep interest which is now felt in such matters, 
 there is good reason to hope that the devotion and diligence of our present dignitaries, and of the 
 clergy in general, will in some measure atone for past neglect. 
 
 We will now consider this art in respect to its probable origin, and as connected with the 
 various changes and styles of architecture, and the feelings which seemed to actuate the artists and 
 operators in carrying it out under the different circumstances, conventionally, heraldically , and other¬ 
 wise, together with its position and the mode of practising it during the time when it is generally, 
 but erroneously, said to have been lost. As this last named error has operated against it, and so 
 much retarded its progress by long, constant, unfounded, and unremitting prejudices, continued 
 from century to century, it will be desirable to examine the truth of it, before we enter into the 
 chronology of the art. 
 
HISTORY OF STAINED GLASS. 
 
 3 
 
 We merely state here, (what we shall in due order show,) that, so far from this art having 
 been lost, it has at no time been even discontinued, and more especially in this country, in which 
 not only restorations, but new works, although more or less bad in their taste, have been con¬ 
 tinuously executed. A vulgar notion has existed that the art of painting and staining glass was a 
 secret process, now entirely forgotten or very partially known; than which nothing can be more 
 erroneous, for, so far from this being the case, it is indisputably true that, mechanically speaking, 
 more power now exists (and has existed for these fifty years, especially over enamels) than the ancient 
 glass-painters ever attained. The enamels which they produced were not encaustic; those of 
 modern painters are indelibly fixed : and so great and extensive are the means now at command in this 
 respect, that the finest pictures may be produced, original or in fac-simile, by living artists. It is 
 therefore perfectly practicable, if desirable, to create such works as are appropriate and in unison 
 with the classic, as well as with the Gothic, style. With such facilities, the results of modern 
 science, it will be readily perceived that, so far from this art having been lost, it was only in abey¬ 
 ance from a want of taste to encourage its production, a consequent want of energy in the exercise 
 of genius in its application, and of skill in tastefully and properly applying it. In this respect 
 indeed not only had the art lost its way from a want of the knowledge of correct application, but 
 even now it can hardly be said to have recovered it, few works of modem times being faultless. 
 Nor is this to be wondered at, seeing that comparatively few remains now exist whereon to found 
 our taste, and those so distributed, that, however great may be the artist s talent, it must of necessity 
 require a very early devotion to the art, much study, travelling, and research, before he can acquire 
 a sufficient knowledge to grapple with all the styles successfully. For this is an art which compre¬ 
 hends many subject^ which collectively constitute the primary foundation, the starting point of all 
 following decorations, and especially in ecclesiological matters ; which requires also a combined 
 study of history, sacred and profane, a knowledge of ecclesiastical and civil costume, armour and 
 armoury, heraldry and genealogy, conventionalism, symmetry, colouring, and the manufacturing of 
 colours; chemistry; drawing, geometrical, mathematical, and artistical; together with a mechanical 
 knowledge of combining numberless parts to compose a whole, of the effect of which he has 
 scarcely an opportunity of forming any other than a problematical judgment, until the entire work 
 is erected,* and which therefore he can only acquire by habit and intuitive feeling. All these 
 departments of science must the artist study, in order to know how to apply all and each in the 
 several styles appropriately and in unison with the different epochs and varieties of architecture. 
 In one word the art requires mechanics to be combined with it ; and the artist who studies but in 
 one department, will find it difficult if not impossible effectually to carry out the others. 
 
 It is not necessary to ascertain the antiquity of glass-making as an invention, beyond the 
 assurance of its remote origin. There can be no doubt that it existed in very early times ; for allusion 
 is supposed to be made to it in a passage of the Greek comedian, Aristophanes, who flourished 
 more than four hundred years before the Christian era, and who speaks of “ the transparent stone 
 from which they light fire,” l e. our use of the burning glass ; t and Agricola, (lib. 12,) says, “ White 
 stones when melted are best for the purpose;” and Pliny says, “That of such like stones they make 
 glass in India most admirably transparent, so that nothing else is comparable to it; t and Ferrandus 
 Imperatus (lib. 24, cap. 16) speaks of the glass-stone called Quocoli, which is “ almost like white 
 marble, but something transparent, and hard as flint, of a light green colour, like a serpentine-stone. 
 
 * “ The Athenians, intending to set up the image of Minerva upon a high pillar, employed Phidias and Alcamenes: the latter having no 
 skill in geometry or the optics, made her wonderfully fair to the eye of them that saw her near; Phidias contrariwise (being skilful m the arts, 
 chiefly the optics,) considering that the whole shape would change according to the height of the place, made her lips wide open her nose 
 somewhat out of order, and all the rest accordingly, by a kind of resuspination: the two images being brought to view, Plndias was m 
 great danger to have been stoned by the multitude, until at length the statues were set up, when the sweet and excellent strokes of Alcamenes 
 were drowned, and the disfigured, distorted, hard-favouredness of Phidias his work vanished (and all this by the height of the place); by 
 which means Alcamenes was laughed at, and Phidias much more esteemed.” Polygraphices, chap. 3, page 317, edit. 1700. 
 
 f Sir Gardner Wilkinson says, “ The Egyptians were acquainted with the art of glass-blowing upwards of 3300 years ago. Manners 
 and Customs of the Ancient Egyptians, vol.iii.p. 88. The workmen are represented making it on one of the tombs. 
 
 + According to Pliny the use of glass is owing to the following circumstance. As some merchants were carrying nitre, they stopped 
 a river which issues from Mount Carmel, as they could not readily find stones to rest their- kettle, on, they used for this purpose some 
 of those nieces of nitre. The fee, which gradually dissolved the nitre, and mixed it with the sand, occasioned a transparent matter to flow, 
 which in Lt, was nothing else than glass. Vide DTsrnelTs Curiosities of Literature, p. 51B, 1th edition, 1795 r Murray, London. 
 
4 
 
 HISTORY OF STAINED GLASS. 
 
 and having veins like Venice tale; this being put into the fire, loses its transparency and becomes 
 more white and light, will not turn into lime, but in length of time be converted into glass. 
 
 But we may go yet further back into the history of this material. The Egyptians as well as 
 the Chinese were well acquainted with enamels, and, as its discovery was probably in the East, it is 
 not likely that it was much used for other purposes than enamels and artificial gems. The in a itants 
 of our Western hemisphere were most likely the first to apply it to windows, thereby making it at 
 once ornamental and useful; though it has been thought that the primitive Basilican churches were 
 supplied with glass-windows in the clerestory. We are certain that glass was in use befoie St. Jeiome, 
 who lived in the fourth century; for, speaking of glass in his works, he writes, Fenestim quse vitro 
 in tenues laminas fuso obductse erant,” which justifies the conclusion that the use and appliance of 
 glass was far anterior to the time in which he wrote, and confirms the opinion of its having been 
 used by the early Christians of Rome. It is related by Philon, a Jew, that an interview took place 
 between the dreadful Caligula and some Christians, at a time when he was giving instructions to 
 some artists, who were embellishing his palaces of Macena and Lamia. The Emperor constantly 
 and pettishly interrupted the discourse during the audience, ordering the artists, that the windows 
 of coloured glass should be surrounded with a border of white glass, to heighten the light ; also to 
 construct a casement to let off the condensed air. (Les CEuvres de Philon, translated from the 
 Greek by Pierre Bellie.) 
 
 Pliny, Cassius, and Isodorus relate the following incident in the life of Tiberius. For 
 some offence the Emperor had banished a glass-worker, who, having during his exile discovered the 
 art of making glass malleable, in opposition to his sentence, returned, when he appeared before the 
 Emperor, and presented one of his glasses to him. The Emperor, enraged at the return of the 
 artist without his permission, dashed the glass on the marble pavement; it was however only 
 flattened by the fall, and the artist took it up and brought it into shape again. The Emperor 
 astonished, inquired if any other person knew the secret ? The artist said, “ Mighty Emperor, no, 
 none whatever.” Upon hearing which he immediately ordered his head to be struck off, stating as 
 a reason, the necessity of keeping the secret, lest glass should become more precious than gold, and 
 derange the metallic circulation of his kingdom. 
 
 Gregory of Tours relates that in A D. 525, “ a soldier of the army of Theodoric penetrated 
 into the church of St. Julian, in Brionde, in Auvergne, of a window of which he broke the glass 
 and Fortunatus, Bishop of Poictiers, towards the seventh century, did with much delight and ecstacy 
 indite and poetise in his praise and admiration of the windows of Notre Dame, at Paris, eulogizing 
 them thus : 
 
 “ Prima capit radios vitreis oculata/enestris, 
 
 Artificisque manu clausit in arce diem, 
 
 Cursibus aurora vaga lux laquearia complet, 
 
 Atque suis radiis et sine sole mical." 
 
 Fortunatus, lib. ii. De Eccles. Paris. 
 
 It is certain that windows of churches were usually glazed at about this time, from Bede, who 
 in speaking of the church of Mount Olivet, near Jerusalem, says, “ In the west front of it were eight 
 windows, which on some occasions used to be illuminated with lamps, which shone so bright, through 
 the glass, that the mount seemed in a blaze.” * 
 
 St. Philibert, founder of the Abbey of Jumieges (in Normandy), caused to be placed between 
 six and seven hundred (655 in all) windows of glass in the cloistral buildings of this magnificent 
 edifice. The following was found written upon this subject in the history of his life by the order of 
 Cochin, third abbot of the same monastery:— 
 
 “ Singula per tecta lux radiat per fenestras, vitrum penetrans, lumen optabile tribuens legentibus." -f- 
 
 St. Ouen, in the life of St. Eloi, makes mention of the same windows, thus : 
 
 “ Apparuit subito in pariete, circa vitream maximam." J 
 
 * Bed® lib. de locis Sanctis, cap. 6, 
 
 + Essai sur la Peinture sur Verre, par E. H. Langlois, p. 7. Rouen, 1832. 
 
 + Ibid. 
 
HISTORY OF STAINED GLASS. 
 
 5 
 
 The preceding citations prove beyond a doubt the high antiquity of glass, not only as an 
 invented article, but as applied to windows to some extent. That it was used in France and Nor¬ 
 mandy long before it was known in England is equally certain. 
 
 As (in many respects) at a later period we owe to our Norman ancestors the introduction of 
 the arts into England, so were we long previous to the Conquest indebted to them or the French for 
 the derivation of this art, glass not being known in England until the seventh century, as it appears by 
 the Acts of the Bishops of York, that St. Wilfred, who died in A.D. 702, was the first to use it in 
 England, by having over from France workmen for that purpose : “ Artifices lapidearum et vitrearum 
 fenestrarum primus in Angliam ascivit.” 
 
 It is rather doubtful what “ lapidearum'' can refer to, unless perhaps to the stone frames of the 
 windows, which must have been so contrived as to answer the purpose of leading in these times. 
 Probably the pieces of glass were inserted in pierced stones, and, the glass itself being very coarse and 
 opaque in the infancy of its manufacture, would naturally enough be mentioned as part and parcel of 
 the frame in which it was set. That glass was from time to time improved in its manufacture is 
 shown by a certain passage in the third Book of Leon d’ Ostie, who mentions the works of Mont 
 Cassin by Abbot Didier; the expression compactis tabulis is employed by the same writer, to describe 
 the thickness of the glass, which seems to prove that its manufacture had made considerable progress 
 since St. Jerome, and that glass was then cast or manufactured in comparatively thin sheets, although 
 of small dimensions. 
 
 The manufacture of glass was commenced in this country in the early part of the eighth cen¬ 
 tury, for we find that about the year A.D. 715, St. Benedict Biscop, Abbot of Wearmouth, in the 
 diocese of Durham, brought over French artists and artificers for the construction of his monastery, 
 and especially glass-makers: “ Misit legatarios Galliam, qui vitri factores, (artifices videlicet Bri- 
 tanniis eatenus incognitos) ad cancellandas Ecclesiae porticumque et ccenaculorum ejus fenestras 
 adducerent.” (Beda, lib. i. De Wiremuthensi Mon. % 5.) And from these, so far as we can 
 ascertain, glass manufacture was derived in England, and the knowledge and practice of it per¬ 
 petuated and maintained ; and it is worthy of remark, that the manufacture of this article has been 
 mainly confined to that district down to the present time. So thoroughly did the Anglo-Saxons 
 acquire this knowledge, that it is said they furnished artizans, in connexion with this article, to 
 other nations, during the eighth century, by which means they also procured for themselves a new 
 embellishment of art, and a new source of human industry. 
 
 It is difficult, if not impossible, to conceive a correct idea of the form, merit, or dimensions 
 of the windows of the ecclesiastical edifices in these very early periods, and for some succeeding ages, 
 they having been introduced as a matter of usefulness, mainly to inclose the edifice and stop out the 
 weather so peculiar to this climate. It is, however, quite certain, that the manufacture of glass must 
 have made rapid strides in improvement in England, France, and Germany, during the eighth and 
 ninth centuries, though it is extremely doubtful if Painting on glass was then conceived, so as to 
 represent figures either on plain or coloured grounds. Perhaps a fanciful arrangement of patterns, 
 possibly interspersed with colours, might have suggested itself, and this practice might have led to 
 the ornamental and mosaic arrangement of colours so prevalent and universal in the earliest stages 
 of glass-painting which are known to us. 
 
 St. Benigne, of Dijon, who wrote about A.D. 1052, assures us, that there did exist in his time 
 in the church of that monastery a very ancient window, representing St. Paschasie, and that this 
 painting was taken from the old church restored by Charles the Bald; it appears therefore highly 
 probable that an attempt at ornamental windows, if not glass-painting, is nearly if not quite coeval 
 with the use of glass for windows, and that it was as much used for scientific and artistic decoration 
 as for comfort. The Romans also excelled in the art of manufacturing artificial gems, “ the trans¬ 
 parent splendour and colours of which would present at the first view a resemblance to the gems 
 themselveswhich record fully supports the previous conclusion, that coloured glasses were in some 
 way or manner in as early use as simple white glass. With these testimonies before us, we may well 
 think it likely that from its first introduction into this country it may have been applied ornamentally 
 in some mosaic manner, by a tasteful arrangement of such colours as were then available. 
 
Sect. II. ORIGIN OF PAINTING ON GLASS. 
 
 That very early attempts were made to paint on glass is very certain, not only from the 
 previous citation from St. Benigne, but also from the very ancient examples that we are acquainted 
 with, which are generally so well arranged in colouring, so elaborate, comprehensive in size, design, 
 ability, and fine pencilling, as to plainly suggest and justify a conclusion that the art was by no 
 means then in an infantine state, but that it must have been handed down in continued practice to 
 the artists of those works, though the exact epoch of its origin it may be impossible to ascertain. 
 As the mosaic use of glass implies its accomplishment by a subdivision of parts, to paint, diaper, or 
 place different patterns on these separate pieces for ornament, or to subdue its glare, was a natural 
 idea, and was probably first done in cold or unburnt enamel, oil, or otherwise, which, being found 
 not to be durable, may naturally have led to the consideration and invention of colours which would 
 bear vitrification. Nor can we suppose that this could have required a very great effort, as the 
 manufacture of pottery and domestic utensils, as well as the glass itself, would at once place the pro¬ 
 cess within reach and command of even rude and inexperienced artists. 
 
 As we have shewn, therefore, on the testimony of St. Benigne, that long before his time 
 (A.D. 1052) a representation of St. Paschasie had been made on glass, and as the earliest remaining 
 glass that we know of is not earlier than the twelfth century, (which cannot even now be excelled, if 
 equalled,) from its relative merits we may fairly and justly conclude, that the art of glass-painting 
 had made much progress towards excellence during the interim to this period. How far the use 
 of coloured glasses was known in the earliest attempts must be a mere matter of conjecture. To 
 draw figures on plain white glass in coarse and heavy lines, or to make geometric patterns, either in 
 outline or shaded by hatched strokes, was the simplest idea, and, to judge by the few remains we have 
 of the most remote period, was much in vogue even to the close of the thirteenth century. It is 
 highly probable that very minute pieces of colour were first added to embellish these plain windows, 
 the idea being derived from the setting of gems in a plainer material. As the art progressed the 
 amount of colour became greater and greater, and we have some fragments of the latter part of the 
 twelfth century, in which only two or three little medallions of blue or ruby glass were admitted as 
 centres of patterns. Such is the glass in the church of Braboume, in Kent, which is of this date. 
 
 As we are about to comment on the different styles separately, it may be well to examine into 
 and ascertain the main principles on which stained glass was carried into effect, when it had assumed 
 a scientific and historical position, and when its authors had taken upon them the important mission 
 of chroniclers of events, on a material much more durable than papyrus or parchment, in connexion 
 with sacred edifices, considered as safe depositaries from the holy reverence in which they were held. 
 As therefore in the early ages of the Church symbolism was, in the abeyance of letters, resorted to as 
 a means of Christian teaching, so in like manner the colours had their uses and symbolic meanings, 
 from which heraldic symbolism was undoubtedly derived; but as the principle was in its early stages 
 of Christian use applied mosaically, as derived from the East, so was it afterwards by stained glass 
 adapted to windows; and, as they were therefore in each case intended for the most part as gems 
 and precious metals, so in fact must they be considered, and not as mere colours. 
 
 Heraldry was not reduced to a science until after the first Crusade, (with which the earliest 
 remaining glass is coeval,) and which began in A.D. 1095, and brought together numbers of princes 
 and nobles from many countries, a circumstance which created a necessity, for the sake of distinction, 
 discrimination, order, and arrangement, of heraldic blazonry, and the more especially so as surnames 
 were not generally then adopted, the chiefs being designated by their various characteristics, such as 
 strength, conquest, colour, learning, place of birth, courage, &c., as is the case with all our earlier 
 monarchs. Yet a certain portion of blazon must have long previously prevailed in their banners. 
 
ORIGIN OF PAINTING ON GLASS. 
 
 7 
 
 and in their professional accompaniments, such being attributed to the tribes of Israel, * and cer¬ 
 tainly to both the Greek and Roman warriors. Thus in the play of iEschylus, called the Seven Chiefs 
 against Thebes, a lull account is given, almost in modem terms, of the devices, mottoes, and coloured 
 emblems by which the shield of each warrior was distinguished. 
 
 Whether, therefore, stained glass was in its mode of colouring derived from the symbolic 
 colours of the Church, or from heraldry or the principles of heraldry, from either, or both, is not 
 very important if considered as a means to effect only; for certain it is, that both were, and must 
 ever to a very great extent be, guided by and carried out upon the same rules, and this for the 
 simple reason that they mainly rest on the primitive colours, and it is a fixed principle, that the eye 
 cannot be satisfied without the presence of the whole. For this very reason it is a standard principle 
 in heraldry, that colour on colour, or metal on metal, is false blazon, a fact which has been averred 
 from time to time by all heraldic writers, and which, in short, is an heraldic law. It is true that a 
 very few exceptions exist, such as the arms of Jerusalem, (Argent, a cross potent between four crosses 
 potent or,) but they only the more forcibly shew the rule, and few if any of these degenerations 
 occur in pure English heraldry, which, from Richard Cceur de Lion, has been reduced to a most 
 accurate science, a most truthful and admirable index to history. 
 
 For the foregoing reasons it is absolutely necessary to thoroughly consider and study the prin¬ 
 ciples of heraldry in connexion with stained glass, as a key to the knowledge and understanding of the 
 primary principles of colouring, and more especially of the primitive styles of which we are about to 
 treat, which are indeed a sort of heraldry upon a larger scale. The reason why this has not been 
 generally comprehended is, that these works have been viewed through a false medium in respect 
 to the colours of which they are composed, namely, by considering them as yellow, blue, white, red, 
 and green; whereas to understand them properly, and to account for the extraordinary effects which 
 these colours produce in combination, they must be considered both symbolically and heraldically, 
 as the colours of the Church, and as the blazonry of our ancient nobility; viz., as topaz, sapphire, 
 pearl, ruby, and emerald ; understanding them as a mosaic assemblage of gems, to which they bear 
 so close a resemblance, rather than as a collection of painted colours. To illustrate this in colouring, 
 yellow and green are mawkish and sickly in effect, while topaz and emerald are magnificent in 
 depth and hue, especially when intermixed with rubies, sapphires, pearls, and gold, to which yellow 
 glass approximates. And what can compare to the gold colour of glass? it is almost more brilliant 
 than the metal itself; nor, until we are accustomed to view these works thus, are we likely to under¬ 
 stand them aright. We may wonder how such an astonishing effect can be practically produced, 
 and one possessing such a charm, by a mere assemblage of so many colours, without a chance of 
 elucidating the mystery, until we invest them with the character of jewellery. 
 
 What progress this art had made, as ornamentally used in this country during the Saxon era, 
 we have no means of ascertaining; but that they may have attempted ornament in it, by depicting 
 simple patterns of zig-zag or otherwise, is possible, by subdividing the several pieces by stone, wood, 
 or lead, so arranged as to form the outline, and to produce the required pattern and effect. As, 
 however, this must always be a subject for conjecture, that which is certain shall now come under 
 our notice. 
 
 his own 
 
 • They were indeed commands given to Moses from God himself: “And the children of Israel shall pitch their tents, every man by 
 camp, and every man by his own standard, throughout their hosts.” Numbers, chap. i. verse 52. 
 
STAINED 
 
 DURING T 
 
 GLASS 
 
 ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 
 
THE TWELFTH CENTURY. 
 
 In speaking of this epoch, which in architecture as well as glass comes within the denomi¬ 
 nation of Norman, we will take into consideration, under the head of this style, some of the earliest 
 examples extant or on record, and include such others as it may be necessary to adduce, down to 
 the thirteenth century; the principles of construction having continued the same, with slight differ¬ 
 ence, during all this period of time. This era, although abounding in symbolism, might well be 
 denominated the heraldic style in embryo, for its effects rest almost entirely upon the same prin¬ 
 ciples as that science; and, as the most beautiful compositions in stained glass are produced from 
 the accidental colouring of blazon, so is this style entirely constructed and regulated by the counter¬ 
 change of gems in like manner; and undoubtedly it is at once the most superb and magnificent of 
 all the styles ever used or attempted in this art. In fact, no assemblage of colours can by any 
 means surpass the grandeur, magnificence, and mystical effect of the rich borders composed of 
 minute pieces of all the recognised colours, blended so harmoniously as never to clash, but pro¬ 
 ducing an inconceivable unity of design by their intermixture. It must be observed that the bor¬ 
 ders usually contained all the colours which the artists could command. These borders were con¬ 
 structed by intersections of gold-colour or pearl, which subdivided them into various small forms or 
 panels, usually circular, or tending to that shape, by which means they obtained two distinct 
 grounds for colour, which were almost invariably ruby and sapphire; the ornament thereon being 
 tinted with all the other remaining colours. But to accomplish the proper effect, and to prevent 
 the appearance of heaviness by blazoning colour on colour, all these after-tints were kept of a pale 
 and neutral kind, approaching to white, all the ornaments of the border being by this means approxi¬ 
 mated to metal by their paleness, and thus preserving the principles and rules of blazon, with all the 
 effect of comprehensive colouring.* These borders inclosed the main body of the window, which 
 usually contained intersections so interwoven as to form circles, ovals, lozenges, and other fantastic 
 forms, in the principal of which were placed the illustrative parts, t consisting of subjects or sym¬ 
 bolical devices; J nor was it uncommon in these times to insert others than those immediately 
 relating to Scripture, such for instance as persons of various trades and vocations, who contributed 
 to erect such works, and placed in the medallions subjects symbolizing their calling, such as the 
 story of Ruth for agriculturists, &c. 
 
 But, although these entablatures contained the principal story and interest of the window, 
 yet they were always kept small and subordinate, because they were less beautiful, that is, contri¬ 
 buted less to the general effect, although possessing more pictorial interest, than the backgrounds. 
 The mode of constructing the figures and their accompaniments in the medallions was conventional, 
 the same manner continuing during the epoch of which we are now speaking; and it is to be remarked 
 that the same habit and mode prevailed during this time amongst all practitioners, in this, as in other 
 countries, whether in stained glass, fresco, polychromatic ornament, heraldry, or tapestry. The inva¬ 
 riable colours for the backgrounds of the medallions were sapphire or ruby (always one of these), ex¬ 
 isting in one broad colour in the same panel or shape. The curious and quaint buildings depicted 
 on them are in no wise natural, but displayed, after the manner of charges in heraldry, in a sort of 
 tier § over each other in the same panel, and sometimes the same figures, shewing a subject of 
 Scripture in one part, and its exemplification or moral in the other, both being exhibited in the 
 same panel, without even an attempt to make them a portraiture of nature; and yet, with seldom 
 more than three or four figures, they contrived symbolically so clearly to express their works, as to 
 
 * See Borders of Plates: St. Peter's, Stepney; Centre Opening of Bromley St. Leonard's; and East Window of Trinity Church, Brompton. 
 
 Ibid. 
 
 J See Side Windows, Bromley St. Leonard’s. 
 
 $ See upper spandrel of St. Thomas’s, Winchester. 
 
10 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 make them intelligible to the meanest capacity. Thus, where they portrayed water, it was by wavy 
 lines of grey and white, or clouds nebulae, precisely as in heraldry. Nor did they ever attempt to make 
 their works assume the effect of an ordinary picture by the introduction of landscape, which was 
 studiously avoided ; but they invariably gave the same emblazoned effect that is produced by 
 needle or woven-work. Architecture, figures, animals, utensils, &c., they placed on the same 
 ground, and independent of any base for them to rest on; and when they required to represent 
 trees they were merely bulbs on stems, which they coloured in ruby, sapphire, topaz, or amethyst, 
 most unlike nature truly; and yet by this means introducing the required colour, their primary 
 object, they arrived at the desired effect. Next to the principal or larger medallions were minor 
 ones, formed in like manner by the interweaving of the same intersections, which were usually filled 
 by quaint emblems or attributes, relating to Christian martyrdoms, or to the subjects in the principal 
 ones, or were embellished by some appropriate ornament in unison with the border. 1 he remainder, 
 constituting the back-ground, was mosaically constructed of sapphire, topaz, and ruby, and was 
 usually reticulated by the ruby being introduced in stripes crossing each other on the sapphire 
 ground, and forming it thereby into squares, * * * § with small pieces of gold-colour at the angles, by which 
 an assemblage of the primitive colours was produced in such a manner as to create a magnificence 
 of colouring not to be comprehended by any description, nor, perhaps, to be obtained by any other 
 means. The works of stained glass during this epoch are so exactly in unison with the illuminated 
 MSS. of the time, and so much after the manner of the Bayeux Tapestry, that it requires no further 
 proof to convince us that the ancients were not (as thought by some) so much deficient in the know¬ 
 ledge of drawing and perspective, as possessed of peculiar notions of their own in carrying out their 
 extraordinary conceptions, f a fact which will not be doubted by any who have once attempted to 
 make themselves masters of their style. 
 
 The celebrated Abb£ Suger states, that he procured “ the best artists from all countries;' 
 to construct his windows for the church of St. Denis, in the twelfth century : and when we take 
 into consideration the concentration of talent exhibited on this occasion, and that they combined all 
 the necessities of the art in each person, being at once chemists, glass manufacturers, artists, colour¬ 
 ists, glass-painters, and glaziers—a sphere of action requiring a vast scope of talent it would be a 
 strange assumption that they could not have drawn less conventionally if they had desired it, espe¬ 
 cially as, in this instance, artists from all countries agreed in practice. Their drawing is indeed too 
 unlike nature to seem an attempt at, or even a caricature of it, and too much ability is exhibited, 
 especially in the delineation of the countenance, to doubt their competency. This will be more 
 evident to us, if we study the perfection of their colouring and ornaments, which are not only truth¬ 
 fully obedient in their character and design, but are pencilled with an astonishing care, and almost 
 invariably so finely and minutely executed, that they will vie with modem productions, either on 
 paper or glass. Their knowledge of effect they exhibited by using vigorous and bolder lines where 
 requisite for that purpose. These principles of drawing, continuing as they did invariable th rough 
 two centuries and a quarter, naturally imply that if any other mode of delineation had been desirable 
 it would have been readily accomplished with nature present to copy from. An able antiquarian 
 author J has so aptly expressed himself on viewing specimens of this art, (of rather later date, but 
 appropriately to the feelings which those of this era are calculated to inspire,) that we here quote it. 
 “ So brilliant,” says he, “ are these windows, that it would seem in fact as though the artist had 
 dipped his pencil in turn in a solution of amethyst, topaz, ruby, grenate, and emerald.” This is 
 most charmingly expressed, but by no means conveys an exaggerated idea of the feeling which 
 works of this art are calculated to produce; $ and the different works of each succeeding period 
 
 * See Bromley St. Leonard’s, St. Peter’s Stepney, and Trinity window, Brompton. 
 
 -f- This will be best understood by referring to the Plate of St. Thomas, Winchester, especially the upper spandrel, and Ely Cathedral, 
 as being most faithful to this style; the medallions of St. Peter’s being less so, from being required to avoid conventionalism as much as 
 possible. 
 
 \ “ Biographical, Archaiological, and Picturesque Tour." Dibdin. 
 
 § “ The curious oriental reds, yellows, blews, and greens in glasse-painting, especially when the sun shines, doe much refresh the 
 spirits. After this manner did Dr. R. revive the spirits of a poor distracted gentleman, for whereas his former physitian shutt up his win- 
 
DURING THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 
 
 II 
 
 impart the same impression more or less varied, although standard and continuous in style of com¬ 
 position as subservient to architecture. 
 
 In the style however of which we are speaking, from the basis of the medallions of the back¬ 
 grounds and of the borders being sapphire, this is in consequence the prevailing colour, and the 
 general impression is therefore that they have this effect; nor is this difficult to account for, the orna¬ 
 mental parts in continuation in the decoration of the apse, being usually blue powdered with golden 
 stars; * but, from the intermixture of so many other colours in so many minute particles, distributed 
 by the different patterns and intersections, the whole effect in the distance is a most glorious purple, 
 the glow of which, as just cited, Dr. Dibdin has so well and so rapturously expressed. 
 
 Nevertheless, although these works were so magnificent, they were never gaudy, possessing 
 as they did such a prevalent quantity of blue, t which was ever most intense, yet so qualified and 
 subdued as to reduce it to harmony with the rest. The same was the case in all the other colours 
 except ruby, so that, by making all the other colours retiring, this was brought out in all its radiancy, 
 a circumstance which furnishes the main reason why the ruby of the antique is thought to be so 
 much superior in tincture to the modem, when in reality its apparent richness is solely from its 
 tasteful application. By the repose of these ancient models (seldom met with in modern produc¬ 
 tions) it was provided that windows should not appear as so many separate ornaments, and kill by 
 their vividness and gaudiness every thing else, but that they should amalgamate, unite, and blend into 
 one comprehensive harmony all the other pails and features, preserving a sobriety and solemnity so 
 essential to true taste, and bringing together into one whole, stained windows, fresco-painting, tapes¬ 
 try, and all the other accessories of religious edifices. 
 
 In designs for this style it has evidently been felt as a principle of taste, that all its features 
 and intersections should be kept as much as possible to the complete or half circle; for, although 
 other forms, such as lozenge and quatrefoil, were sometimes used, the former is most primitive, pure, 
 and in unison with the arch, a thing of paramount importance, deviating only in the minor parts by 
 ingeniously, and as it were coquettishly, interlacing the outline of the plan, thus uniting the principles 
 of this art with that of the architect, t As this art flourished during the twelfth century, it is highly 
 probable that its mosaic character was derived mostly from the East, by the warriors and pilgrims 
 during the earlier Crusades, first probably in the painting and decoration, as in the Moorish palaces 
 in Spain, and then in glass, so soon as the combining of the various pieces together was found to be 
 practicable. 
 
 We will now examine the probable difficulties which the operators in these primitive times 
 had to contend with, as well as the advantages which they possessed in carrying out their plans. 
 From their works which are now remaining, we know that they had the power and command of 
 eveiy possible variety of colours which were or ever can be necessary. There can be therefore no 
 doubt on this point. <> Nor is this to be wondered at, when we take into consideration, that for the 
 several works it was then the custom to obtain glass-manufacturers as well as glass-workers from 
 many countries, amongst whom there seemed to be a general understanding, a sort of free-masonry, 
 for their common object. 
 
 Nevertheless, they must have laboured under great disadvantages in regard to the manu¬ 
 facture of their material, it being on record that in their early works the separate pieces did not in 
 general exhibit a size beyond from four to five inches, and these of such various thickness, and so 
 
 dons and kept him in utter dnrknesse, he did open his window lids, and let in the light, and filled his windows with glasses of curious tinctures, 
 which the distempered person would always be looking on, and it did conduce to the quieting of his disturbed spmts."-Aubrey, >» Anecdotes 
 and Traditions, edited for the Camden Society by W. J. Thoms, Esq., p. 96. 
 
 * “ The figure of the three triangles," says Rennet, “ intersected and made of five lines, is called the Pentangle of Solomon, and, when 
 it is delineated in the body of a man, it is pretended to touch and point out the five places wherein our Saviour was wounded, and therefore 
 there was an old superstitious conceit that the figure was a Fuga Demonum-the devils were afraid of it.”—Anecdotes and Traditions, p. 97. 
 
 -j- For clearness, the description will now be by colours, not by gems and metals as heretofore. 
 
 + See Plate of Thurlow Memorial, in Norwich Cathedral. 
 
 $ The. Author has an original border of glass of this date, containing ruby, blue, green, purple, and yellow, in all variety: it is part 
 of the Suger glass of St. Denis, from the Museum des Petits Augustines. 
 
12 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 unequally rude and rough on the surface, as to bear evidence of their want of power and science in the 
 making of it to anything like an even surface, and of their not possessing any method by which they 
 could regulate and depend upon the manufacture. Nor were they better practised in such colours as 
 were not solid in their mass, or, as it is technically called, flashed or coated, which is always * the case 
 in ruby, sometimes in blue; the ancient specimens of these glasses being strangely irregular and de¬ 
 fective as a material, as well as in evenness of colour. This, though clearly a defect, and not aimed 
 at as it did not exist in the solid colours, contributed much to their effect, and it is not to be doubted 
 that the irregularity of their glass, although not sought for, was well calculated to produce a glisten¬ 
 ing and gem-like effect, of which the later and more evenly manufactured glass, superior as it is in 
 quality, is incapable. 
 
 It is pretty clear, therefore, that these primitive manufacturers did not understand the method 
 of blowing glass, but that they fused their coloured metals in earthen pots or crucibles, and then 
 cast them as nearly as possible to the requisite sizes, afterwards groozing them to the exact shape 
 wanted, which must have involved great labour and pains, as the use of the diamond in cutting 
 glass was not known until the sixteenth century ; and as Suger says that they were in his case 
 lodged and provisioned during the operation, it is clear that all was done on the spot, + certain 
 officials belonging to the monastery being commissioned to the surveillance of the valuables con¬ 
 cerned therein and pertaining to its manufacture. Much error has existed in the supposition, that 
 the depth of effect produced by these early examples is dependent on their thickness. Such is not 
 generally the case, for it varied very much, even in the same piece; for example, plates of glass may 
 be made from half an inch upwards in thickness, and be nearly if not quite colourless, even when 
 placed on white paper ; whilst another sheet of glass, only one-twelfth of an inch in thickness, may 
 possess fullness of colour of a greenish or any other hue, precisely because the material of which the 
 glass is made gives it that tone in its fusion. In fact, this is the constituent colour; and such was 
 the case in the works we now treat of, the substance having scarcely any influence over it. Never¬ 
 theless, it is the case, that much of the early glass is thicker than that used in the later ages, particu¬ 
 larly in the Perpendicular period, and in many instances at the present day. 
 
 Much difference of opinion has existed as to whether the ancient glass-painters planned their 
 own works, some persons attributing this portion to the monks, or special artists educated for that 
 purpose. But Suger says, “We have had painted a series of windows,” &c.; nor does he advert 
 to himself, his brother ecclesiastics, or any special artist, as having had any influence over the con¬ 
 struction of the designs. We may therefore probably conclude that the whole art was concentrated 
 in the persons who made the windows, the parties requiring such works having then, as at present, 
 the power to influence the productions only so far as suggestion of subjects, inscriptions, &c., the 
 general style being worked out by the artists, in conformity with the architecture and their seals, to 
 which they bear a close affinity. 
 
 Proceeding in due order, we now have to treat of their painting. The lead which combined 
 the glass constituted the main outlines, the principal plan, and the general features of their design; 
 and on these the effect chiefly depended. The lead used in these times was less broad than that of 
 the present day, and seldom varied in size, whereas many sizes are now used in the same composi¬ 
 tion, by which means all the various effects of different breadths of outline can be obtained. This 
 object was thus accomplished by artificially adding to the breadth of the lead by blacking in, or 
 painting an additional breadth in opaque colour on the glass itself. The various pieces which the 
 lead confined together were veiy small, and the ornaments and pencilling upon them most elaborate; 
 and, though so unimportant to the general effect, they were usually done with a care and minuteness 
 
 i ne juunor nas a nne modem example ( 
 
 ruuy, manuiaciurea solid 11 
 
 
 abraded on yellow material. 
 
 +J" <he fifteenth century, Mr. Gilbert observe., that '• Band, of free-muons, with their nabtanta, 
 
 travelled from place to place, and were employed more in repairing or enlarging edifice., than in constructing new one. : and the .imlhirity 
 the mm V , ™ 0 "S rel “' d <” f°™er times, may well induce a belief of carver, and glas,-.finer, offering 
 
 “shTO.”;oi,b,rMt r .rr“ l ““ —— Co,lection, and Translation. 
 
DURING THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 
 
 13 
 
 scarcely to be conceived by those who have not closely examined them. The heads of the figures 
 were done on a kind of flesh-coloured glass, and, though small, were portrayed by able, expres¬ 
 sive, and simply arranged lines. It is a favourite notion of some, that the painters of ancient glass 
 did not attempt shadow, but depended wholly on their outlines. Close examination of any ancient 
 example, or an inspection of the magnificent work lately published, by the Jesuits, on the beautiful 
 glass in Bourges, &c., which contains faithful fac-similes at large, will at once dispel this fallacy. 
 So truly is this the case, that it is impossible to copy them without shadowing; the difference being, 
 that in the conventional styles their shadowing was upon the principle of relief , to tone and mellow 
 their glass, not by supposing the light to proceed from any given point, but by making it so qualified 
 and subdued as not to appear to be shadowed, so that the picture was suitable to any aspect. 
 Having painted their work, it only remained for them to fix it by a process of heat, to connect it by 
 the glazier’s art, and, lastly, to erect it, all which they achieved by themselves; fulfilling the parts of 
 chemist, manufacturer, draughtsman, artist, and mechanic. 
 
 We have endeavoured to shew the advantages which were possessed in this, the infancy of the 
 art, and will now, by way of contrast, make some remarks on the disadvantages which they laboured 
 under as compared with later operators. 
 
 The advantage since acquired is the ability to manufacture glass to any required substance 
 and expanse, and the still greater power of taking it in the raw or white material after its manu¬ 
 facture, and, by processes of heat, converting it into other and various colours; whereas they 
 evidently had it not in their conception or power to produce any two colours on the same piece of 
 glass; they knew no means of introducing any second colour except by means of lead. 
 
 An eminent author, who wrote in the eighteenth century, and died in 1772,* says of the 
 style of this epoch, “ There were seen in the thirteenth century many subjects taken from the old 
 testament, or acts of patron saints of the place, of a taste the manner of drawing in those days. First, 
 simply with very little shadow, as in the preceding century; then they tried to form some hatchings, 
 which they placed more especially on their back-grounds and draperies. Their windows were gene¬ 
 rally fixed with iron frames to the shapes of the outline. These windows, in which the surface is 
 generally found to be rough, are sometimes in circles, ovals, quatrefoils, &c.; but, in regard to the 
 historical portion, less importance was given to it, but the back-grounds were all manner of tints and 
 varied designs, giving the most brilliant and varied effects, and by the order and disposition of these 
 pieces forming a most splendid transparent mosaic. The exact symmetry which seemed to prevail 
 in their colouring, the assemblage and freedom of all parts, gave to the whole a fascinating effect to 
 the spectator, the eye being more gratified with the back-ground than the subjects which it inclosed. 
 
 The above quotation fully describes the main principles upon which these very early stages 
 of glass-painting were embodied, and it is well supported, not only by the present remains, but also 
 by the best accounts which are transmitted to us, of which France possesses by far the earlier and 
 greater quantity. English records contain but few accounts of ancient stained windows which are 
 not now in existence; but the History of Peterborough Minster, by Gunton, gives a description of 
 the beautiful windows of the cloisters in that church, destroyed in the time of Cromwell; and that 
 most curious narrative, The Ancient Rites of Durham Abbey, furnishes an elaborate history of all 
 the stained glass which adorned that mighty cathedral at the time of the Reformation. Amongst 
 the earliest notices of French glass are those of the abbey church of St. Denis. The series of sub¬ 
 jects which composed these windows were representations of the military events during the first Cru¬ 
 sades, in the time of Philip the First of France ; some concerning the histoiy of that kingdom, and 
 others relating to Scripture. These works are very remarkable from the fact of their being of so 
 early a date as the twelfth century. During the Revolution in that country the greater part of these 
 ancient relics were destroyed ; but a curious work is still extant,t which preserves wood-cuts of nearly 
 all the subjects of these windows which did exist. Those portions which were to be seen in the 
 
 * Pierre le Vieil, L’ Art de la Peinture sur Verre et de la Viterie. 
 f « Monumens de la Monarchie Francais," by Montfaucon. 
 
 E 
 
14 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 Museum des Petits Augustines, have, since the suppression of that establishment, been lestoied to tl e 
 church of St. Denis. These windows are the most ancient, not only of France, but probably in ex¬ 
 istence, of which we have a certain documentary date. They are a part of the extensive woiks 
 undertaken by the order of the celebrated Abbot Suger, * who has transmitted, in a curious woik 
 his abbatial administration, an article of exceeding interest upon many of these windows, it bein 0 an 
 authenticated document of the developement of the art during the twelfth century, and also convey 
 ing some notion of the symbolical manner in which the churches were decorated at that time . 
 
 “ Vitrearum etiam novarum praeelaram varietatem ab ea prima, 
 qua: incipit a stirpe Jesse in capite ecclesite usque ad earn qua: 
 superest principal! portae in introitu ecclesiae, tain superius quam infe- 
 rius, magistrorum multorum de diversis nationibus manu exquisita 
 depingi fecimus. Una quarum de materialibus ad immaterialia exei- 
 tans, Paulum apostolum molam vert ere, prophetas saccos ad molain 
 apportare repriesentat. Sunt itaque ejus materia: versus isti.” 
 
 “ We bad painted," says he, “ a series of windows remarkable from 
 the variety of subjects, beginning with the Tree of Jesse, starting 
 from the east end of the church to the window over the principal en¬ 
 trance. All of these, both above and below, are the works of many 
 masters from different countries ; one of these windows, by material 
 objects exemplifying spiritual ones, represents the apostle Paul turning 
 a mill, and the prophets bringing sacks of flour.” 
 
 Annexed to the subjects were Latin inscriptions illustrating them thus : 
 
 Tollis agendo de furfure, Paule, farinam; 
 
 Mosaics legis intima nota facis. 
 
 Fit de tot granis verus sine furfure panis. 
 Perpetuusque cibus noster et angelicus. 
 
 Item in eadem vitrea, ubi aufertur velamen de facie Moysis :— 
 Quod Moysen velat Christi doctrina revelat. 
 
 Denudat legem qui spoliant Moysen. 
 
 Paul, in turning the mill, thou separatest the tlour trom tne Dran ; 
 thou makest known the law of Moses. 
 
 With this grain is the real bread made, when cleaned from its bran, 
 which is to be our perpetual food and that of angels. 
 
 In the same window the veil which covered the face of Moses is 
 removed:— 
 
 That which veiled Moses the doctrine of Christ reveals. 
 
 Those who withdraw from Moses his veil, place at open day 
 the law of God. 
 
 In eadem vitrea super arcum fcederis :— 
 
 Fcederis ex area Christi cruce sistitur ara. 
 Fcedere majori vult ibi vita mori. 
 
 Item in eadem ubi solvunt librum leo et agnus :— 
 
 Qui Deus est magnus librum leo solvit et agnus. 
 
 Agnus sive leo fit caro juncta Deo. 
 
 In alia vitrea, ubi Alia Pharaonis invenit Moysen in fiscella:— 
 Est in fiscella Moyses puer ille, puella 
 Regia mente pia quern fovet ecclesi*. 
 
 In eadem vitrea Moysi Dominus apparuit in igne rubi:— 
 
 Sicut conspicitur rubus hie ardere, nec ardet. 
 
 Sic divo plenus hoc audet {ardet) ab igne, nec ardet. 
 
 Item in eadem vitrea ubi Pharao cum equitatu suo in mare derner- 
 gitur: 
 
 Quod baptisma bonis, hoc maliti® Pharaonis 
 Forma facit similis causaque dissimilis. 
 
 In eadem vitrea ubi Moyses exaltat serpentem mneum:— 
 
 Sicut serpentes serpens necat seneus omnes, 
 
 Sic exaltatus hostes necat in cruce Christus. 
 
 In eadem vitrea ubi Moyses accipit legem in monte:— 
 
 Lege data Moysi juvat illam gratia Christi. 
 
 Gratia vivificat, littera mortificat. 
 
 In the same window, above the ark of the covenant:— 
 
 The altar arising from the ark of the covenant reposes on the 
 cross of the Lord. To cement that more important union, 
 life will die. 
 
 In the same window a lion and lamb opening a book :— 
 
 He that is a powerful God, a lion and lamb, opens this book. 
 
 The lamb or the lion becomes flesh in union with God. 
 
 In another window the daughter of Pharaoh finds Moses in a wicker 
 basket: — 
 
 The infant in the wicker basket is Moses. 
 
 The daughter of a king cherishes him with a religious respect. 
 
 In the same window the Lord appears to Moses in the burning bush:— 
 As we see this bush in flames without consuming, so he who is 
 inflamed by a divine fire burns without being burned. 
 
 In the same window, where Pharaoh with all his cavalry is swal¬ 
 lowed up by the sea:— 
 
 What baptism effects for the good, that the similar form but dif¬ 
 ferent cause of Pharaoh's immersion does for wickedness. 
 
 In the same window, where Moses raises the brazen serpent:— 
 
 As the brazen serpent kills all other serpents, so Christ erected 
 on the cross destroys all his enemies. 
 
 The window where Moses receives the law on the mountain:— 
 
 The law being given to Moses, the grace of Christ strengthens it. 
 The grace enlivens, the letter kills. 
 
 Suger continues to say : 
 
 Unde quia magni constant mirifico opere, sumptuque profuso “ As these great windows are of wonderful workmanship, and filled 
 vitri vestiti et sapphirorum materia, tuitioni et refectioni earum with a profuse outlay of material in glass and sapphires, -f- we have 
 ministerialem magistrum, sicut etiam omamentis aureis et argen- appointed to serve us in their care and repair a master-artist, as also 
 teis peritum aurifabrum constituimus : qui et praebendas suas, et to the gold and silver ornaments a skilful goldsmith : both of whom 
 
 * The account of Suger’s abbacy is to be found in “ L’ Histoire de 1’ Abbaye de St. Denis," by M. Felibien. 
 
 -j- It would seem that the good Suger was with regard to the pretended sapphires completely wheedled by the duplicity of the glass- 
 painters ; and this will surprise us less when remembering that one of the historians of the Abbey of St. Denis, posterior by some centuries to 
 this venerable abbot, added his own faith to the trickery, by which Suger had aUowed himself to be imposed upon; this is in fact how 
 
DURING THE ELEVENTH AND TWELFTH CENTURIES. 
 
 15 
 
 quod eis super hoc visum est, videlicet ab altari numinos, et a com- shall receive their prebends (of food and clothing), and whatever else 
 muni fratrum horreo annonam suscipiant, et ab eorum providentia may be deemed necessary for them, as money from the altar, and pro- 
 nunquam se absentent. vender from the common store of the brethren; and they shall never 
 
 absent themselves from the care of these things.” 
 
 These remarkable documents, although of such a remote period, are so clear and explanatory, 
 that in themselves they sufficiently shew the position of the art at this time, and are most fortunately 
 in immediate connexion with the earliest remains. 
 
 It may be as well to record here, that the Abbey of St. Victor, at Paris, before the Revo¬ 
 lution, possessed some remarkable windows, which must have been deeply interesting from their 
 variety, consisting as they did of many of the earliest productions, and constituting a sort of chro¬ 
 nological museum of this art, in a series of windows which had been executed during the twelfth, 
 thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries. Such a loss as this is truly deplorable: the result of a reckless 
 fanaticism which can never be remedied. The only example which we know of the twelfth century 
 in this country, is a geometrical pattern window, which has several particles of colour slightly painted 
 and interspersed; it is in its original semi-Norman arch, with which, from the construction of its pat¬ 
 tern and the primitiveness of its material, it is evidently coeval. It is in the north side of the chancel 
 of Braboume church, in Kent, but in a sadly dilapidated state; nevertheless, it is still a valuable 
 relic, as it establishes the fact which Malmesbury avers respecting the pre-existing glass of Canterbury 
 cathedral, and also the opinion of Sir W. Dugdale, who afterwards asserts that “ he finds the art 
 of painting on glasse came into England in King John’s time this glass is however anterior to his 
 reign by at least a quarter of a century. 
 
 Some remains of very early glass also exist in York cathedral, of which the following is a 
 recent account. “ The earliest painted glass in this city, and indeed one of the earliest specimens 
 that I am acquainted with in England, is a portion of a Jesse in the second window from the west, 
 on the north side of the clerestory of the nave of the cathedral. It forms the upper subject in the 
 westernmost lower light of this window. The date of the glass is about 1200 ; it is therefore much 
 older than the greater part of the early-English glass at Canterbury cathedral, to which I do not 
 think a date can be assigned much earlier than the middle of the thirteenth century. A coloured 
 engraving of this very curious example is given in Browne’s ‘ History of York Cathedral,’ plate 123.”t 
 
 From the windows of St. Denis and the one at Braboume being the only remains we cer¬ 
 tainly know of this epoch, our conclusions of the practice of design during the twelfth century must 
 be thus : 
 
 As at St. Denis: 
 
 1. Jesse, or foliated designs containing figures. 
 
 2. Rich mosaics, borders, and medallions, with subjects. 
 
 3. Geometrical, as at Braboume. 
 
 De Doublet expresses himself with regard to it: “ Suger had obtained with much care window-makers and composers of glass from materials 
 the most exquisite, namely, sapphires in abundance, which they pulverized and melted with their glass, to give it the required colour, which 
 charmed truly into admiration." This pretended fusion of sapphires is in fact nothing more than coated or flashed blue.—Essai sur la 
 Pcinture sur Verre, by M. E. Langlois, pp. 141-2. Some have doubted the supposed reality of the sapphires, but the evident care and pre¬ 
 caution about them makes the matter pretty conclusive.— Author. 
 
 * «* Sir William Dugdale told me he finds the art of painting on glasse first came into England in King John's time.”— Aubrey. 
 Vide “ Anecdotes and Traditions,” edited by the Camden Society. 
 
 -f- On the Painted Glass in the Cathedral and Churches of York ; Proceedings of the Archaeological Institute at York, 1846, p. 18, by 
 C. Winston. 
 

 In 
 

^J-RTOjlma’ airrmno lull 69JW. 3‘G«fpaca) lA^ I^Jm0^injlll4DBm{|«rt 
 
 W 
 Jumiim 
 
 X)urgnt& & (txrrufrfi fcg TEiliani THflrrmgion.42 3nKig 3* tEwt 
 
 dost (HinSoto of tljp ffhotr of Eortoirl] ffaflpiiml. 
 
 Qfmorial to t(jp lafettanonT&urlflto 
 
M 
 
ii»N«r ■ Saint P^Fs-Stork-Str^t: -p'^ 
 
 FrJBowUMQjmmoXit} nEaqa.MjogSf 
 
 ttmMi m Mon ly a floAii ^S^ttor* 
 
 wmmm 
 

THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 We will now proceed to an inquiry into the mode of practice during the thirteenth century, 
 the main principles of which will be found to differ in a very slight degree from the last. Amongst 
 the few examples which we shall cite by way of illustration, is one peculiarly remarkable specimen 
 which still remains entire, and in a tolerable state of preservation, in the little village church of 
 
 Molineux in Normandy, 
 
 adjacent to the ruins of the ancient residence of the Dukes of Normandy, vulgarly called “ The Castle 
 of Robert the Devil.” This window, which is in the chancel over the altar, is of the early part of 
 the thirteenth century; the border is composed of the insignia of France and Castile, being very re¬ 
 markable from its very early example of heraldic appendages'. The medallions inclose four person¬ 
 ages of high distinction, namely, Queen Blanche, King Louis, his son, and his wife Margaret of Pro¬ 
 vence. The back-ground is unlike Suger’s windows, and differs in one respect from most of the 
 windows of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, being heraldically paly, otherwise ruby and blue, 
 divided into several perpendicular stripes, running throughout from the bottom to the top of the 
 window, after the fashion of the display of the livery colours in early banners. This window ex¬ 
 hibits and embodies so much heraldry and heraldic feeling, even at this early period, that it is alone 
 sufficient to dispel all doubts respecting the close connection between heraldry and stained glass at 
 this time. In the Museum of French Monuments, amongst other curious relics and rarities which 
 this place possessed, was a very remarkable compartment of stained glass from St. Leu, the date of 
 which is not known, but which from its chaste and curious conception we will record. It exhibited 
 “the Annunciation to the Virgin. From the beak of the dove, representing the Holy Ghost, 
 started a luminous ray to the ear of the Virgin ; and in the midst of this ray was portrayed a very 
 little child, holding a small cross, being but a reproduction of the following verse, from a canticle 
 much in vogue by our forefathers, and attributed to the famous St. Thomas a Becket, archbishop of 
 Canterbury ; it was entitled “ The five joyful mysteries of the Virgin. ” 
 
 “ Gaude Virgo, Mater Christi, 
 
 “ Qua; per aurem concepisti, 
 
 “ Gabriele nuncio.” * 
 
 As we are mentioning St. Thomas a Becket, we will at once proceed to the notice of the 
 stained glass of the date we are speaking of (the thirteenth century) in 
 
 Canterbury Cathedral, 
 
 with which he was so intimately connected. The eastern part of this most glorious edifice is of the 
 latest Norman construction. William of Malmesbury says, "that it was then considered the finest 
 in England from its stained glass, its marble pavements, and the curious paintings on its roof;” but, 
 although this cathedral at the present day possesses some very ancient stained glass, and that not 
 inferior in merit to the most ancient and excellent of the preceding, the designs and composition 
 being regulated upon the same principles, yet it could not be these precise windows which Malmes¬ 
 bury alluded to, the beginning of the thirteenth century being the earliest date to which we can 
 attribute them. These windows are remarkable, not only from their being semi-circular, but from 
 the glass being executed at an after period, which leaves no doubt that, in carrying out their decora¬ 
 tion at that time, the artists were accustomed, as a matter of good taste, to take into consideration 
 the style of architecture they were dealing with. 
 
 * Langlois, “ Essai sur la Peinture sur Verre,” p. 157- 
 
18 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 These windows, like those of St. Denis, consist of borders constructed upon similar principles, 
 the historical parts being in medallions of the like kind, and the legends disposed of in the same 
 way, namely, in the border surrounding the subjects which form the medallions, or in straight lines 
 on the back-grounds of them. 
 
 The principal difference of character consists in the main back-grounds of the windows, 
 which, instead of being reticulated as those of St. Denis, are formed of deep and massive ruby, on 
 which are displayed very free scrolls of semi-foliated ornaments of various semi-colours, which are 
 so managed as to be taken up at each turn or division of this ornament, than which nothing of the 
 kind can be more magnificent. * Now, although these subjects leave no doubt upon the matter, this 
 very ornament goes far to proclaim the date of execution, the very same kind, combined in different 
 ways, being so plentifully and continuously used in connexion with the style of architecture which 
 immediately succeeded, which strengthens the opinion that they adapted themselves to the style of 
 architecture which they had to treat with. It is stated that “ After the like calamities by fire, this 
 church again suffered by it a. d. 1174, destroying the whole choir from the Angel steeple to the 
 east end, the chapel of the Virgin Mary, and many oflices of the monastery; the Angel steeple 
 being uninjured. Gervase, who witnessed it, gave a particular account respecting it: William of 
 Sens began to restore and erect the new parts in a.d. 1175, but, falling from a scaffold fifty feet 
 high, he was, although not killed on the spot, obliged to discontinue it, and it was carried on by 
 William Anglus, who completed the east end of the choir, Trinity Chapel, and the round tower 
 called Becket’s Crown. In a. d. 1220 the Chapel and Altar, which had been consecrated to the 
 Holy Trinity, were dedicated to St. Thomas the Martyr, whose relics were removed thither.” t Be¬ 
 fore the Reformation this cathedral was adorned with much painted glass, the chapel of the Holy 
 Trinity, in which was the shrine of Saint Thomas a Becket, being particularly distinguished in this 
 manner, (so that “ his history might have been completed from it.” 1) Somner II has given an 
 account of the pictures and inscriptions of twelve windows of Scripture, as follows :— 
 
 “ Fenestras in superiori parte Eccj.es n: Christi Cant, incipientes a parte Septentrionaei.” 
 
 Fenestra Prima. 
 
 1. Moses cum rubo. In medio, Angelus cum Maria. 
 
 Rubus non consumitur, tua nec comburitur 
 In carne Virginitas. 
 
 2. Gideon cum vellere et conca. 
 
 Vellus ccelesti rore maduit, dum puellas venter intumuit. 
 
 3. Misericordia et Veritas. In medio, Maria et Elizabeth. 
 
 Plaude puer puero, Virgo vetulse, quia vero 
 
 Obviat hie pietas: veteri dat lex nova metas. 
 
 4. Justitia et Pax. 
 
 Applaudit Regi previsor, gratia legi. 
 
 Oscula Justitia; dat Pax ; cognata Marite. 
 
 5. Nebugodonosor et lapis cum statua. Puer in praesepi. 
 
 Ut Regi visus lapis est de monte recisus, 
 
 Sic gravis absque viro Virgo parit ordine miro. 
 
 6. In medio, Maria. 
 
 7. Moses cum Virga. In medio, Angelus et Pastores. 
 
 Ut contra morem dedit arida virgula florem, 
 
 Sic Virgo puerum verso parit ordine rerum. 
 
 8. David. “ Gaudebunt campi et omnia quae in eis sunt.” 
 
 9. Abacuc. “ Operuit ccelos gloria ejus,” &c. 
 
 * For an exemplification, see Plate of lower part of East Window of Ely Cathedral. 
 
 ■f" Abridged from Britton’s “ Canterbury Cathedral." The reader will find the account given at length in Professor Willis’s “ Architec¬ 
 tural History of Canterbury Cathedral.” 
 
 % Gostling’s “Walk,” &c., p. 311, 312. 
 
 i “ Antiquities of Canterbury," 2nd. edition, by Nicholas Battely, M.A., London, 1703. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 1.9 
 
 Fenestra Secunda. 
 
 1. In medio, tres Reges equitantes. Balaam. “ Orietur stella ex Jacob, et exurget homo de 
 
 Israel.” 
 
 Isaia et Jeremia. “ Ambulabunt gentes in lumine tuo,” &c. 
 
 2. In medio, Herodes et Magi. Christus et Gentes. 
 
 Qui sequentur me non ambulabunt in tenebris. 
 
 Stella Magos duxit, et eos ab H erode reduxit, 
 
 Sic Sathanam gentes fugiunt, te Christe sequentes. 
 
 3. Pharaoh et Moses cum populo exiens ab Egypto. 
 
 Exit ab erumpna populus ducente columpna. 
 
 Stella Magos duxit. Lux Christus utrisque reluxit. 
 
 4. In medio, Maria cum puero. Magi et Pastores. Joseph et f’ratres sui cum Egyptiis. 
 
 Ad te longinquos Joseph trahis atque propinquos, 
 
 Sic Deus in cunis Judaeos gentibus unis. 
 
 5. Rex Solomon, et Regina Saba. 
 
 Hiis donat donis Regina domum Solomonis. 
 
 Sic Reges Domino dant munera tres tria trino. 
 
 6. Admoniti sunt Magi ne Herodem adeant Propheta et Rex Jeroboam immolans. 
 
 Ut via mutetur redeundo Propheta monetur, 
 
 Sic tres egerunt qui Christo dona tulerunt. 
 
 7. Subversio Sodom® et Loth fugiens. 
 
 Ut Loth salvetur ne respiciat prohibetur. 
 
 Sic vitant revehi per Herodis regna Sabei. 
 
 8. Oblatio pueri in templo et Simeon. Melchisedech offerens panem et vinum pro Abraham. 
 
 Sacrum quod cernis sacris fuit umbra modernis; 
 
 Umbra fugit. Quare ? quia Christus sistitur arse. 
 
 9. Oblatio Samuel. 
 
 Natura geminum triplex oblatio trinum 
 Significat Dominum Samuel puer, amphora, vinum. 
 
 10. Fuga Domini in Egyptum. Fuga David et Doesch. 
 
 Hunc Saul infestat: Saul Herodis typus extat. 
 
 Iste typus Christi, cujus fuga consonat isti. 
 
 11. Elias, Jesabel, et Achab. 
 
 Ut trucis insidias Jesabel declinat Elias, 
 
 Sic Deus Herodem terrore remotus eodem. 
 
 12. Occisio Innocentum. Occisio sacerdotum Domini sub Saul. 
 
 Non cecidit David pro quo Saul hos jugulavit, 
 
 Sic non est cajsus cum csesis transfuga Jesus. 
 
 13. Occisio tribus Benjamin in Gabaon. 
 
 Ecce Rachel nati fratrum gladiis jugulati. 
 
 His sunt signati pueri sub Herode necati. 
 
 Fenestra Tertia. 
 
 1. Jesus sedet in medio Doctorum. Moses et Jethro cum populo. 
 
 Sic Moses audit, Jethro vir sanctus obaudit. 
 
 Gentiles verbis humiles sunt forma superbis. 
 
 2. Daniel in medio Seniorum. 
 
 Mirentur pueri seniores voce doceri, 
 
 Sic responsa Dei sensum stupent Pharisei. 
 
 3. Baptizatur Dominus. Noah in Archa. 
 
 Fluxu cuncta vago submergens prima vorago 
 Omnia purgavit: Baptisma significavit. 
 
 4. Submersio Pharaonis et transitus populi. 
 
 Unda maris rubri, spatio divisa salubri, 
 
 Qua; mentem mundam facit a vitio notat undam. 
 
 5. Temptatio gul® et van® glori®. Eva capiens fructum. 
 
 Qui temptat Jesum movet Evam mortis ad esum ; 
 Eva gulm cedit, sed non ita Jesus obedit. 
 
20 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 6. Eva comedit. Tentatio cupiditatis. 
 
 Victor es hie Sathana: movet Evam gloria vana, 
 Sed quo vicisti te vicit gratia Christi. 
 
 7. Adam et Eva comedunt. David et Goliah. 
 
 Quo Sathan hoc subicit Sathanam sapientia vicit; 
 Ut Goliam David, Sathanam Christus superavit. 
 
 Fenestra Quart a. 
 
 1. Vocatio Nathanael jacentis sub Ficu. Adam et Eva cum foliis. Populus sub lege. 
 
 Vidit in hiis Christus sub ficu Nathanaelem. 
 
 Lex tegit hanc plebem, quasi ficus Nathanaelem. 
 
 2. Christus mutavit aquam in vinum. Sex hydrife. Sex aetates mundi. Sex aetates hominum. 
 
 Hydria metretas capiens est quslibet fetas. 
 
 Primum signorum Deus hie prodendo suorum. 
 
 Lympha dat historiam, vinum notat allegoriam. 
 
 In vinum morum convertit aquam vitiorum. 
 
 3. Piscatores Apostolorum. S. Petrus cum eccles. de Jud. Paulus cum ecclesia de Gentibus- 
 
 Verbum, rete, ratis, Petri domus hasc pietatis. 
 
 Pisces Judei; qui rete ferunt Pharisei. 
 
 Ilia secunda ratis, domus hsc est plena beatis, 
 
 Retia scismaticus et quivis scindit iniquus. 
 
 4. In medio, Jesus legit in Synagoga. Esdras legit legem populo. 
 
 lectores. 
 
 Quod promulgavit Moses legem reparavit; 
 Esdras amissam, Christus renovavit omissam ; 
 Quod Christus legit, quasi pro lectoribus egit, 
 Exemplo cujus sacer est gradus ordinis hujus. 
 
 Sanctus Gregor, ordinans 
 
 5. Sermo Domini in Monte. Doctores Ecclesiae. Moses suscipit legem. 
 
 Hie montem scandunt Sciipturse dum sacra pandunt, 
 
 Cliristus sublimis docet hos sed vulgus in imis, 
 
 Ex hinc inde datur in monte quod inde notatur, 
 
 Christum novisse debemus utramque declisse. 
 
 6. Christus descendens de monte, mundat leprosum. Paulus baptizat populum. Heliseus 
 Naaman in Jordano. 
 
 Came Deus tectus, quasi vallis ad ima provectus, 
 
 Mundat leprosum genus huraanum vitiosum : 
 
 Quern lavat ecce Deus, quem mundat et hie Heliseus, 
 
 Est genus humanum Christi baptismate sanum. 
 
 Fenestra Quinta. 
 
 1. Jesus ejicit Demonium. Angelus ligavit Demonium. 
 
 Imperat immundis Deus, hie equis furibundis. 
 
 Hiis virtus Christi dominatur ut Angelus isti. 
 
 2. Maria unxit pedes Christi. Drusiana vestit et pascit egenos. 
 
 Curam languenti, victum qui prajbet egenti, 
 
 Seque reum plangit, Christi vestigia tangit. 
 
 Ilia quod ungendo facit, lnec sua distribuendo, 
 
 Dum quod de pleno superest largitur egeno. 
 
 3. Martha et Maria cum Petro in navi. Joannes legit. 
 
 Equoris unda ferit hunc : file silentia querit, 
 
 Sic requies orat dum mundi Cura laborat. 
 
 4. Leah et Rachel cum Jacob. 
 
 Lyah gerit curam carnis, Rachelque figuram ; 
 
 Mentis cura gravis est hasc, est altera suavis. 
 
 5. Jesus et Apostoli colligunt spicas. Mola, fumus, et Apostoli facientes panes. Petrus et 
 Paulus cum populis. 
 
 Quod terit feterna Mola lex vetus atque moderna, 
 
 Passio crux Christe tua, sermo tuus iste. 
 
 Arguit iste reos, humiles colit hie Phariseos, 
 
 Sic spies tritfe panis sunt, verbaque vita;. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 21 
 
 6. Jesus cum Samaritana. Synagoga et Moses cum quinque libris. Ecclesia de gentibus ad 
 Johannem. 
 
 Potum quesisti fidei cum Christe sitisti, 
 
 E qua viri cui sex Synagoga librique sui sex. 
 
 -delicta notat hydria fonte relicta. 
 
 Ad te de gente Deus Ecclesia veniente. 
 
 7. Samaritana adduxit populum ad Jesum. Rebecca dat potum servo Abraham. Jacob obviat 
 Rachaeli. 
 
 Fons, servus, minans pecus, hydria, virgo propinans, 
 Lex Christo gentes mulierque fide redolentes. 
 
 Jacob lassatus, Rachel obvia, grex adaquatus, 
 
 Sunt Deus et turbae, mulier quas duxit ab urbe. 
 
 Fenestra Sexta. 
 
 1. Jesus loquens cum Apostolis. Gentes audiunt, Pharisei contemnunt. 
 
 Sollicitse gentes stant verba Dei sitientes, 
 
 Hasc sunt verba Dei quae contemnunt Pharisei. 
 
 2. Seminator et volucres. Pharisei recedentes a Jesu. Pharisei tentantes Jesum. 
 
 Semen rore carens expers rationis et arena. 
 
 Hi sunt qui credunt, temptantes sicque recedunt. 
 
 Semen sermo Dei, via lex secus hanc Pharisei, 
 
 Et tu Christe sator, verbum Patris insidiator. 
 
 3. Semen cecidit inter spinas. Divites hujus mundi cum pecunia. 
 
 Isti spinosi locupletes deliciosi, 
 
 Nil fructus referunt quoniam terrestria querunt. 
 
 4. Semen cecidit in terram bonam. Job, Daniel, Noah. 
 
 Verba Patris servit Deus, his fructus sibi crevit, 
 
 In tellure bona, triplex sua cuique corona. 
 
 5. Jesus et mulier commiscens sata tria. Tres filii Nose cum Ecclesia. Virgines continentes. 
 Conjugati. 
 
 Parte Note nati, mihi quisque sua dominati, 
 
 Una fides satis ex his tribus est Deitatis. 
 
 Personte trinm tria sunt sata rnista farinte, 
 
 Fermenta sata tria tres fructus operata. 
 
 6. Piscatores; hinc pisces boni, inde mali. Isti in vitam aetemam. 
 
 Hii qui jaetantur in levam, qui reprobantur. 
 
 Pars est a Domino maledicta cremanda camino. 
 
 Vase reservantur pisces quibus assimulantur, 
 
 Hii quos addixit vitte Deus et benedixit. 
 
 7. Messores ; seges reponitur in horreum. Zizania in ignem. Justi in vitam aetemam. Reprobi 
 in ignem aetemam. 
 
 Cum sudore sata messoris in horrea lata. 
 
 Sunt hie vexati sed Christo glorificati. 
 
 Hie cremat ex messe quod inutile judicat esse, 
 
 Sic pravos digne punit judex Deus igne. 
 
 8. De quinque panibus et duobus piscibus satiavit multa millia hominum D" 8 Sacerdos Rex. 
 
 Hii panes legem, pisces dantem sacra Regem, 
 
 Signant quassatos a plebe nec adnihilatos. 
 
 Synagoga cum Mose et libris. Ecclesia cum Johanne. 
 
 Qua populos saturant panes piscesque figurant, 
 
 Quod Testamenta duo nobis dant alimenta. 
 
 Rex fecit nuptias filio et misit servos. 
 
 Rex Pater ad natum regem sponsas sociatum, 
 
 Prmcipit adciri populum renuuntque venire. 
 
 Excusant se quidam per villam. 
 
 Quos vexat cura caro. Quinque bourn juga tuta, 
 
 Nuncius excusans: hie hortans ille recusans. 
 
 G 
 
22 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 Petrus docens, sed sequuntur Moysen et Synagogam. 
 
 Sunt ascire volens Deus hunc, hie credere nolens; 
 
 Petre docens istumque studens Judsea fuisti. 
 
 Johannes predicat intente audentibus. 
 
 Vox invitantis causa tres dissimulantis, 
 
 Sponsam Sponsus am at: vox horum previa clamat. 
 
 Ysaias predicat audientibus tribus. 
 
 Ecclesiam Christi junctam tibi pra:dicat iste, 
 
 His invitata gens est ad edenda parata. 
 
 Quidam sequuntur. Regem quidam fugiunt. 
 
 Hie Regis furtum confirmat apostolus actum, 
 
 Credit et accedit, cito gens Judaea recedit. 
 
 Contemplatur Rex comedentes. Resurgunt mortui. 
 
 Ad mensam tandem cito plebs sedet omnis eandem ; 
 
 Sic omnes eadem vox hora cogit eadem. 
 
 Dominus dicit electis, Yenite Benedicti. 
 
 Rex plebem pavit spretis quos ante vocavit, 
 
 Christus se dignos reficit, rejicitque malignos. 
 
 Invenitur et ejicitur non vestitus veste nuptiali. 
 
 Dives et extrusus servus tenebrisque reclusus, 
 
 Quern condemnavit rex ejecit cruciavit. 
 
 Ananias et Saphira moriuntur a Petro. Dominus ejecit vendentes a templo. 
 
 Fenestra Septima. 
 
 1. Curavit Jesus filiam viduse. Ecclesia de gentibus cum Jesu. Petrus orat et animalia dimit- 
 tuntur in linthea. 
 
 Natum cum curat matris prece; matre figurat 
 Christo credentes primos nataque sequentes. 
 
 Fide viventes signant animaba gentes j 
 Quos mundat sacri submersio trina lavacri. 
 
 2. Curavit Jesus bominem ad piscinam. Moses cum quinque libris. Baptizat Dominus. 
 
 Lex tibi piscina concordat, sunt quia quina 
 Ostia piscinae, seu partes lex tibi quinte. 
 
 Sanat ut aegrotum piscina: inotio lotum, 
 
 Sic cruce siguatos mundat baptisma renatos. 
 
 3. Transfiguratio Domini. Angeli vestiuunt mortuos resurgentes. Angeli adducunt justos ad 
 Deum. 
 
 Spes transformati capitis, spes vivificati. 
 
 Claret in indutis membris a morte salutis. 
 
 Cum transformares te Christe, quid insinuares 
 Veste decorati declarant clarificati. 
 
 4. Petrus piscatur et invenit staterem. Dominus ascendit in Hier. Dominus crucifigitur. 
 
 Hunc ascendentem mox mortis adesse videntem 
 Tempora; te Christe piscis praenunciat iste, 
 
 Ludibrium turbae Deus est ejectus ab urbe. 
 
 5. Statuit Jesus parvulum in medio Discipulorum. Monachi lavant pedes pauperum. Reges 
 inclinantur doctrinae Petri et Pauli. 
 
 Hoc informantur exemplo qui monachantur, 
 
 Ne dedignentur peregrinis si famulentur. 
 
 Sic incurvati pueris sunt assimulati, 
 
 Reges cum gente, Paulo Petroque docente. 
 
 6. Pastor reportat ovem. Christus pendet in cruce. Christus spoliat infernum. (Sine Versu.) 
 
 Fenestra Octava. 
 
 1. Dominus remittit debita servo poscenti. 
 
 Ut prece submissa sunt huic commissa remissa, 
 Parcet poscenti seu parcit Deus egenti. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 23 
 
 Petrus et Paulus absolvunt pcenitentem et Dominus sibi credentes. Servus percutit conser- 
 vum. Paulus lapidatur. Stephanus lapidatur. 
 
 Cur plus ignoscit Dominus minus ille poposcit, 
 
 Conservum servus, populus te Paule protervus. 
 
 Regi conservo repetenti debita servo, 
 
 Assimulare Deus Martyr nequam Pharisseus. 
 
 Tradidit eum tortoribus. Mittuntur impii in ignem. Judsei perimuntur. 
 
 Caeditur affligens, captivatur crucifigens, 
 
 Hunc punit Dominus flagris, hos igne caminus. 
 
 Fenestra Nona. 
 
 Homo quidam descendebat de Hier. in Jerico, et incidit in latrones. 
 
 Perforat hasta latus, occiditur ad mala natus. 
 
 Creatur Adam. Formatur Eva. Comedunt fructum. Ejiciuntur de Paradiso. 
 
 Ex Adas costa prodiit formata virago, 
 
 Ex Christi latere processit sancta propago. 
 
 Fructum decerpens mulier, suadens mala serpens, 
 
 Immemor authoris vir perdit culmen honoris. 
 
 Virgultum, fructus, mulier, vir, vipera, luctus, 
 
 Plnntatur, rapitur, dat, gustat, fallit, initur. 
 
 Pcena reos tangit, vir sudat, fcemina plangit, 
 
 Pectore portatur serpens, tellure cibatur. 
 
 Sacerdos et Levita vident vulneratum et pertranserunt. 
 
 Vulneribus plenum neuter miseratur egenum. 
 
 Moses et Aaron cum Pharaone. Scribitur tau. Educitur populus. Adorat vitulum. Datur 
 lex. Elevatur serpens. 
 
 Pro populo Moyses coram Pharaone laborat: 
 
 Exaugetque preces, signorum luce coronat. 
 
 Cui color est rubeus siccum mare transit Hebraeus, 
 
 Angelico ductu patet in medio via fluctu. 
 
 In ligno serpens positum notat in cruce Christum, 
 
 Qui videt hunc, vivit, vivet qui credet in istum ; 
 
 Cernens quod speciem Deitatis dum terit aurum, 
 
 Frangit scripta tenens Moyses in pulvere taurum. 
 
 Samaritanus ducit vulneratum in stabulum cum jumento. Ancilla accusat Petrum. Dominus 
 crucifigitur. Sepelitur. Resurgit. Loquitur Angelus ad Marias. 
 
 Qui caput est nostrum, capitur; qui regibus ostrum 
 Prebet, nudatur : qui solvit vincla, ligatur. 
 
 In signo pendens, in ligno brachia tendens, 
 
 In signo lignum superasti Christe malignum. 
 
 Christum lege rei livor condemnat Hebraei, 
 
 Carne flagellatum rapit attrahit ante Pilatum. 
 
 Solem justitiae tres, orto sole, Mari®, 
 
 Quarunt lugentes ex ejus morte trementes. 
 
 Fenestra Decima. 
 
 Suscitat Jesus puellam in Domo. Abigail occurrit David et mutat propositum. Constantinus 
 jacens et matres cum pueris. 
 
 Quas jacet in cella surgens de morte puella 
 Signat peccatum meditantis corde creatum. 
 
 Rex David arma gerit, dum Nabal perdere quaerit. 
 
 Obviat Abigael mulier David, arma refrenat, 
 
 Et nebulam vultus hilari sermone serenat. 
 
 Rex soboles Helenae, Romanas rector habenae, 
 
 Vult mundare cutem quserendo cruce salutera, 
 
 Nec scelus exercet, flet, humet, dictata coercet. 
 
 Dominus suscitat puerum extra portam. Rex Solomon adorat idola, et deflet peccatum. 
 Pcenitentia Theophili. 
 
 Qui jacet in morte puer extra limina port®, 
 
 De foris abstractum peccati denotat actum. 
 
 Errat fcemineo Solomon deceptus amore: 
 
 Errorem redimit mens sancto tacta dolore. 
 
 Dum lacrimando gemit Theophilus acta redemit; 
 
 Invenies veniam dulcem rogando Mariam. 
 
24 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 Dominus suscitat Lazarum. Angelus alloquitur Jonam sub hedera ante Nine vein. Pceni- 
 
 tentia Mariae Egipticae. 
 
 Mens mala mors intus; malus actus mors foris: usus 
 Tumba, puella, puer, Lazarus ista notant. 
 
 Pingitur hie Nineve jam pene peracta perire, 
 
 Veste fidus Zosimas nudam tegit Mariam. 
 
 Mittit Dominus duos discipulos propter asinam et pullum. Sp. Sanctus in specie columbae 
 inter Deum et hominem. 
 
 Imperat adduci pullum cum matre Magister, 
 
 Paruit huic operae succinctus uterque minister. 
 
 Signacio simplex quod fit dilectio duplex, 
 
 Ala Deum dextra, fratrem docet ala sinistra. 
 
 Jesus stans inter Petrum et Paulum. 
 
 Genti qua; servit petris Petrum petra mittit, 
 
 Escas divinas Judeis Paule propinas. 
 
 Adducunt discipuli asinum et pullum. Petrus adducit ecclesiam de Judeis; Paulus adducit 
 ecclesiam de Gentibus. 
 
 Quae duo solvuntur duo sunt animalia bruta, 
 
 Ducitur ad Christum pullus materque soluta. 
 
 De populo fusco Petri sermone corusco 
 Extrahit ecclesiam veram reserando Sophiam. 
 
 Sic radio fidei cteci radiantur Hebraei; 
 
 Per Pauli verba fructum sterilis dedit herba. 
 
 Dum plebs Gentilis per eum fit mente fidelis, 
 
 Gentilis populus venit ad Christum quasi pullus. 
 
 Occurrunt pueri Domino sedenti super asinam. 
 
 Vestibus ornari patitur Salvator asellam, 
 
 Qui super astra sedet nec habet frenum neque sellam. 
 
 Isaias dicit, Ecce Rex tuus sedens super asinam. 
 
 Qui sedet in ccelo ferri dignatur asello. 
 
 David ex ore infantum, &c. 
 
 Sancti Sanctorum laus ore sonat puerorum. 
 
 Fenestra (Jndecima. 
 
 In medio, Coena Domini. David gestans se in manibus suis. Manna fluit populo de Ccelo. 
 
 Quid manibus David se gestans significavit? 
 
 Te manibus gestans das Christe tuis manifestans. 
 
 Manna fluit saturans populum de plebe, figurans 
 De mensa Jesum dare se ccemultibus esum. 
 
 Lavat Jesus pedes Apostolorum. Abraham Angelorum. Laban camelorum. 
 
 Obsequio lavacri notat hospes in hospite sacri, 
 
 Quos mundas sacro mundasti Christe lavacro. 
 
 Cum Laban hos curat, typice te Christe figurat, 
 
 Cura camelorum mandatum Discipulorum. 
 
 Proditio Jesu. Venditio Joseph. Joab osculatur. Abner et occidit. 
 
 Fraus Judae Christum, fraus fratrum vendidit istum. 
 
 Hii Judae, Christ! Joseph tu forma fuisti. 
 
 Fcedera dum fingit Joab in funera stringit 
 Ferrum, Judaicum praesignans feedus iniquum. 
 
 Vapulatio Jesu. Job percussus ulcere. Helizeus et pueri irridentes. 
 
 Christi testatur plagas, Job dum cruciatur, 
 
 Ut sum Judaea, jocus pueris Helisee. 
 
 Fenestra Duodecimo.. 
 
 Christus portat crucem. Isaac ligna. Mulier colligit duo ligna. 
 
 Ligna puer gestat, crucis typum manifestat, 
 
 Fert crucis in signum duplex muliercula lignum. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 25 
 
 Chnstus suspenditur de ligno. Serpens mneus elevator in columna. Vacca rufa oomburitur. 
 
 Mors est exanguis dum cemitur feneus anguis, 
 
 Sic Deus in ligno nos salvat ab hoste maligno. 
 
 Ut Moyses jussit, vitulam rufam rogus ussit; 
 
 Sic tua Christe caro cruris igne crematur amaro. 
 
 Dominus deponitur de ligno. Abel occiditur. Heliseus expandit se super puerum. 
 
 Nos a morte Deus revocavit, et hunc Heliseus. 
 
 Signat Abel Cliristi pia funera funere tristi. 
 
 Moses scribit Thau in frontibus in porta de sanguine agni. Dominus in sepulcro. Sam¬ 
 son dormit cum arnica sua. Jonas in ventre ceti. 
 
 Frontibus infixum Thau pnecinuit crucifixum. 
 
 Ut Samson typice causa dormivit amicae, 
 
 Ecclesia; causa Christi caro marmore clausa. 
 
 Dum jacet absorptus Jonas, Sol triplicat ortus, 
 
 Sic Deus arctatur tumulo, triduoque moratur. 
 
 Dominus ligans Diabolum, spoliavit infemum. David eripuit oves; et Samson tulit portas. 
 
 Salvat ovem David; sic Christum significant. 
 
 Est Samson fortis qui rupit vincula mortis. 
 
 Instar Samsonis, frangit Deus ossa Leonis. 
 
 Dum Sathanam stravit, Christus Regulum jugulavit. 
 
 Surgit Dominus de sepulcro. Jonas ejicitur de pisce. David emissus per fenestram. 
 
 Redditur ut salvus quem ceti clauserat alvus, 
 
 Sic redit illesus a mortis carcere Jesus. 
 
 Hinc abit illesus David: sic invida Jesus 
 Agmina conturbat, ut victa morte resurgat. 
 
 Angelus alloquitur Mariam ad sepulcrum. Joseph extrahitur e carcere. Et Leo suscitat 
 
 filium. 
 
 Ad vitam Christum Deus, ut leo suscitat istum. 
 
 Te signat, Christe, Joseph ; te, mors, locus iste. 
 
 Sanctus Gregorius dat aquam manibus pauperum et apparuit ei Dominus. 
 
 Hospes abest: ubi sit stupet hie, cur quove resisted 
 Membra prius quasi me suscepisti, sed heri me. 
 
 Gregorius dictat Petrus scribit. Solitarius cum cato. 
 
 Pluris habes catum, quam Presul Pontificatum, 
 
 Qua: liber includit signata columba recludit. 
 
 Hostia mutatur in formam digiti. 
 
 Id panis velat digiti quod forma revelat. 
 
 Velans forma redit, cum plebs abscondita credit. 
 
 Gregorius trahitur et papa efficitur. 
 
 Quem nomen, vultus, lux, vita, scientia, cultus 
 Approbat, extractus latebris fit papa coactus. 
 
 These windows, like Suger’s, bear the relation to each other of type and antitype, and they 
 were placed three in a row, that is, a square compartment, or subject, between two circular ones, the 
 same order being preserved perpendicularly. Although it would appear that in Somner s time they 
 were many of them tolerably perfect, yet they must have suffered much from dilapidation even then, 
 since which they have been completely metamorphosed, and the remains collected together into two. 
 The one mentioned by Gostling, * as the window next the organ loft, is composed of portions of the 
 second and third windows as described by Somner; the other, which is next to this, is composed 
 of parts of the third, fourth, and sixth windows of his description. There is still much more of this 
 glass scattered about in the different windows in this part of the cathedral, well worth attention. 
 There is also much other glass of the same date in the clerestory. The principal part of this glass 
 remained till the time of the Commonwealth, t 
 
 * “ Walk round Canterbury.” 
 
 f Richard Culmer, generally styled “ Blue Dick,” who was appointed 
 the Civil Wars, in describing his own performances, says, “ A minister was o 
 
 one of the six preachers in the cathedral, at the beginning of 
 
 m the top of the city ladder, near sixty steps high, with a whole 
 
STAINED GLASS 
 
 26 
 
 From the foregoing facts, therefore, we may justly conclude that this glass is of the early part 
 of the thirteenth centuiy, and that it constituted part of the decoration on the completion of this 
 cathedral just anterior to its consecration and dedication in honour of St. Thomas the Martyr, in a.d. 
 1220. The figures in these windows have engaged much attention from their great resemblance to 
 those in the Bayeux Tapestry. There is however nothing extraordinary in this, it being the general 
 and conventional mode of portraiture in all matters of ecclesiastical decoration, where figures occur 
 in these early times, as evidenced by this very tapestry. * This glass has long been reputed the oldest 
 in England, but it can by no means claim to be the first executed in this country, from its excellence, 
 and considering the important situation it occupies. But we have shewn that “ the Art of Painting on 
 Glasse” was introduced into this country at least half a century anterior to the time we are now speak¬ 
 ing of; and we are further strengthened in the supposition that it must have flourished here at this 
 time, from a singularly beautiful example still existing in the church of Westwell, in the same county, 
 which, as its architecture is early-English, will be noticed in due order under the head of that style. 
 It is certain that the art flourished from this time continuously in England as well as in other coun¬ 
 tries ; and, though the examples are abundant to select or to comment on, and curious from their 
 kind and variety, it will be expedient to cite only a few, and such as may best exemplify the various 
 modes of construction of the designs during the different epochs. Amongst the many examples 
 which exist we will cite some of the windows of 
 
 Chartres Cathedral, 
 
 chiefly because they bear ample evidence of the importance attached to the art at this early period, 
 as a means of recording past and contemporary events, and also because they exhibit in a remark¬ 
 able manner the close connexion which heraldry had with the principles of their composition. They 
 prove, indeed, that this science had at that age attained to great perfection as a system; and their 
 extraordinary character renders them worthy of especial notice, though of scarcely less interest are 
 the remarkable ones contributed by members of the diffei’ent trades and callings. These windows 
 are also of the thirteenth century, and, as they contain many valuable hints worthy of adoption, we 
 give them as fully as M. Gilbert has described them. “ The large windows of the nave,” says he, 
 “ the altar, the sides, and the chapels, are ornamented with figures representing many saints and 
 personages, a large number of subjects from the Old and New Testaments, and paintings of the arts 
 and trades that have contributed by their subscriptions, or by their manual labours, to the advance¬ 
 ment and adornment of this beautiful edifice. In the circular parts, in rose shapes, which surmount 
 the heads of the windows of the eastern end of this church, are represented kings, dukes, counts, 
 and barons, armed from head to foot, each having a shield charged with their arms, and mounted on 
 horses richly caparisoned. All these persons are for the most part benefactors of this church. 
 They are arranged as follows: 
 
 Northern Window. 
 
 Sixteenth Shape. —The inscription on the glass is as follows : p. v. count de claremont in 
 beauvoisis. It represents Philip Count de Claremont de Mortain de Boulogne, son of Philip 
 Auguste and Agnes de Meraine; this prince was born in 1200, and died in 1233. His arms are, 
 France (sem£e of fleurs-de-lis) a label of five points gules. 
 
 pike in his hand, rattling down proud Beeket's glassie bones, when others present would not venture so high.” (Britton’s “ Canterbury Cathe¬ 
 dral, p. 72 ; Gostling, from Culmer s Account, entitled “ Cathedral News from Canterbury.") This window, however, was of a much later 
 date, having still remaining in it arms and the portraits of the family of King Edward the Fourth, so that the vengeance of Blue Dick and 
 his impious compeers was perhaps misdirected, though it is not improbable that it represented in some compartments miracles said to have 
 been wrought by the intercession of the Saint. 
 
 Sir P. G. de Malpas Egerton, Bart, has in his possession a most rare curiously engraved and enamelled reliquary, on which is repre¬ 
 sented the martyrdom of St. Thomas k Becket. The figures are literally fac-similes of the Canterbury glass. This curious relic was dug up 
 at Tarporley, in Cheshire, and is nearly coeval with Beeket’s martyrdom. 
 
 + Translated from “Essai Historique et Descriptif sur la Peinture sur Verre,” by E. H. Langlois, p. 121 to 128. Edit. Rouen, 1832. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 27 
 
 Nmth Rose.— The same, clothed in his armour: emblazonment as before. 
 
 The same Window. The inscription mahaut; Mahaut or Matilda, Countess of Boulogne 
 uufe of the preceding, is represented kneeling, and bears the arms of her husband. She died in 
 
 Eighteenth Shape—TVo inscription jehanne; a lady kneeling, her drapery emblazoned as 
 m le piece mg gures Represents Jeanne de Boulogne, daughter of Philippe and of Mahaut, and 
 the wife of Gaucher de Chastillon. She died in 1251. 
 
 Thirteenth Rose— Jean Due de Bretagne, son of Pierre Mauclerc, was born 1217, died 1286: 
 he bears a shield gyronny of 12 pieces argent and gules, a label of five points azure. 
 
 Twenty-sixth Shape—YolanA de Bretagne, daughter of Pierre Mauclerc, married in 1238 
 with Hugues the Eleventh, sumamed le Brun, Sire of Lusignan, who died in 1272. This princess is 
 represented standing, her hands closed, and bears the same arms as the preceding personages. 
 
 Choir. — Fourteenth Window. 
 
 Twenty-eighth Shape. —An ecclesiastic kneeling, clothed in an alb, with a red collar, and a 
 maniple, presenting a sort of medal, round which is the following legend : robertus de baron car- 
 notensis cancellarius. It is probably the effigy of the donor of this window. 
 
 Fifteenth Rose—A knight holding the banner of the arms of Castile, and followed by a grey¬ 
 hound ; this is Ferdinand the Third, King of Castile, who died 1252. 
 
 Thirtieth Shape. The inscription is rex castilije. The same personage crowned, speaking 
 with St. James. 
 
 Sixteenth Rose. —Thibaut the Sixth, sumamed le Jeune, Count de Blois, died in 1218. He 
 is armed as a knight, and bears a banner, Azure, sem£e of crosses trefl^es or, a bend argent. 
 
 Thirty-first Shape. Louis Count de Sancerre, sixteenth Count de Blois, kneeling; the same 
 arms as the last-named. 
 
 Thirty-second Shape. —The same emblazonment. The figure kneeling, representing Bouchard 
 Lord of Marley junior, of the house of Montmorency. 
 
 Seventeenth Rose. —An armed knight, holding the banner of France, represents King Louis. 
 
 Thirty-third Shape. —The same king holding a crucifix, and kneeling; a reliquary and the 
 arms of France being beside him. Within the same shape, Louis, eldest son of this monarch, born 
 1243, and died 1260 ; he is also shewn kneeling. 
 
 Thirty-seventh Shape. —Figures representing the donors : beside one of them the word gau- 
 
 FRIDUS. 
 
 Eighteenth Rose. —Amaury, sixth Count of Montford, Constable of France under Saint 
 Louis, died in 1241. Equipped as a knight, he bears a shield gules, a lion argent, (or a frightened 
 horse,) and a standard dancett^, argent and gules. 
 
 Forty-second Shape. —William de la Fert£ Hemaud in La Perche. Inscription, willemus. 
 He is armed, and in a supplicating attitude. Behind him is his esquire leading his horse, and bear¬ 
 ing a shield Gules, three bezants, two and one. 
 
 Nineteenth Window. 
 
 In the crown of the two forms of this window is a knight, in which the standard and shield 
 are the same as those of D’ Aumaury de Montfort; it is the brother of the Constable Simon de Mont- 
 fort, Earl of Leicester. 
 
 Forty-fourth Shape. —The donor of the window, with the inscription following his name, 
 PETRUS baillard. He was a Canon of the Cathedral of Chartres; his dignity being shewn by his 
 costume. He died in 1142. 
 
 Twentieth Window. —A warrior on horseback: his shield, Or, three torteaux, a label of five 
 
28 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 points, which is Taulay; this being Peter of Courtenay, who died in Egypt after the battle of Massoura, 
 fought in 1250. 
 
 Forty-sixth Shape.— The same personage armed, and kneeling before a cross; shield the 
 same as in the preceding. 
 
 Forty-seventh Shape— Raoul de Courtenay; he is kneeling, and vested with a tunic : arms as 
 in the preceding. He died in 1271. Charles d’ Anjou gave this lord the county of Chi4ti, he having 
 followed him in his conquest of the kingdom of Naples. 
 
 Twenty-first Rose.—A knight, hearing a shield gules, two lions or leopards. 
 
 Twenty-second Window, Smith. 
 
 Fifty first Shape. —Henry ClcSment, Lord of Argenton and Mez, Marshal of France, receiving 
 the oriflamme from the hands of St. Denis. This lord died in 1263. Shield, Azure, a cross ancnle, 
 bordure of the same. 
 
 Twenty-third .Rose.—Alicia de Thouars before the Holy Virgin. She was the wife of Pierre 
 Mauclerc, Duke of Bretagne. Died in 1221. 
 
 Fifty-third Shape.— Pierre le Dreux, surnamed Mauclerc, praying with joined hands. He 
 has a coat of arms emblazoned as Dreux, Chequy or and azure, franc quarter ermine. He died in 
 1250. 
 
 Twenty-fifth Rose. —The same personage, armed at all points. 
 
 South Side of Nave. 
 
 A portion of these windows is hid by the organ, and in the bottom, sides, and the chapels, 
 we see no other portraitures but those of three donors, the Cardinal Thomas, Nicholas de Campis, and 
 Henry Noblet; these two last are also ecclesiastics. 
 
 Vendome Chapel. 
 
 Saint Louis, Bishop of Toulouse, presenting to God his grandson, Louis the Count of Ven¬ 
 dome, and Blanche de Roucy his wife. The King, Saint Louis, offering to God his grandson, 
 Louis of Vendome. Saint Reray presenting Louis, Count of Vendome, and his wife Blanche de 
 Roucy. 
 
 Descriptions and engravings of many of these windows are to be found in the works, “ Mo- 
 numens de la Monarchic Francois,” by Montfaucon, and “ Monumens Frangais in^dits,” by M. 
 Willemen; which are the more valuable for artists and the cognoscenti, as the works represented 
 are for the most part contemporaneous with the individuals of whom they perpetuate the memory. 
 But they were not the only persons who contributed to the execution of these splendid windows, 
 for here, as well as in many other places, men of obscure birth and names have associated in their 
 pious liberality the emblems of their modest avocations. Therefore, amid the crowd of historical 
 figures in the Cathedral of Chartres, are seen mingled, paintings of artists, artizans, merchants, and 
 workmen; amongst which are portrayed, a weaver at work, tanners or parchment-makers, labourers, 
 money-changers, bankers, butchers, farriers, saddlers, a tanner at work, bakers, a wheelwright, a 
 cooper, foresters of the chase, goldsmiths, furriers, carpenters, shoemakers, drapers, wicker-workers, 
 a vine-dresser, fishmongers, &c. 
 
 We will just mention the two brilliant rose windows in the cathedral of Notre Dame, Paris, 
 which are from forty feet upwards in diameter, being also of the thirteenth century. The one over 
 the portico is remarkable, as having in it the twelve signs of the zodiac, together with agricultural 
 labourers of each month of the year, and other allegorical figures. A zodiacal window is also exist- 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 29 
 
 ing at Monti gny, in Normandy; in fact, solar windows were a common mode of decoration in these 
 early times. The citation of one more example of later semi-Norman will Hnish our remarks upon 
 that style ; the details of which, together with the previous ones, constitute the principal varieties of 
 construction during that epoch. There exists in 
 
 The Cathedral of Sens 
 
 a window in the North Choir, which is adduced from the curious points which exist in some of the 
 compartments, and from the evidence they bear of the continuation of an heraldic spirit and conven¬ 
 tionalism in the carrying out these works. This window is likewise of the thirteenth century, just 
 before the general adoption of the pointed arch ; consequently the upper formation of the window is 
 semicircular. The border which surrounds the body of the window differs in nothing from the pre¬ 
 ceding examples in respect to principles. The plan of the main part of the window is wrought by 
 three lozenge shapes, which contain as many subjects. From angle to angle of these shapes are 
 struck three-quarter circles, by which geometrical device three quatrefoils are produced, with lo¬ 
 zenges in the midst. The lozenges contain each of them a portion of the Parable of the Good Sa¬ 
 maritan, the subjects in the quatrefoils exemplifying them : 
 
 From the foregoing statements and citations, it will be evident that one established rule was 
 
 * The serpent is represented entwined round the tree, (the body being invisible to them,) the upper part of it appearing to them as 
 thrust through the flower or foliage, shewing a sort of human head on the body of a bird, the only part presented to their view. 
 
 ■j- In the upper part the Lord is seen calling to them, holding a scroll in his hand, on which is written the interrogation. 
 
 + The angel has six wings of divers colours. It is also to be remarked, that the trees are represented as marigolds on stems inter¬ 
 twining, all variously coloured, this being the conventional mode of treating them in those times. 
 
 \ Moses is represented with a nimbus, unusual except with saints. 
 
 || Here a demon is seen whispering into the ear of Pilate. 
 
 ^ In this compartment the blessed Virgin is seen holding a cup, which receives the precious fluid from the pierced side. The be¬ 
 loved disciple who is represented on the other side, is sheathing (or drawing) a sword, and has six wings, which nearly obscure the remainder 
 of his figure from the head downwards. 
 
30 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 continued and adhered to throughout the entire period of Norman and semi-Norman, as well as in 
 those styles which preceded it, subject only to such geometrical variation as the style of architecture 
 from its later difference would naturally dictate, namely : 
 
 1. Figures, heraldic borders, and paly back-grounds, as at Molyneux. 
 
 2. Rich borders foliated and medallioned, as at Canterbury cathedral. 
 
 3. Heraldic figures, arms, armour, &c., as at Chartres cathedral. 
 
 4. Type and anti-type, as at Sens cathedral. 
 
 To which may be added geometrical, as in the preceding century. 
 
 FIRST POINTED, OR EARLY-ENGLISH. 
 
 As we are about to enter into and comment upon another style of architecture, and upon 
 stained glass as immediately connected with it, it may be as well to make some general remarks 
 in reference to the leading features of the style which is commonly called early-English, and espe¬ 
 cially on the architectural formation of their windows, with which the designs for the stained glass 
 were required to be in strict unison and accordance. This style emanated in all probability from the 
 Norman through the semi-Norman, but so gradually did the new method of construction spring out 
 of the last-named, that it is impossible to ascertain the exact time of its first appearance. “ This,” as 
 Bentham says, “ being like most novelties, we may suppose was introduced by degrees.” Its pre¬ 
 valent adoption is however generally fixed at the early part of the thirteenth century, of which period 
 we are still speaking; at all events it was fully developed during the reign of our English King 
 Henry the Third, and it is agreed on all hands to have been in full operation from 1216 to 1272. 
 The cathedral church of Salisbury is by far the most magnificent, extensive, and unmixed specimen 
 which is now remaining ; it was begun in the early part of this reign, and finished in 1258. It has 
 been said that this church “ may be justly accounted one of the best patterns of architecture in the 
 age wherein it was built.” * The east end of Ely cathedral is a fine example of this style, built by 
 Hu<rh Norwold, Bishop of that see; it was (after taking down the circular east-end) begun in 
 1234-5, and completed in 1250. At about this time, viz. 1245, King Henry the Third “ ordered 
 the east end, tower, and transept of the abbey church at Westminster, built by King Edward the 
 
 Confessor, to be taken down in order to rebuild them, at his own expense, in a more elegant form : 
 he did not live, it seems, to complete his whole design, but the difference of style in that part of the 
 church from the other, westward of the cross, which was afterwards built, indicates how far the 
 work was carried on in that king’s time or soon after.”+ The north transept of York Minster is 
 another glorious example of this style; it was built during the prelacy of Archbishop Walter Grey, 
 in 1227 • it has been much admired and long celebrated from the painted glass with which its five lan¬ 
 cets are filled, and which will come under our notice in the course of our remarks upon this style. 
 It is however, the form of the windows of this age which it is especially necessary to bring under 
 notice. “ These we find were long, narrow, sharp-pointed,” j (lancet-shaped,) “ and usually deco¬ 
 rated on the inside and outside with small marble shafts. The order and disposition of the windows 
 varied in some measure according to the stories of which the building consisted; in one of three 
 stories the uppermost had commonly three windows within the compass of every arch, the centre 
 one being higher than those on each side; the middle tier or story had two within the same space; 
 and the lowest only one window, usually divided by a pillar or mullion, and often ornamented on 
 the top with a trefoil, single rose, or some such simple decoration, which probably gave the hint for 
 branching out the whole head into a variety of tracery and foliage, when the windows came after¬ 
 wards to be enlarged. The use of painted and stained glass in our churches is thought to have 
 
 * Sir Christopher Wren, in Parentalia. 
 
 f Bentham’s “ Ely Cathedral” p. 38; and Matth. Paris, Hist. p. 581—861. 
 J Bentham’s “ Ely Cathedral,” p. 39. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 31 
 
 begun about this time. * This kind of ornament, as it diminished the light, induced the necessity of 
 making an alteration in the windows, either by increasing the number or enlarging their proportions; 
 foi, though a gloominess rather than over much light seems more proper for such sacred edifices, 
 and better calculated for recollecting the thoughts, and fixing the pious affections, f yet, without 
 that alteration, our churches had been too dark and gloomy; as some of them now, being divested 
 of that ornament, for the same reason, appear over-light.” 
 
 Although there are now but few remains of the more voluminous and magnificent stained 
 glass of this style, especially in England, yet from the existence of such gems as those of Canterbury 
 cathedral, and the immense lancets of the north transepts of York Minster being filled at the time 
 of their erection, there can be little doubt but that our churches were as generally adorned with painted 
 glass at this period as at any other, t and the more especially are we warranted in this belief, since 
 we know that Salisbury cathedral was filled with works of this art, which is apparent from the re¬ 
 mains which now exist there, and it is recorded § “ that Archbishop Laud made a Star Chamber 
 business of a man who broke some painted glass in the cathedral of Salisbury.” || We cannot there¬ 
 fore doubt but that the magnificent triplets of these times were erected for the reception of stained 
 glass, which they are not only eminently capable of receiving, but which are necessary to their com¬ 
 pletion. Although most of the windows left to us in this style are very simple, and with little or no 
 colour, bearing the character rather of painted than stained glass, yet the designs are remarkably 
 elegant. We cannot doubt that the eastern triplets were more storied and highly emblazoned for 
 grandeur of effect, in accordance with the magnificence of the religion of the time, as were the cha¬ 
 pels also decorated with windows of the like character, those of the aisles being of a lighter kind, 
 with grisaille patterns in the main grounds, and borders, shields, &c., containing saints, kings, sacred 
 monograms, attributes, symbols of the Passion of our Lord, or armorial bearings of kings, queens, 
 sees, abbeys, eminent churchmen, princes, peers, donors, &c. And here again we are reminded, 
 that heraldry was felt and considered to be a constituent principle, not only of stained glass, but of 
 Gothic ecclesiastical architecture and its ornament, both in this style, and even yet more so in some 
 succeeding ones, seeing that from time to time, in sculpture, carving, and painting, not only were 
 shields introduced, but angels almost invariably bearing them; the shields being charged with 
 sacred monograms of our Lord, emblems of his Passion, attributes of the Evangelists, the dove as the 
 Holy Spirit, saints, apostles, &c., emblazoned and illumined upon the true principles of heraldry ; 
 nor did the artists leave the fashion or shape of the escutcheon out of consideration, but they took 
 that it should be in harmony with the arches of their architecture, which was an invariable rule. 
 Hence in this style we find the shields denominated Heater , from their happening to be of that 
 shape ; but in fact it is merely the acute arch inverted, which principle equally governed them in 
 each succeeding style : this however was not the case in the Norman, for, although they preserved 
 the arch, it was not inverted, but an elongation from it to a kite-like shape, as seen in the Bayeux 
 Tapestry. In describing the characteristics of this style we must observe that at no time in England 
 
 * “ Ornaments of Churches Considered," p. 94 
 ■+■ Ibid. 
 
 * Rot Claus, ann. 20 Hen. III. m. 12. “Mandatum est H. de Pateshull thesaurario domini regis, quod borduram a tergo sedis regis in 
 capellft Sancti Stephani apud West, et borduram a tergo sedis reginre ex alia parte ejusdem capelke interius et exterius depingi faciat de viridi 
 colore': juxta sedern ipsius reginaj depingi faciat quandam crucem cum Maria et Johanne ex opposite crucis regis quie juxta sedem regis 
 depicta est. T. vn. die Febr. 
 
 The next record, which has been mentioned by Stowe, gives directions for repairing the granary under the tower, and all the leaden 
 utters and for leading the whole thoroughly on that side, per quas gentes videre possint, and for whitewashing the chapel of St. John, and for 
 making three glass windows in the same chapel, in which were to be represented a little Virgin Mary holding the child, and the Trinity and St. 
 John the Apostle. It gives orders too that tPatibulum) a cross should be painted behind the altar, bene et bonis coloribm; and, wherever it could 
 be done most conveniently, there were to be drawn in the same chapel two images of St. Edward holding out a ring and delivering it to St. 
 John the Evangelist. “ Et dealbari faciatis," adds the record, “ totum veterem murum circa supradictam turrim nostram. Et costum quod ad 
 h° n osueritis per visum et testimonium legalium hominum computnbitur vobis ad scaccarium. Teste rege apud Windesor, x. die Decembr." 
 
 ° C P ° S lt is evident from this and some following passages that painting on glass was then well known. Vide “Anecdotes of Painting in 
 England," by Horace Walpole, vol. i. pp. 7, 8, 4th edition, London, 1786. 
 
 \ “At abater date,°one Blesse was hired for half a crown a day to break the painted glass windows of the church of Croydon.” The 
 man probably took care not to be too expeditious in the destruction. Aubrey's Hist. Surrey, vol. ii. p. 10 7 . 
 
32 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 were large figures introduced. The construction of the designs was as follows : the main body of 
 the window was divided into various forms of quatrel’oils and other shapes, by the geometrical inter¬ 
 sections of the plan, these sometimes containing subjects * * * § or single figures, monograms, emblems, &c. 
 They had either back-grounds of the richer colours, as in the Norman windows, t or were wholly 
 white, or with distributed intersections of colour. + In both of the two last-named cases, character¬ 
 istic ornaments, depicted in brown lines, flourished in free scrolls over the whole body of the window, 
 the backgrounds of the ornament being usually reticulated by minute pencilling, which gave it much 
 the effect of engraving; no style of glass, perhaps, being more captivating than these grisailles. § 
 The borders in the richer style were constructed and coloured much after the manner of the pre¬ 
 ceding works of the Norman epoch, II but, in the simpler and less voluminously coloured examples, 
 merely a strip of plain or ornamented colour, IF and an outer margin of white was introduced, run¬ 
 ning entirely round the jamb, to depict the architectural shape of the window, except at the cill, 
 where it was seldom added, especially by English artists, it being a principle of taste in Gothic deco¬ 
 ration to avoid as much as possible all horizontal lines. In the later examples a stem was introduced 
 running up the centre of the window, from which branches emanated and spread completely over 
 the whole surface, terminating at the different points with ivy, oak, and other leaves, but the back¬ 
 grounds were not reticulated.** Quarrel windows were much in vogue at this time, which were de¬ 
 picted in two ways, viz., by a simple pattern delineated on each, with bands on the upper part of the 
 quarrels, and the back-grounds of the ornaments reticulated, ft which is the earliest manner of paint¬ 
 ing them ; or otherwise by banding the quarrels, and then spreading an ornament completely over 
 the whole, and intertwining it by the flowing of the ornaments with the banded parts. This is a later 
 style, and its object evidently is to admit more light, the back of the ornamented part not being reti¬ 
 culated. As we are now mentioning quarrels (so the word was anciently written, though now com¬ 
 monly pronounced quarries ) it may be as well to remark, that as much importance was attached to 
 their shapes in the different epochs as to the shields of heraldry; so in this period the quarrels were 
 elongated and pointed in conformity with the principles of the style, that is, longer than two equi¬ 
 lateral triangles conjoined at the bases; whereas in the succeeding styles they became more nearly 
 a square set angle-wise, when the arch became more depressed. These works were often composed 
 of white glass throughout the entire design, sometimes with coloured intersections and bosses inter¬ 
 spersed, tt to give them richness and to enliven their effect. It should however be observed, that, 
 although the greater portion if not all the material of this kind of glass was white, it must not be un¬ 
 derstood in a literal sense, for it was rather of a deep greenish tone, not absolutely a colour, but ap¬ 
 proximating to it; for which reason green was but partially used in the tinted or stained parts, these 
 being confined to the primitive colours. The strengthening bars for fixing the windows were usually 
 straight and placed at distances of about twenty inches apart, so as to resist the wind, without refer¬ 
 ence to the occasional interruption of the design. 
 
 A few examples only will now be cited to exemplify the preceding remarks, there being in 
 fact but little of the richer kind of early-Enghsh glass existing in this country. We proceed to take 
 some of them under our review. There can be little doubt, as we have previously endeavoured to 
 shew, that the “ a Becket ” glass in Canterbury Cathedral was executed during this epoch; but as it is 
 planned and executed upon semi-Norman principles, and is in connexion with the architecture of 
 that period, we have classed it under that head. As however we have two indubitable examples re- 
 
 * See Plate of lower part of Ely Cathedral. 
 
 •f See upper part of same Plate, St. Etheldreda. 
 
 t See back-ground of Plate, St. Thomas's, Stepney. 
 
 § See back-ground of same Plate. 
 
 || See borders of Plates, Ely and Brompton. 
 
 IF Vide Plate of Side Windows, Bromley St. Leonard, which will serve to explain this. 
 
 ** See back-ground of Plate of East Window, Bishopstone Church. 
 
 ++ Examples of this kind exist in the side windows at Westwell in Kent. 
 
 tt See Plate of East Window, Bishopstone Church. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 33 
 
 maining of this epoch to refer to, we proceed to bring them under our notice. One of them, which 
 is a very rare example, still remains in the great rose window of 
 
 Lincoln Cathedral, 
 
 the central part of which portrays the blessed in heaven, with Christ seated in the midst. This is 
 surrounded by sixteen compartments, which represent in as many subjects the scheme of man’s 
 redemption. This glass exhibits the same conventional and poetic imaginings so constantly found in 
 all the works of this period ; the same spirit and effect both in the figures and colouring. * * * § Besides 
 this there are other remains of stained glass of the thirteenth century in this cathedral, but they are 
 for the most part intermixed with remnants of later date. 
 
 The other example alluded to exists in the 
 
 Church of Westwell, 
 
 near Charing, in Kent, on the estate of the Earl of Thanet. This structure was entirely and is 
 mainly now a fine example of the early-English style, and the glass of which we are speaking is in 
 the centre window of the eastern triplet; nevertheless, its construction, design, and ornaments, (ex¬ 
 cepting that its main forms assimilate to the vesica piscis, in obedience to the shape of the window,) 
 are so like those of Canterbury cathedral, as to create great doubt whether they were not made by 
 the same artist.t Unfortunately only a portion of the stained glass of this central lancet remains. 
 It originally consisted of four figures, in the same number of pointed-oval shapes, the dove being in a 
 smaller one above them. There are still two remaining, with the dove; these figures represent the 
 Holy Virgin and the Eternal Father, each regally attired and sitting, being all displayed on the richly 
 diapered grounds of the ovals, which are formed by the geometrical intertwining of the same kind of 
 semi-foliated ornaments, so prevalent in all the decorations of this period ; the main stems forming the 
 vesicas and other principal features of the design, and the back-grounds being ornamented by the flow¬ 
 ing foliations proceeding from them, which are coloured, as those of Canterbury,+ with angels inter¬ 
 spersed amongst them, resting their feet upon the foliations. This fragmental remain is the only other 
 genuine example of an early-English rich mosaic window which we know of in this country, and it 
 forms an exquisite study for this style, containing as it does, in a mutilated compartment of a single 
 window, sufficient matter to furnish an idea for any expanse.§ (In one of the side openings of this 
 triplet are the remains also of original and coeval glass; it is composed of quarrels of a banded cha¬ 
 racter, which is accomplished by marginal brown lines towards the two upper edges of each quarrel, 
 and on the remaining portion below these is displayed in similar lines an ornament quite in the tre- 
 foiled character of the period, the back-ground being reticulated in fine hair-lines, which are inclosed 
 with a richly coloured and foliated border. This last cited example of embellishment by quarrel and 
 border is probably the earliest authenticated one of its kind extant.) These remains are highly pre¬ 
 cious, inasmuch as they are a sure guide by which we may produce future works, with a certainty 
 that we are in correct taste in connexion with early-English architecture. They are of the first 
 quarter of the thirteenth century. 
 
 There are also some remains of about this date in York Minster; II but the richest and most 
 complete specimens of this style extant are in the 
 
 * One of these subjects is imperfectly represented in Fowler's “ Mosaic Pavements and Painted Glass." 
 
 -I- The author reinstated this glass some years since for Mr. Willement, whilst in his establishment. 
 
 J See Plate of lower part of design for Eastern Triplets of Ely Cathedral. 
 
 § Mr. Willement has in his possession a copy of this glass partly executed by the author, but it is rendered into a semicircular form 
 at the top. 
 
 || There can be no doubt but that there are still many undiscovered remains of stained glass, even in this country. At Preston 
 church (near Faversham) the window on the Gospel side of the altar, which is (lancet or) first-Pointed, is stopped up with bricks outside: the 
 glass, which is inside, is whitewashed over ; but the medallions and general outlines, which are very discernible from their leading, leave little 
 doubt of its being stained glass of this period. The lower part of this window is Aid by a tomb, which probably accounts for its being bricked up. 
 
 K 
 
34 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 Cathedral of Notre Dame, Rouen. 
 
 They are tolerably perfect still, and are magnificent models of the continued medallioned mosaic style 
 of this time. One of these windows (which are thirty feet high and nearly seven feet wide) con¬ 
 tains thirty-four subjects, which are a representation of the principal events in the life of Saint Julian 
 the Charitable.* This window is geometrically planned by half and entire shapes, assimilating to 
 quatrefoils, each containing five of the subjects, the remainder being placed in the inter-shapes, which 
 are all on a back-ground of richly reticulated mosaic works. The whole is inclosed by a magnificent 
 bordering, after the manner of the foregoing examples, with the slight difference in the planning 
 which the architecture suggested, which was always taken into consideration.t Thus the shapes are 
 formed from four equilateral triangles, a square being placed in the centre of them. The drawing 
 of the figures differs in no respect from those of the preceding century, and much resembles those in 
 the Bayeux Tapestry, although posterior by two centuries and a quarter, thus shewing that the same 
 conventionality prevailed in art, even though used in connexion with a change of architectural style 
 and construction, by different artists and nations during this long period. They were painted by 
 Clemens, a native of Chartres, in 1295, and one of them contains his name. 
 
 The Reticulated glass of this epoch next claims our notice, of which there are considerable 
 remains scattered about in the different churches of this and other countries. The most important 
 and extensive, however, are in the north transept of 
 
 York Minster, 
 
 the five lancets of which have been denominated the “ Five Sisters,” by long tradition—not merely 
 because their number is five, but, according to the legend, because the painted glass which fills 
 them was contributed by that number of ladies, who are said to have supplied by their needle-work 
 patterns for them to be painted by. However much this may have obtained credence from their 
 somewhat resembling it at a superficial glance or a general view, it will soon be found, upon the 
 slightest examination, that they by no means bear a resemblance to embroidery, either in design or 
 developement. These immense lancets are full fifty feet high, and about six feet wide, the date of 
 their erection being that of the transept, which was commenced in 1227. The painted glass of these 
 windows, which is coeval with the transept itself, is by far the largest and finest specimen of the 
 thirteenth century now existing in England, they being each completely filled with painted glass, 
 and presenting at one view 1600 superficial feet. The designs are entirely of an ornamental cha¬ 
 racter, which circumstance, from their offering nothing offensive to fanatical religionists, may have 
 conduced much to their preservation. Each window has a border on both sides, (commencing at 
 the cill, and terminating at the soffit of the arch,) composed of an outer margin of delineation next 
 the jamb, the remainder of small pieces, which form its design, with an inter-margin to circum¬ 
 scribe the body of the window. The window itself contains thirteen compartments or squares of 
 different patterns in each lancet, which are reduced into ornamental features by complex diagrams, 
 and various fanciful shapes, formed by intersected lines, which constitute the leading features of it. 
 The pieces composing the whole are very minute, and the leading is consequently dense. The 
 ornaments of the several pieces of glass consist of brown lines, of a character very prevalent at this 
 period, viz., a sort of trefoil leafage (very similar to those on the architectural capitals of Salisbury 
 cathedral,) the back-grounds of which are mostly reticulated, + the decorations of the border being 
 very similar. These works, although rich in design, are mainly of white or rather greenish glass, with 
 
 * Before any colleges were established in monasteries, the professors in rhetoric frequently gave their scholars the Life of some 
 Saint for a trial of their talent at amplification, &c. Vide D’Israeli’s “ Curiosities of Literature,” Legends, pp. 120, 121. 
 
 There is a print of this window uncoloured, but by no means a faithful representation of it, in the “ Essai Historique et Descriptif sur 
 la Peinture sur Verre, by E. H. Langlois, Rouen, 1832. 
 
 t Vide Plate of East Window of St. Thomas's, Stepney. Elaborate coloured engravings of many compartments of this glass are given 
 in Browne’s “History of York Cathedral,” 4to. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 35 
 
 very little colour introduced, which is chiefly in the blocks, interspersed with the ornament, or in a 
 few margins ; so that it is in fact a sprinkling of stained glass over the surface in a slight degree, 
 rather than an attempt to produce a gorgeous display of it. Nevertheless, from the skilful manner 
 in which the plans and patterns are arranged, they leave no impression of sameness or poverty, but 
 upon perusal are found to possess a vast power and command of ornamental design, and generally a 
 most pleasing, quiet, and captivating effect. Reticulated (sometimes termed grisaille) gl ass seems 
 at this time to have been generally used. Large remains are still existing in the cathedrals of Sois- 
 sons, Rheims, Lyons, Cologne, and most of the principal churches abroad; whilst Salisbury, Lin¬ 
 coln, Wells, and others of our cathedrals, abound with it: nor were our collegiate and parish churches 
 less ornamented in the same style, as the many existing remains still to be seen in Southwell Min¬ 
 ster, Notts; the churches of Brayesnorth, Suffolk; Stockbury, Kent; St. Michael’s, Long Stanton, 
 Cambridgeshire; Stanton Harcourt, Oxon, &c. &c., will fully attest, all of which are formed upon geo¬ 
 metrical plans, with little or no colour introduced, the back-grounds of the ornamental parts being 
 reticulated. Quarrel windows also were frequently in use at this time, which were also reticulated, 
 as in an example still extant at the church of Westwell, in Kent, which has already been noticed, 
 as possessing a rare specimen of this kind of ornament. Innumerable other remains might be cited, 
 but they would only supply additional illustration that the feeling on which the art was conducted 
 was essentially the same in this country and elsewhere. This style, in connexion with the rich 
 mosaic, flourished in unison from about 1216 to 1260. 
 
 The Non-reticulated differs in few respects from the last-named style. It is constructed by 
 geometrically intersected lines, formed by the lead that combined the whole of the several pieces of 
 glass, which were sometimes bounded by margins of colour; small bosses, monograms, emblems, &c. 
 being distributed in different parts of the work to give it interest and to enliven the effect. * The 
 principal difference from the last-named style was the departure from the trefoiled ornament, and an 
 inclination to more natural foliage in its stead; a stem therefore was depicted running up the centre 
 of the window, from which branches proceeded and spread freely and independently over the whole 
 surface of the work, (which was principally of a greenish white,) the terminations being furnished 
 with foliations of oak, vine, ivy, or rose leaves, and roses, acorns, berries, &c. being intermixed there¬ 
 with. The back-grounds of these ornaments were not reticulated, evidently for the purpose of ad¬ 
 mitting more light, which is also evident from the painting being of a corresponding character. 
 This style of glass was almost exclusively peculiar to England; there are however examples in the 
 east windows of St. Ouen, at Rouen, but they are of later date. It did not cease when the first 
 pointed style was discontinued, but was even more abundantly used in the succeeding Decorated 
 than in it; in fact it does strongly mark the approach to that style. Fine and well-known examples 
 of non-reticulated early-English glass exist in 
 
 Chetwode Church, Bucks, 
 
 which is the most perfect example we can refer to, as the first remove from the reticulated. Lysons 
 has imperfectly represented them in his “ Magna Britannia.” Windows of this epoch invariably 
 consist of geometrical forms, interlaced with painted patterns in brown lines; but the ornaments in 
 this instance still partake more of the trefoil than later specimens. The composition is as follows : the 
 border, of white glass, on which is depicted a characteristic ornament in brown fines, and in 
 breadth about a sixth part of the opening, runs up each side of the window to the apex of the arch. 
 This border is bounded on each side by narrow ruby margins. The middle or panel part is com¬ 
 posed of circular bosses of white glass, which, conjoining from the bottom to the top of the window, 
 have patterns depicted on each of them; these are circumscribed by marginal colours, illumined 
 in their centres by small coloured quatrefoils; this constitutes the main ground, and on it, at rela- 
 
 See Plate of Bishopstone East Window. 
 
36 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 tive distances, are pointed-ovals, with coloured margins and blue grounds, each containing single 
 figures of regal or saintly personages. The date of this glass is from 1265 to 1270. 
 
 Many examples are still remaining of the simpler and less coloured of the non-reticulated 
 style, as connected with early-English architecture ; the following however will suffice for exemplifi¬ 
 cation, which, although a mere fragment, still fills the upper part of a lancet window at 
 
 Little Casterton, Rutlandshire. 
 
 It is a charming specimen, and consists of a series of lozenge-shapes, described by margins of dif¬ 
 ferent colours, these forming panels, in the middle of which are as many bosses differently con¬ 
 structed and richly coloured. The remaining features of the design are geometrically intersecting 
 lines described by the leading, each rendered into marginal effects, by brown lines near them, 
 the general ornament being a most spirited and beautiful foliage creeping over the whole surface, 
 and proceeding from a central stem which runs up the middle of the window, the principal portion of the 
 work being composed of greenish-white glass, and the whole bounded by an outer margin, which in¬ 
 closes the window. This specimen is of the latter part of the thirteenth century, and is not reticulated.* 
 At about this time a disposition evinced itself abroad to increase the size of the figures in connexion with 
 the rich mosaics, as is particularly evident in some of the stained glass of Bourges and other cathedrals, 
 which is of the date (or nearly so) of that now spoken of. This practice of introducing large and colossal 
 figures, forms a remarkable contrast to that of our English artists, who at no time adopted them in stained 
 glass in connexion with Gothic architecture, at least not until the art became thoroughly debased. 
 Still, even with this change of taste, the same principle was retained of small and minute mosaics, as con¬ 
 stituting the embellished and richest portion of the work ; nor is this extraordinary, for the plan of 
 decoration by mosaics was the established and universal system down to the fourteenth century; 
 and that it was not confined to glass is equally certain, since numberless vestiges still remain to 
 prove its use in polychromatic devices. The same principle was also extended to monuments, 
 as appears from many examples still in being, amongst which is the celebrated work of the architect 
 Peter Cavalini, namely, the shrine of St. Edward the Confessor; the not less remarkable one of 
 King Henry the Third, the panels of which are of porphyry enclosed with mosaic work of gold, 
 scarlet, &c., with pillars gilt and enamelled, the effigy upon it being of brass gilt, t The monument 
 of Edmund Crouchback is a no less remarkable specimen of monumental architecture and its deco¬ 
 ration at this period, the same having been “ inlaid with stained glass,” t mosaically introduced, 
 which shews that this principle was adhered to, not only in stained glass, but also in universal deco¬ 
 ration, and that the taste of these “ barbarous times” (as some are apt to term them) adopted these 
 modes as being in harmony with the edifice, and no doubt excluded as much as possible all those 
 which were otherwise. In speaking therefore of the mosaic glass of Bourges cathedral, our notice 
 will be confined to certain examples of the date we are still upon, namely, from the middle to the 
 latter part of the thirteenth century, not only to exemplify the foregoing remarks, but also that they 
 may be compared with the works which we have quoted, in order to judge of the mode of practice, and 
 the progress of this art in England and elsewhere at this time. It will be now found that during 
 this period the foreign artists differed very materially from those of this country, especially in the 
 construction of their designs. Whether this was from alienation through rival wars and contentions of 
 our early English monarchs with those of other nations, or whether the continental connexion with 
 
 * The back-ground of the plate of East Window, Bishopstone, Hereford, will give a tolerable idea of this style. 
 
 + In 1248 this monarch ordered to be painted in his Hall at Woodstock the following motto: “ Qui non dat quod habet, non 
 accipit ILLE QUOD optat." Vide Camden's Remains, p. 451. 
 
 t “ Edmund Crouchback, fourth son of Henry III. so called, as some affirm, from the deformity of his person, but, according to 
 others, from his attending his brother in the holy wars, where they wore a crouch or cross on their shoulders, as a badge of Christianity. 
 This has been a very lofty monument, painted, gilt, and inlaid with stained glass. The inside of the canopy has been a sky with stars, but, by 
 age, changed into a dull red.” “An Historical Description of Westminster Abbey, its Monuments and Curiosities,” p. 65. London, 1830, 
 Newman. 
 
DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 37 
 
 Italy, where all works of art were so differently practised, induced other views, it is difficult to say 
 but certam it is, that, from this time forth, there was little assimilation in the stained glass of this 
 country to that of other nations. This was however clearly in some measure from our having esta- 
 bhshed and unswervingly adhered to the first-Pointed style of architecture, which gave it nation¬ 
 ality, and acquired for it the term early-English; stained glass naturally following in the same taste 
 
 The Cathedral of Bourges 
 
 possesses 183 windows of stained glass, consisting of 5592 compartments, and forming perhaps the 
 most magnificent collection in the world, taken as a whole. These windows have been executed 
 during the various epochs from the thirteenth century downwards.* It is however of that glass 
 which fills the single lancets, and which is coeval with our early-English, that we now speak. These 
 exhibit a size and largeness in the glass which is not previously found, and that to the fullest extent; 
 but that which is most surprizing is the great and apparently sudden change from small medallions 
 to immense figures, those in this church varying from fifteen to eighteen and even to twenty feet in 
 height. The proportions of these figures in the lancet windows are full two-thirds of their whole 
 height; they consist of saints and prophets, and constitute the main surface of each window. The 
 draperies are composed of very large and broad pieces of colour, which for the most part is volumi¬ 
 nous, masses of white being avoided, and the fullness of colouring of the foregoing styles being so pre¬ 
 served. The flesh parts are of a reddish-coloured glass, as in the previous styles. The figures have 
 labels of white in their hands, variously inscribed in capitals.! The painting is exceedingly coarse 
 and bold, being mostly of very thick broad lines and with little shadow, yet well subdued. The 
 back-grounds are of one broad colour, sometimes having three or more roundels on it of some other 
 tint. Beneath the figure is a quaint but rude pedestal about a foot in height, which is simply 
 described, principally by the lead lines of combination, and from this columns rise on each side of 
 the figure, terminating at the top with a sort of canopy, or rather tabernacle, quaintly drawn and 
 coloured, with scarcely any architectural pretensions, and with a general resemblance to such parts 
 as are shewn in the medallions of the earlier styles, but most diminutive in comparison with the 
 figures with which they are in connexion, t All these are inclosed by an outer broad mosaic border, 
 very elaborately composed of minute pieces, as in the preceding style. 
 
 This style of window is by no means admirable thus applied, from the monstrously over¬ 
 powering effect of the figures; but the principle of composition is not to be despised, for, differently 
 used and on a smaller scale, it is very charming, because it combines the mosaic and decorated prin¬ 
 ciples. 5 It may be well called “ the Continental first-Pointed,” for no English glass resembles it. 
 
 It has been previously stated that large figures were never introduced by English artists; so 
 in early-English glass figures and canopies were not used, and therefore in strict taste cannot be in¬ 
 troduced, except upon continental principles. As however glass of nearly coeval date does exist 
 abroad, shewing a departure from medallions, and is with some a sufficient authority, we give one 
 instance from amongst many, which will fully establish the precedent. Examples of this kind are in 
 
 Cologne Cathedral ; 
 
 at the east end of which are many lofty and magnificent windows still entire; they consist of four 
 
 * A magnificent work on Bourges Cathedral has recently been published; it is entitled “ Monographic de la Cathddrale de Bourges," by 
 P6res Martin and Cahier. 
 
 -f- All inscriptions during this epoch were in Lombardic capitals. During the thirteenth century Arabic figures were introduced. 
 “ They were used for the first time in 1240, in the Alphonsean Tables, made by order of Alphonso, son of Ferdinand King of Castile, who em¬ 
 ployed for the purpose Isaac Hayan, a Jew singer, of the synagogue of Toledo, and Abel Ragel, an Arabian. The Arabs took them from the 
 Indians, in A.D. 900.” Vide D’lsraeli's “Curiosities of Literature,” p. 196. 
 
 J The author restored a window of this kind and age in 1833, for Mr. Pratt in Bond Street. The figure was represented sittin"-, 
 which if upright would have been ten or twelve feet high ; the borders, &c. were like those just mentioned in Bourges. 
 
 § For a full exemplification of this, see Plate of the East Window of St. Thomas's, Winchester. 
 
 L 
 
38 
 
 STAINED GLASS DURING THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 lancets, each eleven times its width in height. On the top of each couplet is a circlet, which nearly 
 compasses them, and surmounting these a large foliated circle. The whole of the foliated circles, 
 and indeed all the upper part of the windows, are filled with the most voluminous mosaics constantly 
 diversified. Our chief object, however, is to bring under notice the principal openings, which are 
 lancet-shaped. These consist of colossal figures on low pedestals, and under lofty canopies, full of 
 massive and broad colouring, commencing at the cill, and reaching altogether up to one-third the 
 height of the window, each opening at the bottom being thus filled with massive and gorgeous effect, 
 and forming a rich band of colouring at the lower part of them. The remaining portion above is of an 
 entire white ground, with patterns of brown, reticulated, amidst which are introduced various geome¬ 
 trical and complex delineations of colour. The canopies are exceedingly quaint and richly coloured, 
 being rendered into panels and arches by crystal tracery. They are full of aperture and lofty spiral 
 effect, the figures, pedestals, &c. having all the conventional feeling of the aforenamed examples.* 
 This, which is the last example we shall introduce of the thirteenth century, has been cited to shew 
 that figure and canopy may be used in works of this style without any great violation of propriety 
 and taste, although it must be admitted that it is only justifiable upon continental practice and au¬ 
 thority. We conclude, therefore, from the examples which we have adduced, that the laws of this 
 style are as follow: — viz. 
 
 1. Mosaic. —Richly coloured and foliated with vesicas and figures, as 
 
 in the centre opening of . . . • Westwell Church. 
 
 Rich mosaic and medallion subjects, as in . . . Notre Dame, Rouen. 
 
 Rich medallion subjects, as in the Rose Window at . . Lincoln Cathedral. 
 
 Canopy, mosaic, and figure, as in . . . . Bourges Cathedral. 
 
 2. Reticulated. — With ornamental borders and bosses, as in . . York Minster. 
 
 With figure and canopy, as in the .... Cathedral, Cologne. 
 
 3. Non-reticulated. — With borders, panels, and figures, as in . Chetwode Church. 
 
 With coloured intersections, as in . . . . Casterton Church. 
 
 These may also be rendered into many varieties; for example, Reticulated may be embel¬ 
 lished with colours or not, with medallions of subjects, bosses, &c., or without; the same variety 
 being applicable to Non-reticulated, geometrical, or quarrel; which together suggest a variety 
 of which scarcely any other style is capable. So in like manner may the Mosaic and Reticulated be 
 classed together; that is to say, in the case of a triplet, the centre may be of a rich mosaic, and the 
 sides of reticulated pattern, or quarrels and border, as is the case in that ancient relic at Westwell. 
 
 We close our remarks upon this epoch by citing the following document, which was in con¬ 
 nexion with the works at Exeter cathedral. In “ 1303 and 1304 considerable sums are charged for 
 lead and stone, and also for glass and glazing, namely, 364 feet, at 5id, per foot, 8/. 6s. lOd. ; 
 140 feet of painted glass, at bid. per foot, 64s. 2d., and fitting the same 2s. ; to Walter, the glazier, for 
 fitting the glass of the gable end, and of ‘ octo summarum fenestrarum et sex fenestrarum’ in other 
 parts of the church, 4/. 10s.’ ” t 
 
 * See East Window of St. Thomas's, Stepney. 
 
 Vide Britton’s “ History and Antiquities of Exeter Cathedral." 
 

wffim 
 

DfsignHl fur tf)p Inter pnrfinn nf f(|F Gnstfrn (GEmtunns nf Hip OntI]fW 
 



 
 
 
limit- for-tiig • ftrtttmrtton-nf-Hir-DFftO. 
 
 JRarahns i-.lh oSJaimSt SoU'lI 1 ^ 
 
 fnnfci tit COrfow bij ffi&K Bankart 
 
 bonbon 
 
 ffl onnuu'ntal fIIint)on> 
 
 Sonify of ifye Qtjaitcel of 
 
 Stoliipr, ‘Primeft Gljunl), Dorfefl)inr. 
 
mm 
 
STAINED GLASS 
 
 DURING 
 
 TIIE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 This century presents another style, which was indeed commenced in the last, at once so dif¬ 
 ferent in all its conceptions and elaborations, that it will still be necessary to enter into some brief 
 notice of its architectural character. It is denominated Decorated, by some Second-Pointed. “ The 
 Gothic architecture of the fourteenth century differed considerably from that of the preceding one, 
 particularly in the vaulting and the formation of the windows ; the vaulting became more decorated and 
 divided into various angular compartments, forming a sort of tracery, ornamented at the intersections 
 with foliated orbs, carved heads, and other embossed work. The columns were clustered, frequently 
 with rich foliated capitals; the windows were greatly enlarged, and divided into several lights by 
 stone mullions, ramified into various forms in the upper part, more particularly in the great eastern 
 and western windows, which frequently occupied nearly the whole width of the nave or choir, and were 
 carried up almost as high as the vaulting. The arches of door-ways, monuments, &c., were often 
 very richly ornamented on the sides with foliage, generally known by the name of crockets, and the 
 pinnacles were usually enriched in the same manner. In the early part of this century the arches 
 were also frequently ornamented with rows of rose-buds in the hollow mouldings. In this century 
 also prevailed that singular arch formed of four segments of circles contrasted, like an ogee moulding. 
 Buttresses terminating in pinnacles, and sometimes ornamented with tracery, were much used in 
 door-ways, tombs, piscinae, &c., where slender pillars had been employed in the preceding centuiy 
 for the same purpose.” * 
 
 As the examples of this period are numerous in architecture, so also are they in decoration and 
 in glass, in which so much talent in designing was shewn, so great a mastery and science exhi¬ 
 bited in their detail, which was ever correct though various, that we admire every fresh example 
 which presents itself to our view. For purity of conception and plan the east window of Bristol 
 cathedral possesses by far the finest remains of this period, though Exeter cathedral also in its east 
 window has some remarkably good examples, whilst York Minster contains a still greater variety and 
 quantity of the magnificent kind ; and in the lighter styles, Norbury church in Derbyshire, t Trum- 
 pington church, Cambridgeshire, t All Saints, York, &c„ are of equal interest. In speaking of the gene¬ 
 ral mode of constructing the different designs, we shall confine ourselves principally to such specimens 
 as are calculated to exemplify the style, without reference to their being perfect in themselves, for, 
 as “ by the foot we know Hercules,” so does the eye of the artist read in a remnant the original pic¬ 
 ture ; and by this we would impress the necessity of the most careful preservation of even small and 
 seemingly unimportant remains, which often present the best examples in detail. The first thing to 
 be remarked in this style is the total departure from the trefoiled kind of ornaments in the termina¬ 
 tion of the foliated parts, which was so prevalent in the preceding century, and a complete metamor¬ 
 phosis in the borders of the windows. The artist now resorted to a much bolder but less mosaic 
 kind of display, yet equally if not more heraldic in developement. The ornament consisted princi¬ 
 pally of vines and vine-leaves interspersed with grapes, which have a symbolic reference to the 
 words of our Lord, “ I am the vine, and ye are the branchesnor were they confined to the borders, 
 but made to flourish over each opening of the window, so as to form medallions or panels for the 
 figures by their intertwining, as in the east window of Bristol cathedral, i Vine-leaves, however, 
 
 * Vide Lysons’s “ Magna Britannia, Cambridgeshire," p. 53. 
 
 These have been engraved by Lysons’s in his “ Magna Britannia, Derbyshire ; 
 Architecture." Much glass of the same epoch, and probably by the same hand, exists 
 X Engraved in Lysons’s “ Cambridgeshire.” 
 
 ^ Vide Plate of West Window, Snettisliam Church. 
 
 and lately in Bowman's “ Specimens of Ecclesiastical 
 i the neighbouring church of Checkley. Staffordshire. 
 
40 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 were not confined to foliated parts, but applied in their full breadth to the canopies * and other archi¬ 
 tectural representations in the place of crockets, f Although the principle of medallions was par¬ 
 tially retained in this style, yet the system of minute and elaborate mosaics was almost wholly dis¬ 
 continued, the main features being foliaged borders with figures and canopies, which generally 
 occupied the entire opening, as in Tewkesbury Abbey church; sometimes a series of figures placed 
 each over the others, with storied or escutcheonal medallions under each, t was introduced where the 
 windows were lofty, as seen in many examples in York Minster, and this was a favourite mode of 
 construction at the time. Not unfrequently a large portion below the figures (where they were 
 singly used) was portrayed in rich and minute mosaics, as is to be seen in the principal window of 
 the Lady Chapel of St. Chad’s, Birmingham. § This style also embraced the lighter kind of non- 
 reticulated glass, such as greenish-white grounds, either of patterns or quarrels, generally banded, 
 with foliage creeping over the whole surface, as in the latter part of the preceding century; with 
 these were occasionally used borders, medallions of subjects, heraldic escutcheons, bosses, &c., with 
 various geometrical lines of colour, II and emblems, heraldry, or ornaments introduced in the tracery. 
 It was also customary in these times to insert square compartments, containing figures and canopies 
 on these foliaged grounds of white and pattern, continuing through a series of windows, so as to form 
 a band of colour a little higher than the centre of the opening, the lighter ground appearing above 
 and below. It was the practice to display figures and canopies independently, and not confined to 
 the square, letting the pinnacles and irregular parts take an accidental position on these light 
 grounds. As the introduction of this style necessitated the rendering the designs into larger fea¬ 
 tures by figure and canopy, it might naturally be concluded that the several parts would require 
 more painting and shadowing, and therefore it may be as well here to enter into a consideration of 
 this (a common mistake of nearly all modern painters,) as well as into the true principles of constructing 
 decorated designs. As the height of the lights was commonly five times their width from the cill to 
 the tracery, it left a large space to deal with, to diminish which they first applied a border of run¬ 
 ning foliage of vine-leaves and stems, grapes, birds, &c., and next to the mullion an outer margin of 
 white, to delineate the architectural shapes. Between the borders, and occupying about two-thirds 
 of the height, was the canopy, drawn upon simple outline, and planned without attempt at perspective, 
 similarly to those of monumental brasses, and consisting of straight-sided gables II pointed in an 
 acute angle. These were in all their parts much enriched by patterns and detail, their grounds 
 being diapered by damascenes of admirable design. As, therefore, no appearance of a recessed 
 niche was attempted, so was shadow in a great measure unnecessary; nevertheless, they were not 
 entirely without it, for, although the patterns much enriched the work, a certain shadow to mellow 
 and subdue the glare was applied, but in such a skilful way as not superficially to appear evident. It 
 has been thought by some that painting the glass on the exterior was not practised by the ancients, but 
 nothing can be more erroneous, for this is common to every epoch. ** As the portion of each opening 
 occupied by the border and canopy was so considerable, the space left for the figure was of necessity 
 small, less, indeed, than one-third of the opening; a rule which was never lost sight of, as thereby 
 they avoided colouring in large pieces. The figures (which seldom exceeded three feet in height, 
 and were oftener much less,) rested on a kind of battlemented frieze, (for pedestals, strictly speaking, 
 were never used,) which sometimes bore the name of the saint inscribed thereon, or some other cha¬ 
 racteristic ornament. By these means the work acquired a broad and mosaic effect, not broken by 
 
 * Vide Plate of East Window of Killamarsh Church, Derbyshire. 
 
 4 Amongst the many examples are very fine ones of this description, supposed to be originally from Lichfield Cathedral, now in the 
 church of Norton near Twycroft: these the Author recently restored for Lord Howe, and has a facsimile of one of them. 
 
 t See Plate of the Choir Windows, St. Chad's, Birmingham. 
 
 This window was drawn and also executed by the Author, from which his name has somehow been obliterated. 
 
 || See Plate of East Window, Bishopstone Church, Herefordshire. 
 
 f Vide Plate of East Windows of Killamarsh, Blackbrook, and St. Chad’s, Birmingham. 
 
 ** The Author has recently restored for J. H. P. Oakes, Esq. the East Window of Hessett Church near Bury St. Edmund's: it is 
 decorated glass of the early part of the fourteenth century, which is shadowed entirely on the outside of it, the lines of depiction being the 
 only painting on the inside. This glass, which is of the highest order of finish, is sufficient proof of this practice, independently of other 
 general evidences, of which the Author has considerable quantities of different examples and periods in his possession. 
 
DURING THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 41 
 
 shadowed subdivisions into paltry patches, but suitable to any aspect. In the churches of St. Ouen 
 and St. Maclou, at Rouen, are some very singular examples, which we will advert to from their 
 being remarkable exceptions to foreign construction in general. In these churches the disposition 
 to render the pictorial interest of the windows subservient to the more important object of effect is 
 especially evinced. Many windows in succession are seen lofty in the extreme; at the foot of each 
 opening only a small portion, namely, a little more than its width in height, is devoted to the figures 
 or pictorial part, which rest on the dll, and without the semblance of a pedestal. The part above, 
 which constitutes nearly the whole space of the light, is filled with entire and lofty canopies, literally 
 crowded with figures, which is qccomplished by introducing translucent tracery, and so forming 
 innumerable little niches, in which are representations of many saintly personages, angels, &c„ placed 
 as finials to the tabernacle work.* Nor are the metal parts of these canopies alike; some being 
 entirely gold colour, others white, and in many instances gold and white. The grounds and aper¬ 
 tures being different in each successive window, produce in the whole a most charming variety of 
 effect; but it is as a whole that they are so admirable; taken singly, there is not perhaps one that 
 would’produce any striking effect. And thus it is in the present day; we erect perhaps one win¬ 
 dow, which may be excellent in itself, and we wonder that it has not the charm that such as these 
 possess, that it has not all the beauties of all the works that are still in our memory, and conclude 
 that the art is lost; and for these reasons there are few works of the present day that are not spoiled 
 by attempting too much in each. Hence, perhaps, the remains of our ancient works have been so 
 much neglected; for, being mostly in small patches, and possessing neither completeness nor the ad¬ 
 vantage of effect in masses, they have been thought unimportant, until the taste and judgment of the 
 artist or connoisseur has rescued them from oblivion, by pointing out their real merit and value. 
 The manner of drawing the figures of this period, which are larger than in the medallions of the last 
 century, bears a great resemblance to the style and details of the great and other seals of the time, 
 and is equally like the monumental brasses of this date, that is, quite upon conventional principles. 
 In the early periods of this style the flesh parts were painted on glass of light madder colour, but 
 afterwards white was continuously used. lu the latter case the hair and beard were commonly 
 stained yellow. It is not clear that the art of producing yellow on white was known before this 
 period, and even in this time it was seldom done when the colour could be conveniently introduced 
 by leading. The nimbus of this period was added in various colours, ruby, blue, yellow, green, pur- 
 pure &c„ regulated by the grounds with which they came in contact, and without any attempt to 
 copy a reality, but aiming at the primary object, effect. Many curious evidences of this may be 
 seen in the clerestory windows of St. Ouen, at Rouen, where the hair, beard, and even the eye¬ 
 brows of the figures are variously coloured in ruby, blue, green, &c„ clearly shewing that a balance 
 and harmony of colour was deemed of the first importance, without reference to the natural appear¬ 
 ance. Nor were the principles of Christian symbolism and heraldry departed from, for the skill 
 which was exercised in the colouring universally provided that colour should not clash with colour ; 
 nor did this occur, even in the draperies of the figures, but was avoided by fimbriating them with 
 rich orfreys and edgings of gold or silver, or vice versa. Christian and heraldic symbolism was, 
 indeed, unsparingly introdnced at this period, both on glass and in architecture, for all religious 
 establishments, sees, monasteries, nunneries, and orders, kings, princes, prelates, nobles, knights, 
 castles, and corporations, had their several heraldic distinctions and insignia, as shewn by their 
 escutcheons, seals, &c. Universally, therefore, was this taste adopted in this great epoch of architec¬ 
 ture and thus was produced that grand uniformity of ideas which pervaded the whole body of archi¬ 
 tects, sculptors, painters, engravers, and carvers, as one man; hence, those wonders of this age, the 
 remains of some of which are still left for us to contemplate. Many single works will exemplify 
 this - but for example, we will instance one. It is a monumental brass which still exists, though 
 in a’mutilated state, in Rising church, Norfolk, and we will compare its details with the splendid 
 
 • See Hue of East Window, St. Mary’s, Truro, Cornwall, wbieh, though of fie Perpendicu.ar, will give . tolerable idea. 
 
42 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 decorated glass which partly fills the windows of the same church. We allude to the monument of 
 Sir Hugh Hastings, a portion of which is so well shewn in Carter’s Painting and Sculpture, (PI. 71,) 
 and more recently in Waller’s Monumental Brasses. In this we have at once a model for stained 
 glass, decorative painting, colouring, armour, and architecture : in short we obtain an appropriate 
 design for a window from this brass plate, which was once enamelled in brilliant colours. For these 
 reasons, from the encaustic tile of the floor to the bosses of the roof—nay, from the crypt to the 
 spire, we find one succession of grandly uniform ideas. 
 
 Pattern glazing was much used at this time; that is to say, various fanciful patterns depicted 
 by lead lines only, sometimes in pale quaint colours, or otherwise in plain greenish glass. These 
 were used mostly in the clerestory or the subordinate windows of the edifice; but not unfrequently 
 (probably for economy) in the aisles. They were without any painting, and merely a higher order 
 of glazing than ordinary quarrels. Many examples exist at Abbeville, Chartres, Rouen, &c., and 
 most of the continental churches; the nearest, however, to us, are in the ancient church, and at the 
 convent in the Basse Ville, at Calais : some of them are as old as this epoch, but they are still 
 renewed and practised at the present day. They have a very ornamental and agreeable appearance, 
 and are in good taste provided the patterns be kept in unison with the style. * 
 
 We now proceed to the examination and description of some examples still extant, with a 
 view to ascertain the main principles, and, as much as possible, the various kinds of design and 
 detail, which the artists of this epoch adopted. The first example which we will cite is the East 
 window of 
 
 Bristol Cathedral, 
 
 which is foliated, and is selected principally because it is a singular exception in the present remains 
 of Decorated design, from its being so truly in harmony with the foliage in the architectural orna¬ 
 ments of this period, and from its principles of non-architectural embellishment in the way of canopy 
 and tabernacle work, being as it were the connecting link from the preceding style in its planning 
 and drawing, and assimilating only in a slight degree to the centre opening in the triplet at West- 
 well. t The choir, of which this window is a portion, is attributed to Knowles, who became abbot in 
 1303. Speaking of it, Lysons says, “ This bears evident marks of being part of the building erected 
 by Abbot Knowles, in the latter end of the reign of Edward the First; for, besides the beautiful 
 east window and the arches under it, which agree with the style of architecture then in use, the 
 arms (England as used before Edward III.; of Clare, Earl of Gloucester, the last of which family 
 died in 1314; of Berkeley, with the addition of the crosses, first added by Thomas Lord Berkeley, 
 who succeeded to the barony 9th Edw. I.,) which appear below the window, serve very nearly to 
 ascertain the date.? This window is most simple and beautiful in its tracery, and equally so in its 
 glass; it consists, or rather did consist, of foliage throughout, without the slightest mixture of archi¬ 
 tectural features. The principal spandrels are composed of circumscribed medallions, on which are 
 displayed as many shields of the shape of the inverted arch, bearing the arms of Berkeley, Clare, 
 Despencer, Warren, Beauchamp, Bolmn, Mowbray, Willington, Montague, Bradstone, &c„ the 
 remainder of the space being filled up with rich and luxuriant foliage of vine-leaves and grapes, on 
 ruby and blue grounds, alternated and richly diapered, a border running round each spandrel. The 
 lower part is of nine lights, each of which is surrounded with a flowing border of exceeding richness 
 which incloses the principal part of the design. This latter exhibits a fine and free distribution of 
 foliage running completely over each panel, the stems so contrived that they form oval or parallelo- 
 
 , . The gkZed the whole of the windoWH of the new rhurch at Osmaston, in Derbyshire, in this manner, and intro,lured the 
 
 smne feeling ,n all the windows of St. James's Chureb, Paddington. 
 
 F See ante, page 33. 
 
 + Gloucester Antiquities, p. 29. Lysons has partly but imperfectly represented this glass in Plates XCIII. and XCIV. of the same 
 
DURING THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 43 
 
 gram shapes, which contain figures of prophets and apostles holding inscribed labels.* Unfortu¬ 
 nately this glass is at present in a very imperfect, fragmental, and mutilated state, and requires a very 
 careful examination to ascertain and judge of its original perfection ; the whole of the back-grounds 
 have however been most elaborately damascened, and it was composed of material of the highest 
 order of beautiful colours. In its original state this window must have been a most glorious exam¬ 
 ple and a more charming conception has perhaps scarcely ever existed, containing as it did gor¬ 
 geous heraldry, the threading vine, and the wine-like effect of the enriched ruby counterchanged with 
 the damascened blue, producing an entire display of symbolic and heraldic blazonry, but at the same 
 time incorporating figures which still preserved a pictorial interest, and thus keeping up the feeling of 
 the preceding styles by incorporating medallioned effects, and so making each separate aperture of 
 the window a perfectly decorated enrichment, without deteriorating the art by interfering with the 
 architecture, as in the succeeding style, which produced figure and canopy, architecture within 
 
 architecture, and as it were assumed the province of the statuary. 
 
 There is an objection felt now to placing armorial bearings in east windows from a fear of vio¬ 
 lating true principles; but here, as we have shewn, it was abundantly used, and this is only one 
 amongst the many examples which prove it to be quite in accordance with ancient practice. 
 
 ° Canopied design is next in order, of which there are many varieties, adapted according to the 
 circumstances of their situations. The windows to the north and south of the choir of Bristol cathe. 
 dral have been filled with heraldic figures and canopies, one of which still remains, but it is dis¬ 
 jointed. This is circumscribed by a border of semi-lozenges of yellow on a ruby ground; the cen¬ 
 tral part contains a knight in plated armour, with a gorget of mail; he bears a shield on whic is 
 emblazoned his arms, gules a cross argent, and he is holding a lance, to which is affixed a pennon, 
 emblazoned as his shield. This figure is on an enriched blue ground, on each side of which rise 
 columns terminating with pinnacles, which support a lofty canopy composed of a ™ry a cute 
 crocketed gable, with a trefoil arch beneath it. Many shapes and paneled entablatures of differen 
 colours are introduced, surmounted by tabernacle work and buttresses on an entire ruby ground. 
 These windows further exemplify the practice not only of introducing heraldry, but heraldic figures, 
 into the most sacred parts of a church. 
 
 It is worthy of remark, that in the whole of this glass the diapering was not accomplished, as 
 in the later examples, by cleaning out the patterns from dark grounds, but by developing them with 
 thinly described lines, and occasionally by reticulating and producing a lace-work hke effect. The 
 whole character of these works has been exceedingly bold, but the minor parts and the details are 
 most minutely and carefully pencilled. The windows, although they bear ample evidence of having 
 been magnificently filled, are now principally occupied by mutilated remains, sadlyjumbled together. 
 
 The Abbey Church of Tewkesbury 
 
 possesses still some fine remains, which on an extensive scale further shew not only the identity of 
 L principles of heraldry with those of stained glass, but the disposition at this time of freely intro¬ 
 ducing figures of lay and military persons and heraldry into the sanctuary. These windows on the 
 north and south of the chancel of this church, comprise knights, armour, arms, canopies and borders. 
 The tracery parts consist of rich scrolls of vines, very similar in character to those m the East wm- 
 I w of Bristol cathedral, but they are entirely white, excepting the centra boss, from which th 
 ornament emanates, and are on a massive ruby ground richly diapered. The lower or pr.ncip 1 
 lights four of which are in each window, contain knights in complete armour of plate and mai 
 each having a surcoat on which their several arms are emblazoned, one hand resting on the hit of the 
 sword, which depends from the girdle, the other holding a lance. They represent Clare, Zouch, &c. t 
 
 ; “ *" ’**■» ” a 
 
 Sculpture.” 
 
44 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 they are on highly enriched back-grounds of blue, green, &c. and are bounded by columns pencilled 
 as masonry as high as the commencement of the canopies, which they seemingly support, these 
 being pinnacled, crocketed, and buttressed upwards. Exterior to these is an enriched border, which 
 incloses the whole subject. The canopies are very lofty and spiral, acutely pointed in their upper 
 parts, and pierced in many forms, representing windows, &c. differently coloured; the lower parts 
 are hexagonal, having a sort of roof to connect them with the upper portions. Many bands of 
 colour of different tints are introduced, and an arch beneath spans the width. The parts below the 
 figures were originally pedestalled in the form of panels, containing coats of arms, inclosed within a 
 border formed of a quatrefoil and square combined.* Some of these are still to be seen distributed 
 amongst the fragments in the different windows; indeed the whole of these still beautiful remains 
 are in a lamentably neglected and imperfect state. Many other instances exist, shewing the heraldic 
 taste of this period in connexion with this art, as in the 
 
 Armorial Window in York Minster, 
 
 which is one of the windows in the north aisle, in which nearly the whole sixteen remain filled with 
 stained glass. This window has three quatrefoils in the tracery, which constitute the main part of it; 
 they are filled with foliaged ornaments similar to those at Tewkesbury abbey. Below these are the 
 three principal lights, which contain six subjects, each under a lofty canopy, and at the bottom of the 
 centre light, is a mortuary figure kneeling. Interspersed with these are coats of arms and figures in 
 coats armorial: the latter are, first, the Emperor, King of Arragon, Old England, Old France, the 
 same repeated, Beauchamp, Clare, Beauchamp repeated, Eoss, Mowbray, Clifford, and Percy. The 
 shields of arms are, from the top downwards, St. Peter, the Imperial, England, Old France, Arragon 
 King of the Romans, Castile and Leon, Jerusalem, and Navarre. Each light is inclosed with an 
 armorial border of the imperial eagles and the regal lions rampant, each on their proper field. 
 Although this window is more especially heraldic, from which circumstance it is termed the 
 Armonal Window, still there are few of the windows of this age in the same Minster which have 
 not a liberal sprinkling of heraldry, and even in this instance it is, as previously shewn, intermixed 
 with sacred subjects, a remark which will apply to most other edifices. The fact is, chivalry and the 
 Catholic religion were so intimately combined in the middle ages, that the free use of what seems 
 to us merely secular ornaments need not create surprise. Arms were, in a sense, religions emblems • 
 they pertained to the soldier of the cross; they could not be separated from the Church in whose 
 service the bearers of them were proud to fight. The very origin of heraldry, the crusading 
 expeditions, was religious; and it is necessary in considering the works of the ancient artists to bear 
 this in mind, lest we should attribute to them a secular spirit, which they were far from possessing t 
 The great west window of York Minster is also a fine example of figures and canopies: in it are 
 depicted the eight first archbishops, and eight saints of the Church; at the bottom of the window is 
 much pattern and reticulated work, instead of pedestals, to elevate the lower row of figures from the 
 bottom oi the all. In many instances in the same edifice and elsewhere, the figures of saints &c 
 are exhfoded under canopies, and beneath them medallion subjects illustrating some event connected 
 wr h their history; nor were these windows always occupied with coloured glass in foil design 
 but quarrels ornamented and plain, frequently occurred a, different parts as a back-ground to fhe’ 
 
 whole. Although single figures under canopies formed the prevalent style at this time, still an 
 inclination to medalhoned legend lingered in the practice of placing subjects of two or more figures 
 
 takLl Tf l C ° nfimng ^ l ° °” e °° m P artment - 88 in armorial window and 
 
 taking care that each should be complete in itself. A good example of this description is in the 
 
 * Vide Pedestal, in Pl.t, of Altar Window,, St. Chad',, Birmingham 
 
 were 'SZ ‘Il h T M “ M ““"' P™™ “»= »f ™< whleh 
 
 Someraet HenJd. Among,! them are tho.e of Ralph Henge'h.L and JohTof Gaunt.' W ™ d "‘"” ” P '° ““ “ ^ Nioho,,s Ch,,le ’' 
 
DURING THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 45 
 
 Church of All Saints, York, 
 
 which is the last example which we shall bring under notice of the canopied style of this period. 
 Here are represented two figures displayed on a ruby diapered back-ground, both under an acutely 
 crocketed gable, arched underneath. The inter parts are highly enriched with various trefoiled and 
 other ornaments: the back-ground of the gable is blue, (as high as its finial,) which is terminated by 
 a rich horizontal band of gold and colour. Upon this are set three elaborate pinnacles, buttressed, 
 the back-grounds of which are ruby as high as the buttresses, thus leaving the pinnacled parts of 
 them to tower on the ground above, which is of white quarrels, having brown lines trickling over 
 their surface with their terminals stained yellow. All the canopied parts are of gold colour, and 
 the whole is inclosed with a foliated border of green, yellow, and white. This work is of the middle 
 of the fourteenth century, at which time the power of staining yellow on white glass had been fully 
 acquired, and no example which exists could better exhibit the difference between it and that which 
 is coloured in the glass when manufactured, as it largely partakes of both. 
 
 The Geometrical style next claims our notice: this, as was mentioned under the last epoch, 
 was at all times plentifully used, more particularly in this century. The windows of the 
 
 Chapter House of York Cathedral 
 
 are amongst the earliest examples of this kind, and are completely filled with geometrical glass. 
 Their date is of the earliest part of this century, viz. 1307. The borders of these windows are 
 richly coloured and depicted by an undulating or wavy line running upwards by way of stem, from 
 which sprout forth leaves into each reverse angle. These are all white; the ground of these bor¬ 
 ders is ruby : a blue and a white margin next the jamb, and a green one next to the panel part of the 
 window, make the border complete. The interior of the design is made up of flowing lines and 
 lozenges of marginal colours intertwined, and many of these are of white glass painted brown, and 
 have ornaments scraped on them. The whole ground of the window is of white, on which is shown 
 threading and flowing foliage in brown lines, ingeniously and freely distributed. Over all, and em¬ 
 blazoned on these general grounds, are medallions, bosses, subjects, &c., richly coloured. 
 
 Trumpington Church, Cambridgeshire, 
 
 possesses some small remains of rich geometrical glass, especially in the chancel, which is also of 
 the early part of this centuiy. The principal spandrel of one of the windows has the arms of Edmund 
 Crouchback, Earl of Lancaster, (Gules, three lions conjoined at the head in centre, argent.) em¬ 
 blazoned on a triangular shield; the remaining portion of it is of foliaged lines and colours distri¬ 
 buted, Beneath this are the two principal lights, which are composed of a border of leafage and 
 colour interspersed, and inclose panels of geometrical lines principally formed by leading, which are 
 rendered into threading margins by double lines painted near them on the glass ; a perpendicular 
 stem runs up the middle of the compartment, stained yellow, from which the foliage is distributed 
 over the whole surface of the work. At the central parts are bosses of yellow glass, having Hons’ 
 heads (derived from the shield) thereon, t This window is somewhat remarkable from the circum¬ 
 stance of. its exhibiting the power of staining yellow on white, and is the earliest instance of it winch 
 we know of, being nearly two centuries anterior to its professed discovery by the Germans. It was 
 
 * Vide Plate of Bishopstone Window, Herefordshire, which is constructed upon sunder principle 
 ™,d in Shaw's “ Encyclopedia of Ornament," and in Browne's “ History of York Cathedral. 
 
 t This window is imperfectly represented in Lyons's » Map,. Britannia,' Cambridgeshire, p. 58. 
 
 A portion of this glass is 
 
46 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 indeed commonly, although sparingly, used in this country in Decorated glass, but this example is 
 an early instance of it. Geometrically patterned windows, after the manner of the last example, in 
 many forms and varieties, were very prevalent throughout the Decorated period, and there are still 
 many remains. Norbury Church, in Derbyshire, possesses some fine specimens of this style in the 
 north and south side windows of the chancel. They much resemble in character those of the chap¬ 
 ter-house in York Minster, and have shields of arms in each light, but very little other colour except 
 in the borders. There are some considerable remains in 
 
 Checkley Church, Staffordshire. 
 
 The chancel of this church contains three windows (the eastern and the next one to it on each side) 
 quite filled with stained glass, and in a remarkably good state of preservation. They appear, how¬ 
 ever, to be composed of portions of several windows taken from the same edifice, and put together 
 at a recent period. The style of the chancel is Decorated, and so similar in its details to that of the 
 adjacent church of Norbury, (the stained glass in which in many respects much resembles this,) that 
 it is probable they were the work of the same architect. 
 
 The east window is a large one, of five lights, having plain intersecting mullions without folia¬ 
 tions in the head. The general plan or pattern of the glass is composed of circles, inclosing double 
 quatrefoils, and formed as usual by their lines of colour, with coloured bosses in the centre. The bor¬ 
 ders are very rich, some of vine-leaves, others of an heraldic character, with castellated designs and 
 fleurs-de-lis, and having a small exterior margin of white glass. The whole of the mosaic pattern not 
 occupied by colour is graiselled, or covered with creeping vine-leaves and tendrils. There are two tiers 
 of subjects in this window, extending in parallel rows one above the other, across it at equidistant 
 points in the entire length. The lower tier comprises in the centre the Crucifixion under a trefoiled 
 crocketed canopy; the ground of this and all the rest of the subjects being rich ruby, except that of 
 the central upper one, which is blue. The side subjects in the lower tier are inclosed in a complex 
 design, formed by the unison of a vesica with a square, the sides of which expand into semicircles. 
 In one of these are three knights dressed entirely in chain mail, with flowing surcoats; a circum¬ 
 stance which fixes the date of the windows at a period not much later than 1320, after which plate 
 armour came gradually into use. This is another among the innumerable instances of the associa¬ 
 tion of armoury and an heraldic feeling with stained glass. The upper tier contains small figures 
 standing under trefoiled canopies; they are quite perfect; three of them are bishops in full vest¬ 
 ments, the other two are saints. In the head of the window are circular ornaments and shields. 
 
 The two side windows, each of three lights, are similar to the above, but the pattern of the 
 back-ground varies from circles to plain quatrefoils and interlacing vesicas, probably as the parts 
 have been brought together from various windows. There is in these however only one tier of me¬ 
 dallions, about midway in the height. The grounds of these are, conversely to the east window, blue 
 at the sides, and ruby in the centre. Here are the figures of the Virgin and Child, and of saints and 
 apostles under canopies. Most of these have labels with inscriptions, in what are commonly called 
 Lombardic characters, still very legible. One is “ Jacobus,” another, “ Johannesand they are very 
 interesting as a very early instance of labels pendant from the figures, t instead of being placed 
 under the feet. Another represents a kneeling figure, with an inscription in two lines across it. 
 These windows are veiy fine in design, colour, and effect, and altogether must be considered as 
 among the best specimens of the age which we possess. 
 
 Merton College Chapel likewise contains some valuable remains of this kind. These, 
 which are in the side-windows of that structure, much resemble in their general ground and treat¬ 
 ment those of Trumpington church just named, the principal difference being, that in each open- 
 
 * See note f ante, page 37. Lombardic capitals were also continuously used down to the time of Edward III. 
 -f- See Plate of West Window, Snettisham church, Norfolk. 
 
DURING THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 47 
 
 ing, at about two-thirds the height of the windows from the cill, small square-headed compartments 
 are inserted, quite independent of the design, on the ground of the window. These small compart¬ 
 ments each contain canopies and figures most exquisitely treated; an arrangement which presents, 
 from the continuation of the square compartments through a series of windows, the effect of a stiff 
 band of colour on a light ground. It is a style now seldom used, from its only being suitable to side- 
 windows, on account of the last-named circumstance. Excellent examples of these square-headed 
 compartments exist also in the north aisle of Cockayne Hatley, in Bedfordshire, and in St. Mar¬ 
 tin’s church, Stamford.* This, which was the most primitive mode of introducing effigy and 
 architecture, seems to have led to that long favourite mode of planning, viz., figure and canopy com¬ 
 prehensively throughout the whole opening. 
 
 In the east window of Oxted Church, Surrey, are four large spandrels, quatrefoils, of about 
 the middle of this century. They contain severally the Evangelical attributes, viz., the angel, the 
 lion the calf, and the eagle ; they are most spiritedly designed, t and are displayed so nearly upon 
 heraldic principles, as to admit of description by the ordinary rules of blazon. X They are boldly 
 and vigorously painted in outline, and the grounds are highly enriched with diapered ornament. 
 
 Some excellent though small remains of glass of this period are in the east window of Cranley 
 Church, in Surrey. One of the spandrels contains the figure of Christ sitting in Judgment, which is 
 chiefly remarkable from the globe in his hand, as emblematic of the world. On this is heraldically 
 portrayed, in outline, the three great epochs. The lower half is wavy, intended to represent the 
 flood; in the two upper quarters are displayed the tables of the law and the cross of redemption. 
 
 Quarrels were much used throughout the whole of this epoch, sometimes with marginal bands, 
 sometimes without, and complete in their several patterns, or with the ornament distributed through a 
 number of them, as running over the entire window, these often receiving medallions with various sub¬ 
 jects and devices. Reticulated work was also much used during this period, here and on the continent, 
 of which Mr. Shaw has given examples (in his “ Encyclopaedia of Ornament”) from Altenburg, &c. 
 It is worthy of remark, that at this period more green and purpure were introduced than in the pre¬ 
 ceding epochs, especially in the draperies of the figures and in the foliaged parts, a marked indica¬ 
 tion of its becoming less severely heraldic, these tints being very rarely introduced in heraldry; 
 indeed, the very principle of figure and canopy is a sort of inroad upon the consistency of decoration, 
 an assumption of the vocation of the architect and the statuary, and an indication of an approach 
 towards a deterioration of this art. 
 
 Having, therefore, in the preceding remarks endeavoured to explain and shew the chief varie¬ 
 ties, and the ancient manner of constructing the designs for stained glass as connected with Decorated 
 architecture, we deduce from them the following classification of the laws and leading features of 
 this epoch: 
 
 1. Foliaged. —As in the East Window of Bristol Cathedral. 
 
 2. Canopied. —As in the Choir of Bristol Cathedral. 
 
 the Church of Tewkesbury Abbey. 
 
 the Armorial Window of York Minster. 
 
 All Saints’ Church, York. 
 
 * “ Hints on Glass Painting,” by an Amateur; Plate 12 represents an uncoloured example of this glass. Parker, Oxford, 1847- 
 Exeter cathedral has some exquisite examples of Decorated glass of this kind in the east window, but it is the glass of the old Deco¬ 
 rated window adapted at the time to the present Perpendicular window and its tracery, and thus presents the same anomaly that a late super¬ 
 structure would upon an early style, the tracery parts not being in harmony, although the figures and canopies are beautiful despite their 
 association. 
 
 4- See Plate of St. Petrock, Cornwall, the emblems in the spandrels of which are drawn from them. 
 
 J This glass was originally removed from the spandrels of the north and south side chancel windows, previously to their restoration and 
 adaptation to their present situation, (together with other new ones,) by the Author ; they are as follows1 st. Argent, an angel sejant proper, 
 habited vert, wings displayed gules, nimbus azure, debruised by a label of the first, inscribed S. Matthaus, in Lombardic capitals -.—2nd. Argent, 
 a lion proper (deep amber), winged gules, nimbus vert, a label as before, inscribed S. Marcus 3rd. Argent, a calf gules, unguled or, nimbus 
 azure, winged vert, a label as before, inscribed S. Lucas 4th. Argent, an eagle proper, membered or, wings displayed vert, nimbus gules, 
 a label as before, inscribed S. Johannes. 
 
48 
 
 STAINED GLASS DURING THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 3. Geometrical. —As in Norbury Church, Derbyshire. 
 
 Checkley Church, Staffordshire. 
 
 the Chapter-house, York Minster. 
 
 Trumpington Church, Cambridgeshire. 
 
 Merton College Chapel. 
 
 4. Quarrel. —All that pertains to Geometrical may be applied to this, the only difference 
 
 being the change of quarrel ground for geometrical. 
 
 We will conclude our observations upon this style with the following document, which was 
 evidently for the reinstatement of the Decorated glass in the present east window of Exeter cathedral. 
 u On the 7th of March, 1391-2, the Dean and Chapter concluded an agreement with Robert Lyen, 
 glasyer, and citizen of Exeter, (who on the preceding 28th of April had been sworn into the office 
 of glasyer to this cathedral, with a salary of 26s. 8 d. per annum,) to glaze the great window newly 
 made at the head of the church : it was covenanted that for every foot of new glass he should be 
 paid 20 d., and for fitting the old glass, 3s. 4 d. per week, besides 2s. for his assistant.” * This con¬ 
 tract relates to the present east window; “ the window newly made,” to the existing Perpendicular 
 stone-work of it; and the “ old glass” to the present beautiful Decorated glass (which had been 
 removed from the former window of its own character) now therein inserted. 
 
 Vide Britton’s “ Exeter Cathedral,” p. 95. 
 

 

©tatf tCCelt ttCmbjrtD irf 9i«M|am (%rtc|r fimfirlk 
 


■B 
 



 &J.ttonBns.%(nn0l^ ojJo^atBoiPiulterf ' Frintrt m Qolra »p ffl Mi &wtl)«tt. 
 
 ^ItarTffinlioto lilarhbraok (lat|olir (Iljaprl. 
 
 PUBLISHED BT JOHM WEA1E 59. HIGH H0130RN 
 
 * 
 
RMMMNfiM! 
 

STAINED GLASS 
 
 DURING 
 
 T HE FIFTEEN T II C E N T URY, 
 
 INCLUDING 
 
 PALATIAL AND DOMESTIC. 
 
THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 The Third-Pointed or Perpendicular style was introduced at about 1377, and was wholly 
 confined to this country. It presented such great architectural differences from the preceding style, 
 that it scarcely appears to have directly emanated from it; yet, extensively as it was applied and highly 
 as it was enriched, it never did acquire the grandeur, dignity, or magnificent conceptions of the De¬ 
 corated, though it was practised in its various modifications from the reign of Richard the Second down 
 to that of Henry the Eighth, a period of more than a century and a quarter. Although this style is an 
 undoubted deterioration of ecclesiastical art and architecture, still many great and noble works were 
 accomplished in it, amongst the chief of which are the cathedral of Winchester, as reinstated by the 
 great William of Wykeham, and the choir of York Minster. In Dickinson’s History and Antiqui¬ 
 ties of Southwell Minster it is stated, that “ From the time of King Edward the Third, when the 
 departure from the chaste simplicity of the preceding ages first took place, almost every reign pro¬ 
 duced some new species of ornament, or some modification of the old. About the death of King 
 Henry the Sixth, or, at most, not later than that of his immediate successor, Gothic architecture is 
 supposed to have arrived at its acme. There are, indeed, some few instances in the subsequent 
 reigns of Henry the Seventh and Eighth, where the taste of the architect does not seem to have been 
 corrupted by the prevailing rage for finery; but these are, in general, buildings which were begun 
 under the preceding monarchs, where the designs were already formed, and, not unfrequently, where 
 the edifice was so far erected as absolutely to dictate the particular mode in which it must be 
 finished. These, however, are exceptions to the general style of the times; whether the taste in 
 which they are built owes its adoption to necessity or to preference, the architecture of the age was 
 what Warton has denominated * florid Gothic.’ It was ornament without beauty, prolusion without 
 taste, labour without its ordinary consequences—magnificence ; without the smallest pretensions to 
 taste, elegance, or harmony, it was splendid affectation, meretricious frippery.” * It is difficult at 
 this time to conjecture the cause of this sudden change, but a little reflection will enable us to form 
 some judgment upon the matter. From the slight remarks which have been made upon the pre¬ 
 ceding styles, it will be found that the greatness of Gothic architecture was analogous and coeval 
 with the days of the Crusades, of chivalry, of ecclesiastical and military grandeur, when kings; 
 prelates, knights, and squires, mingled in devotional and processional display, when churchmen and 
 laity devoted their energies and means to Christianity and its edifices, when in fact each baron was 
 powerful in his hereditary domains, and ever ready to take up arms for his faith, his honour, and his 
 king. But, as civilization and the arts of peace progressed, domestic comfort was more studied than 
 military strength, and thus ecclesiastical architecture superseded the castellated even in its applica¬ 
 tion to secular buildings. Then were the airy halls constructed, with their vast windows of rich 
 armorial decorations; and hence something of a secular character was imparted to aits, which had 
 hitherto been exclusively applied to religious purposes. 
 
 There are perhaps few of our churches which have not some remains of Perpendicular glass in 
 them, either of the earlier or later kind, so extensively was this art applied during the times of which 
 we are speaking. But its character, details, treatment, and effects, were as different from those of 
 the preceding period as was the architecture to which it was adapted. The mosaic, medallion, and 
 geometrical forms of enrichment were now entirely abandoned, and a much greater proportion of 
 white glass was introduced than in any of the foregoing styles, which was obviously to preserve as 
 
 * Vide Dickinson’s “Antiquities, Historical, Chronolographical, &c., of Nottinghamshire, comprising Southwell,” pp. 78, 79. 
 
 O 
 
50 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 much light as possible, and at the same time to chasten and subdue it; which purpose they accom¬ 
 plished, although by a comparative impoverishment of effect, which fell far short of the exceeding rich¬ 
 ness of the preceding styles, and this was in a great measure owing to the white glass of the whole of 
 this period being less tinted, and not of that greenish tone which was so universal in the earlier windows. 
 
 All the glass of this epoch is of a much thinner substance, and more fragile in kind, than is to 
 be found in any earlier time, (much of it is even less thick than that used at the present day,) which 
 sudden change, for it differed little in this respect from first to last, is difficult to account for, unless 
 the artists had previously been accustomed to obtain it from “ beyond seas,” * and then resorted to 
 home manufacture. Whether such be the case or not, it is certain that the glass used in connexion with 
 Perpendicular architecture in general, is somewhat poor and feeble as compared to that of the twelfth, 
 thirteenth, and fourteenth centuries, not only in substance, but also in quality and colours. It is not 
 improbable, from its differing so entirely in substance and colouring, that glass for artistic purposes 
 was now either only first made or again revived in this country. Indeed, the glass of the Perpen¬ 
 dicular period, though thinner, was more equal in substance than the preceding; and, as a mere 
 article for general use, a vast improvement in its manufacture. The over-thickness of glass must at 
 all times have been a great disadvantage in modelling windows, (which, in fact, were never made 
 sound,) from its intractability; and it is not to be doubted, that, mechanically speaking, later works 
 are much more compact, from the more equal substance of the glass and the lead, and it being, 
 therefore, more perfectly moulded together. At an after period the glass was clearly manufactured 
 of a substance calculated to meet the powers of the diamond upon it. 
 
 The mode of constructing the designs for this style in no respect resembled those of the pre¬ 
 ceding, for, as the windows had become enlarged and elongated, transoms were introduced to subdivide 
 and support them ; and yet, although the area for glazing was more spacious, and so gave more scope 
 for display and effect, the minuteness of design which was generally adopted was incompatible with 
 grand effects; the object apparently being more to amuse the eye with the study of the parts, than to 
 delight the mind by the impression of the whole. But, having once departed from the geometrical 
 and medallioned principle, by the introduction of figures and canopies, it was natural to pursue the 
 new idea to excess, and so to cover the whole surface with scenery and figures, where before the 
 back-ground was the real design of the window, and the medallions only so many ornaments and 
 enrichments upon it. 
 
 The earliest kind of Perpendicular design was generally composed by placing square com¬ 
 partments, each in itself a complete subject, successively surmounting each other, by which means the 
 several lights of each window were filled. A good example of this kind, of a rich character in colour¬ 
 ing, is in Morley church, Derbyshire. This is a legendary history of Saint Robert in many com¬ 
 partments. It was brought hither from Dale Abbey at its dissolution, and is of the same date as that 
 in the east window of York Minster. Some fine examples of pictorial glass of this style also exist 
 in the church of St. Neot’s, Cornwall, and in St. Peter’s Mancroft, Norwich, which will come under 
 our notice in the course of our remarks on this style. 
 
 Figures canopied were also much in vogue at this time, and the application of them to this 
 style is very nearly if not quite coeval with subjects in compartments, for even these were accom¬ 
 panied by small figures and canopies in the tracery parts; nevertheless, the width of the main open¬ 
 ings seems to have had some influence over the designs in these respects, for it will be generally 
 found that when their width exceeded two feet, panel subjects were resorted to, and when they were 
 from one foot upwards, they adopted figures and canopies. There may be exceptions to this rule, 
 but these are for the most part windows of a great elevation, in which larger figures than are common 
 
 * “ John Prudde, of Westminster, called simply Glazier, appears to have painted the windows in the chapel, (Beauchamp Chapel, 
 Warwick,) and it was particularly stipulated that £ he should employ no glass of England, but with glass beyond the tteas , and that in the 
 finest wise, with the best, cleanest, and strongest glasse of beyond sea that may be had in England, and of the finest colours of blew, &c.’ ” 
 —Vide Walpole’s “Anecdotes of Painting,” vol. i. p. 66, 4th edit., 1786.—From the above we may conclude that the glass then made in Eng¬ 
 land was thinner in substance and inferior in colour to that manufactured abroad. 
 
DURING THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 51 
 
 to the style were desirable, as in the east end of Winchester cathedral. Figures and canopies were 
 in fact common to this style throughout. Sometimes they were in tiers of two or three in each light, 
 as in the west window of Cirencester church; but more commonly single canopied figures occupy 
 entire openings. Innumerable examples still exist in Morley church, Derbyshire, All Saints church, 
 York, &c. 
 
 Figures on quarrel grounds were also much adopted at the middle and latter end of this cen- 
 tury, often resting on escrolls, with their names or other inscriptions thereon ; likewise on depicted 
 trusses, as at the church of Barton-under-Needwood, Staffordshire, West Wickham, in Kent, &c. 
 Flowered quarrel windows were also constantly used in filling the clerestory side, and even the 
 eastern windows : they generally had borders of some rich colours, and were often otherwise embel¬ 
 lished with Scripture texts, devices, or heraldry, as in Henry the Seventh’s chapel at Westminster. 
 Scripture texts were also introduced on diagonal stripes f alternated with the quarrels, and likewise 
 on convoluted scrolls distributed in different parts of the windows. Headings of foliage and 
 colour may also be introduced with good effect in connexion with these, together with shields and 
 entablatures containing attributes, devices, monograms, or scriptural subjects, t 
 
 The canopies in the glass of this style in general very little resemble the architecture of the 
 period; they are, in fact, rather conventional than strictly imitative. $ 
 
 The detail of this style is seldom effective : still it is most carefully pencilled by fine lines 
 intersected with crossed lines, instead of deep shading, much after the manner of engraving, upon 
 which feeling it seems to have been done. In this respect there is no variation from the commence¬ 
 ment to the termination of the style; indeed, the whole of the glass of this epoch is so similar in 
 principle, that it might almost be supposed to be the work of the same hand. In all Perpendicular 
 glass, shading was more resorted to than in the previous styles. The outlines being less vigorous 
 made this necessary, but it was so managed that it only in a slight degree subdued the picture, without 
 obvious shadowing. The glass of this epoch is less encaustic than in the preceding ages, whence 
 the universal disfigurement of it; and, the windows being less heavily outlined and painted as well 
 as more within the reach, they have suffered more than the earlier examples. Few if any modem 
 artists have attempted to follow Perpendicular models accurately; it is, indeed, most difficult to 
 do so, from the character of the designs, which combine very peculiar arrangement, quaintness, and 
 high finish, and to carry it out faithfully must be the result of much study, time, and care. 
 
 All that seems to be attempted now in this style is to construct designs something after Per¬ 
 pendicular principles, so far as canopies and minor parts are concerned, and the figures after the 
 Decorated, modified in drawing and treatment upon Germanized principles of oil and shadowy 
 painting; whereas, in fact, the glass of this style bears a closer analogy to engraving, depending as 
 it does for its effects principally upon hatched cross lines, rather than upon its shading. It can be 
 scarcely said that any Perpendicular works (save restorations) have been faithfully repeated upon their 
 own true principles since the close of the epoch, and it is extremely doubtful if any single work so 
 executed at the present day would be appreciated, or satisfy any save the antiquary, from the pre¬ 
 valent false notions of mediaeval drawing. The first window which we shall bring under notice by 
 way of illustration is 
 
 The Great East Window of York Minster. 
 
 This window was begun to be executed in 1405, by John Thornton, of Coventiy, who contracted for 
 the work, and he is presumed, from the importance of the situation of it, to have been the best artist 
 of his time, which, indeed, is fully borne out by this production, for, taking it altogether as to its 
 
 * Vide Plate of East Window of Beeford church, Yorkshire, 
 f Vide Plate of Window in the south aisle of St. Mary’s church, Truro, Cornwall. 
 
 + vye Plates of East Window of Beeford church, and Window of south aisle of St. Mary’s church, Truro. 
 
 I See canopies of East Windows of St. Petrock’s, Cornwall; Dean, Lancashire ; and Truro chancel. 
 
52 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 extent, the ability displayed in it, and the versatility of genius shewn in the varieties of subjects 
 therein, it is a truly wonderful work of art. It is composed of one hundred and seventeen compart¬ 
 ments, each of which is in itself a separate subject; these are in the main body of the window, and 
 in the principal lights below the springing, which are subdivided by transoms. The subjects are 
 not bounded by any marked separation, but are simply joined together, one surmounting the other, 
 and have therefore the same effect as so many pictorial studies capriciously arranged. The only 
 structural representations are in the headings of each light, which rest upon or proceed from trusses, 
 no columns or margins appearing, but each picture is bounded by the jambs at the sides. That part 
 which is above the springing, and forms the tracery, is divided into innumerable little apertures, 
 which are occupied by single figures and small canopies over them ; the former being generally on 
 white or yellow grounds diapered, and certain portions of the figures only being richly coloured. 
 The same taste prevails in the subjects in the lower part of the window so far as regards their grounds 
 of landscape, &c., which are mostly of white, the objects portrayed on it being mainly of pencilled 
 outline, and certain parts of them stained yellow (which in this era was mostly resorted to); the richer 
 colouring, therefore, such as ruby, blue, purple, and green, is for the most part confined to the prin¬ 
 cipal figures and human portraitures in the grouping of the subjects, which are still most quaint and 
 conventional, though admirably executed. 
 
 Mobley Church, near Derby, 
 
 contains some very remarkable and interesting remains of the middle of this centuiy; one window, 
 especially, of the time of Edward the Fourth, which relates to a legend of St. Robert, and another 
 equally so which bears allusion to the Holy Cross. These, together with others still remaining in this 
 church, constitute a fine study for this style, for they comprehend many of the varieties of planning 
 the designs during this period. 
 
 The re-instatement of these ancient relics to their present condition is wholly attributable to 
 Thomas Osborne Bateman, Esq., of Chaddesden, at whose cost and munificence the author has had 
 the honour to restore and rescue them from confusion and decay. 
 
 This church appears, by a brass inscription now remaining in the edifice, to have been built 
 or added to by the order of Godiva Statham, a.d. 1403 ; but there is a tradition that the aisles were 
 built or altered (as they evidently were considerably later,) to receive the stained glass windows. 
 A large portion of these is yet contained in the church, the nave of which is Norman, the chancel 
 Decorated, and the aisles Perpendicular. The stained glass occupies two windows with four lights, 
 two with three lights, and two with two lights. The most singular, perhaps, are now the two north 
 windows of the north aisle. The western of these contains the story of St. Robert of Dale, in 
 seven compartments. 
 
 First Compartment. —St. Robert is shewn shooting deer. Inscription on label, 
 
 Str. iiohrrt efjootrtf) tf )t Drrrr rating ftse come. 
 
 Second Compartment. —The keepers are shewn complaining to the King. Inscription on label, 
 
 ££lf)errof tfjr feerpers complaint to tfje lijmgr. 
 
 Third Compartment. —St. Robert complains to the King of the deers’ havoc. Inscription on label, 
 S?m 1)c rotnplajmrtf) t )pm to tfjc stpngc. 
 
 Inscription from the King’s mouth, 
 
 ©0 Uj 1)0Ill [home] aU [and] pin [pound] tfjem. 
 
 Fourth Compartment. —St. Robert is seen catching the deer. Inscription on label, 
 
 Str. tiotrrt ratcfji«tlj tfir Beere. 
 
DURING THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 53 
 
 Rftb Compartment—The keepers report to the King of St. Robert having caught the deer. In- 
 
 scription on label, from the King’s mouth, 
 
 fjpm com* to me. 
 
 Sixth Compartment. The King is shewn giving St. Robert the ground to plough with the deer. In¬ 
 scription on label, from the King’s mouth, 
 
 ©o pe tofjom anp poise [yoke] tfjem, 
 aits taSe pt gronPe p' pc plooe. 
 
 Seventh Compartment.—, St. Robert is shewn ploughing with the deer. Inscription on label, 
 
 S)crc St. Robert plooctf) toitf) ttje Peere. 
 
 The figures of this window are simply delineated, mostly entirely of white, and standing on 
 black and white pavements, nearly all the back-grounds being massive ruby. 
 
 In the Ashmolean Museum is a MS. by Ashmole himself, who saw Morley church in 1662. 
 This glass, and more than now exists in the church, is fully described therein, and the late additions 
 
 and restorations are partly made from Ashmole’s description. The legend runs thus:_“ St. Robert 
 
 of Dale abbey, (more anciently called Stanley Park,) had sustained damage by the deer from a 
 neighbouring park on his grounds; to rid himself of the annoyance he shot some of them, for which 
 he was summoned before the King: after a hearing and appeal, the saint was finally ordered to take 
 as much land as he could plough over (or round, like Dido at Carthage) between two suns, that is, 
 in a day.” At the foot of each opening of this window is placed an armorial escutcheon: viz., 1st. 
 The arms of Dale abbey, to which the glass originally belonged; 2nd. Of Francis Pole, Esq., who 
 purchased the materials of Dale abbey after its dissolution, and who caused the glass to be brought 
 to Morley church; 3rd. Of Thomas Osborne Bateman, Esq., a descendant of the families who have 
 held Morley manor for several centuries past; 4th. Of Edward Degge Sitwell, Esq., who, with the 
 heirs of Sir Hugh Bateman, Bart., is a joint patron of the advowson, and a considerable proprietor in 
 the parish. Beneath these, on a label at the bottom, and running through the four openings, is the 
 following inscription:— 
 
 Vtftee ancient toinPotos tom brought bp dfrancis ©ole from tt)t abbepof Dale, after Hi Pestruction in a.O. 1539, anP torrr restorcP 
 bp 21211m. 212!Jarrington, UonPott, for Clioittas Osborne Bateman, in ttje pear a.0. 1847. Samuel jpox, Hector, 
 
 The window next to this, in the north aisle, contains the history of the Invention of the Holy 
 Cross, and consists of ten compartments; the inscriptions of which are in Latin, on straight labels at 
 the bottom of each subject, and serve to subdivide them. They are arranged as follows:— 
 
 1. Making of the Cross.—Inscription, 
 
 Santtam rrurem fariunt. 
 
 2. Crucifixion of our Lord.—Inscription, 
 
 Super cruee’ strictus est S.jBj.S. 
 
 3. Burial of the Cross.—Inscription, 
 
 Sanrta crux sub terra conPitur. 
 
 4. The Vision of St. Helena.—Inscription, 
 
 S’eta Helena per somnium crueem bipet. 
 
 5. The finding the Cross by St. Helena.—Inscription, 
 
 Sanctam crueem fnbettiunt a'o cccxxbi. 
 
 6. Testing the true Cross.—Inscription, 
 
 Dantones fccerunt ululatutn In acre. 
 
 7. Heraclius beheading Chosroes, who had obtained part of the Cross.—Inscription, 
 
 <H?cracIiu0 Spent ©tjosroi obtulit. 
 
54 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 8. Heraclius baptizing the younger son of Chosroes, having slain the elder in battle.—In¬ 
 
 scription on the font, 
 
 Jftic tStacliuB 6aj)ti|abtt auum filinm juniorem. 
 
 Inscription on the label, 
 
 3QeracIiu0 filiutn C&OBrotB fiaptiiabit. 
 
 9. Heraclius bears the Cross in triumph into Jerusalem.—Inscription, 
 
 *aitctam rrurem in jttjiriosolimiam pottaiti. 
 
 10. The adoration of the Cross.—Inscription, 
 
 gj’rt* cruris rxaltatio xbiii. ftal. Oct. 
 
 Lord Lindsay in his “ History of Christian Art” quotes from the “ Legenda Aurea” a history 
 of the Invention of the Cross ; and it may well be supposed that this glass was composed by one 
 who had the legend exactly as given therein thoroughly in his mind. St. Helena is said to have 
 journeyed in quest of the true cross about a.d. 320 ; and to have then discovered it miraculously. 
 Some time after this it seems (or a part of it) to have fallen into the hands of Infidels, from one of 
 whom, about a.d. 326, Heraclius, Emperor of Constantinople, retook it: this is alluded to in the 
 latter portion of this window. This window differs much in the mode of execution from that of St. 
 Robert, it being mostly composed of white relieved by yellow and brown outlines ; the only colouring 
 of a voluminous character is confined to the dresses of the figures : its date is the latter part of the 
 fifteenth century. In the east window of the north aisle the specimens are not less interesting. 
 They occupy three openings : 
 
 1. St Mary the Virgin, the Infant Jesus in her arms, who holds a dove.—Inscription on a 
 
 label, 
 
 S*ta maria. 
 
 2. St. Ursula with the Eleven Thousand Virgins.—Inscription, 
 
 S’ta iSIcsula cum xi. m. Virginum aecenbcne in cerium. 
 
 3. St. Mary Magdalen.—Inscription, 
 
 £‘ta fHaria fHagHalrna. 
 
 Beneath the three last-named figures in the same window are as many subjects in compart¬ 
 ments, which now form bases to them. They are most exquisite specimens of glass, and far surpass 
 most of the examples of this period. * They are as follows : 
 
 1. Ecclesiastical figures, habited as pope, cardinals, canons, bishops, &c., singing 
 
 ©61 Ians ©6i gl'ia. 
 
 2. Eleven apostles singing 
 
 © Sccct laue ct fjoitor O'nf. 
 
 3. Thirteen martyrs crowned, &c., singing 
 
 5n oempiterna sccula firata. 
 
 The remainder of the glass is in the south aisle, and in what is supposed to have been the 
 Lady chapel. In the latter are small but beautifully executed portraitures of St. Elizabeth and St. 
 Peter beneath canopies, and adjacent to these on the south side are figures of St Roger, stub Kogrrus; 
 
 * Windows exemplifying the “ Te Deum" were much in vogue during this period. An old writer thus describes one formerly in Dur¬ 
 ham cathedral. “ In the south end of the aile of the Lantern, above the clock, is a fair large glass window, called the Te Deum window, very 
 fair glazed ; according as every verse of Te Deum is sung or said, so is it pictured in the window, very finely and curiously wrought in fine 
 coloured glass, with the nine orders of angels, viz., thrones, dominations, cherubims, &c., with the picture of Christ crucified, and the blessed 
 Virgin Mary with Christ in her arms.”—Description of the Ancient Monuments, &c., of the Monastical Church of Durham, before the Sup¬ 
 pression, written in 1593, and published by the Surtees Society, 1842, 8vo. This interesting work contains a description of nearly all the 
 stained windows which formerly adorned the abbey church of Durham. 
 
DURING THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 55 
 
 of William Archbishop of York, wuirm awfjtep'*; and St. John of Bridlington, STa jw »uor Hiit.iingto.tr; 
 together with a compartment containing the Four Evangelists, which is late glass of about 1490. 
 This deserves an especial notice from its singularity, as well as from the unequivocal proof which it 
 gives of symbolic and heraldic representation being the governing principle of sacred ornament 
 even down to this late date. It is a panel compartment, which originally had a canopy over it, and 
 no doubt comprised one of a series of similar symbolisms. The panel part contains figures of the 
 four Evangelists, represented as old and young men, winged and seated, each holding pens and in 
 the act of inscribing scrolls, which are thrown over lecterns or desks, at the foot of each of which are 
 their several appropriate attributes, viz., the winged angel, lion, calf, and eagle, all of which are either 
 holding or regarding the inscribed scrolls as they fall from the desks. The inscriptions are not 
 legible, but, as they are symbolically representative of the inspired writers in the act of inscribing the 
 Holy Gospels, they were probably portions of them. They are all intermixed in the same panel, and 
 displayed on one common ground of ruby diapered with a rich pattern. 
 
 St. Neot’s Church, Cornwall, 
 
 “has been long celebrated throughout the West of England for the profusion and beauty of its 
 painted glass ; it is,” says Gilbert, “ distinguished also as being the only sacred edifice in England 
 that remains decorated with the legends of a local saint.” * But the latter remark is erroneous, for 
 other examples do remain, the St. Robert of Dale window in Morley church being but one amongst 
 others. This edifice is, however, magnificently adorned with windows, the whole of them being 
 filled with stained glass, some of which are of the middle, but most of them of the latter part, of the 
 fifteenth century. The St. Neot window is in the north aisle; it is of four openings, which contain 
 twelve compartments illustrative of the life and miracles of that saint. The Creation window is at 
 the east end of the south aisle; it consists of five principal openings, and in the tracery of fourteen 
 perpendicular spandrels, which are filled with angels bearing various musical instruments, symbolic 
 devices, inscribed labels, &c. These are wholly on white glass, all the portraitures being in brown 
 lines with shading, but much relieved in different parts by stained yellow. The principal openings 
 contain each of them three subjects, making in the whole fifteen. These have all got canopies of 
 hexagonal character, but no pedestals. The bottom compartments rest on the stone cill, and the 
 upper line of each canopy forms the rest for the middle subjects, but the upper ones run into the 
 tracery by spirally pinnacled effects and coloured back-grounds. Although these panelled pictures 
 for the most part imply the existence of landscape and verdure, nothing is attempted towards a 
 natural representation by tinting those parts green, but all is managed by brown lines, certain parts 
 being stained yellow; and the only parts of these pictures otherwise coloured (excepting the back¬ 
 grounds) are the dresses of the figures, as in the east window of York Minster, and that of the 
 Invention of the Cross in Morley church. The back-grounds, however, of these do differ from those 
 just named, for they are coloured quite upon the heraldic principle of counterchange, such as ruby 
 in one, green in another, blue in another, and so on throughout the window. So in like manner the 
 clouds are depicted as in heraldry—that is, nebulee—and water in flowing lines, in heraldry called 
 wavy. The diversity of tints in the back-grounds produces a richness and charming balance of 
 colouring. To prevent heaviness, convoluted scrolls are placed on them, the inscriptions on which 
 explain the several subjects. 
 
 The following description of one of the compartments in detail will serve as an example of 
 the whole, t Beneath a canopy appears the back-ground, (namely, that space which is occupied by 
 aerial effects in an ordinary picture,) which is of ruby, and on which is an escroll inscribed “ Hie 
 D’n’s,” &c. Beneath this are represented mountains and trees portrayed in white, brown, and yellow; 
 the Eternal Father is standing in the midst dressed in a blue mantle and purple tunic, both fimbriated. 
 
 * See Hedgeland’s Description of the Windows of St. Neot’s, with Collections, &c. respecting St. Neot, by Davies Gilbert, M.A., F.R.S. 
 1830, 4to. 
 
 f See print of Braxted window, which will convey some idea of the general arrangement of these compartments. 
 
56 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 Round his head is a nimbus, and in his hand is placed a wand, which he extends towards the sun, as 
 creating it. The moon is also seen, and both are radiated amidst clouds, which are white and edged 
 yellow, but depicted in the same way as the foregoing examples, that is to say, nebulee, in heraldic 
 language. 
 
 St. Peter’s Mancroft, Norwich, 
 
 contains a magnificent east window, which is a memorial one, and embodies many subjects illustra¬ 
 tive of the fife of St. Peter and other scriptural history, besides many mortuary compartments at the 
 bottom. The tracery parts, which are intricate and numerous, contain many saintly figures under 
 minute canopies. The treatment of this window in regard to its painting or colouring differs in no 
 essential respect from those of St. Neot’s, or the east window of York. The main difference is the 
 mode by which the panels are separated; in this instance they are neither placed in close contact 
 with each other, as at York Minster, nor are they separated by painted architecture as at St. Neot’s; 
 but ru nning foliage encircles each panel, and forms arches to them, varying in character, with Tudor 
 roses in the midst of them. This was a memorial window, and the arms of the party memorialized 
 were quartered in two shields, occupying the central compartment of the window : the one above 
 contained the Tudor rose with the supporters of Henry the Seventh, (the red dragon of Cadwallader 
 and the white greyhound of Beaufort,) to whose house of Lancaster the memorialized were adherents. 
 These compartments have recently been removed to make way for a modem figure of St. Peter!! 
 which is utterly unworthy of the meanest place imaginable. 
 
 Winchester Cathedral 
 
 contains much Perpendicular glass. The east windows are filled with figures and canopies, but, as 
 works of art, they are far inferior in merit to the glass of St. Neot’s. They are remarkable, however, 
 from the largeness of the figures, which much exceed in size those of medieeval art in general, pro¬ 
 bably from their great elevation. The canopies differ in no respect from the works in general of this 
 age. Angels with musical instruments occupy the spandrels. 
 
 The various churches of York are rich in long neglected remains of this epoch. The church of 
 All Saints 
 
 still contains excellent examples. Amongst them is a figure and canopy with draped back-ground ; 
 the figure represents St. John the Baptist; his right hand is elevated in the act of blessing, his left 
 hand is holding a book horizontally, on which rests the Holy Lamb, with nimbus and banner. The 
 under drapery of St. John is intended to represent camel’s hair, and it is painted on gold colour; the 
 upper drapery is blue ; and the nimbus is stained yellow, the outer edge of it being white. This 
 figure, which has a ruby back-ground, rests on an hexagonal pedestal, from which columns rise, and 
 upon them minute effigies of angels, saints, &c., are delineated. These support a most beautifully 
 and elaborately designed canopy, displayed on a blue back-ground. Many representations of these 
 and other works of this period will be found in “ Weale’s Quarterly Papers on Architecture.” It 
 was the common practice of these times to place single figures and canopies over each other in the 
 same undivided opening, as well as subjects. 
 
 Cirencester Church 
 
 contains some examples of this kind, one of which is partly represented by Lysons in his “ Antiqui¬ 
 ties of Gloucestershire,” Plate CIX. He says of this glass that it “ formerly made part of one of 
 the windows at the east end of the south aisle, and is now preserved in the great east window of the 
 
DURING THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 57 
 
 chancel. It appears to be of the age of Henry the Sixth or Edward the Fourth, when the kind of 
 angels’ wings of peacock’s feathers, standing on wheels, which here occur, were in very frequent use 
 for filling the smaller compartments of the windows. The Gothic canopies in the chief openings or 
 larger divisions of the glass are such as were in use at the time above-mentioned, not being a correct 
 imitation of any style of architecture, as the canopies in the stained glass of an earlier age usually were.” 
 In this respect, however, this glass does not differ from that commonly to be seen of this period. 
 
 “ The canopies,” as Lysons says, “ are not a correct imitation of any style of architecture,” 
 but they are in fact in obedience to the manner of all the structural drawing for medieeval art during 
 this the Perpendicular epoch, and in no respect differ in principles of delineation from any of those 
 examples which have been named. It seems to have been felt even down to this time that conven¬ 
 tionality was indispensable, and that to attempt to strictly imitate architecture or nature was to mis¬ 
 apply the art. Some curious paintings in outline, of which there are still some remains in the cha¬ 
 pel of the Holy Trinity in Tewkesbury abbey church, are drawn upon precisely the same principles; 
 these paintings, which are on the east wall of the chapel, were some years since rescued from oblivion 
 by the author of this work. They originally consisted of many subjects separated by canopy work 
 of the last-named description, viz., “ not a correct imitation of any style of architecture.” Those 
 parts which are still remaining are as follow :—In the upper part above the springing of the arch, 
 which the groin forms, is an actual representation of the Holy Trinity, that is to say, the Eternal 
 Father, holding a cross, on which is shewn Christ crucified, surmounting which is a dove as the Holy 
 Spirit: on either side of these are two mortuary figures, namely, a knight and his lady kneeling in 
 an attitude of invocation. The only other subject which remains is one of a series which has ceased 
 to exist; it represents the Coronation of the Virgin Mary : they are all inclosed by connected 
 canopy or tabernacle work; in fact, this painting exactly represents, and would serve as a model 
 cartoon for, stained glass of this style. 
 
 The Church of Barton-under-Needwood 
 
 has in the chancel apse, which is hexagonal, some subjects of late Perpendicular glass. The north 
 and south windows contain the twelve apostles, six in each; they are represented on flowered quarrel 
 grounds, and are shewn as standing on independent pedestals, or rather trusses, on which a scroll is 
 displayed containing their several names. * They have no canopies over them, but labels are seen 
 proceeding from the mouth of each figure, which incircles the head and forms a nimbus : these are 
 inscribed with the Nicene Creed, the first scroll containing “ Credo in unum Deum Patrem omnipo- 
 tentem the last, “ Amen.” + 
 
 Henry the Seventh’s Chapel, Westminster. 
 
 These windows are now in a very imperfect state; but, as the chapel itself bears more the character 
 of an elaborate hall than a church, so was it the case with the painted glass, which was in fact wholly 
 composed of the numerous badges of that King. These devices, together with shields of coat 
 armour, were distributed in various parts of the windows on back-grounds of quarrels, on which were 
 alternated the initials jfy. and ft. crowned. These windows had, therefore, notwithstanding their 
 position, more of a secular than an ecclesiastical character. 
 
 By referring to the foregoing examples, which may be taken as fairly illustrating the ordinary 
 mode of this epoch, we may deduce the foUowing classification: 
 
 Panel subjects, as in 
 Panel subjects, as in 
 Panel subjects, canopied, as in 
 
 East Window, Choir, York Minster. 
 Morley Church, Derbyshire. 
 
 St. Neot's Church, Cornwall. 
 
58 
 
 STAINED GLASS DURING THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Panel subjects, foliaged, as in 
 Figures and canopy, as in 
 Figures and canopy, as in 
 Figures, quarrels, and borders, as in 
 Initial quarrels, badges, &c., as in 
 
 St. Peters Manor oft, Norwich. 
 Winchester Cathedral. 
 Cirencester Church. 
 
 Barton Church. 
 
 Henry the Seventh's Chapel. 
 
 From the contracts for the execution of the windows of King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, it 
 would be naturally inferred that the glass in Henry the Seventh’s chapel was executed by Barnard 
 Flower, for the contract runs thus : “ And so seryatly the resydue with good, clene, sure, and per- 
 
 fyte glasse, and oryent colours and imagery of the story of the olde lawe and of the newe lawe, after 
 
 the forme, maner, goodenes, curiousytie, and clenelynes, in every poynt, of the glasse wyndowes of 
 the Kynges newe chapell at Westminster; and also accordyngly and after such maner as oon 
 Barnard Flower, glasyer, late deceased, by indenture stode bounde to doo,” &c. It could, however, 
 by no means have been any of the glass of which there are now any remains which is alluded to, as 
 this artist practised principally during the latter part of the reign of Henry the Seventh, and died in 
 the very early part of that of Henry the Eighth; besides which, the east windows of the King’s Chapel 
 at Westminster contain glass of an earlier date, and the architecture is by no means calculated to 
 have received windows similar in character to those spoken of in the contract above-mentioned. That 
 the north, south, and west windows of this edifice may have been so filled, although there are no re¬ 
 maining evidences of it, is not improbable. It has long been erroneously supposed that the east 
 window now in St. Margaret’s church, Westminster, was originally intended for this chapel, and the 
 Antiquarian Society, in 1768, not only gave their sanction to the error, but published a print of the 
 work in their “ Vetusta Monumenta,” in confirmation of it. A long description at the foot states, 
 amongst other matter, that the kneeling portraits at each comer are those of Henry the Seventh and 
 his queen, when, in fact, they are intended really to represent his son Henry the Eighth and his 
 queen Katharine, over whom her patron saint and name-sake is seen, with the pomegranate, the badge 
 of her nation, above. So on the dexter side in like manner the King is exhibited, with the national 
 Saint George and the Union rose, which was the especial badge of that monarch. It is the custom 
 of the present age in imitating this style to intersperse diagonal labels containing scripture texts, 
 with quarrels. Although, perhaps, no actual example of such practice could be cited as remaining 
 in any of our churches, yet it is in very good taste, and may therefore no doubt be used to advantage. 
 There are, however, domestic examples remaining in connexion with heraldry, inscribed with the 
 various mottoes, which are in Ockholt House, formerly the hunting-lodge of Henry the Sixth; and 
 we may, therefore, conclude such to have been the taste of his time. These, if used with borders, 
 resolved into headings, * (which are legitimate, from the example before-mentioned at St. Peter’s 
 Mancroft,) have a very charming effect, and by these means a voluminous enrichment is accomplished 
 by very simple means. 
 
 The same principles of drawing, both in architecture and figures, prevailed in the middle 
 ages, whether the picture was on glass or in mural decorations, commonly, but incorrectly, called 
 fresco paintings. So many examples of the latter are now known to exist, and are so readily accessi¬ 
 ble in books of archaeology, that it is needless to enter into detail in the present work, especially as 
 this department of art is only indirectly connected with the subject before us. 
 
 It is well worthy of remark that however deficient the artists of the middle ages were supposed 
 to be in drawing anatomically, they invariably appear to have been guided and governed by feelings 
 of devotional delicacy, which, as we shall lamentably find, may be in vain sought for in later works, 
 for it seems to have been an inherent and an instinctive principle in them never to display the human 
 figure, even in infancy, in disgusting nudity, but they invariably clothed it with a tunic or other gar¬ 
 ment, not probably to conceal bad drawing but to produce a graceful effect, and ensured fit subjects 
 for religious contemplation, without suggesting a single idea contrary to true and perfect modesty. 
 
 cashire. 
 
smam 
 

 i J K.H..V8 UrtOTB [ Jfc 63 UmBm» 
 
 ..Jtar GSniUm of lMorli (Hjnrrli.VorksfiirF. 
 
 
 ir. Celaw cm !3 &H.5unk«i. 
 
 

Ha.s \ Tll'ittii oU), of SoufI) ifralf S'.ffi art)’? Jtriiro. 
 
 PUBLISHED BY JOHN WEALE,59,HICK HOl.BORN 
 
® mural, 
 
 Wtnlurar, flimtketi UbIjUji O'lrarcb, 
 
 Ira Burnt. 
 
 h* 
 
:_ 
 

PUBLISHED Br JC 
 
PALATIAL, MANORIAL, AND DOMESTIC. 
 
 As it was in this age that stained glass was mostly applied to palatial and secular purposes, 
 we will here make a few general remarks upon it. No fixed mode seems to have been adopted 
 beyond the little influence that the architecture has suggested. It has seldom been applied in this 
 country otherwise than heraldically. It is doubtful if any older examples exist (except in sacred 
 edifices) than those in Ockholt House before alluded to. This well-known glass has been long 
 admired : it exists in the bay and other windows of the hall. Amongst other armorial devices are 
 the achievements of King Henry the Sixth; the same also impaled with those of his queen in separate 
 compartments. The escutcheons are surmounted with bold and lofty regal crowns arched. * * * § The 
 King’s arms are supported by his two antelopes sejant; that containing the Queens by the antelope 
 dexter for the King, the eagle sinister for the Queen: they are represented below the shields on tufts 
 or mounds, t and as it were holding them up. The back-grounds to these consist of diagonal labels, 
 inscribed with their several mottoes, “ Dieu et mon droit,” and “ Humble et loial: these are inter¬ 
 spersed with flowered quarrels, t Other arms are displayed in the series of windows, as Norrys, 
 Beaufort, &c., with helmets, crests, lambrequins, and mottoes, 5 similarly displayed. In the reign of 
 Francis the First of France, the renaissance was the style of the day, especially in that country; 
 and as a domestic style it had much merit from its variety. Its ornaments and stained glass were a 
 sort of olla podrida of all conceivable tastes, but a species of Italianised feeling prevailed in it. II It 
 was at this time that such numberless little subjects were introduced in enamel and otherwise. An 
 abundance of them exist in this country (imported at various times), executed on ovals, small squares, 
 and other shapes. Very many of them are works of great merit, but they are only fit for the boudoir, 
 to which they are an appropriate embellishment. So many beautiful and various performances in 
 stained glass and other ornaments took place at this period, especially abroad, that it would be an 
 endless task to enumerate them. In this country, however, the practice seems mostly to have been 
 confined to a distribution of armorial bearings in the different windows. At Smithells Hall, near 
 Bolton, in the private chapel, is an original coat of arms of King Henry the Eighth, which is 
 suspended from a rose branch bearing Union roses, surmounted by the royal crown. 1 
 
 In the same edifice, which is a most curious relic of this period, are many other heraldic 
 examples inclosed in garlands varied in design. ** This mode of surrounding shields with chaplets 
 was very prevalent in the succeeding reigns of Edward, Mary, and Elizabeth. The latter is remarkable 
 as having introduced a distinct and original style of architecture, derived from Palladio and others ; 
 it partook largely of the Italian in feeling and style: it is generally called Elizabethan. As this 
 style was principally displayed by rich entablatures, so in like manner was stained glass in connexion 
 with it. ++ The same feeling in a less pure and dignified manner was continued through the sue- 
 
 * Arched crowns appear to have been first used by King Henry the Sixth. 
 
 + See Plate of design for House of Lords. 
 
 + See back-ground of Window, south aisle, St. Mary’s, Truro. 
 
 § Some of these Windows are engraved in Lysons’ Magna Britannia, “ Berkshire. 
 || See title-page. 
 
 f See design for House of Lords. 
 
 ** See Plate of Hall Window, Brazenose College, 
 ft See Plate of Stair-case Window, Beaumanor. 
 
60 
 
 STAINED GLASS DURING THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 ceeding reigns. It does not appear that voluminous or storied windows were ever generally adopted, 
 either in halls or other edifices of a secular character : canopies and figures were scarcely ever intro¬ 
 duced, from their being too ecclesiastical and heavy in effect. The mode of introducing stained 
 glass, therefore, in such buddings, should be by a mere sprinkling of it, by a distribution of various 
 devices in the different windows, so as not to darken the apartments. The exceptions are in stair¬ 
 case windows, or where it may be desirable to shut out the view. 
 
 We now close our remarks upon the stained glass of the middle ages, which, as Mr. Hallam 
 states, comprise about one thousand years, from the invasion of France by Clovis, to that of Naples 
 by Charles the Eighth. (Vol. iii. p. 308.) 
 
 • See Plate of Stair-case Window, Beaumanor. 
 


#• 
 
FROM THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 
 
 These periods introduce to us styles (if they may be so termed) differing so much in all 
 respects from mediaeval works, that, with all the talent and ingenuity employed on them, they seem 
 from first to last to have been a misconception and misapplication of this art. As at this time 
 engraving and oil-painting had become the ruling passion, so church architecture, to which these 
 arts bore little analogy, became capricious and debased, assuming any form and style which the 
 humour and fancy of the architect or his employers might think fit, irrespective of order or prece¬ 
 dent. Great artists in engraving and oil-painting had now arisen, whom the practitioners on glass, 
 misunderstanding its capabilities, vainly strove to rival. Now, as the latter art mainly depends for 
 its beauties and effects on its association with appropriate architecture, and upon principles opposite to 
 those of oil and shadowy painting, it follows that the attempt to treat glass like canvass must prove a 
 comparative failure. And, although such great geniuses as Albert Durer might and did for a time 
 ennoble and give a dignity of their own to it, yet it was only comparatively, and as it were only with 
 a life interest in the artist; so that, with all its occasional success in particular works, the art of painting 
 on glass can at no period be said to have been in a dignified position from his time. This seems to 
 have been felt by the engravers and painters themselves, who have from time to time abandoned it 
 in despair, and pursued their natural bent,—engraving or oil-painting;—leaving their former pursuit 
 to artists of mediocre talent. 
 
 Partly from this cause, but still more from a voluptuous and sensual school of painting having 
 arisen and attained popularity, the designs of the glass of this age frequently exhibit a grossness and 
 indelicacy which speak little for the religion of those who admitted them into their churches. The 
 art, in fact, was secularised ; it was no longer purely ecclesiastical; domestic architecture had 
 adopted it for its own, and destroyed its character by transferring it from the church to the world. 
 It is true that other buildings than Gothic may be advantageously embellished by works of this art; 
 but to accomplish this the designs must be in harmony with the architecture, and, if this be of a classic 
 character, must be treated with the utmost devotion, delicacy, ability, and skill. But the por¬ 
 trait style of glass, however beautiful and skilfully managed, can scarcely equal the mosaic richness, 
 the beautiful and poetic symbolism of the preceding ages, for the very simple reason that the effect 
 of the first depends upon delicacy of colouring and the concealment of outline ; whereas the latter 
 requires vigorous outline and depth of hue for its effect. For these reasons practitioners of various 
 nations have endeavoured in vain to excel the works of mediaeval artists, which still stand the test of 
 time, and remain pre-eminent amidst the vacillating tastes of ages. Fairford church, in Gloucester¬ 
 shire, contains some of the finest glass of the very latest Perpendicular; but it is so, simply because 
 it is executed upon mediaeval principles, although there are many of the designs debased in their 
 arrangement as applied to church architecture. 
 
 The windows in King’s College Chapel are magnificent in colouring, and the figures display 
 all the anatomical perfection of the very finest school of oil-painters. Their fault, considered as 
 glass, is, that they are regular pictures, extending over the whole surface, without regard to the inter¬ 
 ruptions of the ponderous mullions; and the multiplicity of figures in each invites the eye to make 
 out the subject rather than to view the effect as a whole, so that they must, with all their grandeur 
 and brilliancy, be considered to involve debased principles. * 
 
 The east window of St. Margaret’s church, Westminster, which is equal if not superior to any 
 work of its kind in this country, is open to the same objection; so also are many of the windows of 
 Fairford church, although so celebrated. 
 
 * Tlie original contracts for these windows are still extant. They 
 edit. 1786. See Appendix to vol. i. 
 
 copied in full by Walpole in his “ Anecdotes of Painting,” 4th 
 R 
 
62 
 
 STAINED glass 
 
 When it is considered that Gothic windows are subdivided into ornamental apertures, with 
 the intention that such features should be preserved distinct, it follows that anything which disturbs 
 that arrangement destroys in a great measure its object and mars its true taste : for this reason large 
 pictures expanding in a single subject over the whole surface of such windows involve an unconge¬ 
 niality to their architectural purpose. 
 
 Many different modes of practising this art have arisen during these centuries, but the same 
 caprice in designs has prevailed throughout, with certain trifling exceptions, which do not apply to 
 sacred edifices. As this art must ever be an auxiliary to architecture, so, from the architectural 
 inventions of these ages having been mainly confined to secular and domestic edifices, the glass has 
 almost wholly partaken of their character; hence it is that the Cinque Cento and the Renaissance of 
 Francis the First originated, and the An Kirche glass is but a component of these styles, the one in 
 a measure adapted to the other. 
 
 There are considerable remains of the glass of this era in this country, as in Lincoln’s Inn 
 chapel, the chapel of Hatfield House, * Wadham and Baliol chapels, Oxford, &c.; and it abounds 
 abroad, at St. Jaques Liege, Gouda in Holland, at Rouen, &c.; but some excellent glass of this style 
 may be found without the trouble of going out of this country to see it. It is in Lincoln College 
 chapel, Oxford, the side-windows of which are especially worthy of notice. The east window is 
 composed of subjects; but here the artist seems not entirely to have lost sight of the advantages of 
 mediaeval arrangement. On the whole this glass is far superior in character to the general run of the 
 glass of its time. By far the finest glass, however, which the author ever met with of this epoch, contains 
 groups of angels, which are in large compartments, and which originally formed the aerial portion of 
 an extensive picture of the Ascension. It is foreign glass, and the figure of our Saviour ascending, 
 which belonged to it, came into this country at an after-period, and fell into different hands; it is 
 now fixed in a window at the west end of the south aisle of Grendon church, near Grendon Hall, 
 Staffordshire. The compartments containing the groups of angels were for many years the property 
 of the late Mr. Miller, whose name will always be honoured in connexion with the present revival of 
 glass painting; since which, some fourteen years since, the author purchased them at an auction. 
 From portions of foliage which appeared in this glass, there had evidently been a foreground occu¬ 
 pied by the Virgin and the Apostles as spectators of the event; but these probably never reached this 
 country. A portion of this glass is still in the author’s possession; other parts of it, which are in a 
 state of completeness, are at J. Blaicklock, Esq.’s, 73, Albany Street, Regent’s Park, and at T. 
 Moore, Esq.’s, Cheyne Walk, Chelsea. It is probable that no glass of this age ever possessed all the 
 excellences of this j the gradation and diversity of colouring in the wings of the angels is truly 
 astonishing, as it was not accomplished by enamels but by metals, which in the same pieces varied 
 from the lightest to the deepest hues ; and the painting is worthy of the colouring. It is the work 
 of some great master. 
 
 There can be no doubt, from oil-painting having been perfected in Italy, that it influenced the 
 foreign practice of painting on glass, which accounts for picture-painting in this art being confined to 
 the continent, for it was never generally attempted by British artists until the seventeenth century 
 (those of an earlier date being mostly the productions of foreign artists, although some of them were 
 executed here); the windows of King’s College chapel are the only known exception. 
 
 Towards the latter part of the sixteenth century Palladio introduced a compound style of 
 domestic architecture, which incorporated Italian and Gothic, and of necessity gave rise to a new 
 style of glass, generally (as was its architecture) styled Elizabethan, t This is the most charming and 
 various of any invented style during this epoch; but the glass, though in many instances beautiful in 
 design and composition, was spoiled by carrying it out in enamelled colours, with which the artists 
 were not thoroughly acquainted; nor could any magnificence of effect have been obtained by that 
 means even if they had. 
 
 * One of tlie compartments of this glass was totally destroyed by a recent and calamitous fire there, but has since been renewed by 
 the author for the Marquess of Salisbury. 
 
 "t" See Plate of Stair-case Window, Beaumanor Park. 
 
FROM THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 
 
 63 
 
 Enamelling was much resorted to in nearly all the works of this epoch, although coloured 
 glass was used in connexion with it; but in nearly all cases such parts as were accomplished by 
 enamels have failed, and become disfigured. Indeed, most of the attempts which have been succes¬ 
 sively made for more than three hundred years to combine enamelling of colours with mediaeval 
 practice have failed, excepting in small cabinet pictures, which is the fullest extent to which it can 
 be applied; and this has principally been done by the Germans during this epoch, who, by-the-by, 
 in this art had then scarcely done any thing else. 
 
 We have before observed that the portrait style, or picture painting at large, was principally 
 practised on the continent, which remaining examples of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries 
 will sufficiently shew. During these periods the works in this art differed in few respects, and in 
 degrees of artistic merit in the execution rather than in construction. Gothic architecture was from 
 this time in desuetude; and hence it is that we find Claude, and William a Dominican of Marseilles, 
 in the beginning of the sixteenth century, executing the windows of the chapel at the Vatican, under 
 the direction, and from the cartoons, of Raphael; also the windows of the churches of Sta. Maria del 
 Popolo and Del’ Anima ; thus, in fact, properly applying the portrait style of this art to the 
 classic styles of architecture, with which it sufficiently harmonizes. Jean Cousin, who practised 
 mainly in the middle of the sixteenth century, probably possessed more surpassing and diversified 
 talent than any other of his time in the same style; but he at no time took into the slightest con¬ 
 sideration the architectural associations with his pictures. John Lequier, of Bourges, produced 
 many similar windows for the cathedral of his native town, but, like Cousin, he cared not for con¬ 
 sistency with architecture, which is less surprizing from his having studied and formed his taste in 
 Italy, and having, therefore, no other notion than the portrait style. Argrand le Prince, of Beau¬ 
 vais, also painted many subjects in the same style from the drawings of Raphael, Giulio Romano, 
 and Albert Durer. These, with numberless other works of a like character (by various artists) 
 which still remain, together with the windows of King’s College chapel, Cambridge, done at about 
 the same time, shew that the portrait style was prevalent and universal during the sixteenth centnry 
 here and abroad. 
 
 The seventeenth century continues the same feeling and principles as the preceding, except¬ 
 ing that the works are found to possess much less merit in general. Indeed the art still more 
 declined during this period, even upon its own principles, from inferior talent being employed upon it. 
 Therefore it is that we find such wretched productions as the east window of the chapel of the Uni¬ 
 versity College, Oxford (by Henry Giles of York), in England, and a host of works of comparatively 
 more or less merit in Holland and the Netherlands, where the art was mainly pursued at this time. 
 
 It has not been thought necessaiy to insert any illustrations by prints of these styles in this 
 work, but an abundance of them will be found in Weale’s “ Divers Works of Early Masters in Chris¬ 
 tian Decoration,” and in his “ Quarterly Papers on Architecture.”* 
 
 The Jesse windows of the “ Cinque Cento” period of these epochs are by far the most ad¬ 
 mirable, they being composed of intertwining foliage, which form panels containing figures, enriched 
 by varying backgrounds. These windows are designed so much after the manner of many of the 
 fourteenth century that they might well be mistaken for them, but that the details are drawn and 
 painted upon different principles. A fine example of this kind remains at the east end of the north 
 aisle of the church of St. Godard at Rouen.t 
 
 Most of the other varieties of these epochs are meagre, being principally composed of white 
 and yellow, and when any figure is introduced the canopied parts usually span the whole breadth of 
 the window, irrespective of the mullions, which interrupt them. The details are usually of the 
 
 * Mr. Weale has much claim to the public support, from his having devoted more time, energy, and talent to the advancement of 
 Christian art and architecture than perhaps any living publisher. His “ Quarterly Papers,” among multifarious and valuable information, 
 contain admirable representations of Perpendicular glass from West Wickham, &c„ which are also shewn in his “ Divers Works, &c.” 
 
 f Some good examples of this kind have been placed in the windows at the east end of St. George’s church, Hanover Square. This 
 glass was originally from Mechlin, and was brought into this country about the year 1807- Some years afterwards it was exhibited by Mr. 
 Lowe, a glass-stainer, at his rooms in Newman Street, where it remained until its removal to Messrs. Stanley’s rooms in Maddox Street, from 
 whence it was purchased for its present site. 
 
64 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 Italian style, such as arabesques and the like.* The more prominent parts consist of ambitious and 
 mawkish heraldry displayed in numberless shields of arms, a nook being devoted to the representa¬ 
 tion of some saint. Such are the windows of the choir of St. Jacques’ church at Liege, which are 
 obituary, and therefore almost the sole object of them is to display the family alliances of the various 
 Counts of Horn. Other windows of this edifice exhibit portraits of many members of the same 
 family, with their patron saints, naturally and conspicuously portrayed. 
 
 The church of St. John the Baptist at Gouda in Holland is literally filled with painted glass 
 of these epochs, by various masters, possessing all the different effects which this kind of glass is ca¬ 
 pable of, and such casual merits in certain parts as the various talents of the different artists under 
 the circumstances naturally imparted ; but, with all their excellences, they present the same anomaly 
 in that edifice which an Ionic, Doric, or Corinthian portico does to a Gothic building. 
 
 In the early practice of portrait glass there was little if any attempt to paint the naked parts 
 of the human figures in their pictures of the proper colour, but they were still, as in the middle ages, 
 kept nearly white, the hair being occasionally stained yellow. This was especially the case during 
 the time of Albert Durer; but by degrees, as oil painting progressed, all ideas of conventionalism 
 were discontinued, and laboured but unsuccessful attempts to produce on glass the same effects as 
 on canvass resulted in the degeneration of the essential principles which regulate the treatment of the 
 former material. Hence in the earliest instances these works were pursued by artists of considerable 
 talent, until they, no doubt finding their object unattainable, left it to inferior artists, and thus at 
 length it was nearly discontinued altogether. 
 
 Fairford Church, Gloucestershire. 
 
 This church contains upwards of thirty windows of stained glass, which are attributed to Albert 
 Durer. It is however very doubtful whether he was ever employed in actual operation upon this 
 art, although he is known to have made designs and cartoons for it; he may have been thus engaged 
 in these. The following description of the great west window is taken from a small work called 
 “The History of Fairford Church.” t It represents the Day of Judgment. “In the upper part, 
 Christ sits on a rainbow, and has the earth for his footstool. He is surrounded by cherubim and 
 seraphim; and it is supposed that the sword on his left hand and the lily on his right are intended 
 to represent the attributes of Justice and Mercy. Below, St. Michael weighs a wicked person in 
 one scale against a good one in the other, and, though a devil endeavours to turn the scale, the good 
 outweighs the bad. The dead are rising from their graves (some with the grave-clothes on their 
 backs, others with them on their arms) to come to judgment. From the mouth of an angel receiving 
 a saint into heaven proceeds a label, on which is written, ‘ Omnis sp’it’s lauda D’n’m,’ (Every spirit 
 praise the Lord.) St. Peter with the key lets the blessed spirits into heaven, thus expressing himself, 
 «Gratias agam d’no Deo pro,’ (I will give thanks to the Lord God for [all his mercies]). When they 
 pass from him they are clothed in white, and crowned with crowns of glory, accompanied with this 
 sentence, ‘ Bened’c’s Deus in donis suis,’ (Blessed is God in his gifts.) On one side is a represen¬ 
 tation of hell, with the great devil, drawn with red and white teeth, three eyes, and scaly legs and 
 face. Some are going to hell headlong, some on the devils’ backs, and some on their arms. There 
 is Dives in hell, praying for a drop of water to cool his tongue, and Lazarus is placed in contrast, 
 among the blessed, in Abraham’s bosom; also a woman going to hell in a wheelbarrow, for scold¬ 
 ing at her husband; with many other devices agreeable to the gross ideas of the designer.” 
 
 Although this church was built in 1493 (as it is said) purposely to receive this glass, and it 
 was therefore painted at the very close of the fifteenth century, still, as the works are foreign, and as 
 the art was then, and even from the fourteenth century downwards, less rigidly kept to true prin¬ 
 ciples abroad than in England, as well as from its general character, we have classed it with this 
 
 * See Illuminated Title Page. 
 
 •f- Philip Watkins's “ Cirencester,” 1831. 
 
FROM THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 
 
 65 
 
 period, to which in general character it truly belongs, for it is as it were the connecting link between 
 the mediaeval epochs and the portrait style; in fact the merit of it rests mainly upon its mediaeval 
 mode of treatment, which it undoubtedly would not have had the advantage of had it been done a 
 very little later. 
 
 But few works of this age possess higher merit than those which exist in some of the churches 
 in Rouen. They have long been held in much repute. The author of this work has inspected them; 
 and, however indelicate some parts of them may be, they are undoubtedly most admirably executed. 
 
 The Church of St. Godard 
 
 contains pictures of this age, one of which is a legend of St. Romaine, spreading through 
 three openings. Another subject, displayed in like manner, represents King Dagobert granting a 
 privilege to the church of Rouen. This window exhibits the interior of a grand hall. The King is 
 seated on a throne, and directing an attendant, who is handing to an ecclesiastic the documentary 
 grant. Three courtiers are present, habited in the costume of Francis the First, and some half a 
 dozen dogs in couples are seen on the tessellated floor. 
 
 The Church of St. Patrice 
 
 contains in a gothicised window some strange though excellent glass of its kind, in subjects. 
 They are allegories, and each of them spreads over four openings. One of these pictures represents 
 the Fall, the Devil, Death, and the Flesh. The background of these is one continuous land¬ 
 scape, on which various buildings are interspersed. In the compartment with the Fall is shewn the 
 Tree of Knowledge; in that of the Devil, a church; in that of Death, a mausoleum; in that of 
 the Flesh, a castle or chateau. The first compartment, portraying the Fall, exhibits Adam and Eve, 
 the former perfectly naked, excepting the fig-leaf; the latter is a figure drawn much after the Venus 
 de Medicis. The face of this figure is turned from the beholder ; but, being perfectly naked, it is 
 from its drawing and portraiture, little calculated for a religious edifice. The second compartment, 
 with the Devil, is still less so. This figure is shown hideously naked, and cannot be looked upon 
 without disgust, nor will it bear description. The third compartment, with Death, is scarcely less 
 indelicate. It is illustrated by a female, with three arrows in one hand and a spear in the other; a 
 superabundance of drapery is seen as floating in the wind to display the naked figure, whose bust 
 palls the sight. The fourth compartment, with the Flesh, is signified by a female figure, magnifi¬ 
 cently attired in the costume of the time of Francis the First, Henry the Second, and Charles the 
 Ninth. This figure is represented as holding a chain, is turned towards the compartments just de¬ 
 scribed, and she is very appropriately represented with her eyes closed. 
 
 Four other openings contain another subject, which is called “ The Triumph of Grace.” The 
 background of this picture, like the last, consists of one continued landscape, with water-mills and 
 chateaux interspersed. The subject is represented thus: a car is exhibited drawn by two female 
 figures, inscribed, “ Amor, Obedience,” in front of which is Moses, with the tables of the law in one 
 hand and a wand in the other. Aaron is also seen holding a cross, whereon is shewn a serpent. 
 Roman soldiers and turbaned Turks or Jews are grouped with them, trampling on serpents as they 
 proceed. The car, which is drawn by Love and Obedience, has four wheels, which are crushing the 
 devil, who is seen writhing beneath the chariot. On the platform of the car, at the hinder part, is 
 seen affixed to it a cross, whereon is represented Christ crucified, and at the foot of it are various 
 urns and mystic vessels. In the front of the car is a female figure seated, which represents Christian 
 Grace: this figure, as well as Love and Obedience, holds a palm branch. 
 
 These windows are attributed to Jean Cousin, and they are engraved in outline in the “ Essai 
 sur la Peinture sur Verre,” by E. H. Langlois. 
 
 s 
 
66 
 
 STAINED GLASS FROM THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 
 
 The Church of St. John, Gouda, in Holland. 
 
 This church has been long celebrated from the stained glass which it contains; it has been painted 
 by many masters at different periods of this epoch. As mere works of art the windows possess con¬ 
 siderable merit; they are all in the portrait style. There is, however, scarcely any sacred feeling in 
 them, nor are they less unseemly than those just mentioned in Rouen: on the contrary, many of 
 them have not the slightest reference to godly works, and scarcely one of them is entirely free from 
 gross and material ideas. Many of those which have not these objections are more suited to pro- 
 sceniums of theatres than to the church. Indeed, many of them from their unseemliness would not 
 have been tolerated on the stage at any time. The Siege of Bethulia window, the Annunciation of 
 the Virgin Mary window, and the Birth of St. John the Baptist window, all have some objectionable 
 grossness in them. The last-named, the interior of a chamber, the aged Elizabeth in bed, nurses 
 with confections, some also airing linen, others enwrapping the child,—in short, all the details com¬ 
 mon to such an event, which, according to the more refined delicacy of modern times, would be 
 thought unfit subjects for the interior of a church; though, indeed, the feelings of the age when 
 these were executed was so different, that it would be unfair to estimate their propriety by our own 
 ideas of it. 
 
 The Liberty of Conscience Window. 
 
 This window is in the same church; its date is 1596, and is the work of Adrian G. de Vrije. 
 The frame-work is gothicised, and divided by mullions into six lights. The painted glass consists of 
 an architectural scenic back-ground of the Corinthian order, which displays an open portico or tri¬ 
 umphal arch, through which is seen a street of similar buildings. In front of the arch other columns 
 rise, which support a cornice, and various shields of arms of towns and provinces are suspended from 
 the columns on either side. The subject (which is the only coloured part of this window except the 
 arms) is thus expressed:—A Roman chariot is seen drawn by five females, representing Charity, 
 Justice, Concord, Fidelity, and Constancy. The chariot is passing over Tyranny, which is depicted 
 as an aged monarch writhing beneath its wheels. Liberty of Conscience is portrayed as a female in 
 the masculine habit of a Roman soldier, with sword and shield, and sitting in the chariot: on her 
 right hand sits another female, quite naked excepting the very slightest piece of accidental drapery. 
 This figure is most immodestly displayed and confronted with the spectator. In her right hand she 
 has a heart, which she holds to her breast, and in the left hand a book. On the ground, near 
 Tyranny, are seen chains, broken swords, and battle-axes, and a little removed from these are lying 
 a Corinthian capital and a dog in repose. The base of this window is composed of a large square 
 entablature with Italian frame-work, and a border of shields. The entablature contains the dedica¬ 
 tory inscription, which is supported by two full-grown boys, unclothed, naturally coloured, and 
 sexually developed. 
 
 We shall now close our remarks upon the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, and from the 
 foregoing examples, which have been taken as fair specimens of the modes of developing this art 
 during these epochs, we can only come to the conclusion that the portrait style was prevalent 
 throughout the whole time, associated with such varieties in details and plans as the different artists 
 or their employers might deem fit, without regard to the architecture in which the work might be 
 placed. 
 
THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 So far as regards the first half of this epoch, but little can be said with reference to the 
 practice of the art which will not apply to the last. The same disposition to produce the effects of 
 oil-paintings on glass was continued, and even further attempts were made towards this object, by 
 enamelling colours only. These last proved at once that the art had exhausted itself in vain attempts 
 to rival oil-painting, which had in fact in this sense entirely and long previously superseded it. We 
 find, accordingly, that Francis Langlois, master glazier and glass painter, discontinued his avocation 
 of painting glass altogether ; he afterwards became a china painter and merchant, with which his 
 former profession bore some affinity, and he died in Paris whilst pursuing that calling in 1725. 
 Afterwards, John Francis Dor died, leaving John Le Viel, who was the only person of any note 
 then practising this art in France. Its position in the Low Countries is found at this time to have 
 been very similar. It is however to England that we must look for the continuation and revival of 
 this art, for, during the time of its utter prostration and discontinuance elsewhere, we find that it 
 was still indefatigably pursued in this country, from the early part of this century downwards, and 
 that, too, in connexion with many sacred and noble edifices. 
 
 Therefore it is that we find windows in Christ Church, Oxford, and Northill, Bedfordshire, by 
 Isaac Oliver, of about 1700 ; in Queen’s College, Oxford, by the elder William Price, of about 1715; 
 in the New College chapel, Oxford, we find the windows restored in about 1730 by William Price 
 the younger; and new windows in Magdalen College chapel, Oxford, by the same artist, of about 
 1765. There are others in New College chapel, Oxford, of about the same date, by Peckett, of 
 York. Salisbury cathedral and Brazenose College chapel, Oxford, contain works of about 1776, by 
 the Pearsons. The windows in New College chapel, by Jarvis, were executed about 1777. The 
 east window of St. George’s chapel, Windsor, was executed by his pupil Forest; and the west win¬ 
 dows of New College chapel, Oxford, were executed in 1794 by Eginton. 
 
 The preceding facts, and these works, which still remain, bear ample testimony of this art 
 having been continuously pursued, and will contradict the erroneous notion of its having been lost. 
 It is true that most of these works are very far from being in the true spirit of the art, and that they 
 will not bear the criticism of the more correct taste now brought to bear on them; but it should not 
 be forgotten that the authors of these works were practising at a time when corrupted taste had to be 
 satisfied, and a carelessness prevailed whether they harmonized with the architecture, or whether they 
 embraced any sacred character in their design. It should also be remembered that Walpole, whose 
 taste was far in advance of most of those of his time, held in derision and contempt the windows by 
 Jarvis from the cartoons of the great Sir Joshua Reynolds, still remaining in New College chapel, 
 Oxford; he well knowing then, what has only latterly been discovered by others, namely, that they 
 were utterly devoid of the properties and principles which constitute the beauties and effects of this 
 art, and therefore he appropriately called them “ the washy virtues.” Nevertheless, difficult as it 
 must have been at this time to produce a specimen of this art upon true principles, both from the 
 absence of taste towards its encouragement, and from a paucity of the means of carrying it out, it 
 was even then, under all the disadvantages, accomplished. This was made evident by Robert Scott 
 Godfrey, an English glass-painter, who was exhibiting at Paris in 1769 a large window, painted “ in 
 the style of ancient church windows,” which, according to the Mercure de France, July, 1769, 
 « offered all the character and variety of tones so much admired in ancient glass.” This work there- 
 
68 
 
 STAINED GLASS DURING THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 fore, which then so much excited the admiration of our neighbours, who had such magnificent and 
 ancient works to compare with it, must have possessed considerable merit. It proves that, amidst all 
 the mawkish attempts to continue, revive, and perfect this art upon erroneous principles, there was 
 at least one artist who turned his skill in the right direction. 
 
 From this time to the latter end of the century, few if any attempts had been made to revive 
 this art in its strict sense. Peckett of York perhaps incorporated more ancient feeling into his 
 works than any other contemporary artist. In the practice of enamelling Mrs. Pearson accomplished 
 many meritorious works; and, although such efforts are only suited to the decoration of the bou¬ 
 doir as works of enamelling they will perhaps never be surpassed. From time to time the practice 
 of this art resolved itself into patera paintings and chiaro-oscuro ornaments, until the close of this 
 epoch, which from first to last scarcely produced any work worth description. 
 
THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 This age introduces to us sudden and uncontemplated changes in the art, which arose from an 
 importation of much foreign glass, somewhat dilapidated, and therefore requiring the aid of the re¬ 
 storer to complete it. No person could at first be found capable of performing the task. The art 
 had become thoroughly depreciated. So truly was this the case, that Mrs. Sutton, the wife of the then 
 Archbishop of Canterbury, caused to be removed, and disposed of for any trifle they would fetch? 
 very many of the coats of arms which were in the different windows of Lambeth Palace, they being 
 in her view “ too primitive, tasteless, and ugly.” These ancient relics consisted of the arms of Car¬ 
 dinal Pole and other prelates impaled with the see, and are now remaining in the possession of 
 Edward Beverly Vigurs, Esq. of Mornington Place, through whose courtesy the author has had the 
 honour and advantage of inspecting them in company with Sir Henry Ellis. 
 
 The importation previously alluded to was in a great measure effected by a person of much 
 antiquarian talent and research. This gentleman was Mr. Stevenson, then a publisher and book¬ 
 seller at Norwich, who, in conjunction with Mr. Hamp, a German merchant residing in the same 
 city, made large purchases abroad of ancient stained glass, which, from the French troubles conse¬ 
 quent on the Revolution, was easily obtained, and rescued from demolition, throughout the continent. 
 The purchases which Messrs. Stevenson and Hamp made were for a long time exhibited in Pall Mall 
 and in Wighley’s rooms in Spring Gardens. From the hurry of removing these works of art from their 
 original situation, and from the difficulty of transmitting them to this country, they had suffered con¬ 
 siderable injury. Therefore, before they could be advantageously offered for sale, it was absolutely 
 necessary that they should be reinstated. So far as releading them was concerned, there was no dif¬ 
 ficulty, and this was accomplished by the late Mr. Yarrington of Norwich. The restoration of the 
 glass in vitrified colours was then thought impracticable. Such deficiencies therefore as occurred 
 were made good with ground glass, and then painted in oil colours, which was done by an heraldry 
 painter of the same place. In this state they were exhibited for sale in the aforementioned rooms. 
 
 These works were purchased by various persons, and distributed in different parts of this 
 country. One of the principal purchasers was the late Earl of Bridgewater, who thereby procured 
 sufficient to fill the whole of the windows of his private chapel at Ashridge. They consist of subjects 
 illustrative of sacred history, of the Cinque Cento style, and they now continue to embellish that 
 edifice. 
 
 A vast quantity of foreign glass was imported at the beginning of the present century, and 
 still exists in this country, much of it of the finest kind. We may mention the chapel of Lord Staf¬ 
 ford’s seat at Cossey, near Norwich, the numerous windows of which are completely filled with con¬ 
 tinental glass of various styles and dates; the large east window of Hingham church, Norfolk; the 
 splendid new house at Toddington, near Cheltenham, &c. 
 
 Before his Lordship purchased these works, he anxiously sought to ascertain how far it was 
 practicable to adapt them to the intended purpose, and as to whether those parts which had been 
 repaired in oil colour could be efficiently replaced. On application to Mr. Miller, a glass merchant 
 then living in Swallow Street, his son, at that time an engraver, was induced to turn his attention to 
 the subject. This person was the late Mr. Joseph Hale Miller, who succeeded in reinstating them 
 as they now are. From this circumstance may be dated the commencement of the present revival of 
 this art; for Mr. Miller continued to practise it down to the day of his death, which was in 1842. 
 
70 
 
 STAINED GLASS 
 
 From the restoration of the aforesaid glass, which took place at the beginning of this century, 
 the progress of the art has been slow, partly from the adverse circumstances of its commencement, 
 but more from the want of a proper study and understanding of its capabilities and means of effect. 
 The disadvantages which it has laboured under since its revival are immense, even in respect 
 to the necessary material, which was subjected to a restriction under the then existing excise. But 
 it was in a great measure from our glass manufactories being upon so large a scale that any mode¬ 
 rate quantity required for the purposes of art could not be obtained, from the comparative un¬ 
 profitableness of the order. What was produced therefore embodied for the most part merely showy 
 colours, amongst which scarcely any were available; and if by any chance exceptions occurred, it was 
 from some unintentional mistake of the manufacturer. As therefore the consumption of the greatest 
 quantities of stained glass was for taverns and conservatories, it was more profitable to the manufac¬ 
 turer to provide for them alone than to trouble himself with the scanty demands for works of art. 
 
 From the revival, the continuous practice of this art has depended upon many persons and 
 establishments, severally having totally different views, pursuits, and objects towards the accomplish¬ 
 ment of their ends. Hence it is that, from the time of Mrs. Pearson downwards, many in this pro¬ 
 fession have pursued no other path in it than a continuation of the same mode of producing pateras, 
 borders, groups of flowers, and small pictures. Mr. Miller, however, took a different view of the 
 matter; for, having restored the windows for Asliridge chapel, he was soon employed upon other 
 works of equal importance, amongst which are restorations of ancient glass in the upper part of the 
 east windows of Henry the Seventh’s chapel, at Southwell Minster, Tottenham, Hanworth, Strelly, 
 Gayton, Northill, Bromley, &c. He was also employed upon many new works in Wells cathedral, 
 G hil worth, Blackburn, Wallingford, and other churches, which he executed upon ancient principles. 
 His chief work, however, was the east window of the old parish church at Doncaster; this immense 
 window is filled with figures and canopies, and will in many respects even now vie with most modern 
 productions. This window, which was one of his earliest productions, seems to have had an imme¬ 
 diate influence over the future destiny of this art, for from this time the ancient mode of colouring 
 and treatment was at once in a great measure perceived. Unfortunately Mr. Miller, although a person 
 of great talent and perception, was not a herald, nor did he possess much antiquarian knowledge ; 
 whence the leaning of his taste was towards the portrait style of painting; and he cherished that 
 fatal error, that ancient models could be improved by pictorial treatment, which had already pre¬ 
 vailed without success through more than three centuries, and which still continued in him. This 
 impression might have been strengthened, from the circumstance of a competitor appearing, who 
 was a china-painter and enameller, and whose opinion and taste, together with that of the day, was 
 diametrically opposite to mediaeval art. Whether such was the case or not, Mr. Miller’s mode of 
 practice was occasionally semi-antique, but in most cases absolutely modern. 
 
 Whilst Mr. Miller was still practising, Mr. Charles Muss, the person previously alluded to, 
 turned his attention to glass-painting, to which his former profession of china-painting naturally led 
 him. He possessed talent far superior to those generally engaged in that vocation. He utterly con¬ 
 temned all mediaeval works, his whole object being to produce high pictorial art upon glass. Never¬ 
 theless he was of necessity obliged to adopt the ancient method of connecting the pieces together by 
 leading, which was done by him with a minuteness and labour scarcely credible. His principal work 
 was “The Battle of Neville’s Cross,” which he painted in a window for Brancepeth Castle. He ex¬ 
 ecuted many other works, amongst which is his last, the east window of St. Bride’s Church, Fleet 
 Street, which he had not quite completed at his decease. George the Fourth paid him much respect, 
 and (we believe) purchased the whole of his collection from his widow at his death in 1824. Long 
 previous to his decease, from finding his efforts to accomplish a pictorial perfection in this art abor¬ 
 tive, he made it a secondary object, and divided his attention between it and enamelling on copper, 
 in which art he excelled to adnjiration. 
 
 The preceding are the main circumstances under which the revival of this art has taken place. 
 Other persons than those named were practising at the same time, amongst the principal of whom 
 
DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 71 
 
 were Sir John Beetson at Shrewsbury, Mr. Yarrington at Norwich, and Mr. Watson in London; but 
 they did not differ in their views or practice from those already mentioned, but rather followed them. 
 
 Such therefore is the position in which the art was found at the termination of the first quarter 
 of this centnry. 
 
 From the preceding accounts it will be found that little if any thought had been bestowed on 
 the principles of applying those works in respect to their situations, style, or fitness. No attempts 
 towards this, the great desideratum, were made for some considerable time afterwards. Some differ¬ 
 ences in carrying out designs more inclining to ancient authorities, it is true, took place; but this 
 was seemingly from a vague impression that somehow a better effect was produced thereby, and from 
 a desire to overcome the constantly expressed disappointments of the cognoscenti, until at length it 
 became the interest, if not the inclination, of producers to practise, so far as they were able, in that 
 feeling. So long as its patronage was confined to persons of this taste, amazing progress was made 
 in the reformation of this art; but when it became more extensively patronized it was subject to the 
 capricious and unsettled tastes of the many. Thus it proceeded for some time, having neither 
 standard, rule, consistency, nor tasteful purpose. 
 
 As, however, architecture has ever influenced the destiny of this art, so in fact has it in the 
 present instance. Whatever, therefore, may be the position of it now, any correctness of its applica¬ 
 tion is entirely owing to relative circumstances. Bentham, Lysons, Carter, and other antiquarian 
 writers, have from time to time represented and explained the merits of mediaeval art and architec¬ 
 ture, and laboured hard to induce correct taste. From the revival of architecture, therefore, it is in 
 reality that this art has obtained something like a settled purpose, and it is now likely to become, as 
 in past times, a classified, corresponding, and associated ornament. However slowly it may be 
 admitted, a correct principle in it is as necessary as in any other department of art. When this truth 
 shall have been made generally evident, discrepancies will be at an end. But this cannot well be 
 until a more complete intercourse is established with all persons concerned in the restoration of our 
 churches and other edifices—a voluntary contribution of our several experiences and thoughts,—like 
 the freemasons of past times; for it is equally requisite that the architect should possess some judg¬ 
 ment of stained glass in common with all other decorations, as that the artist in glass should have 
 some knowledge of architecture, the absence of which knowledge has been one of the causes of so 
 many faulty works. 
 
 Great and laudable efforts have been made of late years to recover the study of Gothic archi¬ 
 tecture by able and learned men, who have by their labours done much towards the accomplishment 
 of that purpose. But, unfortunately, they have been for the most part isolated, and confined to 
 classes or localities; and hence their knowledge has been too limited. Amidst the many archi¬ 
 tectural societies, as though the accessory science of painting on glass was of no real importance, no 
 one seems to have thought of establishing an institute of the professors of that art, or even of incor¬ 
 porating them with others; and yet, as this is the chief embellishment of sacred architecture, a know¬ 
 ledge of it is surely most essential and requisite, since without it no ecclesiastical edifice can be con¬ 
 sidered complete. It is for want of this unanimity of purpose that so few edifices of the present day 
 can be found unique, for, perfect as many of them are in construction and exterior, few indeed will 
 bear the strictures of tasteful criticism, either in their interior, detail, or decoration. 
 
 The English clergy, therefore, especially those of the provinces, have done more to 
 patronize and promote art by their individual taste and influence than any other body, and than even 
 the artists themselves; and this is mainly from their having under their care the fine old churches of 
 past times, the purposes and beauties of which they study in a religious sense, and with a taste 
 chastened and refined by a liberal education. It is, in fact, they who encouraged the erection of 
 mortuary windows, which, though only an ancient idea revived, is a chaste, religious, and beautiful 
 mode of accomplishing two objects at once,-embellishing the church, and memorializing the dead.* 
 
 * The following Plates are of Memorial Windows: viz.-NoRMAN :-Bromley St. Leonard's, near Bow by Stratford; Thurlow Memo¬ 
 rial, Norwich Cathedral. Early-Engush -.-Saint Lomas's, Stepney. Perpendicular :-Beeford Church, Yorkslure. 
 
72 
 
 STAINED GLASS DURING THE NINETEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 To the clergy therefore we are mainly indebted for the present position of this art, as well as 
 of church architecture; to which may be added the opportune repeal of the duty on glass, for which 
 latter advantage we are mainly indebted to Sir Robert Peel; and perhaps no greater boon or encou¬ 
 ragement was ever given to any art than to that of painting on glass by that measure, which has 
 placed every requisite within reach and command. 
 
 Nothing therefore is now wanted towards the perfect revival of mediaeval practice, so far as 
 relates to the laws of pictorial effect, but a clear understanding of its true principles, and the correct 
 modes of its application; for the same mischievous errors that have caused the incongruous taste 
 of the three preceding centuries have hitherto influenced and marred true taste in this. 
 
E I 0 0 R A P II I C A L NOTICES 
 
 OF SOME OF 
 
 THE MOST EMINENT 
 
 ARTISTS IN GLASS PAINTING AND 
 
 FROM THE 
 
 STAINING 
 
 TWELFTH CENTURY TO THE PRESENT TIME. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES 
 
 OF SOME OF THE 
 
 MOST EMINENT ARTISTS IN GLASS PAINTING AND STAINING. 
 
 In Walpole’s Anecdotes of Painting, vol. i. chap. 2, it is stated, that “ during the reigns of 
 the two first Edwards he finds scarcely any vestiges of Painting, though it was certainly preserved 
 here, at least by Painting on Glass.” The following catalogue, although it by no means professes to 
 comprise even a tithe part of the practitioners who flourished during the middle ages, may still 
 be acceptable; but its chief object is to prove the uninterrupted practice of this art, successively from 
 time to time, even though it may have been in some measure retarded from various vicissitudes and 
 casualties. It cannot fail to be observed in the early documents, that the terms glazier and glass- 
 painter were synonymous ; and that in fact the former term must by no means be understood accord¬ 
 ing to its acceptation in the present day. On the contrary, it implied a knowledge of high art, a 
 presidency over the chief ecclesiastical embellishment of those times, namely their windows, long 
 antecedent to its after rival, oil-painting. After the introduction of this latter art, many of its most 
 eminent professors will be found dignifying the former by their operation in it: nor can it be doubted 
 that the science of painting on glass has always been held in high honour, especially when we find 
 such men as the scholars of Raphael, Vandyck, &c. practising in it. 
 
 Art indeed is a term grand and comprehensive, every part of which has its relative, and may 
 well be likened in its sections to so many instruments of music well attuned, which, by uniting their 
 tones, produce the most ravishing harmony. 
 
 Although very many names of much deserved eminence of more modern date might have 
 been added to this list, from many reasons, and especially to avoid every thing which might imply 
 invidiousness, it has been preferred to leave the record of their names to future biographers. It is 
 obvious that the works of living artists cannot be criticised by a contemporary member of the same 
 profession. 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE TWELFTH CENTURY. 
 
 Roger of Rheims. The Historian of the Monastery of St. Hubert in the Ardennes, speaks of 
 this Roger as more than a century anterior to Cimabufi, but does not inform us of the exact nature of 
 his talent. He states as follows : “ Illuminavit quoque oratoria, quas extruxerat, pulcherrimis fenestris, 
 quodam Rogero conducto ab urbe Remensi, valenti admodum viro, et promptissimo hujus artis et 
 peritissimo.” (Ree. de Hist, de Gaules, t. xi. p. 150 et 151.) 
 
 b 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Cimabue. He was a noted painter, bom at Florence about 1240, who greatly added to 
 the perfection of glass-painting. It has been inadvertently stated that glass-painting was of as recent 
 a date as the time of this artist, who died in 1300. We trust we have sufficiently shewn the inaccu¬ 
 racy of such an opinion, and that glass-painting was certainly more than two centuries anterior to 
 this date. 
 
 Clement a native of Chartres, painted the windows round the choir of the cathedral of 
 Rouen about 1271. In one of these windows is seen his signature, thus : “ Clemens vitrearius Car- 
 notensis.” 
 
 Giotto. An Italian born in 1276, who contributed with Cimabu£ to the revival and im¬ 
 provement of this art. 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Canoce, William. Was glass-painter to the cathedral of Rouen from 1384 to 1386. 
 
 de Kircheim, John. He was glass-painter to the cathedral of Strasburg, and, according to 
 the Abbot Grandidier, in his history of that church, painted many of its windows. Amongst the 
 numerous subjects that these paintings represent, are some figures larger than life. This artist was 
 alive in 1348. 
 
 Lyen, Robert, glass-painter and citizen of Exeter, was sworn into the office of glazier of 
 the cathedral, and concluded an agreement with the Dean and Chapter to glaze the great window, 
 then newly made, at the head of the church. It was covenanted that for every foot of new glass he 
 should be paid twenty pence, and for fitting the old glass three shillings and four pence per week, 
 besides two shillings for his assistant. Whatever might be necessary for glazing he was to provide 
 at his own cost, but all the new glass was to be provided by the Chapter. His agreement was con¬ 
 cluded March 7, 1391, and he was sworn into the office of glazier, April 28, 1392, at the yearly 
 salary of twenty-six shillings and eight pence. 
 
 Robert of York. Glass-painter; he painted the great western window of York Cathedral 
 (specimens of this exquisite glass are given in vol. i. of Weale’s Quarterly Papers), and contracted 
 with Thomas Boneston, custos of the church, to glaze and paint those windows, the glazier to find 
 the glass, and to be paid at the rate of sixpence per foot for plain, and twelve pence for coloured, 
 glass : the indenture bears date 1338. 
 
 Van Eyck, John, sumamed John of Bruges, bom in 1370. He is considered the inventor 
 of oil-painting, and commonly supposed to have introduced enamels, which, however, were long pre¬ 
 viously known. In glass-painting he certainly greatly perfected the use of it. 
 
 Walter. He was glazier and glass-painter of Exeter cathedral. An account exists in the 
 Rolls, of four pounds ten shillings, for fitting the glass in the gable-end, and of “ octo summarum 
 fenestramm, et sex fenestrarum” in other parts of the church ; also an amount of 364 feet of glass at 
 threepence half-penny per foot, eight pounds six shillings and tenpence; 140 feet of painted glass, at 
 five pence half-penny per foot, sixty-four shillings and twopence; and fitting the same, two shillings. 
 
 2 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE FIFTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Barbe, William. Was glass-painter to the cathedral at Rouen from 1459 to 1484. 
 
 Barbe, John, son of the preceding, succeeded his father in the works of the same cathedral 
 from 1488 to 1530. Amongst other works he was employed at the windows of the castle of Gaillon 
 from 1502 to 1509. 
 
 Damaigne, Robin. Glass-painter to the cathedral at Rouen; he exercised his talent in that 
 church in 1458. 
 
 Delanoe, William. This artist worked at the castle of Tancarville in 1492, and painted in 
 that edifice the arms of its noble possessors. 
 
 Durer, Albert. It would be superfluous to enter into the merits of this great artist, who 
 contributed so much towards the advancement of this art by his able drawings and co-operation, as 
 well as of engraving and oil-painting. 
 
 Fflower, Barnard. Glass-stainer and painter of the latter part of the 15th century, and the 
 beginning of the 16th. He painted the glass in the Ladye Chapel, then called the King’s New 
 Chapel, at West Minster. 
 
 Gradville, William de. Glass-painter to the cathedral at Rouen from 1246 to 1432. 
 
 Jacques, surnamed L’ Allemand, from his being from Ulm. He was of the order of St. 
 Dominic : he died at Boulogne in 1491, more than 80 years of age, and was afterwards canonized. 
 The historian of his life states that, not to disobey his prior, who sent him out collecting alms, he 
 quitted the superintendence of his kiln or oven, and that on his return he found the baking of his 
 paintings quite perfect. The community of glaziers and glass-painters of Paris, even in the 18th cen¬ 
 tury, celebrated the anniversary of the beloved Jacques L’Allemand, on the day of the second Sunday 
 in October. 
 
 Mellein, Henry, of Bourges, painted a full-length of Joan of Arc for the church of St. Paul 
 at Paris. This magnificent piece of work was executed in 1436, five years after the death of that 
 heroine of Orleans. The picture of the coronation of Charles the Seventh, executed on the windows 
 of the Town Hall at Bourges, are attributed to him. All the figures in these windows are considered 
 to be portraits. It was probably as an authenticated testimony of his approbation that the monarch 
 whose accession this window records granted to this artist letters patent, given at Cliinon, on Jan. 3, 
 1430, by which this said Henry Mellein is endowed with exemptions and privileges which were then 
 considered as especial favours and advantages. Picula Vieil in his work gives a lengthened account 
 of these acts of authority, which are not without interest. 
 
 Pety, Sir John. In one of the windows in the south of York Minster is depicted a magistrate 
 in his gown, kneeling at a desk; below it is the following inscription : “ Orate pro Anima Johannis 
 Pety, Glasiarii et Majoris Ebor, qui obiit 12 Novem. 1508. This window was glazed by Sir John 
 Pety, Knight, some time Lord Mayor of the Citie of York, who died 12 November, Anno 
 Domini 1508.” Many windows in the Minster and the different churches of York &c. were executed 
 by this person in the 15th century. 
 
 Prudde, John, of Westminster, styled glazier, painted the windows in the Beauchamp Chapel 
 a c 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 at Warwick. It was specially stipulated that he should use no glass of England, but glass from be¬ 
 yond the seas, and the colours to be of the finest, such as blue, yellow, red, purpure, sanguine, and 
 violet, but not green ; for which he received two shillings per foot, amounting in the whole to ninety- 
 one pounds one shilling and ten pence: he lived in the 15th century. 
 
 Thornton, John, of Coventry, glazier, contracted in 1405 to execute the great east window of 
 the choir of York Minster. He agreed with the Dean and Chapter to receive for his own work four 
 shillings per week. This extraordinary window is very nearly the height and breadth of the middle 
 choir, being 76 feet high, by 32 wide. The upper part consists of most elaborate tracery, and the 
 principal openings below contain one hundred and seventeen compartments, representing so much of 
 Holy Writ, that it takes in almost the whole history of the Bible. Thornton finished this extraordi¬ 
 nary and magnificent work in less than three years. The short space of time in which nearly 4000 
 superficial feet of glass was completed is not less astonishing than the price, which, however, as in the 
 case of Robert Lyen of Exeter, must have been exclusive of materials, and must be reckoned by the 
 relative value of money. 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE SIXTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Anquetil, Peter, master-glazier of St. Maclou, at Rouen, in 1541. He painted many win¬ 
 dows in that church. 
 
 Bacot, Philip, at Feaucamp, in France, lived in 1563 (see Buselin). 
 
 Buselin (Brothers). These artists obtained from Charles the Ninth the confirmation of the 
 ancient privileges of glass-painters, which King Henry the Second of France had himself ratified in 
 favour of Renne le Lagoubalde and Rennis his son; as also to Laurent Lucas and Robert Herusse, of 
 Anet, election of Dreux ; to Phillip Bacot, at Boussi; to Peter Endrier, at Feaucamp; and in the 
 county of Caen alone Mehestre Liom de la Rue and his son Martin Hubert Giles and Michael Du 
 Bose, brothers, were in possession of and enjoying the same privileges, granted for the most part from 
 the provinces of Normandy before this time, which shews that the practisers of this art were then held 
 in peculiar estimation and distinction. 
 
 Besoche, Michael, master-glazier of the church of St. Maclou at Rouen, 1535. 
 
 Besoche, John, filled in the same church the office and functions as the preceding in 1595. 
 
 Bose, Giles, and Michael du (Brothers), glass-painters, living in 1549, in the parish of St. 
 George d’ Aubnay (see Buselin). 
 
 Both, of Utrecht, in Holland. Although a glass-painter, he is less known as such than as 
 being the father of John and Andrew Both. He lived at about the end of the 16th century. 
 
 Bouch, Valentine. In his will, dated 25th March, 1541, he bequeaths to the cathedral of 
 Metz all his large patterns, from which he had made the windows of that church, to serve and aid 
 in future in the repairs of the said windows whenever necessity might require ; this will embraces 
 many other extremely eccentric disposals, spoken of by La Viel in the first part of his work. 
 
 Bownde, Richard, of St. Clement Danes, London, painted some of the windows of King s 
 College chapel, Cambridge. He lived in the year 1527 (see G. Hoone). 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 Brochon, John, glazier of Notre Dame de Bron, cited by Father Rousslet in his history of 
 that town, cap. 8, p. 121, namely, John Brochon, John Orquois, and Anthony Noirsin, whom he 
 styles glaziers, who no doubt were also the painters, for it seems improbable that the names of the 
 glaziers of these beautiful windows should be recorded, and not those of the painters, except that 
 they were the same persons: they lived in the 16th century. 
 
 Chenesson, Anthony, of Orleans, employed at the castle of Gaillon in 1507-8, by the Car¬ 
 dinal George d’ Amboise the First. The extensive windows of this palace were executed by Che- 
 nisson and John Barbe. 
 
 Claude, and William, a Dominican, quitted Marseilles, and painted at Rome the windows 
 of the chapel of the Vatican, under the direction and from the cartoons of Raphael. After the 
 death of Claude, brother William painted by himself the windows of the churches of St. Maria del 
 Popolo and dell’ Anima: he died at Arezzo in 1537, aged 72. 
 
 Cochin was a glass-painter, and ancestor of the artist of this name of the 18th century: he 
 was from Troyes in Champagne, and lived in the 16th century. 
 
 Commonasse, William. In 1576 this artist newly re-instated the windows on the city side 
 of Auxerre cathedral, and received 30 livres for the same. 
 
 Connet, John de, a glass-painter who lived in the time of Bernard de Palissy, the middle 
 of the 16th century. 
 
 Cousin, John. This famous artist, justly sumamed the Michael Angelo of France, is so well 
 known that it is unnecessary to give a very long account of him. He was bom at Souci, near Sens, 
 and was still living in 1584, at a very advanced age. Cousin was undoubtedly amongst the most 
 excellent of the glass-painters of the 16th century, in the portrait style of work. He taught a great 
 many pupils, and made cartoons for a great many churches of Paris and the provinces. His pnn- 
 cipal works in Paris are those of St. Gervase, which he undertook, as is reported, m competition 
 with Robert Painaigner. Those of the choir of the same edifice are also attributed to him. He 
 painted the martyrdom of St. Lawrence, the history of the Good Samaritan, and in a chapel near the 
 choir the reception of the Queen of Sheba by Solomon, which has his monogram and the date 1551. 
 The beautiful graiselles of the castle of Annet are also attributed to him, and the windows of the 
 chapel of Vincennes, from the drawing of Luke Penin and Claude Baldwin. He also enriched with 
 chef-d'ceuvres in stained glass Moret,near Fontainbleau, as well as others in the last named town : one 
 of his works is the Last Judgment, in the church of St. Remain. He painted glass a so for the 
 charnel house of the church of St. Stephen du Mont in Paris, in the chapel of the castle of Fleungny 
 near Sens and in the same place he executed the Tiburtine Sibyl after the cartoons of Rosso, shew¬ 
 ing the Emperor Augustus prostrated, and the Virgin and the Infant in her arms encircled with a 
 celestial ray John Cousin was also an able geometrician, architect, and perspective draughtsman. 
 His picture of the Last Judgment not only gives him the credit of being a good oil-painter, but his 
 tomb of Admiral Chabot proves him to have been a good sculptor. The figure of the Pope promp¬ 
 ted into hell came from his pencil, which, in his time, caused him to be much suspected of holding 
 1th Calvinism. He notwithstanding lived much esteemed under the kings Henry the Second 
 Francis the Second, Charles the Ninth, and Henry the Third, who in particular honoured him with 
 
 much distinction. 
 
 „ Thierry and Walter, brothers, noted artists, natives of Holland, and in part the 
 
 painter^of the—windows of St. John of Gonda,* which were executed during the latter part of the 
 
 16th century. 
 
 • A detailed aecou.t .1 .!»= ™do». - 1- » »>' ■' «' 
 
 a •*» 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 David, George, a glass-painter of much ability, was born at Delft, in Holland, in 1501, and 
 died at Basle in 1556. 
 
 Demoles, Arnold, a very excellent glass-painter, embellished by his works the cathedral of 
 Auch, in Gascogne. An inscription in Gascon patois, placed on his windows, indicate that they 
 were painted in June, 1509. 
 
 Derode, Nicholas, a glass-painter who executed a window in Rheims cathedral, which bears 
 date 1581. 
 
 Eudier (see Buselin). 
 
 Evrard, Matthew, glass-painter to the cathedral at Rouen from 1574 to 1603. He was 
 working at the same time at the church of St. Maclou in the same town. 
 
 Evrard, Michael, was master-glazier of St. Maclou, Rouen, in 1758. 
 
 Germain, Michael, executed the stained-glass for the then new portal of Auxerre, which he 
 fixed in 1528. 
 
 Gheyn, John de, a Flemish glass-painter, who died in 1528, 50 years of age. 
 
 Gheyn, James de, son of the preceding, bom at Antwerp, 1565: he was an able engraver and 
 painter on glass, and was equally successful in other styles of painting. 
 
 Goltius, and Henry his son, Germans, the latter at Mulbreitcht in the Duchy of Juliers, in 
 1578, died at Haarlem in 1617, aged 59. He was celebrated for his painting on glass, and his 
 numerous productions as a draughtsman and engraver. 
 
 Gontier, John and Leonard, brothers. 
 
 Linard, Madrin, and Cochin, most able glass-painters of the 16th century, were all bom at 
 Troyes in Champagne. This town and its environs comprise more painted windows than can be 
 found in any other locality. Amongst the windows of the noted Gontier are those which decorate 
 the cathedral in the town of Troyes, the college of St. Martin des Vignes, Montier-la-Celle, and the 
 windows of the chapel of St. Stephen, painted by Leonard, who died at the age of 28. The Bene¬ 
 dictine authors of the Voyages Litt^raires (Paris, 1717, vol. I. p. 93), speaking of the windows of 
 Troyes, allude to a window at the end of the sanctuary of St. Pantaleon, of that town, executed by 
 Gontier, for which the Cardinal Richelieu offered 18,000 francs (^720). Notwithstanding that the 
 offer was so liberal, the sum being very considerable at the time, it was refused. The extraordinary 
 part of this anecdote is the rejection of the offer to an individual whose imperious demands seldom 
 met with refusal. 
 
 Guerardes, Mark, a Fleming, native of Bruges, died in England (see Mark Villems). 
 
 Guillaume, Brother, a White Friar and glass-painter (see Claude). 
 
 Havene, Gabrielle, was glass-painter of the church of St. Maclqu, at Rouen. 
 
 Heere, Lucas d’, a Fleming and glass-painter, died in 1564, aged 50 (see Mark Villems). 
 
 Henriet, Claude and Israel, father and son; the latter was the rival and friend of the famous 
 o 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 Callot. Claude Henriet painted the windows of the cathedral of Chalons, in Champagne, which are 
 remarkable from their beauty of drawing and colouring: he worked also in many of the Parisian 
 churches, and it is said that those of St. Stephen du Mont are his. 
 
 Heron, a glass-painter of talent, who practised at St. Andr£ des Arcs and at St. Merry, at 
 Paris (see James de Parroy). 
 
 Herusse, Robert. In a confirmation passed by the President of the Election of Dreux, 
 given in 1570 in favour of glass-painters, this artist is qualified in the following manner: “ Maistre 
 Robert Herusse, Maistre es Arts et Sciences, de Sculpture, et Peintun” (see Buselin). 
 
 Hoone, Galyon. This artist, together with some others, executed some of the windows of 
 King’s College Chapel, at Cambridge. An existing agreement speaks of Thomas Larke, archdeacon 
 of Norwich, on the one part; and Gailon Hoone, of the parish of St. Mary Magdalen, glazier, Richard 
 Bownde, of St. Clement Danes, glazier, Thomas Reve, of St. Sepulchre’s, glazier, and James Nichol¬ 
 son, of Southwark, glazier, on the other part; the latter agreeing to set up eighteen windows of the 
 upper story of King’s College Chapel, like those of the King’s new chapel at Westminster, as Bernard 
 Fflower, late deceased, by indenture stood to do; six of the said windows to be set up within twelve 
 months; the bands of lead to be after the rate of twopence per foot. They also agreed to execute 
 the east and west* windows of the King’s College Chapel. They lived in the early part of the 
 Sixteenth century. 
 
 Hubert, Martin, glass-painter, living in 1545 in the parish of Gurques (see Buselin). 
 
 Joyse, Cardin, glass-painter of the parochial church of St. Ouen, Rouen, 1512. 
 
 Kuffeus, or Kussens, (Corneille Isbrantsche) (see Thibout, Sixteenth Century). 
 
 Lagoubalde, Rene, and Remi. Father and son (see Buselin). 
 
 Lequier, John, an eminent glass-painter, born at Bourges. This artist at an early period of 
 his life formed his taste in Italy, and, having studied the great masters, returned and enriched his 
 own country with magnificent windows in abundance, a great portion of which were destroyed during 
 the Revolution. Many of the windows in Bourges cathedral are by him. Several of his pupils dis¬ 
 tinguished themselves, and often aided him in his works. This painter, to whom La Vieil makes no 
 allusion, died at Bourges in 1556, in the parish of St. John des Champs, and was buried m the chapel 
 of St. Anne. 
 
 Leyde, Lucas de, a glass-painter 
 land, in 1494, and died in 1533, aged 39 
 with the great Albert Durer. 
 
 of much merit: he was bom in the town of Leyde, in Hol- 
 From the diversity of his genius he was fairly comparable 
 
 Lenabd, a glass-painter from Troyes, in Champagne : practised at the end of the Sixteenth 
 century. 
 
 Lucas, Lawrence (see Buselin). 
 
 Masson, Geopphy, glass-painter of St, Onen, Ronen, with Arnold de la Pointe, in 1508. 
 
 * This latter was 
 
 never added. All the rest remain. 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 Mehestre, Simon (see Buselin). 
 
 Monori, a Dominican prior of the abbey of Cerfroy, in Soissonnais : he painted in 1529 the 
 windows of the refectory of this monastery. 
 
 Nicholson, James, of Southwark, a glass-painter; he executed some of the windows of 
 King’s College Chapel, Cambridge: he lived in 1527 (see G. Hoone). 
 
 Noirsins, Anthony, a glass-painter of the Sixteenth century (see Brochon). 
 
 Orquois, John, also a glass-painter of the Sixteenth century (see Brochon). 
 
 Palissy, Bernard de, was one of the best French artists of the Renaissance, and one of those 
 men whose universality of talent approached to the Michael Angelos, the Leonardi da Vincis, and 
 Jean Cousins. He was a geometrician, engineer, physician, chemist, naturalist, modeller, draughts¬ 
 man, and one of the greatest of glass-painters. He wrote many works much in estimation, in one of 
 which he takes the title of “ Inventeur des Rustiques figulines du Roy et de la Royne sa Mere.” 
 Amateurs even now seek with avidity the China vases ornamented in relief, manufactured in the 
 fabrics from the taste of this great artist. The admirable suite of the Amours and Misfortunes of 
 Psyche, which decorate the Hall of Arms of the castle of d’Ecouen, near Paris, are all attributed to 
 him. His painted glass after the drawings of Raphael for a long time delighted all eyes at the 
 Museum des Monumens Franfjais. At the time of the second Restoration, when the old Prince of 
 Cond£ was visiting this museum, some person pointed out this glass to him, stating that it originally 
 belonged to one of his castles, upon which it was ordered to be removed, was packed, and placed in 
 one of his outhouses. After much mutilation it has since been distributed in different quarters. 
 This artist, Palissy, in the distinction of his works has much suffered from the suppression of the 
 Museum des Petits Augustins. He was one of the great artists of the Sixteenth century. Notwith¬ 
 standing his advanced age, and the eminent services which he had contributed to the arts, he could 
 not in the eyes of the Leaguers find mercy: they had him arrested on account of his religious opinions, 
 and shut up in the Bastile. Henry the Third visited him in prison, and said to him, “ My good man, if 
 you do not accommodate yourself to the facts of our religion, I am constrained to leave you in the 
 hands of your enemiesto which this great and aged man replied, “ Sire, those who constrain you 
 can never do the same by me ; for this reason, I know how to die.” He was bom in the environs of 
 Agen, and terminated his life in prison, 1589, at the age of 80, after a life of great talent and rare 
 virtue. 
 
 Parroy, James De Chamu. John Nogan and Heron painted in competition the history of 
 St. Peter, with the Latin citations taken from the Acts of the Apostles, of St. John the Baptist, and 
 of St. Francis d’Assise, in the windows of the choir of St. Merry, at Paris, which church was finished 
 in 1612 : they painted also many of the windows of the chapels of this church. Parroy was bom at 
 St. Poursin sur Allier, in the Sixteenth century, and was a long time a scholar of the noted Dominican. 
 The collegiate and parochial church of St. Croix, at Ganat, was furnished with windows from the 
 hands of this artist, who painted the four Fathers of the Latin church there. De Parroy died at the 
 age of 102, at Moulins, in Bourbonnais, and was buried in the church of the Jacobins in that town. 
 
 Perier, Francis, pupil of Lanfranc, painted for the charnel-house of St. Paul, at Paris, the 
 History of the First Council of the Church, and the Shadow of St. Peter healing the Sick. 
 
 Pinagrier, Robert, rivalled John Cousin : he painted in 1527 and 1550 the windows in the 
 parish church of St. Hilaire, of Chartres; one of the finest was copied for the charnel-house of St. 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 Stephen du Mont, Paris, and was removed to the church by Le Vieil. This window was a singular 
 allegory, and shews the principal sovereigns and noted persons of that epoch occupying themselves 
 in collecting from the tomb the blood which is abundantly flowing from the wounds of our Saviour. 
 This artist painted also the windows of St. Gervais, and of many other churches in the same city. 
 
 Pinaigrier, Nicholas. The finest windows in the charnel-house of St. Paul were from the 
 hands of this artist. Robert, John, and Louis Pinaigrier contributed also to the execution of the 
 windows of that edifice. Le Vieil considers these artists as the sons or grandsons of the last-named, 
 who was rival to J. Cousin. 
 
 Pointe, Arnould de la, master-glazier of the church of St. Ouen, at Rouen, in 1508, in con¬ 
 junction with Geoflry Masson. 
 
 Pot, John Le, a Fleming, established himself at Beauvais, in 1500, and married the daughter 
 of Anthony Caron, painter, of that town. He excelled in the graiselle, and was besides a clever 
 sculptor : he died in 1563. 
 
 Pot, Nicholas Le, relative of Angrand Le Prince; he was from Beauvais, and painted many 
 subjects in glass for that town, but, like John Pot, he excelled principally in graiselles. His works 
 bear his monogram, NLP, united; he was probably son of the last-named. 
 
 Prince, Angrand Le, principally known from his admirable windows in the church of St. 
 Stephen, at Beauvais. These windows have excited much notice from various authors : they indeed 
 possess a merited notoriety, and are truly excellent. Many of the subjects are from the drawings of 
 Raphael, of Giulio Romano, and Albert Durer; also a Christ in the cathedral from the last-named 
 master. This eminent painter prided himself in obtaining models from the greatest artists in Italy 
 and Germany, and at a late period there still existed at Beauvais some of the valuable drawings that 
 he had possessed. He died at Beauvais in 1530, at an advanced age. 
 
 Repel, Soyer, master-glazier to the church of St. Maclou, Rouen, in 1565. He had through 
 his hands all the windows round the choir of this edifice, and also those of the Lady Chapel, to repair. 
 
 Reve, Thomas, glass-painter of St. Sepulchre’s, London, executed some of the windows of 
 Kind’s College Chapel, Cambridge : he lived in 1527 {see G. Hoone). 
 
 Rogiers, a native of Holland: he painted the windows of the chapel of the Holy Sacrament, 
 St. Gudule, Brussels. These windows were ordered by Francis the First, Charles the Fifth, and 
 many other sovereigns. 
 
 Rue, Liom de la, and his son {see Buselin). 
 
 Symonds Symond, of St. Margaret’s, Westminster {see Francis Willyamson, Sixteenth 
 Century). 
 
 Tacheron Peter, bom at the end of the sixteenth century, was master-glazier at Soissons, 
 and painted in that town, in 1622, the ten admirable windows of the Hall of the Arquebusiers. 
 These represent subjects from the Metamorphosis of Ovid, and are perfect in drawing and colouring. 
 Louis the Fourteenth, in passing through Soissons to Flanders, in 1663, was so struck with their 
 beauty, that he requested four of them to place in his cabinet. The Company offered him the whole. 
 He postponed his decision until his return, at which time he had fortunately forgotten all about it. 
 
 / 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 The Cloister des Minimes of the same town enclosed some excellent graiselles, also attributed to 
 him. 
 
 Tardif, Olivier, glass-painter of the cathedral at Rouen from 1540 to 1554. 
 
 Thibotjt or Tibaot, Willem, Dutchman, was working in association or partnership with 
 Cornelius Isbrantsche Kuffeus, or Knssens, his countryman ; the latter died in 1599, the former m 
 1618. Thibaut painted in 1563 a window for the church of St. Ursula, at Delft, in which is seen 
 the portrait of Philip the Second, king of Spain, and his wife Elizabeth de Valois, daughter of 
 Henry the Second of France, in royal robes. The same artist enriched the church at Gouda with a 
 window representing the taking of Damietta by the Crusaders in 1219. The same church at Gouda 
 contains a window by his partner, Cornelius Knssens, representing progressively the Prayer of the 
 Pharisee and the Publican in the Temple. In a great hall at Leyden are windows with portraits at 
 full-length of all the Counts of Flanders, which are by these artists. 
 
 Toornevliet, native of Holland; a most excellent draughtsman and glass-painter, who lived at 
 Delft; he was the first master of the Flemish painter Mieris, who was already very talented when 
 he passed into the hands of Gerard Douw: the latter used to call Mieris his prince of pupils. 
 
 Van Cool, Laurent, painted the windows of the privy council at Delft; the counsellors are 
 represented as large as life, and in armour from head to foot. Le Vieil considered this artist as the 
 one that Florent Lecompt styles “ Laurent the Glazier.” He lived in the sixteenth century. 
 
 Van Dyck was a talented glass-painter. He was doubly honoured in being the father and the 
 first master of the great Anthony Van Dyck. 
 
 Van Kuyck, John, a native of Holland, and eminent as a glass-painter; he was bom at Dort 
 in 1530, was arrested and accused there of heresy, and was burned alive for the same, 28th of 
 March, 1572. 
 
 Van Zyll, Dirk Thierry. He took part of the works at Gouda; one of the windows has 
 his signature, and the date 1556. He was born at Utrecht. 
 
 Vieil, William Le, ancestor of the glass-painter and author of that name; worked for the 
 church of St. Maclou, at Rouen, 1584. 
 
 Villems, Mark, a Fleming, born at Malines about 1527, and died 1561. This artist, with 
 De Heere and Guerardes, occupied themselves principally in furnishing drawings for glass-painters; 
 the latter used to furnish them coloured, which obtained for him the name of the Illuminator. 
 
 Vriendt, James, a Fleming, brother to the noted Frank Floris, called the Flemish Raphael; 
 he executed the Nativity in the cathedral of Antwerp, and the Last Judgment over the portal of St. 
 Gudule, at Brussels. The dates of his birth and death have not been ascertained. His brother was 
 bom 1520, and died 1570. 
 
 Williamson, Francis, of Southwark, glass-painter, and Symond Symonds, of St. Margaret’s, 
 Westminster, agreed to glaze four windows of the King’s College Chapel, Cambridge, of orient 
 colours, and imagery of the old law and the new law, after the manner and goodness in every point of 
 the New Chapel at Westminster; also according to the manner done by Bernard Flower, glazier, 
 deceased ; also according to such patterns called vidimus s , to be set up within two years next ensu- 
 
 10 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 ing, to be paid after the manner of sixteen pence per foot for glass ; this agreement took place the 
 3rd of May, 1527. 
 
 Wytenwael or Vytenwael, and Joachim his son, bom at Utrecht in 1566. The latter com¬ 
 posed the drawings of two allegorical windows of St. John de Gouda. 
 
 Ypres, Charles d’, painted on glass and furnished cartoons to glass-painters. He committed 
 suicide at Ypres, 1564. 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Bylerte, a painter on glass of Utrecht in the beginning of the seventeenth century. He 
 was the first master of his son, John Bylerte, a distinguished historical painter. 
 
 Chamu (see James du Parroy). 
 
 Clayes, Jansze, a native of Holland, painted, in 1601, the story of the Woman taken in 
 Adultery, in the windows of St. John de Gouda, by order of the Burgomasters of Rotterdam. This 
 window bears his name and the above date. 
 
 Clebc, Le, father and son, undertook and painted the windows of the new church in the 
 parish of St. Sulpice, at Paris, and many historical subjects in its chapels; also similar works in the 
 chapel of the Mazarine College. 
 
 Clock, Cornelius, Hollander, painted for the Burgomasters of Leyden and Delft many win¬ 
 dows of the church of Gouda, in 1602 and 1603, from the cartoons of Swanenburg. These windows 
 represent, amongst many other subjects, the sieges of Leyden and Delft: amongst the many figures 
 which portray these military events are portraits of the Prince of Orange, Boisot, and many other 
 distinguished personages. 
 
 Desangives, Nkholas, of France ; he painted, amongst others, the windows of the charnel- 
 house of St. Paul’s, at Paris. His works bear his monogram, and possess high artistic merit, he 
 being a most skilful draughtsman. Le Vieil speaks in high praise of his talents. 
 
 Donw Gebabd, of Holland, whose works are well known, was born at Leyden, 7th April, 
 1613- his father, who was a glazier, placed him with Bartholomew Dolendo, a sculptor, to learn 
 drawing and some few months afterwards to Peter Kowhorn, glass-painter. H.s father was so much 
 delighted with the precocious talent that Gerard exhibited, that he passed him to the school o 
 Rembrandt, where his extraordinary genius took a fresh turn in the production of some splendid 
 
 pictures. He died in 1674. 
 
 Fouchieb Bernabb, native of Holland, born at Bergen-op-Zoom; he studied in the first instance 
 under Van Dyck,’ practised on glass and in oil, and executed some splendid works. He died in his 
 native country in 1684. 
 
 Giles Henry of York: he painted the east window of the chapel of the University College, 
 Oxford, representing die Nativity of our Lord, given by Dr. Ratcliffe. The transparent colon*, of 
 this window are choice and good, but the enamel parts were not encaustic, and have so failed that 
 the portraiture of the subject is almost obliterated. | [ 
 
 / 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 Goust, Phillip, was glass-painter to the cathedral at Rouen from 1605 to 1620. 
 
 Hoet, Guerard, born at Bommel in 1648, painter on glass and in oil. He received his first 
 lessons from his father, who was also a glass-painter, in consequence of Wamar van Rysen having 
 established himself in Holland. Hoet, then 16 years of age, entered the school of that master, when 
 after one year his father died, which occasioned him, in concert with his brother, to carry on his late 
 father’s business, and to complete such works as he had undertaken, still not quitting the practice ol 
 other styles of painting. In 1672 he went to the Hague, to avoid the calamities of the war; from 
 thence into the duchy of Cleves, and thence into France, where, notwithstanding his talents, he was 
 reduced to the task of engraving the landscapes of Francis Millet, for which he was barely remunerated. 
 At length he determined to return to his native country, and established himself at Utrecht. After 
 marrying he there opened a school for drawing, but this not answering his expectations he finally 
 fixed himself at the Hague, where he was fully appreciated. He died there in 1733. His large 
 works for the churches of the Netherlands, and the ceilings of the different mansions which he 
 painted in Holland, are in themselves a sufficient eulogy of his talent. 
 
 Holsteyn was the father of Cornelius Holsteyn. It is supposed that the latter owed to him 
 the first elements of his art. He was born at Haarlem, 1653. 
 
 Janssens, Peter, enjoyed a great reputation as glass-painter in the Netherlands, and was one 
 of the pupils of John Van Brockorst. He was bom at Amsterdam in 1612, and died at the age of 60. 
 
 Kowhorn, Peter (see Gerard Douw). 
 
 Linards, James, of Amsterdam (see Pieters, Gerard, end of Seventeenth Century). 
 
 Michu, Benoit, an artist of great ability, was renowned as master-glazier at Paris in 1677. 
 His father was a Fleming, but Benoit was probably bom at Paris, where his parents were established 
 before him in the same profession. He enriched by his works the cloisters of the Feuillans in the Rue 
 St. Honore. This edifice was lighted with forty central windows, each containing twelve panels, 
 with friezes and armorial bearings; the central ones being historical subjects. These paintings were 
 not entirely from the hands of Michu, as seen by the chronograms, bearing date 1624, continued to 
 1628, again to 1701, and finally to 1709. He was also employed for the windows of the chapel of 
 Versailles, and those of the church of the Invalides. In 1726 he painted the arms of Cardinal de 
 Noailles in the centre of the great rose window (palace side) of the cathedral of Notre Dame, Paris, 
 which window was then reinstated at that prelate’s expense. The window of the Crucifixion, in the 
 cloisters of the abbey of St. Genevieve du Mont, is also by him. He died about 1730. 
 
 Minouflet, Charles, of Soissons, glass-painter, amongst other works executed a rose-window 
 of the abbey of St. Nicaise, at Rheims, during the seventeenth century. 
 
 Monnier, father and son, natives of Blois, glass-painters of the sixteenth and seventeenth 
 centuries. 
 
 Monnier, John, was son or grandson of the preceding: he was patronised by Mary de’ 
 Medici and the Archbishop of Pisa, who took him to Florence and Rome. On his return to France 
 he executed some handsome windows for the charnel-house of St. Paul’s, at Paris in which he 
 placed his monogram. 
 
 Nogare, John (see James de Parroy, Seventeenth Century). 
 
 12 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 Perrin, a glass-painter of the seventeenth century, painted some windows from the cartoons 
 of the eminent Lesueur, for one of the chapels of St. Gervaise, at Paris. Sauval speaks highly of 
 him, and Le Vieil thinks the arms and cyphers of the Cardinal Richelieu, which are in all the win¬ 
 dows of the church of the Sorbonne, done by him by order of the Cardinal. 
 
 Porcher, glass-painter, painted some of the windows of St. Paul’s, at Paris, in the seven¬ 
 teenth century. 
 
 Spilberg, a glass-painter, was following his profession in 1619, in Dusseldorf. 
 
 Sutton, Baptista, glass-painter. 
 Shoreditch, London, in the year 1634. 
 
 He executed two windows for the church of St. Leonard, 
 
 Tomberg, William David, or Daniel, a native of Holland, who lived in Gouda. He 
 worked seven years with Westerhout, and from thence went to the father of Van Dyck. His talent 
 was not of a high order. He died in 1678. 
 
 Van Bockorst, Hollander, a glass-painter, was the master of Peter Jansens, in the seven¬ 
 teenth century. 
 
 Van Bronokorst, John, bom at Utrecht, in 1603, was initiated by John Verburg, glass- 
 painter, but quitted his school for that of Peter Matthew, a very clever glazier, whom he left at the 
 end of eighteen months for Arras, and then worked a long time at Paris. On his return to Holland 
 his intimacy with Polemburg gave him the taste for oil-painting, and to the present day his oil-paint¬ 
 ings are not less admired than his beautifi.1 windows, especially those painted for the new church at 
 Amsterdam. 
 
 Van Diepenbeke, Abraham, was great as a glass-painter, draughtsman, and composer, bom 
 at Bois le Due about 1607. He was a pupil of Reubens, who spoke in much praise of his talent. 
 He left the school of that great master to travel in Italy, where he acquired considerable proficiency. 
 He painted on the windows of Antwerp cathedral the Works of Charity, at the foot of which he 
 executed portraits of the Administrators to the Poor in 1635, in which some of the heads are as 
 fine as the portraits of Van Dyck. At the same time the church of St. James and many of the con¬ 
 vents were decorated with his glass-paintings. In St. Gudule, at Brussels, are four windows of this 
 able master, much admired; amongst which are seen portraits o the Emperors Ferdinand and 
 Leopold the Archdukes Albert and Leopold, and the Infanta Isabella. He pamted all the windows 
 of the cloisters of Minimes, at Lille. He was nominated director of the academy of Antwerp, in 
 1641, and died in that town in 1675. 
 
 Van Linoe, Bernaro, painted, in 1636 , the windows of the chapel of Queen’s College, Oxford. 
 In 1641 he was commissioned to pain, the north and south windows of the University Collegei chapel, 
 qubiects from the Old and New Testament; he also painted, at the 
 ° f ; h6 f of the chape, of Wadham College, composed of subjects 
 
 cost of Sir Joh In the chapel of Balio i he pain ted, in 1637, one of the northern 
 
 taken from the L Eunuch, and in one of the south windows the story of the 
 
 windows,. represent^St .^ ^ he painted , in the sou th aisle of Christ Church, 
 
 thrrJoryTjonas; and in the chapel of the Trinity many windows, comaining the picture of 
 the destruction of Sodom and Gomorrah, Jesus disputing with the Doctors, Ac. 
 
 Van Ulet James, bom at Gorcum, in Holland, about 1627. He excelled in glass-painting 
 
 Van Ueet, for ^ brilliant colouring of his windows. Some 
 
 and chemistry, a science to which he was 13 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 of his finest works are at Gorcum, and also in the county of Gueldres. He likewise obtained much 
 celebrity in oil-painting, and was a burgomaster of his native town. The year of his death is not 
 ascertained. 
 
 Van der Veen, Guerard {see Antiquus, Eighteenth Century). 
 
 Vasseur, Nicholas Le, painted the four windows of the chapel of the Communion of St. 
 Paul, at Paris, from the cartoons of Vignon : they were executed in the seventeenth century. 
 
 Verbourg, John {see Van Bronckorst). 
 
 Vieil, William Le, born at Rouen in 1640, descended from ancestors who followed for 
 centuries the art of glass-painting; he gave good proofs of his talents in many parts of Normandy. 
 The church of the ancient Hotel Dieu, dedicated to the Magdalen, possesses a window from his 
 hands. In 1685 he became a competitor for the windows of St. Cross, at Orleans, in which church 
 he executed many other works. Posterior to these works he occupied himself with many others, in 
 conjunction with his third son, the only one whom he initiated in his art: he died 1708. 
 
 Vrije, Adrian De, a native of Holland. He painted four of the windows of St. John, at 
 
 Gouda. 
 
 Westerhout, a glass-painter, bom at Utrecht {see Tomberg). 
 
 ARTISTS OF THE EIGHTEENTH CENTURY. 
 
 Antiquus, John, native of Holland, bom at Groningen in 1702. He is only known as having 
 practised this art at the age of 20, in connexion with Guerard Van der Veen. He was an oil- 
 painter and good draughtsman : he died in 1750. 
 
 BAUMGyERTNER, a Tyrolese glass-painter of the middle of the eighteenth century. 
 
 Bernier, glass-painter, cited by Brothers Maget and Goblet, lived in the eighteenth century. 
 
 Brice, William. He entirely re-glazed the large rose window on the side of the Bishop’s 
 palace at Notre Dame, Paris; also the windows of the Holy Chapel, which are indebted to his 
 skill for their preservation. 
 
 Bbus, Le. In the church of St. Nicholas de la Taille, near Havre de Grace, the windows are 
 composed of yellow ornaments on white grounds ; one of them bears an inscription, partly erased : 
 —“ Le Bran, a Caudebec, Pinxit.” They are dated 1758 and 1759. These shew that the art was 
 still continued abroad as well as in England, even at this time. 
 
 Dihl, a French glass-painter of the early part of the eighteenth century. 
 
 Don, John Fhaxcis, a glass-painter, pupil of Le Clerc. He painted, in 1717 and 1718, some 
 panels ornamented with friezes for the cloister of the Carmes des Chausses, of Paris 
 
 14 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 Goblet, Brother Anthony, a Franciscan friar, native of Dinan, died 18th April, 1721, aged 
 5*5. He was a glass-painter of Paris : also Maurice Maget, monk of the same order, died at Nevers, 
 17th December, same year, aged 49. These monks have left MSS. relating to all that concerns 
 painting on glass, of which Le Vieil availed himself. 
 
 Godfry, Robert Scott, an English Glass-painter, was exhibiting in Paris, in 1769, a large 
 window painted in the style of ancient church windows, in which the colours were solid and brilliant, 
 and offering all the variety of tones which are so much admired in old glass. This (then) modem 
 production was considered remarkably fine, rare, and splendid, according to the Mercure du France 
 journal, July, 1769. 
 
 Huve, nephew and pupil of Michu, but he did not attain the eminence and ability of his 
 master. He executed some of the friezes of the Invalides and of Versailles. But as he was not 
 received master, the fear of being prosecuted by the jurors of his profession compelled him to retire 
 to Croix St. Lefroi, where he was still the victim of the arbitrary measures he had before experienced. 
 He died in 1752. 
 
 Jarvis, painted in 1777, from the drawings of Sir Joshua Reynolds, the west window of the 
 New College of Oxford. This represents seven allegorical figures: Temperance, Courage, Faith, 
 Hope, Charity, Justice, and Prudence. Above these, in a space 18 feet high and ten wide, is 
 represented the Nativity of Christ, a group of shepherds approaching to salute the Saviour. These 
 windows have undergone a remarkable vicissitude. For half a century they were held up to admi¬ 
 ration and for imitation, until at length some witty critic, as Walpole had previously done (justly, 
 certainly), dubbed them the “ washy Virtues ,” when their virtue and charms became as evanescent as 
 their colouring. Still we ought not to forget that it is ourselves that have really changed, and not 
 the window; and to these, as well as many others connected with the names in this Biography, are 
 we indebted for the transmission of the art. The fault was as much the taste of the day as of the 
 artists, who painted to please, and did then accomplish their object. It is gratifying to find that an 
 Englishman, Godfry, was exhibiting at about the same time in Paris a window of Ins own upon 
 something like true principles, and after the ancient models, which was there appreciated.* As 
 Godfry probably went to Paris despairing of sympathy of taste in his own country, it is no very high 
 compliment to the cognoscenti of this kingdom at that time, and a tolerable apology for Jarvis. There 
 are still remaining unfortunately those who like the “ washy” style. 
 
 Langlois, Francois, master-glazier and painter on glass. He was of mediocre talent, though 
 he painted some works at St. Genevieve. He died at Paris, then a China merchant, 1725. 
 
 Maget, Brother Maurice (see Goblet). 
 
 Oliver, Isaac. Amongst many other works, he painted, in 1700, at the age of 84, St. Peter 
 delivered from Prison by an Angel, for the college of Christ Church, Oxford. 
 
 Pearson and Wife, painted, in 1776, from the drawings of Mortimer, the last window of 
 Brasenose College, containing representations of our Saviour and the four Evangelists under canop.es, 
 &c Poor and inferior though this window is, it has vast advantages over those oi New College, 
 painted by Jarvis, and is constructed upon better principles. It is indeed inconceivable how Jarvis s 
 windows obtained such reputation, except from the association of the name o Sir Joshua Reynolds 
 with them. Pearson painted many other windows at Salisbury cathedral and elsewhere, and recently 
 died at a patriarchal age. It is to his wife however that Pearson was indebted for any thing that 
 
 * See Godfry, 
 
BIOGRAPHICAL NOTICES OF ARTISTS 
 
 was artistical in his works. This lady was an admirable painter; her paintings ol the cartoons of 
 Raphael in enamel, and many other cabinet paintings, shew such careful and exact treatment, as to 
 leave no doubt of artistic ability, and the charming way in which she tastefully applied and gra¬ 
 duated her enamel colours has never been surpassed, nor will perhaps be again equalled. 
 
 Peckett, of York, painted from 1765 to 1774, from the drawings of Rebecca, the northern 
 windows of the New College chapel, at Oxford. Also some windows in the Minster were by him 
 placed in the south transept in 1762; he painted the large window at Lincoln cathedral, and in 1766 
 the west window of Exeter cathedral. He also painted for the Library of Trinity College, Cam¬ 
 bridge ; but the best works which he ever executed are in the chapel of Clumber Hall, in Notting. 
 hamshire, the seat of His Grace the Duke of Newcastle. These consist of armorial bearings, inter¬ 
 spersed with mosaics. They are, especially considering the state of the art at the time, in excellent 
 taste, and by far surpassing all his other works. He was the best glass-painter of his time. 
 
 Pieters, Gerrard, a native of Holland, pupil of James Linards, an excellent painter in the 
 style of the time. He was so enamoured with his art that he has often been heard to say that he 
 would not relinquish it to become a prince. He lived in the middle of the eighteenth century. 
 
 Price, William, of London, repaired, in 1715, the windows of Queen’s College, Oxford. 
 The centre window is entirely from his own hands. One of the windows of Christ Church is also by 
 him, from the drawings of Sir James Thornhill. In 1700 he painted the eastern window of the 
 chapel of Merton College. 
 
 Price, William, Junior, of London, painted in the chapel of Magdalen College, Oxford, 
 some figures near the altar. In 1740 he repaired the windows of the New College chapel, in the 
 same city. He died in 1765. 
 
 Regnier, Peter, monk of the congregation of St. Maur, died in April, 1766, after being 
 occupied nearly the whole of his life in this art, but only in the houses and convents of his order. 
 He not only painted many windows of the royal abbey church of St. Denis, but he also restored 
 the ancient windows of that church. 
 
 Rowe, Edward, a glass-painter, died in the Old Bailey, 1763. 
 
 Sempi, P. A., a Fleming, painted in partnership with Michu, whom he excelled, in the win¬ 
 dows of the cloisters of the Feuillans of Paris. These artists, with Pierre le Vieil, took part in the 
 windows of the chapel of Versailles, and the church of the Invalides at Paris. 
 
 Simon, Francis, native of Nantes, glass-painter, of the beginning of the eighteenth century, 
 practised in his own country, and, in conjunction with William le Vieil, in the windows of St. Nicholas 
 du Chardonnet, at Paris. 
 
 Vieil, William Le, bom at Rouen, son of the preceding of that name, received his first 
 lessons from Jouvent, his maternal grandfather, and uncle of the noted painter of that name, brother 
 of the Abbot of St. Ouen, at Rouen, who painted on glass for the houses of his order. His superior 
 sent him to Paris to execute the friezes of the windows of the church of Blancs Manteaux; he took 
 Le Vieil with him, and made him paint for his first essay the Crucifixion for the high windows of the 
 sanctuary of that church. After this Le Vieil painted at the palace of Meudon, the dome of the 
 Invalides, &c., from drawings by Lemoine and Fontenay. The works of this eminent painter are very 
 numerous; and he restored the windows of the Holy Chapel at Bourges, and the Cordeliers at 
 Stampen, which were broken by a hail-storm. 
 
 16 
 
IN GLASS STAINING AND PAINTING. 
 
 Vieil, John Le, son of William just mentioned, was the scholar of Francis Jouvent for 
 figure, and was taught ornament by Varin, founder and chaser to Louis XVI. Le Vieil contributed 
 to the execution of the friezes of the chapel of Versailles, and was engaged in works of the same 
 kind for the castle of Cressy, the cathedral of Paris, mansion of Toulouse, college of Bemardins, 
 and many other edifices. At the death of John Francis Dor, he was the only artist in Paris prac¬ 
 tising glass-painting. 
 
 Vieil, Lewis Le, brother of the preceding, a glass-painter, and scholar of Demachy. 
 
 Vieil, Peter Le, author of the eminent work styled “ L’ Art de la Peinture sur Verre, et de 
 la Vitrie;” born at Paris, 8th February, 1708. His family, originally of Normandy, practised in 
 succession the art of glass-painting for more than two centuries. Peter, of whom we are speaking, 
 was in the first instance a scholar and boarder in the college of St. Barbe; from thence he went 
 to the one of La Marche, where he was very successful in his studies. When seventeen years of 
 age, he proceeded to Normandy for the purpose of taking the habit of St. Benedict, in the abbey of 
 Fontenelle, otherwise St. Wandrille, to which his father had been a postulant in the same order. 
 He aspired with ardour to his undertaking, when a sudden change took place in his views from the 
 misfortunes of his father, he being left with ten children besides himself, and all too young to assist 
 him. Accordingly he relinquished all ideas of a monastery, which he left, much regretted by his 
 superiors, and joined his father to assist in conducting his works, to which province he necessarily 
 confined himself, not having learned drawing. He was, however, a scholar and a man of taste, and 
 many other literary productions are by him, such as “ Essai sur la Peinture en Mosaique, “ Sur la 
 Pierre speculaire des Anciens,” &c. &c., by which means he ennobled his association with this art, 
 and honoured the art itself. He lived in celibacy, and died of the third attack of apoplexy, at Paris, 
 23rd of February, 1772. 
 
 finis. 
 
 h