BYZANTINE CAPITAL FKO.AI TIIE MOSQUE OF DAMASCUS

MEDIEVAL ART FROM THE PEACE OF THE CHURCH TO THE EVE OF THE RENAISSANCE

A.D 312.1350

By

W. R. LETHABY

To

P. W.

 “Are we, then, also to be strong by following the natural fact? Yes, assuredly."

Val d’Arno.

As preface I should like to say a word on the great loss to knowledge that comes about from our having no accessible collection of photographs of historical works of art. Books can be collected at any time, but photographs are now very often the only authentic records of buildings which have been restored out of all validity. Every year travellers in out-of-the-way parts of the world, such as Sinai, Syria, Asia Minor and Armenia, bring back valuable photographic documents, but they art; for the most part lost to science owing to there being no centre where they are collected. Again, during the whole of the last century English architects were diligently measuring or sketching all the mediaeval buildings in Europe, yet very few original collections of material for this period are to be found, and it is to be feared that in the majority of cases such records have been destroyed. May I venture to point out to travellers that any of our national collections would, I am sure, treasure such drawings and also copies of photographs of interesting works of art?

For the use of drawings and other kind services I wish to thank Mr. T. M. Rooke, Mr. S. C. Cockerell, Mr. A. Christie, Mr. A. H. Powell, Mr. R. W. Schultz, Mr. H. Ricardo, and Mr. H. F. B. Lynch. I must also par­ticularly acknowledge the continuous help of E. C. L., especially in translating German, and in the preparation of the Index.

Inverness Terrace. August 1904,

CONTENTS

Introduction

CHAP.

I. The Age of Constantine : Rome and the East .                    9

II. Constantinople, Ravenna, and the Age of Jus­tinian             32

III. Later Byzantine, and Romanesque Origins .             63

IV. Romanesque Art in Italy . . . . .  91

V. Romanesque Art in Germany, France and England              120

VI. Of Romance Art 135

VII. Gothic Characteristics 154

VIII. French Cathedrals I       192 /

IX. French Sculpture and Painting . . .    215 X

X............... French Masons   243

XI. Gothic Art in England, Spain, Switzerland, Belgium, and Germany . j . . . .      262

XII Gothic Art in Italy . . . . . .        276

Appendix                299

LIST OF FULL-PAGE PLATES

PLATE

I. Byzantine Capital from Mosque of Damascus Fronthpiece II. Tempip of Baalbec. Ceiling of Portico . Facing pag* 8

III. Rome. Basilica of Sta. Sabina . .        „ 22 IV'. Ravenna. Capital bearing monogram of

Theodoric . . . . .      „       32

V. Constantinople. Sta. Sophia. Capitals, &c.                „   34

VI. Ravenna. Impost-Capital. Sixth century                      ,,   36

VII. Ravenna. Impost-Capital from S. Vitale                         „ 38 - VIII. Ravenna Impost-Capital from S. Vitale    „       40

IX. Constantinople. Sta. Sophia. The great

order of the interior 42 X. Ravenna. Mosaics of Sant’ Apollinare

Nuovo........     50

XI. Ravenna. Mosaic portrait of Justinian .                       „   52

XII. Ravenna. Mosaic portrait of Theodora .                        „  54

XIII. Ravenna. Ivory Throne. Sixth century                         „ 56

XIV. Damascus. Central part of Great Mosque             „ 62 XV. Ravello. Pulpit of parcel-mosaic . .          „   72

XVI. Borgo San Dunnino ....,,   90

XVII.       Florence. San Miniato. West front in

1875       

XVIII. Florence. The Baptistery . . . „       100

FLATK

XIX. Florence. Baptistery. Inlaid marble

pavement .... . taringpagt 102

XX.          Pisa. Detail of bronze doors . .                      „  104

XXI. Benevento. Detail of bronze doors. „                    106

XXII.       Milan Interior of Sant’Ambrogio .                     „  110

XXIII.      Sicily. Cloister of Monreale . . „                      116

XXIV.      Bitonto Cathedral. Exterior gallery           „  118

XXV.       The Gloucester candlestick, c. mo                      „ 124 XXVI Cologne. Church of the Apostles .       „  128

XXVII. Issoire. View of church from the

east ,,130

XXVIII. Mortenval. Abbey Church c. 1125

before" Restoration'’ . . .  „       134

XXIX. Tracey-le-Val Church, c. 1130 .    „                      140

XXX. Beau vais. Apse and flying buttresses                      „ 154 XXXI. Buurges. Glass. Christ of the Apo

ealypse . . . . .  „      176 XXXI1 Chartres. Glass. Figure of donor,

Guy de Montfort . . .       „       180

XXXIII.    Strasbourg. The pulpitum, now

destroyed ,,184

XXXIV.     Strasbourg. Part of west front .                       „ 188 XXXV. Paris. Notre Dame, west front .     „  192

XXXVI. Sens. West door . . . . „       198 XXXVII, Reims. Door of north transept,

c. 1230-1240 . ...      „       206

XXXVIII. Boarges. West porches . . .      ,,                      208

XXXIX. Rouen. Choir . . . .      ,,      210

XL. Rouen. Lateral duor of west front.   „                       212 XLI. Chartres. Sculptures of western

doors . . . . . . „ 214 XIII Chartres. Jambs of left-hand and

central doors of north porch .  „       222

PLATE

XLIII. Chartres. Jambs of left-hand and

central doors of south porch . . Facingpag«, 224

XLIV. Amiens. Solomon and Saba. South

door of west front . . . „ 226 XLV. Amiens. Herod and two of the Magi.

South door of west front , . „ 228 XLVI. Reims. Jamb of central porch . . „ 230

XLVII. Reims. Joseph             232

XLVIII. Reims. Simeon. , , . . „ 232 XLIX. Reims.. Central porch. Angel . . „ 234.

L. Auxerre. Sculptures of the west porch                    236

LI. Auxerre. Sculptures of the west porch ,, 236 LII. Strasbourg. Central pillar in the

south transept         238

Lalll. Amiens. Reliefs of the Virtues and

Vices ....... 242

LIV. Amiens. The Signs of the Zodiac and

the labours of the j ear. . . „ 244 LV. Amiens. The Signs of the Zodiac and

the labours of the year. . . „ 246 LVI. Paris. The Virgin. From north tran­sept door of Notre Dame , . . „ 252 LVII. Abbey of Villars. Monastic transitional

style „ 262.

LVIII. Lau->anne. South transept before

“Restoration” . . . , „ 272 LIX. Bruges. Hotel de Ville and belfry . „ 274 LX. Bologna. Monument of Rolandino.

c. 1300     ,,276

LXI. Bitetto Cathedral. South Italian work „ 278 LXII. Palermo Window of S. Agostino . „ 280 LXIII Florence. Sculptures from the cam

panile . .  . . , „ 284

iv     ILLUSTRATIONS

PLATK

LXIV. Florence. Sculptures from the cam­panile ..  , Facing page 286

LXV. Orvieto. Door jamb " Cosmati work ” ,, 288 LXVI Beauvais. House front, c. 1550 . ,, 296

LIST OF DIAGRAMS, PLANS, AND DRAWINGS IN TIIF. TEXT.

b

xvi   ILLUSTRATIONS

FIG.        PAG*

46. Cruciform font            87

47.   (A) Plan of S. Croce Camerina ; (B) l'lan of S. Maria

di Squillace ; (C) Its crypt ....  88

48. Plan of destroyed Church of St. Andrea. Rimini .               89

49. Part plan of St. Mark’s, Venice ....     94

50. Haikal of church at Anttnoe in Egypt ...                           95

51. Sections of moulding, St. Mark’s, Venice . .                          96

52.   Patterns from wall linings in (A) San Miniato,

Florence; (B) St. Demetrius, Salonica . . 98

53.   Grouped shafts, St. Michele, Lucca . . . 106

54.   Panel from St. Paolo, Pisa . . . . .106

55.   King David, from the Baptistery, Pisa . . . 107

56.   Inlaid marble pillars. St. Michele, Lucca . . 10S

57.   Figure in mosaic. St. Ambrogio, Milan . .110

58.   Ribbed vaults from Church of Skripou . . .312

59.   Pillar from crypt of Modena Cathedral . . . 113

60.   Tomb of two masons . . . . . .118

61............... Plan of Church of Aaelien    122

62.   Plan of destroyed Church of Valenciennes . . 149

63.   Plan of Church of Cistercian abbey of Chaalis . 150

64.   Destroyed abbey church of St. Mary, Soissons . 152

65.   Diagrams o» vaults . . . . . . 155

66.   Diagrams of vaults ...... 157

67.                 Section of nave, Amiens ....                            160

68.   Plans of church at Chars, Oise .... 162

69.   Plan of.E. transept and chevet, St. Quentin . . 163

70.   Plan of Church of St. Yved at B-aisne, near Soissons 165

71.   Plan of.Chutch at Villeneuve-le-Vicomte . . 166

72.   Plan of destroyed Church of Vaucelles . . . 167

73.   Plan of the Templars’ chapel, I.ann . . .168 74.. Plan of Angers Cathedral . . . . .169

75.   Section of liall of St. Martin des Chimps . .170

76.   Apse windows of Auxerre . . . . -171

ILLUSTRATIONS   xvii

FIG.       PAGK

77. Rose and lancets, Ourecarnp .... 172

78. Early traeeried windows, Reims ....   172

79. Early traceried windows, Amieni . . . .                         173

80. Rose window of N. transept, Ch&lons . . .                         174

81. Rose window, Notre Dame, Paris . . . .                         175

82. Triforium windows, Amiens ..... 17b

83. Stained glass from S. transept, Chartres . . 177 84a. Upper part of window called Notre Dame de la

Belle Verriere, Chartres . . . . .178 846. Lower part of same window . . . -179

85. Portion of window from I.aon ....        181

86. French Gothic mould?ngs .....     186

87.   Gothic mouldings from Normandy, and base from

Noyon . . . . ... . .     187

88.   Ground plan of Laon Cathedral . . . .196

89. Sketch of one of the W. towers, Laon . . .                         197

90.   Plan of Notre Dame, Paris , . . . .200

91.   Notre Datne, Sainte Chapelle and clock-tower of

palace. From Froissart MS .... 202

92. West front, Chartres ......   205

93. Tomb of Louis, eldest son of St. Louis, at St. Denis 217 94 and 95. Effigies called Childebert I and Clovis II.

St. Denis ....... 220

96 and 97. Effigies called Louis III. and Carlotnan. St

Denis. 224

98 and 99. Effigies of Philippe III. and Jean II. St.

Denis . . . . . . . .227 100 and 101. Effigies of Robert and Marguerite

d’Artois. St. Denis .....     233

102. Painting a statue. From a MS. ....    235

103. Daughters of Sion. From stained glass at Orbais           236

104. Moses. From stained glass at Orbais . . .                         237

105. Study by V. de Honnecourt      238

-xviii        ILLUSTRATIONS

iFIG.      PAGE

106. Portrait from grave-slab, Chalons-sur-Mame. .             239

107. Portraits from grave-slab, Ch&lons-sur-Mame . 240 jo8. Hugh Libergiers, master mason of Reims . .         246

109. Drawing by V. de Honnecourt of apse of Cambrai            249

110. Eudes de Montreuil, master mason of Paris . .252 hi. Master mason of apse of St. Ouen . . »           254

112. Gravestone of a master mason, Cluny Museum .          256

113. From gravestone of a master mason at Caudebec .         257

114. Seal of master mason of Strasbourg . . . 258 •a 15. From stained glass at Chartres . . . .259 a 16. (A) Original design for W. front of thirteenth

century church. (B) Suggested interpretation . 260 117. Inscription in honour of the master mason of Notre

Dame .                     . 261

j 18. Suggested original form of E. end of Lincoln

Cathedral ....... 268

119. Ground plan of Lausanne Cathedral . . .272

120. Early altar front. Coire « . . . .273

121. Detail of altar front. Coire. . . . .274

122. Shrine and altar formerly in S. Maria Maggiore,

Rome ........      283

123. City gate and Baptistery, Florence. From a MS.       288

124. From stone slab in the Cluny Museum . .                         296

INTRODUCTION

•* The knife is in the meat, and the drink is in the horn, ard there’s revelry in th» hall, and except for a craftsman who brings his craft the gate will not je open to-night.”—Mubtnogion.

Art is man's thought expressed in his handwork. The course of art has left a great series of documents for the history of civilisation. Moreover, the quality, importance, and number of monumt nts are ikely to vary according to the greatness of the periods in which they were produced. They are witnesses which cannot lie; they are, indeed, not so much records of the past as samples of actual history. Westminster Abbey is a great piece of the middle of the thirteenth century still projecting above the later strata of English life and effort. Periods of art are those in which a process of development has been set up by which certain ideals have been followed for generations and centuries, so that possibilities of thought-expression have been con­tinuously explored and built up. In such great art are crystallised the aspiration and consciousness of an era of national life.

A wide view of history makes it evident that periods of art have coincided with the crests of general development. Where we have no other chronicle it is safe to argue from

ART AN INDEX

the existence of a school of art to a period of culture of which it was the outcome. For instance, we know nothing of the people who built Stonehenge but Stonehenge itself; we know little of the Mycenaeans save the wonderful remnants of their work-civilisation ; and in the long chain of Egyptian culture undulations in the state of society may be directly inferred from the index curve of art, and we know that the last great period synchronised w'tli the reigns of Seti and Raineses. It was Pericles who raised the Parthenon, and Augustus who gave his name to the great Roman epoch. Old St. Peter’s stood for the first power of the Christian Empire, and Sta. Sophia for its Eastern culmination under Justinian. The Dom of Aachen marks the rule of Charlemagne; Jumieges and Durham witness to the might of the Normans; the building of Notre Dame coincides with the rising power of Philip Augustus; and our own English art came to its crown with Edward I.

It would be of interest to trace the movements of the art centre of Western civilisation from generation to generation and to mark out the forces radiating from the several points by a sort of artistic meteorology.

Every school of art is the product of antecedent schools plus the national equation of the moment, and these two factors may either be found as almost distinct and existing

*>         D

side by side, or they may run together into a new com- » pound form. So true is this that the history of art may be compared to chemical analysis; and one of the offices of its historian is to distinguish and weigh the component parts of any given example. If his tests were rigorous enough he should be able to trace every element,

EXTENT OF CHRISTIAN ART 3

At the time when our story begins Roman art ha/1 lon_ been subjected to Greek influence, and the centre of development was in the east of the Empire rather than in Rome. Moreover, the needs and desires of the Church, itself of the East, soon farther sweetened and freed official

Fin. 1, Pcjt'.rry ves'rl in the British Museum. A figure of Christ with cruciform rjimtus between the profiles of Constantine anl Bausta, who are named in the surrounding inscription • c. 320, probably of Syrian or E gyptian oiigin.

Roman art into Early Christian art, whirh quickly spread over an enormous field—over Syria, Asia Minor, Arabia, Armenia, North Africa, and Egypt, where early churches are found far up the Nile boyond Khartum.

After the fourth century Constantinople became the artistic capital of the world, but only maintained its pre­eminence until the rise of the Mohammedan Empire, when

4

KAST AND WEST

the vital centre moved eastward. The early buildings of the Arab conquerors, erected for them by Christian builders in a style at first Byzantine, or more properly what we might call Ilellenesque, * and then slowly changing into more Eastern complexions, form one high peak in the chain of art. The Dome of the Rock, the Aksa in Jerusalem, and the Mosque of Damascus, are more ener­getic and clearer in expression than any other architecture of the time. The Arab-Byzantine school attained enor­mous power, and, indeed, this Eastern wave of Hel- lenesque art is not yet exhausted in Persia and India.

To come back to Rome and the West. During the years of the Gothic wars arid the folk-r -igrations art must have been almost wholly eradicated, and such as remained was compounded of the dying classical tradition, of barbarism, and of the fresh influences of the Christian East.

When Theodone set up a stable society, with its centre at Ravenna, he borrowed from the art of Constantinople, and not long afterwards Ravenna became the seat of an exarch representing the Eat tern Empire. From this time the Eastern element was for centuries the most vital one in Italv and the West.

When Charlemagne, having founded the new Empire, built his monumental church at Aachen at the end of the eighth century, he obtained marbles and mosaics from Ravenna, and it was planntd like San Vitale in that citv and other churches further east. The influences emanating

•By “Hellcncsque" I mean most simply the Oriental Christian styles, including Byzantine. It was developed out of the Hellenistic art as Romanc.-que is generally supposed to have developed from Roman.

TWO MEDIAEVAL STYLES

from the Carlo\ingian centre in turn affected the whole West. After the division of the Frankish Empire followed a period of disintegration and stagnation, until, with Otto II., a time of renewed energy began, and from this we may date the origin of the great Rhenish school.

In the tenth and eleventh centuries several forms of what is usually called Romanesque art arose in various States in North Italy and France. Of these States, one of the most powerful was Normandy, and here was early developed a great branch of Romanesque art which was soon carried into England.

During all this time further waves of Oriental mpulse passed westward, especially over the southern parts of Italy and France; and with the Norman conquest of Sicily a mixed style arwo there out of northern and eastern elements.

In the middle of the twelfth century the germ of modem France, the small royal domain, began to wax in power, and at this moment its local phase of Romanesque began to change and speedily matured into Gothic, a noble and adventurous style which formed the western efflores­cence of art in the Christian era.

In briefest summary, there are two chief styles of mediae\al art to be dealt wi^T,h in these pages -the east­ward culmination, or the Byzantine school, and the western, or Gothic. To recapitulate from this point of view. The long arid eventful period, the thousand years from a.d. 300 to 1300, from Roman to Renaissance art, is vet a perfectly organic one. It begins with a change in the spirit of Classical art, produced by Oriental mysticism and Christianity, which profoundly affected the subject-

6

BYZANTINE

matter dealt wir.h, and supplied an epic interest and human meaning which had been so markedly lacking in it. This soon brought forth the first great mediajval .school in the East. After the mighty disturbances in the West, when Goths, Franks, Lombards, and the rest flowed in over the Roman Empire, when western society began once more to solidify, to wake to national consciousness, and to desire the works of peace, it was natural that inen should turn towards the great artistic capitals of the East, and absorb what they might of the trad tions wh 'ch had in them been preserved. The populations of Western Europe had in different measures been freed and re- harbarised, and the arts they now developed witness per­fectly both as to the derived seed and the new ground in which it was planted.

In France, as I liave said, the diverse elements again ran together in the twelfth century and formed the western mediaeval school known as Gothic, an art^perfectly clear, energetic, and^homogejieous, in which the sculpture and pointing were as noble as the structures were direct and daring. This French-Gothic school was widely spread over Western Europe by the middle of the thirteenth century, and was even carried into Italy, where it influenced the native Byzanto-Uomancsque, and formed many ex­quisite mixed styles by the time that the millennium of mediaeval art drew towards its end.

In Italy, however. Gothic art was never fully assimilated, and it seems probable that it was even a conscious reaction of artistic patriotism against this Northern art that led to the endeavour to bring back the past of Rome, and initiated that substitution of scholarship for experiment

which is the central principle of the Renaissance architecture by which Roman authority once again conquered the world.

Of the causes which produced the phenomena of Mediaeval Art, a large share is, as will he shown, to be assigned to Eastern forces acting on the West. A

o      o

thousand years of receptivity seems to have come to a close with the Renaissance.

Th«tGothic, indeed, stands out as exclusively a western style, but even this came as a short summer time, fulfilling a long growth from wide-spreading roots, nourished by the rivers of Eden. There is much more of the East in Gothic, in its structure and fibre, than is outwardly visible. To account for Gothic we have to account for its historic basis and for the whole atmosphere of mysticism, chivalry, and work-enthusiasm, with all the institutions, monastic, romantic, and social, which formed its environ­ment. Looking at the slow prepaiation for, and the rapid passing of, western gothic art, and considering the sudden and entire breakdown of its traditions and ideals, I am drawn to the conclusion that the causes which underlay this art are to be found ,n a long infiltration of the Oriental spirit to the point of saturation, and then the bursting out of the new, yet old, energy shaped to northern requirements.

I must not here bring forward particular instances to illustrate and fortify this hypothesis, but I may suggest that it will appear more probable when we survey mediaeval art as a whole, both historically and in its geographical distribution.*

*      On eastern influence in western art see Byz. Zeits. igoj and Ameri­can Jour, of ArchauLgy, i8y4 ami 1895.

8 DISRUPTION OF TRADITION

It is not generally realised in how large a degree the Persian, Egypto-Saraeenic, and Moorish forms are members of one common art with Gothic and developed side by side with it. Gothic art, however, as it pro­gressed broke away more and more from the body of ancient customs. The history of art between the Byzantine era and the present day, as can be seen with least con­fusion in the comparatively free arts of painting and sculpture, is the history of a transition from common tradition to indiyidualist realism. Architecture has fol­lowed the same course, although the issue in regard to it has been more obscured and blocked by many attempted revivals of old forms.

JSovfils ¹

TEMPLE OF BAALBEC. CEILING OF POKTICO (See p. 15)

Face p. 8

CHAPTER I

THE AGE OF CONSTANTINE: ROME AND THE EAST

The mighty Empire of Itome at the time when our inquiry begins was already showing signs of break i lg up into three main divisions—the East, where the empire was continued for more than a thousand years ; Italy, where the Pope once more built up a great centralised power; and the Western Provinces, over which flowed the Germanic invasions. Recent writers give a preponderating influence n the transformation of classic art into Christian, to such late Greek centres of culture as Alexandria, Antioch, and Ephesus, rather than to Rome. Dr. Strzygowski has presented the evidence for this view in a series of learned works.

Rome itself, long before the Edict of Milan in favour of Christianity in 313, had been subject to Eastern in­fluences ; ndeed, the removal of Constantine’s capital to Byzantium a few years later, in 330, can only have been the result of great causes, long in action, which showed that the true centre of the empire’s life was nearer to the Ea«t. There is a great difference between earlier and later Roman art, which ^:s probably to be accounted for by increasing Oriental influence. This is particularly marked

CHANGE IN ROME

in the Palace built directly after 300 at Spalato by Diocle­tian, which is distinctly Syrian. Even the colonnaded streets of Damascus and Gerash are repeated in this vast palace enclosure, and the architectural details resemble work at Baalbec and Palmyra.

The great monument which best marks the change of

Fig. 2. Early Christian tomb front.

style, the Pantheon, was built more than 150 years before this time by Hadrian,* and the interval is filled by some extremely interesting buildings, of which the so-called Temple of Minerva Mediea is a good example. This building is properly a Nytnpha?um, erected about 260. There is a valuable unpublished plan of it made about 1512 by Coner in his folio of original drawings now in the Soane Museum. The central chamber followed the most perfect type that can be devised ; the area being enlaiged, and, at the same time, the construction strengthened,

*      The vast Imperial Villa at Tivoli, recently well described in Gusman s fire volume, and whic h also dates from this titre, shows how free and masterly was late Roman construction.

by a series of domed recesscs. These rise only to the half height, abme which the thinner wall of the central chamlicr is supported by buttresses. The disposition of the lateral buildings given on the plan (.?«■ Fig. 3), which have now entirely disappeared, shows that the prin-

*^r4

Fig. 3. ** Temple of Minerva Medica," Rome, from an original drawing in the Soane Museum, made c. X510.

ciple of supporting a high central dome by lower vaults was fully understood. The walls of the interior were once covered with slabs of porphyry and marble, and its dome was encrusted with shell* and glass mosaic.* From

*      I find an interesting early vuw of this building about 1500 in the Italian engraving of LeJa by the Master I. B. in tbe British Museum.

12 BUILDING AND ARCHITECTURE

the same source is taken Fig. 4, a remarkable octagonal plan, of a large Roman bath at Baia-, the remains of which still exist.

In this later Roman school, building was carried to as high a point as it has ever reached. Construction was experimental, yet masterful, and all manner ot exquisite

Fig. 4. Late Roman building, from a drawing in the Soane Museum, made c. 1510.

materials l.ke coloured marbles, glass mosaic, and gilded bronze, were used in never equalled profusion, with line freedom of handling, and often with excellent, if some­what redundant, taste. Yet one thing it larked to make it that still nobier thing—a great school of architecture. The dements of sculpture ar.d painting were merely formal, and in no way epic; they were added to a building as adornments, and were not the very soul of its life. The

times in history when building, sculpture, painting, and other arts have been perfectly co-ordinated into a higher unit) have, indeed, been very few; but it we are to dis­tinguish between fine building and noble architecture thi»

O     o

organic unity must be the test.

In the Constantinian epoch there were two schools of “ decorative " art in Home—one. splendid, academical, ard, on its expressive side, formular; the other, the humbie art of an Eastern sect h^;dden in the catacombs—a li\ ing art for the dead. Not Dnly did the two schools respond to two classes of demand, but the artists must have belonged to entirely different camps. On the one side flhey were accurate, cultured, official; on the other, simple, and almof-t amateur, yet their work was pene­trated with ideas and full of emotion. The bringing of these elements together formed Constantinian art in Home.*

It is a pity that Roman buildings have been examined tinder the guidance of the text of Vitruvius by men who looked for “ Orders of Architecture ” rather than for li\ ing experiment in building. And a great advance towards a reasonable view of Roman art has been made by Choisy’s studies ot the principles of Homan construc­tion. We turther need above all a scientific study at Roman planning, abundant materials for which have now been collectcd.

Many of the links in the development and transforma­tion of ancient art must have been irrecoverably lost by the destruction of Eastern cities.

*      On thu Catacombs seo Wilpert’s fine bonk.

14

THE EAST

For instance, Maundrell, in i6qq, saw a remarkable building at Corus, near the borders of Mesopotamia, which he describes as “a noble old monument, six- square, whii'h open> at six windows above, and is covered with a pvramidical cupola lu each angle within is a pillar of the Corinthian order of one stone, and there is a fine archil rave all round just under the cupola, having

had heads of oxen carved on it, and it ends at top with a large- capital of thp Corinthian onler.”

Especially significant in regard to painting are the wax painted portraits from Egypt, some of which are shown in the vestibule of the National Gallery. They furnish the very facial types which are afterwards found in the catacombs and in the mosaics.

In Svria the transition from classic art to Christian can be traced through a large series of dated monuments, as is shown by the recently published results ot the American

«

Fig. 5. Early Christian Basilica, Sagalassos, in Asia Minor. After Strzygowski.

Fig. 6. Early Church at Dodona, with transverse triple apse.

Archaeological Expedition. And it appears that from first to last this Eastern ari was Hellenistic rather than Homan. I do not suppose that there were any structural or decorative methods which were not absorbed by the artists of the Empire; Roman art, like its culture generally, was syncretic. Some of the decorative pro­cesses largely used tr Christ’an art, such, for instance, as incrustation of wall surfaces with a veneer of precious marbles, seem especially to have been delighted in at the cap'tal. But the informing spirit of architecture, and the way of looking at ornament, w^ras very different in Rome from what it was in the East. The characteristics of Eastern art throughout are greater freedom in structure, and closer reference to nature with constant variety in ornamentation. We already have pure naturalism aimed at in the Assyrian reliefs. - The fine Hellenistic sarco­phagus from Sidou called “ Alexander’s ” has a most exquisite meander of vine carved on its frieze. In the series of monuments represented by the Golden Gate at Damascus, anti the ruins of Palmyra and Paalbec, besides the unfettered way in which the. so-called “ order ” is treated, the carved ornamentation shows a strong life, full of imagination, executed in a forceful way. At Baalbec the frieze is practically suppressed; it has become a band of carving lying flush with the outer member of the architrave, and under-carved so that the light falls through it as through a trellis. The “ palmette ” ornament of the. cyma is continually changing in pattern, and even the “ egg ard tongue ” moulding is made interesting from point to point by dunging patterns in the alternating spaces. (Compare Plate 2.)

16 ORIGIN OF CHURCH TYPE

In these, and still more markedly in several Hellenistic sarcophagi, is to be seen a new principle in regard to •sculptured ornament, a principle that Ix'comes typical in Byzantine carvings, whereby the sunk portion is not re­garded as a mere bac kground, butas an alternating t'ornn By this methocTsharply-defined shadows seem to be inlaid into the general shape of the member decorated. In the West the Palace of Diocletian at Spalato is certainly an offshoot of this school of art.

Even the Basilican church must have been developed outside of Rome. As early as 325, a* an inscription shows, was built the little church of Orleansville in Algeria. Strzygowski thinks that some of the many churches found in Asia Minor may date from pre-Constantinian days. (Fig. 5 is of uncertain date.) The church at Nicomedia, destroyed in the Diocletian persecution, must have been built before the end of the third century. A description of what was probably a church of the third century is given ir. a Syriac MS., the Tsstamentum Domini * Ard still earlier the vision of the Heavenly Temple in the Book of Revelation must be based on the form of edifices bailt by men.

The type of the primitive church was formed by the composition of many elements. The apsiaal presbytery with its altai is so clearly in direct correspondence with the rite there celebrated that it is unnecessary to look for any other origin. It re&erub'es the triclinia of private houses; an alternative derivation has been suggested from the little memorial srholcF built above the entrances to the catacombs in Home, som«* of which have tri-apsidal

*      Rev. Art ChrCt, 1^59, p. 515.

terminations, like the church shown in Fig. 6.° But it is to tie observed that memorial feasts were held in these buildings, and it is most probable that they were inde­pendently derived from the great apsidal dining-halls. This, therefore, furnishes some confirmation of the first theory, and in any case these little buildings are probably too local and too late to have influenced the first churches.

Certain traditions of temple-planning were also carried forward—notabk in the orientation of churches, which, like temples, are built on an cast to west axis, and the earlier churchcs had Ihtir great doors to the east like the temples, and ::i exact opposition to the later custom of having the doors to the west. The Atrium may also come from the forecourt of temples. It was natural when great churches were built for a large assemblage of people that, having to fulfil purposes analogous to those of the basilicas of justice, they should take over from them the colonnade and roof system as a current tradition of building. It is not that the church entered into the justice halls, but similar needs of covering large spaces brought about similar results. The word Basilica was in use for a church in Constantinian days, but it seems to have been applied to any form of church.

We wi.l now turn to the first Christian churches of Rome.

Constantine, it is said, at the suggestion of Bishop (Pope) Sylvester, bui't the basilica of St. Peter, over the tomb of the Apostle, whose body he placed in a

*      Churches of this form are not known in Rome. The finest are the White an.t Red Monasteries in Egypt, both of the fifth century.

i8

ST. PETER’S

chest of bronze.* Directly above it stood the porphyry columns of the altar ciborium, and he placed between the apse and the body of the church some beautiful columns carved with tendrils of vine, which he brought from Greece. The church was a vast structure, having five avenues between colonnades, crossed at the end by the transept, from the centre of which, behind the be autiful vine columns, opened the apsidal presbytery, raised high above a crypt, and approached by a flight of steps on either hand. Around the apse were the presbytery seats in raised banks, the Pontiff's throne being against the curved wall on the axis. Under the altar was the confcssto of St. Fetor,—the crypt which contained the tomb of the Apostle,—which was approached by a central flight of steps in front of the altar. Above the vine columns was an entablature which was enriched with plates of silver and supported candelabra. The nave was divided from the transept bv the “triumphal arch,’¹ which %vas entirely covered with a mosaic showing St. Peter presenting Constantine to Christ, to whom he was offerin'; a model of the church. Across the arch was another beam, the head of the arch being filled with lattice­work, against which were attached a cross and two gigantic keys. This beam corresponds to the Rood beam in later Western churches. Nearly under it stood the ainbo, in front of which, in the nave, a space was enclosed by low screens for the choir of the singers. The wails of the nave above the architraves supported by

*      As the lateral walls of the Basilica stand on old Roman founda­tions, that the \postle & bo iy should have been found th is con­veniently placed is nearly a topographical impossibility.

IN ROMP:       19

the colonnades were entirely painted over with histories from the Bible. On the north side, between the windows, were Prophets, and beneath, many pictures beginning with the animals entering the Ark. Opposite, to the south, the pictures were from the New Testament. The roof, of low pitch, showed its tie-beams and other timbers. In the eastern front of the church opened five entrances; the great central doors being adorned with silver, on which were figures of St. Peter and St. Paul. A forecourt, or atrium, was surrounded by colon­nades, in the midst of which was a fountain in the form of an enormous gilt bronze pine-cone throwing threads of water from multitudinous holes, and canopied over bj bronze lattice-work, on which perched beautiful bronze peacocks. The outer porches of the atrium were adorned with mosaic. The facade of the church, rising above the cloister colonnade, was also covered with mosaic, where three ranges of figures portrayed Christ between the Virgin and St. Peter, with the four symbolic beasts, then the Evangelists themselves, with their books, and below the twenty-four elders putting oft' their crowns. This facade, with its mosaic, is shown in an eleventh- century manuscript preserved at Eton. The great church was but one building of a group. On the south side rose two circular Imperial tomb chapels, and on the north side was the palace of the Popes— a castle surrounded with walls and strong towers.

The solemn beauty of St. Peter’s with its gable-mosaic shining in the morning sun as the people passed through the fountain court, and assembled for the early service in its dim, long-avenued interior, may hardly be imagined.

20 ST. PAOLO AND STA. SABINA

Of all these things only the pine-cone, two of the peacocks of the fountain, and several of the vine-columns which stood before the presbytery, remain to us. These last, according to one story, were said to have come from Solomon’s Temple, and they are figured in Raphael’s celebrated cartoon of the Beautiful Gate of the Temple. The pine-cone is antique, and bears the signature of P. Cmcius Salviu*, it has recently been shown that it was probably only placed in the “Para­dise” of St. Peter’s about iioo, but Strzygowski says that a pine-cone was the traditional form for Church fountains. Compare Fig. 7 from a Byzantine MS. The decorations of St. Peter’s were mostly later +han the structure, and were added from time to time through

the ages.

Fig. 7. Pine-cone fountain from a By-

iantme ms.      Constantine’s basilica of St. Paul’s out­

side the walls was quite a small church, the plan of which has been recovered by excavation. It was rebuilt from 386 as a large five-aisled basilica, facing in the other direction.

At St. John Lateran only the Baptistery seems to have been built by Constantino, and of this a portion remains.

We cannot stay to refer to any more of the basilican churches in Rome, save only to say that Sta. Sabina, built about 430, is probably the most complete and unharmed, and contains many early treasures in its mosaics, carved doors and marble incrustations. For

.i-. i: • ix

XXZ-L J, J

Fig. 8. Marbl>“ plating f.om rpindrils of arches in Sta. Sabina, Rome, from a drawing by Mr. A. Ciristis.

22

STA. CONSTANTIA

these last see Fig. 8; this method of plating surfaces with precious materials fitted in patterns was much used in both late Roman and Byzantine work, and it seems to have been a Roman gift to Christian art (PI. 3).

A few steps from the early basilica of Sta. Agnese outside the walls is the best preserved of the Con- stantinian churches, the circular building which it is said contained the tomb of Sta. Conitantia. A cential dome rises over a ring of arcades, the columns of which are coupled perpendicularly to the circumference. I give an early plan (Fig. 9) of this interesting building made by Coner about 1512. This plan however is wrong in show­ing sixteen divisions iit the interior instead of twelve. To the exterior it has a cornice of plastered brick with marble moaillions, and the walls were probably plastered.

The mosaics of the central dome ha\e been destroyed, but there was once a Baptism figured here. “ This fact and the discovery of circular walls beneath the middle of the rotunda have suggested that this mausoleum might, have served for a Baptistery.”* Now our own Bede says that Constantine built a basilica to the Holy Martyr Agnes at the request of his daughter, “and a Baptistery in the same place where his sister Constanh'a and her daughter were baptized.”

The vaults of the circular aisle are covered with most interesting fourth-century marble mosaics representing intertwined vines with “Putti” busy with the labours of the vintage. Around the lower part of the dome the mosaics represented a river in which cupids fished and

*      Marucchi, 1902.

played with water-fowl in a late classical taste, but on it, opposite the door, floated the Ship of the Church. Above this river rose a sort of pergola of conventional foliage set

Fig. 9. Plan of Sta. Constantia, Rome, from a drawing in the Soane Museum, made c. 1512.

in which were subjects from the old and new Laws. In the thick outer wall there is an altar recess opposite the door, and apsidal niches to the north and south. Before the altar recess a small domical compartment interrupts the con-

2 +

EARLY MOSAICS

tinuous vault of the aisle. It and the side apses wove adorned w'lh subjects in mosaic, and the two side ones still remain. In the small dome, Christ, the Apostles, and two women in white robes, were represented in one group, and opposite, the Lamb and the sheep in front of the Heavenly Jerusalem. In the semi dome, above the apse on the right, is represented Moses receiving the Old I <aw, while opposite, on the left, Christ gives the New Law to St. Peter, accompanied by St. Paul. The surfaces of the walis were richly encrusted with marble, the arches were plated with marble, and around the tambour of the dome ran a band of opus sectile, representing, by a luxtaposition of different marbles, a cornice. The mosaics ot the small

*      apses are so different in spirit from the rest that for long it was thought that they must be considerably later, possibly of the sixth century ; but there is now a general consensus that they art¹ contemporary with the rest. In the two apses is already found a mystic sentiment with a developed code of symbolism. Christ giving the Law stands on the mount above the four gushing streams, at His feet are the faithful sheep, and right and left appear Bethlehem and Jerusalem. He gives a roll inscribed, “dominus paoem dat.” In the other mosaic, God the Father is seated on an Orb, and the field is filled by great palm-trees. In the destroyed mosaic of the little cupola the two women clothed in white robes were the Churches of the Gentiles and of the Circumcision. In the magnifi­cent apse-mosaic of Sta. Pudentiana similar figures appear, and in Sta. Sabina (c. 430), two figures which stand on e’lher hand of a dedicatory inscription are named

ECCIXSIA FX GKXTFKUS aild ECCIESIA EX CIKCUMCISIONE.

or the time directly following the first age of church building there must be scores of ruins and foundations, the little church not long ago discovered at Silchester in the distant province of Britain being one. Fig. 10 is

□

Fig. 10. Early Christian Church      Fig. xi. Early Christian Church,

at Silchester.   Jataghan, Asia Minor.

its plan; Fig. 11 from Asia Minor may be compared with it.

All knowledge of Constantine’s churches in his new capital on the Bosphorus is lost, and those which were built by his direction over the holy sites in and about Jerusalem are little more than a memory {see p. 57).

His buildings at the Holy Sepulchre were erected in ten years from 326. They have suffered so much from violence and change that little of the original work

remains. The rock sepulchre, however, is still partly surrounded by an arcade and a wall which every one admits represents the Constantinian work, and this stands to the west of more recent buildings. The three niches in- the circular wall may be compared with those of Sta. Con- stantia above, and with St. Theodore, also in Rome. Although so eariy it seems to me that in all these cases

Fig. 12. Suggested plan of the Churches of the Holy Sepulchre, Jerusalem, a? built by Constantine.

the intention was to give something of the cross form to these circular buildings. Compare the cruciform nimbus of Fig, i. Eusebius says that Constantine (i) decorated the Holy Tomb as the head of all, with columns and ornaments. (2) Then came a large space with porticoes on three sides. (3) The side which faced the grotto, that is, the east side, was formed by the basilica, large and hi^h; the interior was encrusted with coloured marbles, the ceiling was car ved and gilded, and the roof was covered with lead. (4) Along all the length of the basilica were two colonnades on each side, the first rows, columns, and those behind, square pillars; three doors opened to the east. (5) Opposite the doors in the end of the basilica was the hemisphere, the head of all, w hich rose as high as

the roof ot‘ the church, and was surrounded by twelve columns, the number of the Apostles, the summits of w hich were ornamented with great bowls of silver offered by the Lmperor to his (rod. (6) Then, before the entrance of the Temple, was an atrium, surrounded by porticoes with a fore-gate against the public street.

A large body of commentary on the text (of which this is a summary) exists, the most recent contribution being an accurate survey of all the existing build­ings either above or below the surface, by Mommert; and criti­cisms by Strzygowski on the re- constmction proposed by the former. Mummert substantially follows De V ojriie in understanding

n      o

that practically one large building is meant, the open space being directly above the rock sepulchre.

His critic, however, separates the parts into a rotunda, an inter­mediate court, and a basilica, but

does not work the scheme out with any detail. Arculph. in the seventh century, as is well known, left a rough plan showing a similar arrangement; but it has been supposed that, as Constantine’s buildings had been more or less destroyed by the Persians in the meantime, this need not represent the original disposition. The account, hywever,

Fig. 13. The ChurcLts of the Holy S^pulchr". from the Madtba mosaic.

given of the original buildings by St. Silv ia clearly shows that the “ Resurrection ” (the Holy Sepulchre) was sepa­rated from the “ Great Church” by a court (see Fig. 12).

It has been assumed, I think by all writers, that Eusebius’s “ hemi-sphere ” was the apse of the Basilica, but it was pointed out to me by my friend, Harold Swainson, that the word “hemisphere” is used by the Silentiary for the dome of Sta. Sophia, Constantinople, and also by Agat'hias and Evagrius ; and it must be supposed that the same word here has the same meaning. Now, if we follow again the clauses of the description, it seems possible that Eusebius, having described the interior of the Basilica and reached the three eastern doors, turns back again to the “ head of all,” that is, the Rotunda of the Resurrection, where was, he says, this hemi-sphere. Moreover, it was surrounded by the twelve columns tearing silver bowls, “ offered by the Emperor to his God,” which might well be understood to form an inner enclosure to the Tomb itself; such an enclosure as was customary in circular churches. For instance, the central point of the Church of the Ascension was, says Arculph, surrounded by a circular bronze screen as high as a man, having a great lamp hanging over it. The silver bowls on the twelve columns mentioned above may very likely have been for lamps. St. Silvia, speaking of the services in the Anas- tasis, tells us that the Bishop withdrew “ within the rails” or “ within the chancels.^1- From the Breviary, it appears that the marble pillars and silver bowls were in the Basi­lica, and if this is accepted the evidence is best satisfied by supposing that the apse was covered by a dome, half of which rented on the apse wall, and the other half on

arches and piers, or it nnght be something like the Church at Spoleto, but the Breviary may copy Eusebius.

Strzygowski shows that the beautiful sculptured cornices of the south wall of the present buildings are Constantinian, and he believes that the wall which they adorn is also original. It is true that the cornices fit perfectly to the masonry—but so, apparently, do the Romanesque doors and windows, and the antiquity of the wall does not seem proved.

As to the entrance doors fac­ing the east, there does not seem to be any doubt; a rough representation of the buildings was not long ago found on a mosaic floor at Madeba (Fig.

13), which shows the three doors, a plain roof, and a rotunda appearing behind, fig. 14. The Tomb chamber

Some remnants of the eastern ^{111 ine Ro of thf Holy} .       ,       Sepulchre, from a fifth century

portico seem stih to exist. ivory at tue British Museum.

One of the best restorations which have been made i-> that given in the Quarterly Review for 1899. One point that Strzygowski seems to have over­looked in his plan⁵¹ is that the intermediate court must have been large enough to contain the supposed site of Golgotha, as we learn from St. Sib ia, and as Arculph shows. The original form of the central sepulchre proper a« adorned

*      See " Orient oder Rom ”

TRANSFORMATION

by Constantine is shown to us on several early ivories, probably the. best of which is one of the fifth century in the British Museum (see Fig. 14). It consisted of

a chambcr, with a dome abo\ e, following the tradition of such a tomb as that called Absalom’s at Jerusalem.

Of the life which animated the Church of the Holy Sepul­chre, the pilgrim, St. Sihia, gives a most lively and detailed account as she follows day by day the processions and services of an Easter week in the fifth century. “Every day before cock-crow all the doors of the Anastasis are opened, and from that hour to daybreak hymns and anttphons are sung.”

A great number of temples

*      ere transformed into churches. The Parthenon itself became a church and at Baal bee a fine basilica was built in the courtyard of the temple. The Pantheon was consecrated in the seventh century. Another interesting Roman example is the round temple of Romulus, built c. 312, which together with the adjoining templum .iacrae urhis. built in a.d. 78, became, c. 530, the church of SS. Cosmo and Damian- A

Fig. 15. Roman temples altered into the church of SS. Cosmo and Damian in the sixth century.

OK TKMPI.ES

3i

drawing by Coner in the Soane Museum best preserves the form of the church. A door was cut between the round and oblong temples, and the latter was sub divided by a wall bent into an apse which was pierced by three openings {see Fig. 15). A third remarkable church in Ttome, San Stefano Rotunda, is held by several writers to have been a Roman Macellum, or Market Hall. It has existed as a church since the fifth century. One of the noblest of churches in scale and form is San Lorenzo, Milan, of which the origin is sti 'l uncertain. Of recent writers Dehio and also Kraus consider it to have been a civic building, while Strzvgowski holds that it is an Ambrosian church. The church certainly stands in direct relation to the magnificent portico, and the plan resembles a hall in Hadrian’s villa. On the other hand, its plan is cruciform, and has a good deal of likeness to that of the great mosque at Adrianople—which balzenberg and Choisy take to have been an early church—and to the seventh century Armenian church of St. Gregory recently discovered at Etschmiadsin.*

Altogether the late Roman and Early Christian schools are of great importance, and in building especially lie very close to a theoretical central stem of architecture from which the more specialised schools have diverged. The freedom of late Roman building-art is hardly yet fully recognised: even the pointed arch was made use of.f

*      See Fig, 37.

t See *he Bulge of Severus, illustrated in Hogarth’* “ Levant." For -the latest accccnt of thj Holy Sepulchre sec the Jour. Royal Inst, of British Architects 1910. For Bethlehem see below, p. 57.

CHAPTER II

CONSTANTINOn E. RAVENNA, AND THE AGE OF JUSTINIAN

Nearly all the buildings erected in Constantinople during the time of transition to the perfected Bvzantine style of Justinian's day have been destroyed. It is clear, however, that the authority of the Roman style had been entirely abrogated, end that a way had been ope'ned up for free experiment once more. In some of the remarkable build­ings of Syria, for instance, stone, construction was reduced to the mere elements of square posts, lintels, arches, slabs, and the rest; all well devised and wrought, but entirely free from the dead hand in “ proportion ” and “ decoration.” This work, however, while germane to Byzantine work, is not properly to be classed as such. It is rather a separate school, which might as already said be called Ilellenesque , wnile the term Byzantine should be reserved for the style we shall endeavour to describe, the style which was developed to its highest point in Constantinople during the reign of Justinian, and to work directly derived irom that school.

Vast stores of recently acquired facts gathered from explorations in North Africa, where the remains of more

IV

&

RAVENNA. CAPITAL BEARING MONOGRAM OF THEODORIC (See p. 41)

Face p. 32

Fig. 16. Stone friezes of fourth or fifth century in the Cairo Museum, af*er Strzygowski. There are similar fragments in the British Museum.

C

EGYPTO-HELLENF.SQUE

than a hundred early churches have been found, and from

Asia Minor, Syria, and /-qjjnv.        Egypt, are hardly yet to be

.*a] i: '/Jjjlhh.•fegTseen in due perspective. For

*      *" ■* the decorative side of “ Hel- •'      lenesque” architecture im­

' port ant data have been publishe d by Strzygowski in *«‘r 4#'   his catalogue of Coptic

works in the Cairo Museum, ■ rm  ^and in his tract on Aachon.

(M   At Cairo there are several

' fragments of carved friezes

F.C.17. Stone Capital with palm-   _{of loral limestone in ft frce}.

branch carving, from Old Cairo, fifth     ⁵ century (?).

Byzantine style, which are probably not later than the fifth century (Fig. 16). A capital of the same material, found in old Cairo and purchased for the Berlin Museum (a simdar one is now in the British Museum), is of remarkable in­terest as being ob­viously allied in its decoration to the great capitals of

Fig. 18. Ivory panel in the Cairo Museum, Slightly re- torti}.

V

Sebak

' COXSTANTlNOl'LK. STA. SOPHIA. CAl’ITALS, ETC.

AND BYZANTINE ORIGINS

Santa Sophia itself. It was certainly of loral ■workman­ship, and it would be desirable to determine whether the type originated in Constantinople or in Egypt. As to this, it may bo noticed that the palm-foliage with which it is decorated is more closely related to such work as that shown in Fig. 16 than to any Constantinople work; and

Fig. 19. Diagram of Syrian arch form from Lhurch of St. Simeon, sixth ccntury.

the likelihood seems to be that this is an Egypto- Hellenesque type (Fig. 17 and Plate 5).

Alexandria was the great'school of, and mart for, ivory-carving ; and many of the decorative ideas developed there were easily distributed over Christendom. Fig. 18 is a slightly restored diagram of an ivory panel in the Cairo Museum which might pass for the representation of a marble from Constantinople or Ravenna. I give also in this place a diagram (Fig. 19) of the characteristic form of Sjrun Arch, taken from a photograph of St.

36 BYZANTINE CONSTRUCTION

Simeon's Church (sixth century). Arches of similar form are found in Egypt, sometimes of stone, as at the. White Monastery, and more frequently of brick, and it seems clear that this form was first developed in brick construction as an easy expedient, and only adopted in stone when the eye had become used to it. Altogether, the share of Egypt in the transformation of art was probably of great importance.*

In Fig. 20 is represented a fine mosaic pavement from Carthage, now in the British Museum, probably of the fourth or fifth century, and certainly Christian. It shows interlacing jets of water rising from chalice-shaped fountains; in the interspaces are peacocks, and in one place a partridge, both Christian symbols; the four streams from which stags drink, flowing from the sacred mount, fill another space. This should be compared with the mosaic from the Baptistery at Salona given by Garrucci, which is explained by the inscribed verse, “As the hart panteth after the water brooks,” &c.

In Constantinople itself, the construction for the most part was developed out of the use of brickwork walls and vaults, and marble masonry. The marble, a beautiful coarse white variety, was found near at hand 'n the island of Proconne-sus. The most characteristic constructive method is the concretion of brickwork. The bricks are thin “Roman tiles,” and the mortar forms about half of the mass. Marble is used for isolated monolithic columns, and for lintels and door-jambs. All is pure construction, for in no system has the functional structure, the bones

*      A goor! account of the two fine mid fifth century churches of the White and Monasteiies has been published bv Bock, 1901.

VI

6 RAVENNA. IMPOST-CAPITAL. SIXTH CENTURY

Fig. 20. Mosaic pavement from Carthage, in the British Museum, fifth century (?).

and muscle of a building, been more sufficient unto itself.

The chief factor of Byzantine building is domical vaulting, the domes or vaults being shells of brickwork which are homogeneous with the walls, wide-spreading rather than high, and covered on the outside with lead. The concentric type of plan naturally resulted from the use of the dome, the parts around the middle spaces being so disposed as to spread the weight of the central dome over a wide area, and gradually diminishing in height. This resulted in greater unity of construction than is found in any other highly developed buildings.

“Decora^fion ” was conceived of as the covering over, but not disguising, of this frame, with a continuous anil beautiful surface-skin obtained by the application of thin sheets of vari-eoloured marbles and of glittering mosaic.

In the interiors, where mosaic was used, it was carried continuously over the vaults and arches without any separating ribs, the re-entering and salient angles being rounded to take the tessera.

The exteriors of these churches were comparatively plain, save for the marble pillars and carved cornice of the atrium, but some of them had at least their western fronts covered with mosaic. Clavi^o, a Spanish ambassador, who visited Constantinople in 1400, describes the church of St. Mary of the Fountain as having its exterior “ail richly worked in gold, azure, and other colours.”

The column-capitals of Justinian's time have never been matched for beauty. New types were then in use, together with modified forms of older ones in great variety. The new capitals were made by reverting to first principles of

liAVKNNA. IMPOST-CA 1*1 TAL FllOM S. VITALE

masonry. If a cubical block of marble be placed on a round shaft- the diameter of which is less than a side of the square, and if now all the surplus material be cut away at, the hottom so that the large square above gradually changes and diminishes into the circle beneath, we get the broad form of the new “ Impost Capitals.” Over this general form was designed a network of evenly distributed, sharply serrated leafage, and the ground was deeply sunk, and in places entirely undercut, so that a veil of marble stood free of the background. (Plates 6-8.)

There were many varieties of the Impost Capital, which are found again and agai¹'.

Thus those of the great order of Sta. Sophia, ■which in some respects stand apart from all others, are adorned with what, for distinction, we maj call palm- branches. Exactly simi­lar foliage is found on capitals at Paren/o and on one from Pomposa at Ravenna. (Compare Fig. 17 and PI. 9.)

The variety which Ruskin named, from some at St. Mark’s, the “lily capital,” has been found in Constanti­nople and many other places. The finest example known is preser\ed in the Cairo Museum ;* it is w rought in the marble of Constantinople. At San Vitale, Ravenna, the whole ground story of the central area has capitals of this type. On the four sides of these capitals, in square panels, are

*      Fee Strzygowsli’s Copf Cat. for figure ar.l full list.

FlO. 21. Byzantine capita! ut sixth century, iiow 111 mosque of KTouan, Nortn Afr.La.

4°

BASKET CAPITALS

caned tree-!ike forms simplified almost to a fltur-de-lis; thp rest of the capital is occupied bv inteil&cing basket work. The whole is strangely beautiful, but the panels call for some explanation of origin and meaning. The figure is a ioliaged T cross, which at ihe same time lias some resemblance to the lotus. It seems probable, as Strzygowski

Fig. 12. B; zar.tinr basWf-t-capita’ found in Rome, from Piranesi.

suggests, that this type was of Egyptian origin. An example of this kind of capital has recently been found in the Mosque of Keroupn, not far from the ancient Carthage. Another found at the same place has the carved ornament arranged within a series of interlacing lozenges (Fig. 21). Similar capitals to these last are found at Sta. Sophia, Parenzo, Jerusalem, and other places. The “ bird and basket ” type of capital found Constantinople has its lower part carved with open interlacing bands like a

VIII

$ RAVENNA. IMPOST-CAPITAL FROM S. VITALE

Face p. 40

BYZANTINE CORINTHIAN ₄:

circular basket, and oil the rim of this four doves are perched which fill the angles under the abacus. I give a figure after Piranesi of a capital of this kind found in Home (Fig. 22). “ Byzantine-Corinthian ” capitals appear

f'iG. £3. Cap.tal from a church in Isauria, AMa Minor.

in a great variety of forms. Of these I show a beautifu example from a church in Isanria, Asia Minor (Fig. 23). Capitals at Parenzo and Ravenna are very similar in the much-recurved tips of the acanthus-leaves.

Still another type is the “ wind-blown acanthus," in which the leafage is twisted to the side instead of drooping. I give a fine example from Ravenna, which belonged ta

42

IMPOST BLOCKS

the basilica of Hercules, built by Theodoric, whose mono­gram it bears. (PI. 4,) The identity of the form and material of capitals found mi many places widely apart can only be accounted for by supposing that they were all wrought at one centre, and that centre must be Constantinople.

Byzantine capitals usually have impost-blocks above them, from which the arches .spring. An early example is to be found in the remnant of Galla Placidia’s church of St. John the Evangelist, Ravenna. Many origins have been suggested for this feature, but its practical utility has not been sufficiently noticed. Classical capitals which bore lintels were relieved of weight on the delicate project­ing parts by allowing the lintels to bear only above the columns, the rest of the tops of the capitals being slightly lowered. When, ir a Byzantine building, arches sprang from capitals the "mposts of which arches were as big as, or bigger than, the capitals, it was the best expedient to interpose a plain, weight-cany ing block, reduced below so as only to rest on the centre of the capital. Moreover, this fell in with the general tendency to “ stilt" arches, or even to give them a horseshoe form, which was developed in Syria and Asia Minor. The impost-block was particularly convenient where the wall above the capital was very thick and the arch impost was oblong in plan. (Plates 7 and 8.)

The earliest church still existing in Constantinople is the Basilica of St. John, built about the middle of the filth century. This is not vaulted, and, except for the freer character of the details in sculpture, is much like a Roman church of the same time. The details, however,

IX

Abdullah

_k CONSTANTINOPLE. STA. SOPHIA. THE GltliAT OKDEK OF THE INTEIUOK

show that, the Byzantine transformation was well advanced when the portico was built. Sts. Sergius and Bacchus, built by Justinian, about 527, is entirely vaulted, and has all the marks of the developed style. The domed central

Fig. 24. Diagram showing form 01 th*² dome of St. Sergius, Constantinople.

Fig. 25. Plaster rib on the same dome.

area of this church is an octagon standing w ithin a square which encloses an aisle around the octagon, to which the aisle opens between marble columns. At the four inter­mediate sides of the octagon these columns are not placed in straight lines, but are formed into exedras or apses. This is an extremely beautiful arrangement, enlarging upon the principle we have already seen used

44

ST. SERGIUS

■q the “Temple of Minerva Medica” in Rome, but here the dome, instead of being tarried by solid work, is entirely supported on open colonnades. The form of the dome is not properly described by Salzenberg or Choisy. It is not spherical nor set on regular penden- tives, but, each angle of the octagon being rounded into a niche, the dome springs in sixteen sides, the alternate ones over the angle niches being concave to the interior. On the inside, modelled plastered ribs follow the sixteen divisions and surround the eight arches. This is much disguised with Turkish painting, but is certainly Byzantine. The capitals of the columns, which are of great beauty, bear monograms of Justinian Basileus, and of Theodora (see Fig. 24 and Fig. 25).

The church of Sancta Sophia was begun in 532, and it was dedicated in 537. It is descrilied by two contemporary writers, Procopius, and Paulus the Court poet. In plan it is alone among churches (Fig. 26). It may be conceived as formed by dividing St. Sergius in two from north to south, and removing the two halves from one another by the distance of the width of the dome (now become two semi-domes), then, above the square void, raising a still higher dome supported right and left by ranges of arcades, as in a basi.ica. The dome is wide rather than high, and the sense of amplitude surpasses that offered bv any other building in the world. In buildings of the basilican type size is obtained by repetition of a unit bav, but here the vast church is but one chamber surrounded bv double tiers of aisles. The columns are of porphjry and verde an­tique, the carved capitals of white marble, the vaults were all encrusted with golden mosaics. The walls are sheeted

STA. SOPHIA 45

over with thin slabs of precious marbles, as the poet says,

“ fresh green as the sea, or emerald stone ; or, again, like blue cornflowers in grass, with, here and there, a drift of

₄6

STA SOPHIA

fallen snow; there is wealth of porphyry, too, powdered with bright stars.” The iconostasis was of silver and the altar of gold, under a silver canopy. The amlio, which stood forward, in the middle of the church, was of silver, ivory, and precious marbles.

These, of Course, have all disappeared, as also has the atrium, which enclosed a space in front of the western doors, with a fountain in the midst. Paulus, describing the opening ceremony after the repairs of 558, writes : “ At last the holy morn had come, and the great door groaned on its hinges, as the sun lit up the glories of the temple. And when the first gleam of rosy light leapt from arch to arch all the princes and people hymned their songs of praise, and it seemed as if the mighty arches were set in Heaven. Whoever raises his eyes to the beauteous firmament of the roof scarce dares to gaze on

©

its rounded expanse sprinkled with stars, but turns to the fresh green marble below; seeming, as it were, to see flower-bordered streams, or the deep peace of summer sea broken by the plashing oars of spray-girt ship.” Two interesting contributions to the study of Sta. Sophia have lately been made, by Antoniadi in a series of articles in Knowledge (1903), and by Preger in the Jh/zanthmche Zeitschrft (1901). The latter shows that the account the “ Anonymous ” gives of the church dates at latest from the tenth century. His description of the floor laid to symbolise the four Paradise streams, the Ambo, the Fountain of the Atrium, &c., must apply to the church as it was before the dome fell in the last quarter of the tenth century. Our own R. Diccto. c. 1180, gives a version of this text in his history.

While Sta. Sophia was being built, a second greai church, the Holy Apostles, was begun by Theodora in 536. From the description of Procopius it is well known that this was in the form of a cross covered by five domes.

Fig. 37. Approximate plan 01 tne church of the Holy Apostles, Constantinople.

The central dome, he says, was pierced with windows, the sanctuary being beneath this, at the middle point of the church. In 1896 there was discovered in a convent on Mount Athos a poem describing this church, written about 900, by Constantine of Rhodes. He first refers to the

commanding position of the cross-shaped church on the fourth hill of the city, and then tells us that the master first designed a square, around which were added four arms, each hsving a double storey of columns.

The¹ central dome stood above four square pillars, and four pillars, standing in squares repeated four times, supported the other four domes. There were also forty- eight columns to each storey, like double “ rows of bod\ guards.” Twelve, the number of the apostles, in cach ot the four limbs, enclosed three sides, outside which was an aisle running continuously around the church.

In the. interior, bands of brightly coloured marble sur­rounded the walls “ like a w reath.” The domes and arches and the upper part of the walls were covered with mosaic; in the centre was Christ, the Virgin, and the Apostles (possibly the Ascension, as in the St. Mark’s central dome); there were besides several other scenes from the life of Christ—the Annunciation, Nativity, and Coming of the Kings, the. Presentation in the Temple, Baptism, and Transfiguration—most of which also occur in St. Mark’s.

The description can be well explainrd by reference to the plan of St. Mark’s, which, tradition says, was derived from that of the Church of the Apostles.

The wall of the aisle surrounding the piers and columns which upheld the domes formed a strong outer support. There wao a narthex and an atri 1m. but an eastern apse is doubtful. (See Fig. 27 from the Byzardmische Zritschrrft*)

A Bvzaniine church usually stood apart in a close, sur­rounded by trees. It was entered through a cloistered

*      For th* ch’irch of S. Irene Rte \pp"ndix.

RITUAL ARRANGEMENT

forecourt, in the midst of which stood the phi ale, or fountain. Across the front of the church stretched the narthex, forming its vestibule. The apse, and usually a short square space in front of it, shut off from the body of the church by a screen, was the bema. Around the curved wall were banks of raised seats, the synthronon, in .the midst of which, against the wall, stood the patriarch’s throne. In front of the throne was the altar, protected by a canopy upheld on four columns. The bema was entered by the holy doors in the iconostasis. In front of this screen was the solea, a space set apart for the choir of singers. And on the middle axis rose the ainbo. with stairs to it both to the east and west.

Choisy has lately restated what was the opinion of R. dp Fleury—that the iconostasis of Sta. Sophia stretched across the chord of the great eastern hem icy el e; but this would give a screen of a hundred feet long, and the position is not- in accordance with the evidence still to be found in St. Sergius, nor with the text of the Silen- tiary’s poem. Still more lately the question has beeii re-examined by M. Antoniadi, whose view is that the hemicycle was not included in the bema.

In Sta. Sophia and other churches of the first rank, the interior walls below were entirely sheeted with marble, and, above, they and the dome were overlaid with mosaics on a gold ground. Lesser churches w'ere painted in sweet, gay colours. Painted ualls and vaults, as, for instance, those in the parecclesia of the Chora church i^-i Constantinople, are sometimes almost more beautiful than the mosaic churches. Paintings or mosaics alike cover the whole surface continuously. The former harmonise in fair, pearly

5°

MOSAICS

hues, but the more splendid mosaics fill the whole reservoir of «ir with a golden haze. Columns of polished porphvry and verde antique in such a setting take a value like jewels. Byzantine mosaics and wall paintings and, indeed, book-paintings as well, are all alike in the dignity and directness of method, and in the mastery of sweet and grave expression, which characterises them. In a tradi­tional art, as this was, each product has a substance and content to which the greatest individual artists cannot hope to attain. It is the result of organic processes of thought and work. A great artist might make a little advance, a poor artist might stand a little behind, but the work, as a whole, was customary, and was shaped and perfected by a life-experience whose span was centuries. No more fit illuminations for pages of masonry ran be conceived than these mosaic figures; in their simple serenity they seem a cloud of witnesses, angels and saints, upon a golden sky.

Outside Constantinople the finest groups of Byzantine churches are to be found in Salonica and Ravenna. At Salonica there are two basilicas, a domed square church, and a domed circular church. St. George, the round church, is 79 feet in diameter, with large niches round about taken out of the wall, which altogether is about 18 feet thick. The dome has a series of remarkable early mosaics of martyrs in attitudes of prayer, who stand before large architectural facades. The church and deco­rations seem to be of the fifth or even the fourth century. Many of the martyrs figured 'n the mosaics were soldier- saints, and it seems probable, as the mosaic, over the

X

RAVENNA. MOSAICS OF SANT' APPOLLINAKE NUOVO

SSswaoti'jL.

SALONICA AND RAVENNA 51

nppning to the ap.se is destroyed, that that contained St. George, and that the others were companion wairiors. At Ravenna we can very well trace the course of early

Fig. 28. Plan of St. Vitile, Ravenna.

Byzantine art. Here are a number of monuments which are almost exactly dated, and some of which have preserved the full splendour of their decorations. Of the first period we have the work executed for Galla Placidia, the daughter of Theodosius the Great and

52

GAIXA PLACIDIA

sister of Honorius. Iler tomb chapel remains nearly perfect to this day. It is a small cniciform building with a domical vault over the centre, roofed as a tower on the exterior. The four vaults of the arms of the cross spring at about five feet from the pavement. Above this height the vaults and walls are entirely covered with mosaic, and below, the walls are plated with marble. The cupola is built of earthenware amphora: set into each other and ^:mbedded in concrete. The mosaics have a blue ground on which, at the centre of the cupola, is a large cross set in a heaven of gold stars. Below are the four symbols of the Evangelists, and, on the walls, are figures. This building was completed before 450. Within the next eight or ten years the orthodox Baptistery was built and decorated by Bishop Neon. It is a tall octagonal structure, domed on the inside and encrusted with blue- ground mosaics, marbles and stucco reliefs.

The next period is that of Theedoric, to which belong the great basilica of Sant’ Apollinare Nuovo (r. 526), part of the octagonal church of San Vitale, the Mauso­leum of Theodoric (c. 520), the Baptistery of the Arinns (c. 526), and other less perfect buildings.

Sant’Apollinare Nuovo has an arcade of a dozen hays supported 011 cipollioo columns; above this arcade is a long procession, in mosaic, of vrhite-robed saints, from end to end. These were not wrought until between 556 and 569. On the left, at the east, the Virgin sits on a star embroidered throne surrounded by four archangels. To her come the three kings led by the star and bearing gifts, and they are followed by virgin saints, each one of whom bears a crown, and between each pair rises a palm-

XI

RAVENNA. MOSAIC PORTRAIT OF .JUSTINIAN

THEODORIC

53

tree. At the west end is a city with a port and ships; over its gate, from which the saints seem to issue, is written: “ civitas classts ” (the port of Ravenna). On the right-hand side of the nave, and opposite the Virgin, is Christ and four angels, and then a procession of saints led by St. Martin. These seem to come out from a repre­sentation of Ravenna itself at the west end. A magnifi­cent palace is here shown, and over the city gate appear the letters “ civitas raven . . ” These bands of mosaics are about ten feet hi^li. The idea of this procession of all saints reminds us of the Panathenaic frieze wrought a thousand years before around another temple by other Greek hands.* (Plate 10.)

The Mausoleum of Theodoric is a circular building on the outside, and covered by a low dome, or rather lid, of one stone about thirty-three feet in diameter. Upright projections like enormous handles are left on the uj p r side surrounding the dome, and on these are engraved the names of the Apostles. These curious features appear to be imitations of small abutting arches like those which sur­round the dome at Sta. Sophia, Salonica. The height of the building is divided into two stages- the lower one is the

O     O

larger, and was surrounded above by an arcaded passage. C'hoisy points out that it has stylistic affinities with Syrian.work, and Strzvgowski, calling to mind that several of the early bishops of Ravenna were Syrians, thinks that Ravenna in much derived from Sjria, especially from Antioch. The capping of a single stone with its onia»

*      These mosaic ; have been restored. Lar'je portions wpre missing wh»“n the plates given by (latrucci were drawn The two city subjects belong to TheoJoric’s time.

54

ST. VITALE

ment, which resembles goldsmiths’ work, and was doubtless decorated with gilding and colour, was possibly intended to suggest a crown.

San Vitale is very similar in its plan to Sts. Sergius aud Bacchus in Constantinople; but here the central space has eight exedras instead of four; that is to say, it has all octo foil form. It is usually said to have been built between 525 and 534; the mosaics are later, and it was not consecrated until 547. It is said that Ecclesius the bishop handed the building over to Julius Argentarius about 526, who finished and decorated it. The capitals of the choir bear the monogram of Julius, and some inscriptions have been found, one of which says he built, ornamented and dedicated the church, and another that he perfected it. The capitals of the body of the church have monograms, which have been explained in many ways, some of which are quite impossible. Strzygowski in a recent study of the subject says he can get no other result than neon Ei*Ls[copus], This is startling, as Neon ruled the See from 449 to 458. See monogram 2, Fig. 29; Garrucci gives 3 as the monogram of Neon from the Bap­tistery, and some others are here added for comparison. It is to be noted that some of the columns signed with mono­gram 3 come above those signed by Julius. Altogether the difficulties in accepting the reading Neon seem too great. The monogram may be read Petrus Episcopus as well as Neon. In the centre of the apse-mosaic, Christ is seated on an orb, beneath which spring the four rivers, which flow away through fields of lilies. On one side a white-robt-d arch­angel presents San Vitale, to whom Christ extends a crown ; on the other, Ecclesius, the bishop, is led up, and presents

TEA VEX XA. MOSAIC 1*0 It T1J AIT OF THEODORA

RAVENNA

55

a model of the church. Gn one wall is a group consisting of the Emperor Justinian and the Bishop Maximian, with attendant clergy and soldiers. On the other side is Theodora with her Court ladies; her headdress glitters with jewels. (Plates ii and 12.) In these mosaics mother-of-pearl is

Fig. ag. Monograms: (1) Thsooioric from Basilica of Hercules;

(2) Neon Eps (?) from S. Vitale; (3) Neon from Baptistery, see Garrucci; (4) Iohannec from S. Clemente, Rome; (5) Kuphraslus Eps. from “Parenzo; (6) Maximian Episcupus, kavenna; (7) anapeov (?), Ravenna.

used, and in the emperor’s and empress’s jowels are set real stones and pearls. The marble capitals and pierced screens are of finest Constantinople work. The soffits of the arches have patterns in modelled plaster. The mosaics of San Vitale, and the long processions of Sant’ Apollinar* Nuovo, are directly the work of Justinian, who repossessed himself of Ravenna in 539. The problems raised by

5⁶

PARKNZO

St. Vitale are of great interest in the history of Art. Ill IQ03 the foundat ions of an Atrium were found squaring with the Narlnex which stands obliquely to the church. It has also been recently shown that the vaults of the aisle of the Rotunda were built after 539.

Sant’ Apollinare in Classe, the other great basilica, was built in 534-538, after the death of Theodoric in 526. Here, also, are many beautiful mosaics. In regard to this basilica. R. de Fleury has brought forward a theory that the arcades at a late time have been lifted up bodily for some feet, an equal space being cut out of the wall above, the reason being to raise the floor out of danger of inundation.

At Parenzo there is another basilica of the same age; but, before turning to it, I would just mention the superb ivory bishop’s chair at Ravenna, which bears the monogram of Maximian. It was probably wrought in Alexandria, and is the finest existing example of ivory work. (PI. 13.)

Of Parenzo it is related that it was built from 539 to 543, and was founded with the goodw ill of the Emperor Justinian. Here the atrium is intact, and a baptistery is attached to the centre of its west side. The exterior of the west front of the church was covered with mosaics of saints adoring Christ, Who sat amid the seven candlesticks. In the interior there is a fine assortment of capitals of different types, and the ornamental plasterwork of the arches is almost identical with that of Ravenna; in fact, it seems likely that the work was entirely done by the same artists who worked at Ravenna. The apse has pre­served its hem‘cycle of seats, and its walls are covered with beautiful inlays of marble, porphyry, mother-of-pearl,

xii r

K A VENN A. IVOKY THIiONE. SIXTH CKXTUKY

BETHLEHEM

57

and iridescent shells. In the conch of the apse is a mosaic of the Virgin seated, on a background of gold flecked over with rose and azure clouds; on either hand is an angel, and on the left Euphrasius, the bishop, who holds a model of the church, and other figures.

Monograms of Euphrasius ap­pear on the capitals and in other parts of the building. Some mosaics of Christ and the Apostles on the front of the triumphal arch, probably of the ninth century, have lately been discovered.

Justinian seems to have been the greatest builder who ever lived. He did not,lin.e Augus­tus or Nero, merely adorn a city, but. his entire ejwpire.

An important monument in the East, of which the date has been much disputed, may here be spoken of. This, the Church of the Nativity at Bethlehem, is from its asso­ciations and the influence it

must have exercised, one of the most interesting of the world. It is a rive-aisled basilica, crossed by a transept proper, the east, north, and south arms all being termi­nated by similar apses. An excellent description of il &> it appeared in 1484 is given by Felix Fabri. The seventy

Fig. 30. The Uasf.ica at Beth­lehem, with details of the pillars at the crossing-

58

CHURCH OF

precious columns of the interior and the marble slabs uning the walls were polished as brightly as a mirror On Hie capitals rested beams of wood, above which the walls were adorned ivith mosaic, with figures from the Old Testament and corresponding figures from the New. “The whole church is either cased with marble or mosaic.”

The roof is of wood covered with lead. The church is 160 feet long inside, and under the crossing is the famous cave in the rock. It is known from Eusebius that Constantine built a church over this chamber. Eutychius, writing in the tenth century, says that this church, being small, was destroyed and built in a better fashion by Justinian. This account is accompanied by some apparently legendary matter. Justinian, it is said, was dissatisfied by the way his agent had carried out his commands, and hail him executed. Procopius, in his history of the works of Justinian, only says that the emperor restored the wall of Bethlehem and the church of the Abbot Joannes in the same place.

Fergusson says that “ the choir with its three apses does not seem to be part of the original airangement, but to have been added by Justinian.” De Vogue, however, is clear as to its being a work built “ in one jet,” and con­cludes that the account of Eutychius is to be set aside, and that the basilica is an original work of Constantine. R. de Fleury is of the same opinion.* As to the present church being one work I entirely agree; and I now believe it to be Constantine’s. It is certainly not like

•      Of recent writers K-aus holds it to bo Constantinian ; En'ari that the nave is <.f the sixth century, Dehio that the nave and east end are of diflerent dates; V. !e Due L>eems to have he'.d that the whole was a »ixth centary work. (Sec this English volume published in lyio.)

THE NATIVITY

59

Justinian’s work in Constantinople, and many stylistic arguments could bo urged in favour of both views. But on weighing them I feel that while it cannot lie Justinian’s work, it must be Con­stantine’s. From internal evidence alone, I should be inclined to assign it to an intermediate period, after St.

Jerome had made Bethlehem a famous monastic centre. We might expect that Constantine’s building would ha\e been a circular martyrion, not a large congregational or monastic basilica; the front faces the west, not the east.

The plan is a pronounced cross, and the abaci of the capitals bear crosses within wreaths.

Clermont Ganneau has recently shown that the western facade had a mosaic of the Nativity dating from the time of Justinian. It is said that the Per­sians under Chosroes, recognising their own national costumes in those of the three kings, forbore to destroy the church. The inner walls were decor­ated with mosaics until a late period.

Inside the gable wall was a great Tree of Jesse; around the choir the New Testament story; and in the nave symbolic buildings standing for the seven great councils. Most of these mosaics were of the twelfth century. A part of the atrium and three entrance doors were also in existence until lately ; now only the central door remains.

Fig. 31. Byzantine candlestick in the Cairo Museum.

6o    ST. CATHERINE SINAI

The convent of St. Catherine at Sinui is an undoubted example of a monastery of the time of Justinian. It is a fortified stronghold surrounded by a square of high thick walls. Within, the church is set down obliquely and the interspaces are filled with cells, chapels, stores. The church is basilican, with apse and side chambers. The columns of the interior bear fine capitals, the pavement is covered with marbles, the roof is painted and gilt, and the apse is covered with mosaic. Around the apse is figured the Transfiguration—Christ, Moses and Elias, and below Peter, James and John. Round about in medallions are the Apostles arid the Prophets. Upon the vault is the Burning Bush and Mount Sinai, with two figures of Moses, putting off his shoes on one side and on the other carrying the tables of the I^aw. Above are two angels and two heads in medallions, which the monks say represent Justinian and Theodora. On the right of the apse is the white marble tomb of St. Catherine, ornamented with reliefs, one of which represents two fawns adoring. Behind and below the level of the apse is the (more anrit nt ?) chapel of the Burning Bush. The chief giory of the church is the enamelled door between the narthex and the nave. This door is S feet wide and about. 14 feet high, and the enamels, are mounted in two panels surrounded by delicately ornamented bronze work. This door is probably the work of the tenth or eleventh century: the mosaics also may be later than the church. Ebers* found on some timbers which had belonged to the roof three Greek inscriptions to the following effect: “ For the pre­servation of our pious King Justinian the Great.” “To

*      “Durch Gos.hen zum Sinai.”

ST. SIMEON STYLITES 61

the memory of our defunct Queen Theodora.” “Lord, whom we adore in this place, save Thy servant Stephen, and the architect of this monastery, Ailisios, also Nonnas; have pitv on them.”

This fortified monastery as a whole follow s the type of the earlier White and Red Monasteries on the Nile, built about 450.

One of the most extraordinary buildings of the sixth

1

F:g. 3a. Diagram of lower storey of the Pa'aoc at Mashita inMoib. The whole is e'aborately carved wth foliage birds, and boasts. The portion here shown has recently been re-erected in the Berlin Museum.

century is the church of St. Simeon Stylites in Syria. In the centre of a fine octagonal court rose ihe saint’s pillar, and from the four cardinal sides opened as many complete basilican churches, while the intermediate sides of the octagon were occupied by semicircular exedrsr.

We must spare a page just to mention the subject of Byzantine palaces. These, it seems, were, as typical in their traditional arrangements as the churches. The plans of the Palatine palaces have been recovered, and we have a full record of Diocletian’s palace at Spalato. In the East, the wonderful building discovered by Tristram at

6 2   BYZANTINE PALACES

Mashita, in Moab, was in a fair state of preservation. This last Fergusson assigned to Chosroes II. (598-628), and Perrot and Chipiez agree that the “ orname ntation certainly bears the mark of that date.’’* I cannot accept its bang Persian ; it seems rather to be semi-Byzantiae work of the age of Justinian or even slightly later. The plan follows the Western type, having a striking resemblance to Spalato. Moreover, Dr. Merrell has shown the untenability of the historic assumption. To account for the Byzantine character it ha> been said that it might have been built by Greek artists for the Persian conqueror, and we have a record that the palace at Ctesiphon, built by Chosroes I. (53^I_579) ^{was 80} built, but in artistic character there is no resemblance between these two buildings. Comparison surely makes it plain that the lovely Ma-.hita work, which lias affinities even with Baalbec and Palmyra in the style of the decorations, must be more Byzantine. Fig. 32 is a diagram of the lines of the lower part of the facade ; this framework is covered and filled with carved adornment. The type of the ornamentation, animals and birds in an elaborate thicket of foliage, is like that of the Ravenna ivory thione. Compart' the great triapsidal triclinium of the Palace of Constantinople and also the triclinium of I^o 111 the Vatican with the great hall here. The plan of the Roman palace at Tre\ es given by Dehio may also be compared with Mashita. Recent excavations have shown that the so-called palace of Theodoric at Ravenna is really a gate­way or outhing portion, and probably not earlier than the eighth century.

Dieulafoi and Gayet also accept this date. S<.e Appendix B.

DAMASCUS. CENTRAL PART OF GREAT MOSQUE

jFace p, 62

CHAPTER III

LATER BYZANTINE, AND ROMANESQUE ORIGINS

In the West, as we shall show in this chapter, Byzan­tine influence was widely distributed, and led up to a new epoch of art which may be said to have appeared about the year iooo.

After the campaign of Belisarius and the establishment of the exarchate at Ravenna, Rome was hardly less Byzantine than Ravenna itself. A large Greek colony was settled there, and this was much increased during the iconoclastic persecution after 725, when Sta. Mar'a in Cosmedin, the Church of the Scuola Greca, was in conse­quence rebuilt, and a large number of Greek monasteries were erected. Recent excavations at S. Sabas, Sta. Maria Antiqua, and S. Clemente, have brought to light much new evidence in regard to this period, when it seems that the arts in Rome had lallen into the hands of the Greeks. S. Sabas was the church of a Greek monastery. Here the lower part of the apse, work of the sixth or seventh cen­tury, was painted with a row of saints having inscriptions both in Greek and Latin. At Sta. Maria Antiqua all the inscriptions were also bilingual, and the paintings are obviously Greek. In the lower church of S. Clemente a !arge series of paintings was found, probably of the eighth

64    BYZANTINE GUII.DS

century, which, although less typically Greek, are e\ idently an outcome of the Byzantine school.

All the mosaics of this middle period, such as those in the Chapel of the Lateran Baptistery, must be Greek. Cattaneo, speaking of the mosaics of S. Frassede, says: “ Like those which were executed in or out of Rome from the sixth to the ninth century, they are, according to my judgment, of Greek work manship. This opinion agrees with what Leone Ostiensi says, namely, that when Desiderio, Abbot of Monte Cassino, founded in 1066 a kind of school of mosaic-work under the direction of Greek masters, be revived this art in Italy after it had been five hundred years extinct.” Ifinciani figures the brick stamp of Pope John VII. (705-707), the letters of which are in Greek, Ii*JANN. The South of Italy during the eighth, ninth, and tenth centuries berame almost entirely Greek. In the North, Venice and Ravenna were equally Byzantine during this period. Rivoira gives a monogram found sculptured on the round lower ot S. Apollinare Nuovo, Ravenna, which he would read as that of Bishop Johannes (850-878), but it is clearly in Greek, as shown by the delta and the termination in OV, and Strzygowski reads it ANAPEOV. {See Fig. 29.*)

Constantinople forms a broa4 bridge between Bonnn antiquity and the Middle Age, and there all artistic traditions were preserved and handed on. Only in Constantinople is it certain that there is continuity

*      Tbe dates of the Ravenna towers are undecided ; some hold that they are of the sixth, otsers of th* eighth century; the earlier date is,

I think, more probable for at least one of them.

BYZANTINE GUILDS    65

between the Rowan Collegi and Med inaval Guilds. Other Guilds may have survived in the West, but common features between those of Constantinople and those of Italv and France, at a later time, seem to point to direct trans­mission. Leo the Wise, son of Basil I., under whom the arts greatly revived in Constantinople, made a new codifi­cation of the laws, including those relating to merchandise and craftsmanshin. From these it appears that the Cor­porations of (-onstantinople in the ninth century had for Grand Master the prefect of the town, who was the inter­mediary between them and the Government; and the edict of 1,00 relating to these corporations bears the name of “ The Book of the Prefect.”

The crafts occupied fixed quarters in the city, and all products had to be sold ^;n open market, at a standard price; the corporation usually bought materials in block, which it distributed among the members of its College; but in the regulations referring to the Building Crafts— joiners, plasterers, marble-workers, locksmiths, painters, and all “ artisans who undertake works ”—we find that it was customary for the employer to furnish materials and for the craftsmen to engage to do the work. The cor­porations are named in the following order: notaries, goldsmiths, exchangers, merchants of silken goods, Syrian merchants, merchants of raw silk, silk spinners, makers of silken goods, linendrapers, perfumers, chandlers, soap- makers, spicers, salters, butchers, pork merchants, fish­mongers, bilkers, innkeepers, cattle brokers, and, last, all those who undertake any kind of work as joiners, plasterers, &c. The customs here made known to us are extraordinarily like Western Guild regulations.

66 DECLINE AND REVIVAL

Byzantine art in Constantinople .speedily declined after the age of Justinian, and the most beautiful buildings of the next epoch are those built for the Mohammedan conquerors of Syria and Egypt by Greek masters. The Dome of the Bock at Jerusalem, and the Aksa Mosque trere built by Abd-al-Malik at the end of the seventh century. It has been -.aid that the latter is Justinian's Church of the \ irgin altered to a new purpose, but it seems more likely that the church was on an entirely different site—on Mount Sion—and that the fine capitals in the Mosque were wrought for their present position. The Mosque of Damascus, built about 705, was, of a'l these Byzanto-Arabic works, the most beautiful, having a vast arcaded courtyard which was patterned with mosaics all around above the arches. (Plate 14.) An agreement between the Caliph Wa)id aud the Emperor provided that the. latter should supply fsefym (mosaic) to adorn the new mosque which he was building. The exterior of the Dome of the Rock was also covered with similar mosaics. The mosque of Amr at Cairo was rebuilt in 711 in a form which it still preserves, although it has been added to. Arab art is probably largely of Coptic origin.

The history of later Byzantine art following the age of Justinian has never been fully set out. A second marked period is found ^:n the work of the eleventh century, which represents a revh al under the Basils, and the beginning of which probably coincided with the restoration of orthodoxy in 843. It has lately been argued that the basilican Church of St. Demetrius in Salonica was rebuilt in the seventh century, but in any case it follows the tradition of sixth-century work. Hie church now the Kalenders

PATTERNED WALLS     67

Mosque at Constantinople, probably belongs to the inter­mediate period. The similar small cruciform church of Protaton, Mount Athos, is dated c. 950. The later style is more Oriental and not so universal as the earlier work. Elements seem to have been absorbed by it from Persia and Armenia, and some of the later carvings have become semi-barbarous, consisting of beasts tearing one another and of birds of prey—an Eastern savagery parallel to the I jp in bardic.

The eastern wars and the great iconoclastic dispute broke the tradition of the Hellenesque Byzantine style. When there came a revival ip the arts the style is so changed as to call for a distinct name—Secondary Byzan­tine may serve our purpose, but I believe that Armenian Byzantine would express the facts. Kondakov, w ho has care­fully examined the iconography and ornamental arts of the two periods, says that the later miniatures, mosaics and enamels are deeply affected by Oriental influences. “ At the end of the tenth century the Bvzantine empire has lost its true Greek national tradition. 'Hie government, commerce and industry have been invaded by Oriental and barbarous elements; the throne and the army have become the prey of Armenians and Slavs. In art the sculptured panels of Georgia, and the gates of the churches of Armenia decorated with arabesques offer direct corre­spondences with Byzantine works. The Christian Orient and Constantinople reformed the architecture in the same sense. Hence the picturesque narrow corridors, tall tambours and barbarous ornament.”

The later buildings are for the most part small, the domes are raised high on drums and partake of the

68    LATER CHURCHES

character of central circular towers; the walls are of stone, or their exterior surfaces are much ornamented with patterns formed in the brickwork. Of this class of surface-work the most beautiful example is the palace on the western walls of Constantinople, sometimes called the Palace of Belisarius, but which was probably built by Constantine Porphvrogenitus. One of the most, complete Byzantine churches ’n existence, St. Luke in Phocis, a description of which has been recently published bv Messrs. Schultz and Barnsley, well represents the later tvpe of churches; it was built early in the eleventh century.

As types of these late buildings I give small plans of the church of the Monastery of Daphne at Athens (Fig. 33), and of the church on the island of Chios (Fig. 34). Daphne almost exactly resembles the churches of St. Nicodemus at Athens and St Luke in Phocis; all were built in the first half of the eleventh century. The plan of the Chios church is also practically the same, cxcept that it is without the lateral aisles. The mosaics of this church are dated 1042-56.*

The fine church of the Apostles at Salonica with its high domes and walls built in bricks laid in patterns must be fully as late, and not as Texier dates it of the seventh century.

The Church at Skripou, which also follows the plan- tvpe of Daphne, is of special interest, as we find its vaulting executed with diagonal ribs.

Messrs. Schultz and Barnsley have given a full account cf the very perfect mosaic-scheme of St. Luke's, Phocis.

*      Another modification of the same type and plan is fuund in a church near Athens, where the d >me rises ab ive an hexagonal space, two points of which touch the north and south tvalls.

AND MOSAIC SCHEMES      69

Strzygowski has described those of Chios, and Didron and Brookhaus have given the schemes of the Athos churches. Of these Vatopedi was founded in 972, and the mosaics belong to the first half of the eleventh century. Millet has devoted a volume to the beautiful mosaics of Daphne.

Fig. 33. Plan of the Monastic Fig. 34. Plan of the Church on the

Church of Daphne, near Athens.     lcUtnd of Ghioi, eleventh century.

The only mosaic-scheme of which we know anything at Santa Sophia, Constantinople, belongs to this later time. At the centre of the dome was a colossal figure of Christ, the Pantokrator ; in the pendentives are still four immense cherubim; on the walls to the right and left were depicted prophets, great saints of the Eastern Church,

and probably Apostles; on the conch of the east apse the Virgin with the Holy Child was seated on a throne; on the vault immediately over the altar were the Arch­angels Michael and Gabriel; and at the crown of the vault between them was the Veronica; on the great eastern arch was figured the Throne prepared for the Second

Fig. 35. Church of tlie A[ astles, at Salonica, after Texier.

Coming of Christ, and at the springing of the arch, St. John the Baptist, and the Virgin; the great western arch had at the Crown the Virgin, and figures of Sts. Peter and Paul at the springing; over the entrance door was the Majesty between medallions of the Virgin and a winged figure of St. John the Forerunner, and at Christ’s feet an Emperor; in one of the cupolas of the galleries was represented the Pentecost, the tw^relve Apostles in a circle receiving the tongues of fire from the Holy Spirit

STA. SOPHIA SALONICA 71

in the midst, in the west gallery were subjects from the Lite of Christ.

One of the finest existing dome-mosaics is that of Santa Sophia, Stdonica, which has at the centre Christ seated on a rainbow within a circle borne by two flying angels. Below, round about, are the twelve Apostles, and the Virgin accompanied by two angels, all standing on rocky ground with a tree separating each figure from the next. The mosaics were described in 1849 as “ still quite fresh with the exception of a large Virgin and Child slightly disfigured.” This subject wa» in the apse, which I find described a few years later as ha\ ing a figure on a gold ground, “ I should say a Virgin and Child, but thoroughly defaced.” Around the Be 111 a Arch was an inscription referring to the building of the Temple of Jerusalem. On the side walls was an inscription gi ving the names of Constantine and of Irenius, Bishop. Around the dome, was another inscription giving the first figures of a date, the rest being unfortunately destroyed ; this date has been interpreted as having been 490, or again, 645. but must be later.*

This Church is mentioned certainly in a document of 685 695, but I cannot think that the mosaics go back so far as any of these dates. We have seen that the Ascension was figured on the dome of the Apostles Church, when described about 900, but it may then have been just completed. The scheme as found at Salonica exactly coincides with the directions for representing the Ascension, given in the painter’s manual, written at. a later date, and resembles the central dome of St. Mark’s (c. xioo).

* See Byz, Z. its, 1X95, p. 432.

72

TRANSVERSE APSES

Compare also an ivory panel, apparently of the tenth century, figured by Schlumberger.* Altogether I cannot think that these mosaics were earlier than the tenth century.+

Several fine floors of marble inlaid with meandering bands of mosaic which were executed in the tenth and eleventh centuries, still exist in Greek churches. From this method of “parcel-mosaic” sprang the so-called Cosmati work of Rome. Such work if found there would at once be accepted as Cosmati work of the thirteenth century. (See Plate 15O

It was this late Byzantine style acting on the West by many channels, bj the migration of its ai'tists, by the dissemination of ivories, MSS., bronzes, gold-work, tex­tiles, and enamels, which gave the artistic impetus which led up to Romanesque art. The West, of course, con- tr^;buted the ability and readiness to absorb and transform these influences.

At the time we are considering a chureh-plan is found in many places, as at Salonira, on Mount Athos, and in Armenia, which has apses projecting north and south of the central area as well as to the east. (See plan, Fig. 36, of St. Elias, Salonica, c. 1012.) We shall see farther on how this plan became a favourite one in western Roman­esque architecture.

*      "I'n Emcereur Bys:.” p. 453. This, and "l'Epop^e Byz by the same author, contain a large buJy of illustrations of tenth to twelfth cent’iry Byzantine Art.

t Sine*; writing the above, I have seen the tract of E. G. RtJin giving photographs of the mosaics an3 inscription, he assigns them to the eleventh or twelfth century. The Virgin is a very beautiful figure, much like that at Torcello. For the last word on the inscription stv J. Kurth in Alh.n. Mittk. xxii. 1897.

COSMATI WOllK

ARMENIAN CHURCHES

In the tenth century, probably the most original forms in the art of building were in use in Armenia. The remarkable churches of the deserted walled city of Ani are built of finely wrought stone in a style partly Byzan tine, partly Persian, and with certain features which are curiously like Romanesque work.

Wall arcades are largely used, the roofs are steeper than in Greek work, and a tower and cone take the place of the central dome; arches are pointed. A good ac­count of this architecture has latelv been given by Mr. Lynch.*

I had written so far before I had seen of the discovery of the extremely important link in the church of St. Gregory the Illu­minator at Etschmiadsin, built

in 640-661 by the Patriarch _{pjG ?6} p_Un of the church of Nerses HI. This shows that St. Elias, Salonika, €, 1012. the favourite Armen) m plan of

the form of a lobed cross or quatrefoil dates from an early time. The central area of this church was a quatrefoil surrounded by an aisle circular to the outside. Four strong pillars at the points of the quatre­foil once bore a dome. The presbytery occupied the eastern lobe of the cross, and this alone was surrounded b\ a closed wall; the other lobes were set round bv columns, all having basket capitals and mono­grams of Nerses. The great piers had attached three­

*      “Artaema: Travels and Studies.”

quarter columns, and the aisle wall was decorated by small attached pillars, which evidently formed part of a continuous wall-arcade like that of the apse of Ani. This and the three-quarter columns of the great piers are

Fig. 37. Plan of the church of St. Gregory, Etschmiadsin, Armenia, c. 650.

strangely “ Romanesque ” features to find at so early a time. ( See Fig. 37.)

The lobed cross plan is again repeated in a more marked form in the probably equally ancient plan of the patriarchal church of Etschmiadsin. Here the four great piers stand within a square area from which, in the centre of each wall, opens an apse—four in all. {See Fig. 38.)

One of the most remarkable of the churches noticed by Mr. Lynch is that of Akhtamar, described as unique in his experience. It is built of squared reddish sandstone, on the apsed cruciform plan, 48.6 X 38 feet inside, with a sixteen-sided tower over the crossing, capped with a stone

&

Fig. 38. Plan 01 the Cath*d>a'i of Ktschmiadsin, Armenia.

cone, or rather many-sided pyramid. It is “ a work of the first quarter of the tenth century.” The exterior walls at the half height are adorned w ith a series of relief sculptures of Bible stories and other subjects—the Serpent tempting Eve, Adam and Eve on either side of the tree, and in one place a king presenting a model of the church to an ecclesiastic. The roofs, and this is general in these Armenian churches, are covered with stone slabs, evidently

bedded solid on the vaults, the inclined joints being covered with half rolls of stone. The walls are built in very finely jointed ashlar of big stones.

I have seen photographs of Eslick Vank church, Tor- toom, ■which clearly belongs to the same school. It is said to have been built by Gugol in the reign of

Ardaneses II. of Georgia between 923 and 927. It is a fine stone-built cruciform structure, with a central tile- covered cone over a high drum. The exterior has a good deal of sculpture, and in the interior is a large sculptured group, of Christ in the centre with hand upraised in blessing, 011 the left the Virgin, on the right St. John, and, beyond, two other figures with square nimbuses, a king and ecclesiastic, each carrying a similar model ot the church,

I have aUo seen photographs of the noble Convent

POINTED ARCHES        77

Church of Gelati, near Koutais in the Caucasus. This Is. built on a cross plan with one great apse to the east and two smaller ones on each side of it opposite the ends of the aisles; the aisles extend ,0 the face of the transept;

at the centre is a tall circular tower with conical roof, Brosset gives a useful plan of this fine church, but the beauty of these monuments cannot be imagined from his poor diagrams. I give a slight sketch (Fig. 39) from a photograph of a small church in the Caucasus, which would not at all surprise us if found in the West. Fig. 40

78

MOUNT A.THOS

shows the hijrh cones and stone roofs characteristic of many of these Armenian churches.

Another beautifully built stone church is the ruined cathedral of Koutais, the finest of Georgian monuments, bu'lt c. 1003 ; the fapade has tall recessed pointed arches.

Ani Cathedral, built about 1010, is especially remark­able in having the dome upborne on pointed arches built in several recessed orders rising from piers also membered. The exterior is surrounded by a single storey of wall arches, while the apse within has a deeply recessed wall arcade of small scale, exactly like such arcades in the west. This in Texier’s plan, in Mr. Lynch’s photograph, and Brosset’s diagram of the interior, seems strangely western. Compare also an interior given in Strzvgowski's Klein Asien. Other of these An^; buildings are built in a Persian style; one called by Mr. Lynch the Church of the Apostles has a large porch with domes .supported on diagonal arches. These Armenian churches are built ol very fine squared masonry, the character of which seems to be derived from the Syrian school of building. The greater part of Armenian architecture is probably an outcome of an admixture of Hellenesque and Persian influences. In the Persian Palace of Ctesiphon and in the remarkable building at Rabbath-Ammon are found wall arcades decoratively applied just as in the Armenian churches. The second-named building indeed must, 1 should think, have been built by an Armenian master.

When we compare with the Armenian churches a late stone-built church in the West, the little cathedral of Athens with its dome on a high drum at the intersection of fu’ir roofs, and its profusion of senr barbaiio carvings,

it is impossible not to recognise that the church is almost Armenian.

The step to the brick churches is easily made, and it seems likely that the apsidal-transept plans were derived from the typical Armenian plan.

Strzygowski has pointed out that the new influence probably made room for itself under Leo the Armenian,

813-20. Of six churches on Mount Athos, the plans of which were noted by Dr. Covel about 1670, four, ncluding the Catholicon of Vatopedi, had three equal apses pointing East, North, and South.

He describes the church of Vatopedi as ha\ing a cupola standing on four pillars of ophite and as having been once all covered wi^fh mosaic, “ there is yet in the inner Narthcx the An­nunciation admirably done." Before fig. 41. Diagram plan

the entrance to this Narthex hung a ^{of tbe chur}chof v 'top. di, , .       Mount Athos, with mono­

rich embroidered ante-port given by grams of Andronicus.

Andronicus-Palaeologus, and show ing

his monograms. “ The outward gates are of brass, and

have the Salutation engraved on them.” * Fig. 41 is a

diagram from Covel’s sketch of this church, which was

built from 972. A second church of the same form on

Mount Athos is that of Iviron, founded by George the

*      British Museum MS. Covel also saw the largest church on Patinos, which he says was built by Alexius Comnenus, as was shown by an inscription. Fur Mt. Athos see Brockhius and Kondakov.

Iberian about 976. This George, who was the true founder of the Athos communities and began the Laura in 963, may have brought this plan directly from Ar­menia, or it may hav e come by way of Constantinople.

As the Byzantine style in its own proper habitat changed in response to ideas derived from Armenia and the East, so there is reason to think that the art of the West generally, by absorbing fresh stimulus from Eastern sources, gradually changed its complexion from the conservative art which looked to Rome to the progressive art which developed through Romanesque to Gothic. These de­velopments were derived directly from the East—above all through the ports of the Mediterranean, the sea which through historic time has distributed culture. The chief points which concern us are the origins of vaulted and cruciform churches having central towers: that is, the typical Romanesque church. There are indeed many in­dications that tall and slight wall arcades like those of the ground storey of Pisa Cathedral: towers roofed in gabled sections like some German examples; and even perhaps the typical Norman notched and zig-zag ornaments, are all derived from oriental sources.

The term Romanesque has been generally accepted for the art which, in many forms in Italy and the West, fills up the space between the decline of the first Christian art and the emerge nce of Gothic. The earlier forms of these schools might better be described as Byzantesque, or Proto-Romanesque. More specifically Romanesque must be understood to mean a Northern school of art character­ised by movement rather than by adherence to tradition, and tending towards the development of Gothic. In its

ASIA MINOR

81

highest state it is represented by large cruciform churches having a cupola or tower over the crossing, with a circular apse arid radiating chapels , such a church was completely vaulted, and al last these vaults were supported by libs. Dr. Strzygowski, in a series of books, has recently been studying the continuous action of Eastern art upon the West. He does not think that this influence was so much passed on through Rome as by way of Ravenna, Milan, and Marseilles. He finds the origin of Romanesque archi­tecture in Asia Minor, Armenia and Syria, where at an early time churches are found which have many of the characteristics of Western work of the eleventh and twelfth centuries. lie classes these Eastern churches into (i) Basilica^; (2) Octa<roris; (3) Domed Basilicas; (4) Domed Cross-churches. He shows that some of the first were, in the East, entirely covered with stone vaults.

At Binbirkilisse, in Asia Minor, there is a large early basilica, the central vault of which was supported by chamfered transverse ribs. Another church has the aisles covered by a series of ramping transverse barrel vaults inclined upwards to the nave arcade. Gayet gives the plans of more than one Coptic church with barrel vaulted naves. More than half a century ago Lepsius described and gave the plan of a church which he found far up the Nile at Barkal by Dongola, which from the plan seems to have been entirely vaulted, and possibly to have had a cupola over the ccntre. (See Fig. 42.) He describes it as built as Y gh as the windows of well-hewn sandstone, and above that of unburnt- bricks covered with plaster The whole was surrounded by a great court containing numerous convent cells. See also the plan of the Norm

82    VAULTED BASILICAS

African basilica of Kef, Fig. 43, as restored by C. Diehl. The church of S. Foca, P110I0, Syracuse, again was an entirely vaulted basilica of early date (see Byz. Zeit. 1899). Such vaulted basilicas seem to have been common in tljp

Fig. 42. Christian Basilica, from Barkal near Dongola, Egypt, probably entirely vaulted, of sixth century (?)

Fig. 43. Christian Basilica of sixth century at Kef, North Africa, partly vaulted, from Diehl's ¹⁴ Justinian.*

Fast. St. Irene, Constantinople, is a modification. The tenth-century (?) writer known as the “Anonymous,” describing S. Sophia, says it was at first of basilican form, and that Theodosius covered it with cylindrical vaults. This at least shows that the idea was fam.I jr to those in Constantinople.

DOMED CROSS CHURCHES 83

The octagonal and circular churches, where a central dome home on pillars was surrounded by a vaulted aisle, easily passed into the cross type by accentuating the four cardinal sides, as was the ease at Nyssa in the fourth century.

The domed basilica is a very interesting approximation to the cross-chu-vch, but in it the arcades are continued across what would be the transepts in a fully developed cross-church. If Hohault de Fleury’s restoration is to be trusted, the fifth- orsixth-contury church at Spoleto approximates to this class.

Of domed cross-churches Strzygowsk. gives, as an instance, the ruins of a fine church at Philippi, more tully described in the Byzantinische Zeitscbift for 1902.

I give a Pi an of a small cross-church or baptistery at Dioclea in Montenegro, probably of the sixth century. The plan of a very striking church, St. Titus,

Gortyna, Crete, which has been shown to me by Mr. Fyfe, is markedly cruciform, the arms being terminated by apses opening N. and S., the great apse being of the transverse triple arrangement shown ^:n Fig. 6.

Much has been said as to a late development of cruciform churches, but I cannot find any arguments which show more than the fact that the exact late conditions are only found at a late time. Mr. Micklethwaite, in his most able tract tracing the development of the plan of the Saxon church, seems to make the cross-tvpe come about as the result of a series of accidental approxi-

Fig. 44. Plan of chrn ch at Dkx Ira Montenegro, c. sixth century.

84    CROSS CHURCHES

mations made wholly in England; and Prof. Baldwin Brown, following the same lead, writes that the “ early Greek cross-plan is not in the direct line of development which ultimately produced the Latin cross-plan of later mediaeval days. . . . The early Greek cross-plans in­volved the feature of a central pavilion. . . . This is not the same thing as the, later central tower over the inter­section of the arms of a Latin cross.” *

I think that a truer view of the ca.se would he arrived at in some such general statement as this :—There have been in the main two great and persistent types of church plan, and the final type of large Western churches was reached by combining the two. The first is the Congre- tional, basilican, or ship type of plan, with its long columned aisles; the second is the martyrion, circular, or cross type, usually entirely vaulted. Both were in use from the age of Constantine, but in certain parts of the East, as in Asia Minor, North Syria, and Armenia, the latter type was particularly favoured, and ultimately almost prevailed over the basilican type. In the seventh, eighth, and ninth centuries, churches of the eastern cross-type were frequently built in the West, and finally the aisled cross church of Romanesque type was reached by bringing the two types together. An interesting sidelight on this trans­formation is given bv the adoption and development in the West of the plan in which the transepts have apses opening north and south like Fig. 36. The Western, vaulted, Romanesque church, with its central lantern tower, is a translation of the Eastern central-cupola type into the terms of the basilic an church.

*      "Art in Early England," vol. ii. p. 285

NYSSA

85

We surely might have been safely certain that from the time when the cross-symbol was well developed churches of that form would be specially delighted in, and of this there is overwhelming proof. St. Gregory of Nyssa, in the latter half of the fourth century, describing his proposed church, says: The ground plan is a cross ; that is, it is composed of four spaces which are connected, as one generally tinds in the cross-shaped plan, by a circle set into the cross.

I have called the figure a circle because it runs round like a ring, but. its form is given by eight anyrles. Four sides of ©

the octagon which lie diametrically opposite to one another connect the middle space through

arches with the four FlG. 45. Church at Nyssa, fourth cen- contiguous spaces. The tury, from S. Gregory’s descr.ptiun.

other four sides of the

octagon do not open in the same way into l.ke spaces, but a half circle embraces each of them, which at the top rests od the arch in a shell-like rounding. Thus there are eighi arches in all, by means of which the squares and half circles which lie opposite to one another respectively, are put into connection with the middle spaee. Within the square-shaped spaces which lie opposite one another are to be placed the same number of columns [as in the octagon] ; they also will carry arches, and are indeed of the

86    CRUCIFORM FONTS

same construction as those of the middle centre- space. Over these last eight arches (of the octagon) the eight-cornered space will be raised four ells higher to receive the windows placed above them ; above this is a conical roof. The breadth of each of the four- cornered spaces will be eight ells, while the length should be half as much. So also the half-circular niches show eight ells. The walls are three feet thick outside these measures. The structure is to be vaulted and of brick and stone; the columns channelled and with capitals of the Corinthian style; the doorjambs marble, with a frieze of reliefs above.

I have condensed this interesting account, the earliest precise description of a Christian church, from Dr. Strzygowski’s rendering,* and ghe a diagram which should be compared with the slightly different figure in his Klein Amen.

At about this same time St. Ambrose erected at Milan the Church of the Apostles ad mod urn crwis. Later, Procopius tells us how the Church of the Apostles in Con stantinople was set out in cross-fo^m. And Arculph has left the plan of the church at Jacob’s Well, a perfect cross. Of the Abbey Church ot Ramsay in England, built 968-974, it is said that it was built after the pattern of a cross with a tower in the midst sustained by arches over the projecting arms. At the west end was a smaller tower.

It may here be remarked that the early symbolic use of the cross-forir. is found very frequently 111 fonts, in Con­stantinople, in the Greek Islands, in Armenia, and in Palestine. As an example of a large church of the

*      D^r Dim zu Aachen. Bin Ptuttst.

cross-tvpe, the Church of the Nati vity at Bethlehem may be cited, and that it was recognised as such is proved by the fact that it is described by the traveller Willibald in the eighth century as “ a glnr-ous building in the form of a cross.”

In Sicily there are the ruins of several small cross­churches, which are plainly Byzantine work. One of the most perfect is S. Croce Camerina, Bagno Si Mare, of which the stone-built central dome is still standing. (Fig. 47, a.) At Roccella di Squillace in Calabria is a most remarkable large ruined cross­church, which has the appearance of being a fully developed Roman­esque work, especially in its plan.

It has been assigned to the sixth

or seventh century, and comparison fig. 46. Cruciform Font from with other brick churches in Asia      Pa:estine.

Minor given bj Strzygowski makes

this less difficult to believe. On the other hand, it has some resemblances to Murano, built about 1000, and is much what we might expect to find in a Norman church built by Calabrian Greeks.

Caviglia takes the view that it was built as early as 550-600, and says it was suppressed in 11x3- Bertaux, however, in his fine I'ltalie Mer'idionale, 1904, points out its resemblance to Monreale, and considers it to be of the twelfth century—a view with which I must express agree­ment. This church was about 220 feet long, built of thin ^v bricks and the choir vaulted, the roof above being a terrace homogeneous with the vault. (See Fig. 47, b.)

R. de Fleury gives the plan of the foundations of the Church of St. Andrew at Rimini, which was of the sixth or seventh century, and cruciform. (Fig. 48.)

B     A

Fig. 47. A, Plan of S. Croce Catnerina; B, S. Maria di Squillace; C, Its Crypt.

Strzygowski sums up the characteristics df the Syrian and Asia Minor schools as being—the use of vaulting instead of wood roofs, the absence of an atrium, a west fa9ade having a porch between two towers, the use of piers as supports instead of columns, the addition of a

COUNTER-APSED PLANS 8c,

square compartment before the ap.se, and the bringing of windows together in groups of two or three. He suggests that these details, as well as the general type of the church, went to form Western Romanesque. He also shows that the churches having an apse at the west end as well as at the east are first found in Egypt and Syria,* and he suggests that even the radiating chapels of Romanesque churches were ultimately derived from the niches round about the apse in Egyptian convent churches, St.

Martin’s at Tours, built 472, being the link.

It is certain then that in the East basilican churches were vaulted from an early time; and that churches were also as a continuous tradition planned in the form of the Cross. In these buildings piers frequently take the place of columns, and these piers were in Armenia recessed into a series of orders. Here also a cenrral tower takes the place of a low dome. In these facts we may find the origins of Romanesque Architecture. From the seventh to the ninth centuries there were built in the West a series of “ Central Churches ” which have the closest resemblance to

*      The Cathedral of Canterbury as first made known to us by description was of this double ended type. It has been assumed th«t the W. apse of this church was built by Augustine, but this is not certain. The Carlovin^ian church of St. Gall was planned in this form from the first. There was a second double-ended church in Lnglacd at Abingdon, both may have followed the Cariuvingian t) pe.

HieREQvGscrrsN

PAEHN NOCf MTT^S

Fig. 48. Pi-in ofdestroj ed church of St. Andrea Rimini.

₉o WESTERN VAULTED CHURCHES

Eastern martvrion churches. Already at the end of the seventh century Wilfrid of York began at Hexham a church in the form of a round tower with four arms. In Milan, St. Satyrus, 879, and near Orleans, St. Gormigny des Pres, c. 800, nearly repeat the Armenian plan ot Fig. 38. Charlemagne’s church at Aachen falls into the same class, and our King Alfred at Athelney builf a church in the form of a cross with ends round«d, i.e. a quatrefoil, We may easily find a reason for the form of Wilfrid’s church in the presence in England of the great Archbishop of Canterbury, Theodore of Tarsus, 669 -690, but another cause besides the general influence of the East on the West for this form of church appearing in the West is to be found in the fact that Syrians and Armenians were pre-eminent as stonemasons.

In the transition to Romanesque in the West, account will have to be taken of the place of Noith Africa in archaeological geography and of the probability that a stream of influence flowing from Alexandria by way of Carthage to the shores of Spain tempered the conditions in the West by a sort of Gulf-Stream of art. In the many churches of North Africa recently explored by Gsell and others, many of the details resemble Romanesque work, and at least five churches have been found of the counter apsed form followed at St. Gall.

From ft photo by Mr. //. /Heardt>

110KG0 SAX DOXXIXO (See p. 114)

CHAPTER IV

ROMANESQUE AUT IN ITALY

Whenever in Italy we see a school of architecture in course of formation, we shall find that it has its roots in a fresh Byzantine impulse.

It has long been thought that the origins of Italian

©        o    o

Romanesque are to be found in a supposed Lombuidic school; but more recent examination has shown that the Lombardic monuments are themselves of compara­tively late date.

When the long strife of Goths, Latins, and the armies of the Eastern Empire, had exhausted Italy, the Lombards conquered the Northern Provinces about 568, set up theii capital at Pavia, and became the chief power in the land. The Exarchate, Rome, and the far South, how ever, remained outside of their direct sphere of influence. The Lombards were one of the Germanic peoples who, about this time, formed new nations within the confines of the Western Empire. They acknowledged relationship with the Saxons, Franks, Lotharingians, Bavarians, Suabians and Burgundians. When, later, Charlemagne subjected them to his empire, it involved only a change of dynasty, not of people. The significant facts in art during this era are—

the continuation of the early sehool in Rome, modified by influences reaching it from the Eastern capital; the waning of early Byzantine art in the city of the exarch ; and the slowly permeating element of barbarism which resulted from the Germanic conquest.

The Lombards must at first have taken over the tradi­tions of the land, and there is no evidence for anything like a distinct form of art in Lombardy until after the direct rale of the Lombard kings had passed away. Lombardic art is rather to be understood as a geographical than a dynastic distinction; and some of the most charac­teristic works of “Lombard" architecture were built as late as the twelfth century.

The general style from the sixth to the eleventh centuries Cattaneo has called Italo-Byzantine, and he has rightly denied the existence of any specific Lombard school during this time, except so far as it shows itself in bar­barism. He has also pointed out that the first active and indigenous school to arise had its centre at Venice. It was, indeed, in origin strictly Byzantine, but in Venice it found such a congenial soil that it soon took root, and bore even finer fruit than at the same time in its original home.

Cattaneo, who knew every sculptured stone in Venice, and had the most penetrating insight for their classifica­tion, sorted out several as having belonged to St. Mark’s Church as rebuilt in 976, and in these are to be seen the clear evidences of the new growth. In Torcello Cathedral, rebuilt in 1008, we have the most perfect and assured example of this Venetian Byzantine style. The marble capitals of the nave aie magnificent. Ruskin, who at least

TORCELLO

93

wai a supreme j udge of beauty, says that they are amongst the best he had ever seen as examples of perfectly calcu­lated effect from every touch of the chisel on the snowy marble. Torcello is altogether a noble church. In the apse is one of the most striking mosaics in existence, being a single figure of the Virgin, habited in blue, on a gold field; while at the west end, in opposition to her stately calm, is displayed the tragedy of the Last Judgment.

It w ill be interesting to condense the description Beckford gave of it as it was in 1780 :—Beyond the altar appears a semi-circular nichc vvi^h seats like the gradines of a miniature amphitheatre. Above rise the forms of the Apostles in red, blue, green, and black mosaic, and in the midst is a marble chair. The font which stands by the entrance has figures of horned imps clinging around its sides. The windows are closed wi'h shutters of marble.

The existing Church of St. Mark was begun about 1045, and consecrated in 1094, but there are preserved within it many fragments from an earlier church, besides the great collection of Byzantine marbles brought from all parts or the East. There is evidence that the early church was a small basilica, but it was rebuilt as a Greek cross. This is set out with a three-aisled body crossed by a three- aisled transept. The three piers about each angle of the crossing are large and square, forming together great masses which support the domes, while the other bays in the nave and transepts have ancient marble columns. The four arms, as well as the crossing, are covered by domes. Eastward the two aisles and the central span are termi­nated by apses. The walls of these apses are about ten feet thick, and large niches are cut, as it were, from the

94    ST. MARK’S

mass—three in the middle apse and five in each lateral one.

Justinian’s celebrated Church of the Holy Apostles at Constantinople was, as we have seen, built in the form of a cross and had five domes. It is generally acknowledged

Fig. 49. Part plan of St. Mark’s, Venice, showing apses.

that St. Mark's follows the scheme of this church. It may be that even the niched apse was present in the prototype, for some early churches in Egypt and North Africa have this characteristic. Butler, describing the Church of St. John at Antinoe, attributed by legend to St. Helena, says that churches so ascribed “are always marked by a particular form of haikal (bema); witness the Red and White Monasteries, the church at Arment, and many others; . . . a deep apsidal haikal.

VENICE  ₉₅

with recesses all around it, and columns close against the wall.” A basilica, at Kef, North Africa, supposed to be of the sixth century, has a similar apse, the dome of which follows the. scalloped form of the plan. Certain northern apses of the twelfth century* such as Terouanne and Dommartin, probably derive from St. Mark’s. At St. Mark's there have been many additions to the eleventh-century church ; the western narthex and the high leaded cupolas rising above the dome are amongst them. This church is a treasury of antique columns of porphyry, fine marble, and alabaster, as well as capitals and sculptured slabs, collected wherever they could be found, and dedicated to it as jewels to a shrine. Many of the capitals are from the time of Justinian ; some of them are signed with his mono­gram, and others have Basileus,

in monogram. These marbles, and the incrustation of the whole interior with mosaic figures and subjects on a golden ground, are its special glories. The sub­jects of the mosaics on the three domes of the central axis are, to the Ea->t the Pan toe ra tor surrounded by Prophets ; in the centre the Ascension; and to the West the Descent of the Holy Spirit. The mosaics were begun about 1100. The effect is well described bv James Howell (1651)—“ The inner part from the middle to the highest part thereof glistereth with gold, and the concavity of the vaults is enriched with divers goodly anti

₉S    MURANO

ancient pictures which do present unto the spectator by their grave and venerable aspect, a kind of awe intermingled with piety and religion ; that which is from the gilding down to the pavement is well compassed ami joined together with goodly tables of marble. The pavement is marble engraven with divers figures. In sum, there is uo place in the whole church but is either decked with

Fig. £i. Sections of marble moulding, from St. Mark's, Venice.

marble, gold, or precious stones.” Fig. 51 shows the type of mouldings—door jambs, and a cornice—found in late Byzantine churches in which it is easy to see the germs of Romanesque and even Gothic mouldings. These are from St. Mark’s.

Before leaving the Venetian School, Mur&nu must just be mentioned. The church here was begun in 998, and the fine mosaic pavement is dated 1140. The plan is generally basilican, but it has a transept. Its chief features have been beautifully illustrated in the “ Stones

of Venice ”; but it has now been greatly ruined by restora­tion. Compare the well known triangular decoration of the east end of tlii.s church with the comice of Fig. 35. It is still more like work at S.M. Pannnakaristos 111 Con­stantinople. Murano, Torcello and St. Mark’s are Greek churches on Italian soil. A legend as to the Byzantine architects of St. Mark’s has been printed by PL Muntz.

The next schools to take on a distinctive character were those of Florence and Pi.sa. San Miniato was founded in 1013, and is almost certainly the most advanced church of its date in Italy. It is commonly said that there was a great outburst of energy in architecture after the dreaded year 1000 was overpast, and this seems to be borne out by the facts. A careful catalogue of the dates at which the churches ir. the cathedral quarter of Florence were founded, or are first heard of, shows that one—San Lorenzo was founded by St. Ambrose in 393; one—San Giovanni (the Baptistery), c. 670 (?); one—Santa Reparata, 724 (?); in the ninth centurj there were two; in the tenth, eight; in the eleventh, seventeen ; in the twelfth, fourteen ; in the thirteenth, six. Moreover, in the eleventh century Florence was re-walled.

Fiesole Cathedral represents in some degree the primitive Tuscan Romanesque. It was begun in 1028, and largely restored in 1206, while the campanile was built in 1213 by Master Michele. It is a small stone-built basilica, with a raised tribune over a crypt. In comparison, San Miniato seems to mark a new departure. It is a basilica of nine bays, but every third bay is marked by a pier formed of four semi-shafts, making a quatrefoil on plan. One semi-shaft of each pier rises higher on the wall than

₉8

SAN MINIATO

the rest, and together with the corresponding one opposite supports an arch which spans the nave. In line with these, other smaller arches cross the aisles. The spaces between the arches are covered with an open king-post roof, the timbers being painted with bright colours in patterns. The choir is raised high above a crypt, and the apse open? under an arch similar to the others. The walls and faces

Fig. 52. A, Marble patterns from wall lining:, in the interior of San Miniito, Florence ; <?nd B, St. Demetrius, Salonica.

of the arches are ca.sed in marble, black lines forming simple patterns 011 a white ground. The western front is also encrusted w?th marble, it is later than the rest. The windows at the east end are filled with thin trans­lucent sheets of marble. It is a noble church, almost entirely free from the barbaric element in Lombard buildings. The marble windows and linings show the B\ zantine influence. (Plate 17.)

A

B

xvir

San Giovann>, the celebrated baptistery of Florence is railed by Villani and other early writers the Duomo, but from its close association with the. church of Santa Reparata, which occupied the site of the present cathedral, it would appear that it was always more, strictly the cathedral baptistery. San Giovanni and Santa Reparata are, after San Lorenzo, the oldest foundations in the city, but their exact date is uncertain, and they may have been contemporary. Santa Reparata had its west front some twenty-five or thirty feet nearer to the baptistery than that of the present cathedral. It was a basilican church with a detached campanile. “ Santa Reparata took its title of ‘ Pieve¹ through its union with the basilica of San Giovanni, and not from having contained the baptismal font. The bishops used Santa Reparata for the most solemn functions, and it and San Giovanni were considered as one sole rathedral. As says Rorghini, * In Santa Reparata was placed a distinctive seat for the bishop, built of marble, stable and firm.’”*

It is to be observed that the baptistery stands exactly opposite the west door of the cathedral, its own door being to the east and its altar to the west. We find a similar disposition at Pisa, and earlier still at Parenzo, where the baptistery, like the church, is entered from the atrium, but on the opposite side of the court. The space between Santa Reparata and San Giovanni was doubtless at first an enclosed atrium; it was a burial-place up to the thirteenth century.

According to the legend given by Villani, the Baptistery

*      A. Cocchi, *' Le Chicse di Firenze," 1903. On S. Giovanni, see A. Nardini 1902.

bid been a Temple of Mars. Roman fragments which have been found re-used in its construction may account for this story. San Gipvann is authentically mentioned in a document of 897. Writers have held that originally it had only one door where is now the apse, and that thr altar was where the principal door now is. But with all probability there were always three doors, and from 1177 the two porphyry columns, the gift of the Pisans, have stood at the east door. Excavations made in 1895 discovered the old semi-circular apse, which, “without doubt, was the original, supplanted by the present one.” * (PI. 18.)

The mosaics of the tribune were the work of Era Jacopo in 1225. This fria- was one of the twelve original followers of St. Francis. The great mosaic of the octagonal vault, a colossal figure of Christ, twenty-five feet high, was wrought, by Andrea Tafi and his master Apollonio. In the apse was a throne for the bishop, and the altar under a tabernacle adorned with sculptures by Andrea Pisano. In 1329 Piero di Jacopo was ordered to go to Pisa “ to see the bronze doors w hich are in the said city," and to draw them, and to go on to Venice to searrh out a master to work new bronze doors for the baptistery. It seems that Piero did not succeed, for in 1330 the doors were allotted to Master Andrea di Ser Ugolino da Pisa, who employed Piero and others, and had the wax models completed in two and » half months. They were cast, in Venice in 1332, but buckled, and had to be straightened by Andrea. This interesting account goes to show that before this time Venice was the chief centre for such bronzev. ork. As to the date of the baptistery in its existing form it is

*      Cocch,.

most reasonable to conclude that the long series of deco­rative works, ending with Andrea’s bronze doors, were the finishings of a rebuilding undertaken not verj long before we first hear of works there. As soon as these were com­pleted Santa Reparata was itself rebuilt as the Cathedral of Santa Maria del Fiore, and “ Giotto’s Tower” super­seded the old campanile. If the Baptistery was the first work undertaken in a scheme for rebuilding the whole cathedral group this would account for its reputation sur­passing that of the old cathedral proper. Its earlier decorations are in many respects similar to those of San Miniato, and, as a baptistery, it falls iiito companionship with those at Pisa and Parma. At Pisa we find granite columns like those at San Giovanni. Altogether it is probable that it was rebuilt in the eleventh century.

This Florence Baptistery is one of the most individual and perfect buildings in the world—a great octagonal chamber about ninety feet across, w ith a domical vault. The external roof is homogeneous with the vault, and it and the walls are entirely sheeted with plates of marble. The wall-mass is lessened in the interior by large recesses on the ground-floor and by galleries above. At the spring­ing of the vault the stone roof slopes against it like a continuous buttress. The floor is covered by a pavement of white, dark green, and sombre red marbles, arranged in small pieces, to form chevroned and rippling patterns which suggest running water, and were doubtless an allu-

Oo   O     f

sion to the four rivers of Paradise, which are mentioned in the service for blessing the baptismal waters. In one place is a large square inlaid with the signs of the zodiac and patternwork. (Plate T9.)

Villani, speaking of this, says: “ We find from ancient records that the figure of the sun made in mosaic, which says, f f.xgiro torte sol ciclos et rotor igne,’ was done by astronomy, anil, when the sun enters into the sign of Cancer, at mid-day it shines on that place through the opening above, where is the turret.” This palindrome inscription can still be read surrounding the sun figured in the centre ; but if the sun ever shnne on it in the way Villani says its position would have been quite different, and there is not the least evidence that it has ever been moved.

It stands in the most important part of the floor on the axis directly east of the font. It should be observed that this ornamental square of pavement figures accurately a rose window. Such a v. indow is hardly to be found before the second half of the twelfth century. Even the filling recalls stained glass, and it seems to me that the panel is a translation of the pattern of a French window into Florentine marble. The inscription is in a fine late twelfth- century style, and we may safely conclude that the whole pavement, and the marble wall-linings, are not earlier than the year 1200. The inscription states that Florence, prompt in all good works, had the wonderful pavement made per .rigna poiomm, which must be the record of which Villani speaks, but it refers, in fact, to the signs ot the Zodiac upon it. The iconographical scheme of the vaults is distinctly Greek, and Byzantine influence is well marked in the draw i^Tig of the mosaic figures.

The marble casing and inlaid pattemwork are the chief characteristics of this early Florentine style, and these are evidently derived from Byzantine work. With

SAN P1EKO A GKADO

the inlaid patterns are oft en found simple figures like the seven candlesticks, and, in the Baptistery, water-pots.

Of external marble work, the Badia below Fiesole is the richest example. The facades of San Jacopo sopr’ Amo, of the Bishop’s chapel by the Baptistery, of San Stefano al Ponte, and of Santi Apostoli, are all very interesting.

Close to Pisa is the remarkable church of San Piero a Grado, which is as early as, or earlier than, San Miniato, with which it has some affinities of style. Here, however, the striking feature is a magnificent series of very Bjzan- tine paintings, which cover the whole of the walls above the arcades. The church has three apses at one end and a single apse at the other. Most writers see in one end of the church the remains of a Carlovingian building, but the most recent writer on the Pisan churches, Benvenuto Supino,* thinks that the ancient church was rebiiilt in sections all “ after the iooo.”

In Pisa, in 1063, was founded what is, perhaps, the first of the great mediaeval cathedrals. It is a live-aisled basilica, crossed by a three-aisled transept. Apses open from the ends of the transepts as well as to the east. Over the crossing rises a dome which, owing to the unequal spans of the nave and transepts, is elliptical in form. The plan closely resembles the church at Bethlehem, but, as we have seen, apsidal-transcpt churches were a favourite form in the East during the tenth century. This type is found again in St. Fedele, Como, the Duomo, Parma, and several German Romanesque churches. Pisa

*      Arte P'san*, 1904.

PISA CATHEDRAL

is one of the great churches of the world. Its distin­guishing feature is that of being built throughout of marble, yellow-white alternating with bands and inlays of dark green. Fine sculptured shafts which flank the west door are exquisite alike in workmanship and design, anil most difficult to account for in the filiation of style. They appear to be the work of a Greek long settled in Italy, possibly from the Venice or S. Italian schools, urged on by Pisan energy and rewards. Above the lowest storey rise tier upon tier of arcades standing free from the walls, and sharply defined on the shadowed background. The church is surrounded by a broad paved platform, on which it seems to rest, like a great ivory shrine. The bron/e doors entering the south transept are wonderful for the vividness and force of the composition and execution of the figure groups. The. many-columned interior is most impressive. The transverse arches under the dome are pointed. The small columns of the facade are of precious marbles, and the spandrils and other points of interest are inlaid with mosaic. This parcel mosaic work is parallel to that known as Cosmati work ’n Home : both are derived from Greek sources. The tall blind arches of the ground storey recall Armenian work. B. de Fleury ami l)ehio have brought forward theories that the plan is the result of an alteration of scheme; but with this view Supino does not agree, he thinks it was laid out as we see it from the first. The first master of the works was Buschetto, who was followed by Bainaldo, who completed the church early in the twelfth century. It is a much argued point whether Buschetto was or was not a Greek as reported by Vasari; but of the Byzantine influence there cannot

FISA CATHEDRAL. DETAIL OF BKONZE DOOKS

BAPTISTERY, AND CAMPANILE 105

be a doubt, and yet it is a work of wonderful originality “in which elements Byzantine, Lombard. Arab, are fused into a new and simple whole.” (For doors see Plate 20.)

The circular baptistery, which stands on the same axis as the cathedral, to the west of it, was founded in 1153, the master in charge of the works being Diotisalvi. It is nearly a hundred feet in diameter, with an inner arc-aded ring on fine granite columns, said to have been brought from Elba. These support an upper gallery and a dome, or rather cone. The exterior has been much modified by a later addition above what was the aisle roof. There are four doorways, which open north, south, east, and west, and are adorned with beautiful sculptures. On the jambs of the east ucjr are panels of the occupations of the twelve months and other subjects. These are strikingly Byzantine, a Uavid being figured just like a Byzantine emperor. The lintel shows the Baptism and other scenes from the life of St. John. This is clearly modelled on a late Roman sarcophagus front. Above, in a row, are half-figures of Christ, Mary, and John, and four angels and four evangelists alternately; at the ends are palm-trees. The shafts on either hand are carved like those of the w^rest door of the cathedral, and are equally beautiful.

The great cylindrical campanile was begun by Bonano in 1174. Above a .solid storey there are six stages ot open arcades like those of the church. It may be said to have been designed by rolling up the west front of the cathedral. The whole magnificent group of buildings stands in a flat grassy dose on the outskirts of the town, and is seen shining against a background of the marble mountains from whence they were hewn.

Perhaps earlier than the cathedral, und of more interest, in that it has been less restored, is the Church of Sail Paolo on the south hank of the river. This is a plain T-shaped basilica, with a dome o\er the crossing and an apse to the east. The west front is arcaded like the cathedral, and not having been scraped, the colour of the yellowed marble, set off' with strips of dark green, shows how necessary to a building is its own skin. Some little carvings abo\e the door might be of ivory. This facade

Fig. 53. Grouped shafts  Flo. 54. Panel from the

from St Michele, Lucca.  front of St. Paolo, Pisa.

and the dome probably date from 1118-1148. The arcade of the interior has pointed aivhcs which may be dated c. 1050.

The Pisan style, as we have said, differs from the Florentine in the use of solid marble instead of casings, but it was undoubtedly influenced in some respects by the latter. For nstance, the curious type of panel found in the tympana of the arches, which has been called the Pisan Ix>zenge, and which is formed of a series of bands recessed one w:thin another, is evidently a translation of the inlaid panels found in similar positions in Florentine

BEX E VENTO. L»ET A11,

of nrcoxzrc dooks

SAN MICHELE, LUCCA

work. In the first place these panels come from the East; in Fig. 52 those on the left are from St. Miniato, and those on the right are from Salonica.

Lucea and Pistoia follow Pisa, but in Lucca the Lombard influence is more marked. At San Michele, Lucca, the marble structure is inlaid all over with an extra­ordinary complexity of ornament, knot-work, foli­age and beasts. This front is said to be the work of Guidetto, at the end of the twelfth century. As points of proof that there was Greek influence at work in the Pisan school, I give rough sketches of inter­twined pillars from San Michele, Lucca, and San Paolo, Pisa, and also the David panel from the bap­tistery at Pisa. The school of Pisa was so much enam­oured of tiers of slender arcades screening the solid wall that the gable of San Michele, Li'cca, is carried up some thirty or forty feet higher than the roof proper only for the purpose of providing room for more arcades, and to serve as a wide basis for a colossal statue of the Archangel. Apart from this exaggeration, one surpassing source of mystery and beauty which could be obtained in no other way was dis-

jamb of the Baptistery. Pisa.

io8   EXTERNAL ARCADES

covered and made available by this means. As the sun lights up the ranks of free-standing arcades, their sharply defined shadows are thrown against the marble wall behind, so that arcades of light are countercharged against arcades of shadow, while an infinity of intricacy results from per­spective and from the ever-moving ranks of shadows. At San Michsle, Lucca, the glittering of the twisted, sculp­tured, and inlaid columns accentuates still further this bewildering effect. Fig. 56 shows some of these patterns. The Lucca inlays are translations; in local marble of the

Fig. 56. Examples of inlaid marble pillars from St. Michele, Lucca.

Pisa mosaics. Originally the free standing arcades are derived, 1 believe, from open arcades of small scale, which were often used round the top storey of the exteriors of apses forming galleries.

Up to a comparatively late time all that we can properly call Lombardic is the more barbaric element found asso­ciated with the current Italo-Byzantine style of Northern Italv. Sant’ Ambrogio, Milan, and San Michele, Pavia, are remarkable structures in that the walls and points of resistance are more exactly organised for the work they have to do than in churches of the basilican type. The nave and aisles are both vaulted, and the high vaults are supported on diagonal ribs. Such churches, it is evident,

form important links in the transition to Gothic; and about the vaults of Sant¹ Ambrogio have raged most violent blasts of controversy, especially since French writers have seen in such “ ogival vaults” the particular mark of Gothicness. For long it was claimed that Sant Ambrogio in its entirety was not later than the ninth century; oil the other hand, recent French writers have asserted that the vaults are “ frankly Gothic,” and were built in the twelfth century, according to a new method imported from France. The only certain dates known are that of the altar made in 835) and of the campanile, which dates from 1129. The most recent Italian authorities (such as Venturi—“ Storia dell’ Arte Italiana,’’ 1903, who cites Stiehl, 1898) accept the view that the vaults are of foreign fashion derived from Burgundy, and were about contemporaneous with the campanile, and, indeed, that the whole church in its present form, with the exception of fragments which have been re-used, belongs to this time. I>ater, in 1196, a part of the church fell, and at that time the ciborium of the altar was re-made, with beautiful pediment sculptures modelled in stucco. Sant’ Ambrogio has a tine arcaded atrium, and its door jambs are highly decorated with interlacing patterns and other sculptures. The simplicity and large scale of the interior covered with its ribbed vault is most impressive. On the right and left of the Nave are two isolated porphyry columns, one of which supports a bronze serpent and the other a cross. The brazen serpent is called that of Moses which indeed it represents, as the Old Testament type or the cross. On the left is a magnificent anibo, and in the centre of the apse the golden altar, with its c borium

around the apse are mosaics, of one of which I give a figure from a drawing by Mr. Alfred Powell (Fig. 57)•

r      The difficulty as to the

~      ®     remarkable vaults of Sant’

J jy-sWp >>     Ambrogiois hardly lessened

^V SVwiS ' by the view _ ust set forth,

cn. \ because if the campanile V\  was built in 1129, it is

f\(\ *' > . I      reasonable to suppose that

the main body of the church would have been completed before this an­nexed feature was begun, and that therefore the building of the church must date from early in the twelfth century, and it is doubtful whether anv ogival vaults can with cer­tainty be pointed to in Burgundy ^or the lie de _{t          r}       France before 1120. The

J'T   j uj/ I ^vault-s of Sant’ Ambrogio

1 I / r I/i /Q ' 'A ■vOX I ^{aiCj moreover}> ¹¹⁰ timid

Iff I If/ . * /1\ —\ \ experiments, but of large III Hi 's_i/ 11 ■■ span and boldly executed.

F,g.S7- F^reinmo.aicfrnn.theapse ^ of St. Ambrogio, Milan,

ever, in the next chapter, the Norman school, which seems to have been in close contact with that of Lombardy, was in possession of this method of erecting ogival vaults befqre, 1100; and it

MILAN. INTERIOR OF SAXT’ AMBROGIO

Face p. 110

EARLY RIBBED-VAULTS m

seems that, on the evidence, we are compelled to suppose that Sant’ Ambrogio derived its scheme of construction from Normandy. It may be that the origin of the ogival vault is to bp sought for in Normandy, or even in England; but there are many reasons for thinking that the seed idea, like so many others, came from the East. (PI. 22.)

Choisy savs that ribbed vaults (of small scale) were known to the Arabs one hundred and fifty years before they appeared in the work of our church masons. He cites and illustrates as examples of Voutes stir nervures the chapel in the mosque of Cordova, and from Armenia the narthex. of the chapel of Akhpat. Street, in his book on Spain, describes and illustrates the mosque at Toledo, which he says is known to have bfen already in existence in 1085, and was practically unaltered when he saw it. It is a square divided into nine small compartments, each one being vaulted w ith rather intricately ribbed cupolas — “ a little vault with intersecting ribs thrown in the most fantastic wa) across each other and varied in each com­partment.” Again Street, in his account of the Templar church at Segovia and the Chapter-house at Salamanca, shows that ribbed cupolas were erected in churches (in the twelfth century), which certainly derived the disposition of their ribs from Moorish examples. The Moorish and Armenian examples are none of them quadripartite vaults, and they are of comparatively small size; they do, however, furnish the principlf of supporting vaults by independent ribs. As to the true ogival form it is to be pointed out that the most characteristic form of Byzantine vault from the time of Justinian was the cross-vault which did not form level penetrations but rose toward the centre, thus forming

domical cross-vaults. This is just the type fol'owed (with the addition of ribs) by the earliest ogival vaults. As for r'bs, the dome of Sta. Sophia is not a plain surface within, but is thickened at intervals bv wide projecting ribs. Now we know that this dome was rebuilt in the

P ig. 58. Ribbed vaults from the church of Skripou in Greece*

last quarter of the tenth century: and an Armenian chronicle cited by Schlumberger says that this was done by an Armenian architect, Tirdates. I find, moreover, that in the Byzantine church at Skripou the vaults have diagonal ribs of brickwork. This church is probably of the eleventh century, as we have seen. I give in Fig. 5S particulars of these vaults, kindly furnished to me by Mr. Schu)^fz.

Thr church of St. Benedetto, Brindisi, in the centre of the Byzantinised part of Italy, has ogival vaults. Anti of about the .same date in the choir-vaulcs of Cefalu Cathedral, in Sicily (begun c. 1132) diago­nal ribs appear; the mosaic work passes over them, as over the cells between, but there is every reason to suppose that here, too, they are structural.* These examples, anti doubtless many more could be adduced, seem to point to the East as being the birth-land of this form of vault; and it may even be possible that the S.

Italian and Milan vaults were indepen­dently derived from Byzantine vaults rather than from Normandy, especially as their ribs are of brick, like those in the East. Eastern stalactite vaulting may be a branch development of similar experi­ments. The derivation of Western ogival vaults from Eastern ribbed cupolas would fall in with the fact that the Angevin vaults, which seem to be just as early as those of the He de France, are rather ribbed domes than cross-vaults.

Fig. ,59. Pillar from the crypt of Modena When a well-defined school of art, dis- Cathedral, tinct from the Italo-Byzantine, arose in Lombardy in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, the mixture of barbaric elements in the ornamentation gave to it a wonderful liveliness of fancy and an expression of struggling energy,

*      All these Italian ogives may prove to be derived from France.

COM ACINI MASTERS

The walls teem wi*h dream-fanoies of knotted dragons and fighting men, while the pillars rest on great lions tearing their prey (Plate 16 and Fig. 59).

I can here do no more than name some chief centres where characteristic examples of this vigorous school of art arc to be found, Cremona, Aosta, Verona, Como, Modena, Parma, Piacenza, Ferrara, Borgo San Donnino, and Cortazzone, and refer to Venturi’s fully illustrated pages.

Much has been written about a school of “ Comacini Masters,” who are supposed to have carried on archi­tecture in North Italy, and to have been responsible for the supposititious school of early Lombard art; but it is generally held by scholars that the word does not refer to a centre at Como, but should be understood as signifying aii association or guild of masons, and that the Magistri Comacini heard of in the seventh century were of no special importance. It does seem probable, however, that the expansion of N. Italian art over many pails of Europe, which appears to have taken place in the eleventh and twelfth centuries, may bo traced to the fact that in Italy the guilds had privileges which made members free to travel at a time when Western masons were attached to manors or monasteries.

In the twelfth century a new phase of art appeared in Rome. There had been an interval of some two centuries when mosaic working seems to have been forgotten. The mosaics of San Clemente, S. M. Maggiore, and S. M. Trastevere are the first of the new school. Many pave­ments were also wrought of morsels of porphyry and

PARCEL MOSAIC

precious marbles, for the most part obtained from antique columns, and arranged ih patterns, taking usually the form of meandering bands surrounding discs, in » style of work usually railed “ Opus Alexandrinum,¹¹ but parcel mosaic might be more explanatory.

Similar mosaic, but smaller in scale, and with gold tessera? added, was also much used for pulpits, bishops’ thrones, altar tabernacles, and Paschal candlesticks, being set in panels and bands sunk in the marble. This work, for which Rome became famous, was widely distributed, especially in the South. It has generally been called Cosmati work—from Cosmas, one of a family of marble- workers. This family, however, was not the first to practise this form of workmanship. Works were already described at this time as being decorated “ Romano opere et maestria.” In one inscription the artists are called r Macistri doctissimi Romani.¹¹ A master who was

O

brought from Rome to make the marble-work for Edward the Confessors shrine signed himself thereon “ Civis Romanus,” and exactly the same formula occurs at Corneto and at Civita Castellana. Examples of this work are found which were executed in the first half of the twelfth century.* Peter and his brother Nicholas, followed by the son and grandson of Nicholas, worked at Corneto from 1143 to 1209, and Paul and his four sons made the tabernacle in Saint Laurence outside the Walls, beginning in 1148. Cosmas, mentioned above, was working in the first years of the thirteenth century. Still another chief of a school was Vasalletti, whose inscription, signing the cloisters of St. John I^ateran, has recently been found, and

*      A late example of this work is given n Fig. 122,

116  COSMATI ORIGINS

the candlestick of S. M. Cosmedin, was the work of a certain Pascal, “ vir doctus et probus.” The first artist of this Roman school of which we have any knowledge was one Paul, who was working about noo.

Pavements of “ Opus Alexandrinum,” similar to those in Rome, which are found in many Byzantine churches, must have been the point of departure for the Roman art. Mr. Frothingham in the American Journal of Archaeology, 1894 and 1895, has made a careful study of this point, and has proved that the Roman art originated as oik; branch of Byzantine art, which at about the same time formed schools in Venice, in Rome, and in South Italy, and Sicily; while ,n the East a parallel development was taking place in Coptic work. Some wall-mo.saics of the eleventh century at Daphne, by Athens, which are of this kind of marble work, have lately been cited as further evidence by Millet, and, the beautiful pavements at St. Luke’s monastery should also be referred to in this connection. To have strictly followed the productive influences I ought to have grouped Rome and South Italy with Venice as centres of new life in art, and I may once more point out that the decorative use of mosaic at Pisa and the marble inlays of Florence and Lucca, may he traced back to Byzantine originals.

The bronze gates of St. Paul’s outside the Walls, made in Constantinople by Staurachios in 1070, still remain a memorial of the artistic suzerainty of the Greeks at this time. There are others of the same origin and of about the same date at St. Mark’s at Venice, Salerno, Amalti, and four or five other places.

Another artistic dynasty that must be mentioned is

xxm

SICILY. CI-OISTEH OF JIONIiKAI.K

SICILY

117

that of Sicily under the Normans. The Saracens held Sicily from the ninth century until Counts Robert and Roger won it for the.r own, and during this time there was such an immigration of Greeks as to amount to “ a second Hellenisation ” of South Italy. Bertaux illustrates the remarkable Cattolica of Stilo, a little cross church in a square, with live high domes, which is of so eastern a type that it would look at home in Persia. At Otranto a crypt is supported by beautiful columns engraved over with patterns said to be of the ninth century. The Normans at once entered into the Grceco-Arab civilisa­tion of South Italy, and n their large way patronised art. The divers elements in the blood of this art— Arabic, Greek, and Northern—soon produced a mag­nificent school: bold, yet refined; simple, yet glittering and splendid, its great monuments are the Cathedral of Cefalu (1132), the Palace Chapel at Palermo (conse­crated 1140), the Abbey of Monreale (built, from 1174 to 1182), and the Martorana, Palermo (1184-1221). In these buildings Damascus, Mount Athos, Rome, and Cluny seem to make equal contributions to a dream-story of architecture. The Palatine Chapel has a domed sanctuary joined to a basilican nave; the ceiling is Arabic and the walls are covered with Greek mosaics; while the inscriptions are in Arabic, Latin, and Greek. The Maitorana still shows the remains of a complete scheme of Byzantine mosaics. The abbey church of Monreale is of great size, a basilica of about 330 feet long, all encrusted with marble and mosaic. The semi-dome of the apse is completely filied by a colossal head and shoulders of Christ. This figure, which rises, as it were,

118

MONREALE

behind the le\ el cornice at the springing of the conch, as seen in the shadow, is one of the most wonderful concep­tions of art. The nimbus of the head must be some seven or eight feet across. Below, of more normal scale, are enthroned the Virgin and Child between two Archangels, and the Apostles follow. At the side of the church is a cloister of marvellous beauty, the marble columns of which are all exquisitely carved or inlaid with mosaic; and in one angle is the fountain known to every one. (PI. 23.) Some of the carved columns of tlii* cloister are, although smaller

FlG. 60. Tomb of two masons, uno animo laborantes. Of the seventh or eighth century. Now in a museum at Venice.

and later, so much like the door-pillars at Pisa spoken of above that I am inclined to think that the Pisan carver must have come from South Italy. To the west and north of the church are bronze doors. The north doors are the work of Barisanus of Trani, who, about 1179, wrought similar bronze doors tor Trani and Ravello. The western ones were made in 1186 by Bonanus of Pisa, whose name may still be road on them. Plate 21 shows similar doors at Benevento.

On the mainland, in the south of the Italian peninsula, at Bari, Otranto, B’tonto, and other places, are to be found works conceived in a style mixed of Sicilian and

BITOXTO CATHEDRAL. EXTERIOR GALLERY

BYZANTESQUE ART     119

Lombardic elements, and of extraordinary beauty and vigour. (Plate 24.)

Many memorials exist of the individual artists who worked in Italy during the times with which we have been dealing (Fig. 60), but I reserve what is to be said in regard to mediaeval craftsmen to a later page.

If I have here seemed to insist overmuch on the Byzan­tine factor in Italian art, it may be urged that I have only applied in detail the truism that during the earlier Middle Ages Constantinople was the artistic capital of the world. Until about the year 1000 there was little in Western art beside Byzantinism and barbarism, and up to this time the products of the various schools might better be called Byzantesque than Romanesque.

CHAPTER V

ROMANESQUE ART IN GERMANY, FRANCE AND ENGLAND

In Gaul, early Christian art was a provincial variety of the. art of Rome. In the fourth century organised Christi­anity spread over the whole country and reached Britain. At Sion an inscription mentions the repair of a church in 377, and the foundations of the church at Silchester in Britain must go back as far. The most ancicnt existing church in France is the Baptistery of St. John at Poitiers, which dates from the sixth century; and at Grenoble and Jouarre there are reirnants of seventh-century works. Although the remains are few, records show that great churches existed in all the important cities of Gaul—at Lyons, where the church is described by Fortunatus; at Tours, where the basilica of St. Martin was rebuilt about 472; at Paris, where the basilica of Sts. Peter and Paul was built by Clovis; and at Clermont, where a basilica is described by Gregory of Tours. At Nantes, in the sixth century, above the centre of a church rcse a high structure richly painted, and probably of wood, “ like the peak of a mountain”; and such spirelike pavilions seem to ha,\e been general 111 Gaul. A large number of the early

churches were of wood. Towers proper were attached to churches from the fifth or sixth century. If annexed, they were usually square; if isolated, circular, like the round towers of Ireland. The interior walls of the main building were covered with paintings, as was the case in the churches at Jar row and Monkwearmouth, built by Benedict Biscop. The floors were frequently of mosaic, and polished marble columns were obtained where possible. The high altar «tood under a ciborium; beneath the altar was the confessio; and across the triumphal arch rested a beam, which carried the cross, candles, and relics. The later ornamentation, both in France and England, was a variety of the Byzantesque styles. We have at. Brixworth, Northamptonshire, the remains of a fine basilican church of the seveuth century.

The rising of the Carlovingian dynasty marked a period if transition in the arts corresponding to the political ami social changes of the time. Roman traditions in Western Europe had fallen into almost complete decay save for the infiltration of Byzantine elements. The coming of the Franks also brought an element of barbarism. The school of art fostered by Charlemagne formed a rallying-point, and, dircctly from the East as well as by contact with Ravenna and Rome, it absorbed influences which were afterwards distributed over Germany, France, and even Lombardy. The church at Aachen, built 796-804, as a national monument, and attached to Charlemagne’s palace, is the most typical building of the epoch. It was built by Master Odo of Metz. An octagonal central area is surrounded by an aisle sixteen tided to the exterior. A fine vaulted gallery surmounts

the aisle, and the centre is covered by a dome. A pro­jecting porch to the west, with two large staircases, rises high above the aisle. The original eastern termination was destroyed when a fine Gothic choir was begun in

Fig. 6i. Plan of the Palatine Church of Aachen.

1353. Its foundations have been found and show that it was square-ended and small. The ambo must have stood in the east part of the central area.

A collection of ancient materials was brought from Theodoric’s palace at Ravenna, and re-used in the structure, and some white marble capitals still surmount

ITS BRONZE AND MOSAIC

the external pilasters. The dome was covercd with a mosaic of Christ and the twenty-four elders : Ciampini has given an engraving of this, the Purlers had risen from their thrones to offer their crowns to Christ. Above w ere the Evangelists, and the field was set with stars :* the floor was also of coarse mosaic. Bronze balustrades which fill the openings of the gallery are of great beauty, and appear to be more ancient than the church. There are also bronze doors, and in the porch is preserved a bronze pine-cone three feet high, which probably stood in the atrium, forming the fountain, like the more celebrated pine-cone at old St. Peter’s. It bears an inscription referring to the four rivers of Paradise and is said to be of the tenth century. It was given by Abbot Udalric, and bears an inscription referring to the Eden Spring—“ the source of all waters which flow on earth [Gihon gently flowing]: Pishon holding gold : Euphrates fertilising the land, and arrow-sw ift Tigris: Abbot Udalric piously gives thanks to the Creator.” Altogether this is a muvt impressive building, and is in many respects carefully constructed, especially in the vaulting of the aisles and of the gallery. In the latter the alternate compartments rise at an angle against the central octagon, so as better to support, the great dome. The masonry closely resembles Theodoric’s tomb. Dr. Strzygowski in a recent study of this monument shows good reasons for thinking that the church is not to be regarded as a mere imitation of St. Vitale, but that it is one of a series of buildings belonging to the. “ Central type” built under Eastern influences. He supposes the upper storey of the w est porch

*      These mosaics were destroyed in 1719.

124 S. GERMIGNY DES PRltS

to have had an opening like the balcony of Syrian Churc hes, and that the circular stair-turrets on either hand rose as towers. lie supposes that the bronze balustrades of the interior as well as the bronze doors were made for the position they now occupy; in any case it is known that there wasai. important sehoul of bronze casting established at this time :n Germany. At the present moment prodigious “ restoration ” works are in progress.

Another monument of this age is the gateway of the Abbey of Ijorsch, founded in 764. This gateway may probably be dated about 800.

The well-known plan of the monastery of St. Gall, a great church with apses east and west, and two round towers, also belongs to this time. It is especially interesting as giving us the disposition of the buildings in a large monastic establishment in the early Middle Ages, and shows how, even at this time, the tjpe had become fixed. The church has transepts, giving it the cross form.

In France, the remarkable Church of S. Germigny des Pres, a square with semicircular projections on each face, and a lantern- tower rising on four piers over the centre, consecrated in 806, and the old nave of the Cathedral of Beauvais, b.jilt in 987-998, are the best examples of the Carlo vingian Romanesque.

In the German Empire, especially along the Rhine, there was a great reviv al of art from about 975 to 1000, following on the introduction of Byzantine artists by Otho II., who married Theophano, daughter of Romanus II , the Emperor of Constantinople, in 972. This Germanic- Byzantine style is sometimes called Othoni*.n, and it affected every branch of craftsmanship, especially miniatures

THE GLOUCESTER CANDLESTICK, c. 1110

Face p. 124

of manuscript!!, ivory carvings, and bronze casting. Several monuments of the time of the Emperor Henry II. (died 1024) show the height to which this school of art attained. On the right hand of the choir of Charlemagne’s church at Aachen stands as a pulpit the ambo, a work of groat beauty and splendour, given to the church by Henry II. It has panels of carved ivory, surrounded by silver-gilt borders, set with cameos and jewels. It is inscribed hoc opvs ambonis avro GEMMisQvx MIC antis, &cThe carved ivory panels are early Christian work from Alexandria.

The bronze-works of Hildesheim also belong to this period. These are the famous doors with panels of figure reliefs, and the large spiral pillar ornamented with a con­tinuous ribbon of Bible stories, at the foot of which the four rivers are poured out of vases. These were wrought under Bishop Bernward in 1015-1022. The very beautiful seven-branched candlestick at Essen, the branches deco­rated with open-work knops, and terminated with flower­shaped nozzles, should also be mentioned. It seems to figure in a symbolic way the Tree of Paradise in the centre of the world, for around the base are little images of the quarters -Omens, Occidkxs, Aaun.o—the fourth being lost. The Gloucester candlestick, now in South Kensington Museum and given to Gloucester early in the twelfth century, is perhaps an example of this German school of bronze working. If a book illustration is to be trusted there is at Hildesheim a candlestick almost exactly similar called Bernward’s. The wonderful thirteenth-century candlestick at Milan with seven branches and open-work foot and stem is clearly allied to the school represented by the Gloucester candlestick, for which see Plate 25.

The great bronze-working school of Huy and Dinant, which produced remarkable works early in the twelfth century, and became the pre-eminent market for them, must have been an offshoot of the Othonian art-dynasty. The monk Theophilus, the earliest systematic writer on the arts of the Middle Ages, who probably wrote at the end of the eleventh century, and in whose work a large share of Byzantine tradition survives, seems to have belonged to this Rhenish school of art, which, in the two centuries following the time of Charlemagne, was the chief on this side of the Alps; and from it was largely derived the art of England during this time.

The next impulse upon Germany was to come from Lombardy, the nearest Italian neighbour state, where, as we have seen, great sti.-rings in art were manifesting themselves from about the year iooo. The eleventh and twelfth-century German buildings, especially along the Rhine, at Cologne, Mainz, Worms, Speyer, Bonn, and many other places, closely resemble Lombardic work.

As early as 1107 there is a record in the chronicle of the Abbey of Rolduc, in Hainault, that its crypt was built scematc LongohanTmn by Brother Embricon and his friend, who came from the environs of Toumay. Lombard masters about this time seem to have been called to work all over Europe. Bayet says that Lombard masters built a Russian cathedral in 1138-1161, and we are told how St. William soon after the year 1000 took Lombardic arti<ts to Dijon and Normandy. Again, Street cit.es a Spanish document of 1175, in which Raymundus Lam-

bardus, with four other latnbardos, agreed for certain works at Urgel—surely these too are Lombards.

In Italy itself the Lombards seem to have been in request; a record shows that certain building work and sculpture at Treviso was executed by Pietro Lombardo and his sons.

lombardic work is doubtless to be found 'n manyplaccs outside of Italj. There are scattered widely over Europe, from Vienna to Gloucester, and from Lund in Sweden to Spain, many build'ngs strikingly similar in some respects of detail to Lombard buildings. And there was a greater uniformity of style in building in the twelfth century than at any other time. Probably the Lombard masons worked under conditions which made it easy for them to travel, and this may in part account for the requests made for their services, and for the w ide circle of their influence.

The most typically German characteristic is the use of double apsidal terminations, accompanied by a western as well as an eastern transept. Such double-ended churches early arose in the East, as we have seen, in con­sequence of changing the direction of churches which at first bad their doors to the east and apses to the west. Our own Canterbury, in the tenth century, was an example. In Germany, as early as the time of Charle­magne, this type was adopted irrespective of its original cause, and was follow ed in the plan of St. Gall.

The noblest church of this form is Mainz Cathedral. The east choir dates from about 1100, and the western choir, which is of trefoil form, is a century later. There is a lantem-tower over each crossing, and four other towers. Without *aid within, notwithstanding much

128 GERMAN CHARACTERISTICS

restoration, this is a superb building, sombre and strong, and built of a beaut iful reddish stone.

Another characteristic Rhenish plan is that in which the transepts as well as the eastern limb have apsidal terminations. This plan also, as before said, was a favourite form in the East. St. Mary in the Capitol, Cologne, consecrated in 1049, is of this kind; so is the Holy Apostles, in the same city, and St. Qui. irms, atNeuss. The latter is a fine late Romanesque church, not finished till the thirteenth century. We have seen that in North Italy there are some churches of this form, and that it is ultimately to be traced to the East. It was doubtless introduced into Germany on the great wave of Byzantine influence which flowed in in the time of Otto II. (Plate 26.)

A third characteristic feature is the use of tall towers, generally in pairs, rising at the re-entering angles of the transepts, closely resembling Lombardic campanili. This Romanesque style formed the typical German expression in architecture, and German builders are found again and again reverting to it, long after the introduction of Gothic from France in the middle of the thirteenth century. It is a fine building-style, especially happy in the massing of parts; but in detail a little dry, and lacking in sculpture.

The harshness of style was doubtless entirely modified by extensive schemes of painting (for example the splendid ceiling at Hildesheim), and by many noble bronze furnish­ings—light coronae, vessels, and doors.

The Romanesque church, wilh its transepts and square lantern-tower rising over the crossing, is only another version of the Eastern scheme of building, the lantern- tower taking the placc of the high central dome.

COLOGNE. CHURCH OF THE APOSTLES

Lombard and Rhenish influence is evident in manj centres of early French Romanesque. In the South-west of France in the eleventh century there was a school which definitely followed oriental models, doubtless directly derived from over-sea. From the admixture of these influences with the earlier traditions issued in this new time of growth many lovely varieties of building. St. Front, Perigueux, is the most famous example of the South-western school of Perigord: it dates from about 1100. But there are other examples of the same type still earlier. St. Front is a cruciform domed church something like St. Mark’s, Venice, from which it is often said to have been copied, but it is even more like St. Barnabas in Cyprus, and rather seems to belong to a series of churches built under Eastern influence- a southern wave of Byzantinism spreading along the shores and over the islands of the Mediterranean, Cyprus, Crete, Sicily. Street refers to two or three churches in North Spain which are stone vaulted, and which he thinks may belong to the tenth century. One of these, a small church, has the transverse triapsidal plan which I think clearly shows the influence of the secondary Byzantine style. In the Spanish churches the central lantern often remained a dome till late in the Middle Ages. In the main we shall I believe, find that French Romanesque had its roots in the Rhine and the Mediterranean, and that certain centres were also influenced directly from Lombardy.

Sincc the above was written, Mr. A. G. Hill has described four remarkable early churches in North Spain ; three near Oviedo all built, it is said, by one Tioda, in the middle of the ninth century in a" Latino-Byzantine ” style, and the

other, Santiago de Peiialva, a Moorish building of the truth century which has apses at each end. Two of the former are very small cruciform structures with round barrel-vaulting and western galleries. “The sculptured capitals have strong Byzantine feeling.” We may regard it as certain that on both sides of the Pyrenees there was an early school of Byzantesque church building, and that the Romanesque school of the South of Frcnce derived much of its inspiration from this source.

In the South-east there was another school, the most characteristic marl of which was its surface decoration by bands and patterns of cut-stone of divers colours. Issoire is a line example of this kind The well-known church of Le Puj follows the Perigueux form, but it is treated in the manner of Issoire, for which see Plate 27.

Toward' the end of the eleventh century many magni­ficent Romanesque churches were built in France. One of these is S. Semin, Toulouse, begun c. 1075, and of which the eastern limb was consecrated in toq6. A companion church over the Spanish frontier is S. James of Com- postella, begun c. 1080.* The fine churches of Conques, Brioude, and Mauriac also belong to this school, as does, in many respects, Cluny, the great central monastic establish­ment of France. In 1089 St. Hugh commenced its recon­struction on a va.it plan; n 1095 the choir was termi­nated; and the church was dedicated in 1131. The architects were two of the brethren, Hezelon of Liege

*      There is the closest resemblance between St. Semin and St. Tames. A recent Spanish author claims that the Oompostella church is the earlier and shows more of BjzantiLie influence: lie dates it 1074 or 1075, ai'd St. Sernir., 10S0.

ISSOIRE. VIKW OF CHURCH FROM THE EAST

and Gauzon. About 1220 was added the vast narthex. It was a five-aisled church, with a secondary transept east­ward of the main crossing, an apse, and radiating chapels. Double chapels opened from the great transepts. A lantern-tower rose Over the crossing, surrounded by three others, one on each arm of the nib.in transept, and one over the east, or minor, crossing. The interior was of great height and entirely covered by vaults, that of the nave resting on transverse arches. The narthex was like another three-aisled nave, aiid was terminated at the west by two big towers. The line of style development and persistence passed through Toulouse and Cluny.

In Normandy large works, well built and proportioned, were being produced about the middle of the eleventh century. Jumieges was begun about 1040. Bernay, which dates ^from 1017 to 1050, belongs rather to the anterior school. Domfront (c. 1050), St. ^Nicholas (c. 1062-1083), and also Holy Trinity (1062-1072), both in Caen, have simple groined vaults over the choirs, a most important development in the course of Northern architecture. Here the vaults do not follow the barrel- vault type found in the early churches of the South­eastern part of France, but they are cross-vaults allowing of the penetration of clerestory windows in each bay. It is this relation of vault and window which was one o{ the early steps leading up to Gothic.* The abbey church of St. Stephen, Caen (1064), is so planned as to show that high vaults over the nave were contemplated at the first, although the scheme was afterwards abandoned. Ruprecht Robert, the historian of Norman architecture, has no doubt

;,hat the main principles of early Norman construction were brought from Lombardy, especially by the influence of Lanfrunc, the Prior of Bee, from 1045, but although a Lombard influence might account for much it wi’l not account for the vaults. The application of vaults to central spans was first r.iade in the school’s influenced from the East over the Mediterranean; the cross high-vault was a Northern adaptation which was found to be convenient for giving window space. (The high vault of Tournus, once said to have been erected as early as 1019, is now dated 1066- 1107).

The next great step, in which we find the completion of the Romanesque style, and the opening of the immediate transition to Gothic, was made by reinforcing these simple cross-vaults with ribs under the intersections, forming thus the ogival vault, ‘j’here are no vaults of this description now existing in Normandy itself which can be dated earlier than the middle of the twelfth century, but there is no doubt that, 111 the English branch of the school, they had by this time long been in use. Mr. Bilsoii has recently shown that, at Durham, ribbed vaults w^rere used from the first building of the church, commenced at the end of the eleventh century. The vaults of the aisles of the choir, which still exist, were completed by 1096, and the high vault of the choir was built by 1104. It was removed ; but the vaults of the transept (c. 1100-1120) and nave (c. 1130), the construction of which followed those of the east end, still remain. “ Every part of the church was covered with rbbed vaulting between 1093 and 1133.” TTiere are also early twelfth-century ribbed-vaults at Gloucester, and the whole choir, built from 1089 to 1100, must have been designed for vaulting, as counter­

butting arches, to resist its thrust, cover the triforium of the choir. The same arrangement is found at Norwich (}>egun 1096). In the drawings which Carter made of the Priory of Holy Trinity, Aidgate, he gives details of a bay of early Norman cross-ribbed vaulting which can hardly be later than the rebuilding immediately following the fire of 1132. Mr. BiIson’s study of the subject has created so much interest in France that Count Lasteyrie has brought such rebutting reasons as are possible against the claim; but the historical evidence for the building of Durham is so complete, and the sequence of vaults has been so clearly worked out, that there is no doubt that the claimfor early ribbed vaults in England has been fully proved. Although it seems impossible to resist Mr. Bilson’s con­clusion generally, yet in the case of the highly developed vaults of Malmesbury, I cannot think that the proof for a date so early as “ not later than the middle of the twelfth century ” is made out. The vaults here are quite systemat ic wilh pointed transverse arches, and the nave arcade is also pointed. Work at the Abbey does not seem to have begun till some time later than 1142, and there is no reason to think that, even if the choir was begun directly after this date, the nave would be reached 111 six or eight years. Again, the elaborate sculptured south door anti porch and the west door, can hardly be dated earlier than 1170-80. and although their masonry does not range w ith the main work, there are no indications, and I cannot think it likelv, that there were ever earlier doors. I should say that openings were left out for those highly sculptured features which were built in at the end of tht work. Notice that the elaborately caned porch arch

with its Bible stories, and eight Virtues trampling on Vices, had dragon-headed terminations to the drip-mould similar to those of the nave arcade ; they wefe reset in the four­teenth-century outer a roll. We are not, I think, Justified in supposing that the pointed arcade of the interior arid the aisle vaults are earlier than c. 1160. They show, I consider, a knowledge of fhe solution arrived at in the lie de France. The evidence for the use of the ogival vault in Norman England is clear, and without claiming that they were originated here, it is necessary to traverse I^asteyrie’s statement that, if Norman, they must have been first used in the mother-land of the style. It is just possible that this method of construction may have been invented 1 a England during the progress of the enormous volume of building which followed on the Norman Conquest. But, as said earlier, it is probable that at least the first principles of the system were obtained from the East.*

It is but a single step over an invisible line from Romanesque art to “Gothic” art; it would help us to realise this if the names we give these styles answered to the relationship of the arts, and it might be convenient to interchange the word “ Romance " w ith Gothic.

*      On l>urhdii ?nd early Ogival vaults, see Apjcndix

JHMtlENN AL. ABBKY Cill K.C1I (o. 112:,) &EFOKE “ liESTOllATION ”

Face p. 134

CHAPTER VI

OF ROMANCE ART

By Romance art I mean that art which is usually calltd Gothic; the art, especially of the North of France, w hich was developed from the Romanesque. The name of Gothic came into use in Italy at the Renaissance. Its origin may be traced to the fact that students at that time supposed that buildings of the earlier Middle Ages which differed from “the true Roman manner” were the work of the Goths who overthrew the empire “Then,” says Vasari, “arose new architects who, after the manner of their bar­barous nations, erected the buildings in that style which we call Gothic.” Under this name he groups buildings erected from the early Christian to the Romanesque periods. And the confusion became still greater when this wo I'd Gothic was extended to include the perfected mediajval buildings of France and England, and was withdrawn from the earlier styles. It is, however, in some respects a convenient name, and it agrees so fai with the facts that what we now call Gothic is an art developed where a Teutonic people had built its civilisation upon the ruins of a Roman province. In the countries comparatively untouched by the Germanic invasions this ait never found a home.

136

FRENCHNESS

Romance art is but one of man)¹ expressions of the life of the Middle Ages, which may bo imagined as a crystalli­sation of society, the several facets of which manifested.

■on the side of action, chivalry; in literature, the romances ; a great enthusiasm and development in the Church; in learning, the establishment of the universities; and in civic life, the organisation of town communities and guilds. This same spirit,, expressing itself through the crafts, is Romance art. It was bom in the age of the Crusades, the time of “ a culture not founded on knowing things, but or the art of doing things.” It is not to be doubted that in all this France not only led, but invented, whore others followed. In a very true sense what we call Gothic is Frenchness of the France which had its centre in Paris. If, among the neighbouring countries, the Gothic of England comes next, as indeed it does, it is because England was so far French. In the eyes of the Norman kings it must have seemed that their true capital was Rouen, and that England was but a conquered province. William the Conqueror, addressing the citizens-— of London, called thorn French and English. And the chronicler, speaking of the accession of Henry I., says tha⁴ both French and English approved. Not only French art, but French thought and language in the thirteenth century held the predominating place in Europe. French tales of chivalry were everywhere read and imitated, and Brunetto Latini wrote his “Tresor” in French, “ parce que la parleure est plus delitable et plus commune a toutes gentes."

In Italy itself the influence that was to transmutt, Lombardic art into the art of Assisi, Verona, and the

INADEQUATE DEFINITION 137

Florence of Arnolfo, came from France; some of the Cistercian monasteries are examples of almost pure French Gothic. In an interesting study of the development and character of Gothic architecture, Professor Moore ha> applied Viollet le Due’s canons to a comparison between French and English mediaeval art; hut in his search for a. strict definition of Gothic he is carried to a conclusion which excludes most of the examples usually understood to be representative, and which, in its rigidity, is even, 1 venture to think, opposed to the true Gothic spirit. For instance, he asserts that it is ⁴¹ an architecture of churches only,” when the traditional claim has been for the adaptability and inclusiveness of Gothic. It all follows, however, from the logical method employed, which may be paraphrased thus:—YYe shall best find the character­istics of Gothic architecture ^;n the most perfect ex­amples of thirteenth-century cathedral-building; and then, conversely, only buildings which show these highest characteristics are Gothic. It follows, naturally enough that—“Gothic architecture, as I define it, was never practised elsewhere than in France,” and that even the Sainte Chapelle in Paris is only “ strictly Gothic as far as it goes.” On the other hand, a bril’iant French writer in a recent study of Gothic says that the progress of archi­tecture was a long battle between darkness and light, till at last the architect of the Sainte Chapelle ir the pride of conquest built with light itself. So we choose our in stances! Even in his special use of the word it does not seem benevolent—at least it is unscientific— -of Mr. Moore tc. refuse to us any Gothic in England. He should surely allow us a half or quarter Gothic.

It may be granted that it would be convenient if we had a word whith expressed “ that system of balanced thrusts ” which is best exemplified in cathedrals like Amiens ; yet it is impossible at this time to divert the word “Gothic” to this limited use. “ Ogival ” might perhaps be made by agreement to serve the purpose.

Gothic architecture is but a subsection of Gothic art, and ogival cathedral-building is only a subsection of Gothic architecture. Indeed, it may be doubted whether Castle- Gothic has not been neglected in the study of the evolution of the style. Gisors, Chateau Gaillard, and Coucy are in no wise behind the cathedrals; and whereas church-builders might be conservative and sentimental, castle-builders perforce aimed at pure construction.

The course of the development of castle-buiiding is contemporary, and affords an interesting parallel to church- building. The most advanced school was seated in Normandy. Choisy says that the most ancient western fortresses, which show Byzantine influence, are found in Normandy and England—Falaise, Loches, Bochester. At the end of the twelfth century the castles of liichard Cceur-de-Lion are contrived on the most learned com­binations, and Chateau Gaillard marks an epoch in mili- tan architecture. It belongs to the system of defence elaborated in Syrian castles during the twelfth century, when Syria, from whence Richard brought the principles, became the classic land of fortification. In the course of the thirteenth century the He de France became the foyer of castle-building, as Coucy evidences.

In Palestine the castles of Toron and Scandalion were built as early as 1107 and 1116. The great invincible

OGIVES NOT ESSENTIAL 139

stronghold of Kerak, fifty miles east of Jerusalem, was ounded as early as 1121, and Iblin in 1142. The names of some of these strongholds give proof of the consciously romantic spirit of the twelfth century castle-builders. We find Blanchgarde, Nigragunrda, Beauvoir, Belfort, and Mirabel. Henry II.’s castle near Tours also bore this last name, and in the same spirit of the Arthurian romances Richard Cceur-de-Ir'on called his stronghold at Les Andeleys Chateau Gaillard.

The most recent and careful French writers, now that they find that cross-ribbed vaults were so early in use in England, are no longer as ready to be bound to the ogival vault as the only origin of Gothic. Enlart writes: “The ogive is so little the only characteristic that there exist ogival buildings without ogives.” But the superiority of French buildings has always been admitted by a section of English writers ever since G. D. Whittington wrote a truly remarkable account of French architecture exactly a hundred years ago, undertaken to prove “ the superior advances of the French in Gothic architecture.” It is true, however, that his remark that the exterior of Notre Damy₁ Iteims-is the most beautiful piece*of architecture in the world, was objected, to In John Carter._Tiu„ the "~Gg7ltfef)Tfi)?s M■igazine_i with a burst of patriotic archaeology, 'as a *^tTMirfirl'6us,"malignant, and unwarrantable B’edTanilte tirade."

It is t}ie flying buttress which is the most characteristic member of perfected Gothic architecture, and this feature cloeyseein LtrhSve been develoPEd-kv-the school of North France and 1‘aris. In this region_the transitional style was^mey*forwar3 in so rapid a movement, and with

such a fire of enthusiasm, that it reached a greater height than anywhere else. So great, indeed, is the variation, that the High Gothic of this region forms a species apart. This school borrowed the rib-vault, but the flying but­tress it gave. The early phase"oF tlie full Go⁺fnc may be (lesmbed~as~coM?i<fr-fl'rf/ift/ ogivaL When, by means of flying buttresses, the aButmerlI were fixed”, the wal l-field was left for the”window to spread over. When the hays were entirely opened out by windows, complete ogival was reached.

Probably theicad Tjf"the Noi^h TrcncIT school may be carried back a step farther, and it may have resulted from accepting and systematically applying the pointed erch in association with ribbed vaults. The origin of Gothic architecture may be fairly held to date from this conjunc­tion, and this first form might be called pointed ogival. The ribbed vault itself is found so early, in work so typic­ally Romanesque, that it must be held to be the completion of that style rather than the origin of the Gothic. But transitional ogival might, date from its introduction The churches of Morienval and Tracy-le-Val are good examples of the Northern French transitional style. (Plates 28-29.)

Into Germany and Spain the thirteenth-century art of France seems to have been definitely imported, and as far afield as Sweden and Hungary we hear of French masters being called to execute works. Renan has put in evidence how a master of Paris was in the thirteenth century (1263 -1278) commissioned to build the church at Wimp- fen, near Heidelberg, “ in opere Francigcno.” The style, he says, was then called Opu° Francigenum, and that is the name it ought to keep.*

*      “ Lit. Hist. Prance,” ii. pp. 210, 2AS.

!

TRACEY-LE-VAL CHURCH, c. 1130

Gothic art is that art which, following step by step the development of the Middle Ages, blossomed in the thirteenth century and closed its first period with the Black Death. We may most simply set for it an arbi­trary period which will be la'rly correct by taking the Great Plague (1348-1350) as its centre; and by setting two hundred years on either side of this we get 1150 as the beginning and 1550 as the end of Gothic art.

Gothic architecture, to which I must particularly refer in these pages, is a sort of fairy storv in stone: the folk had fallen in loYejrith building* .and Joyed that their gtHdaSiHEs^r work7 and ivories, their. jieal^and eyen the pierced patterns of their shoes should be like little build- intrs. little tabernacles, little “fiaiTa jmdows....."Some of J their tombs and shrines must have been conceived as little

^{have llked} ^ttle angels to fcop.^ j ^ about themallalive and blow fairy trumpets. In the T building of the great cathedrals it must be allowed that ⁴ there is an element that we do not, understand. The old x^*J builders worked wonder into them ; they had the ability Q rv which children have to call up enchantment. In these high vaults, and glistening windows, and peering figures, there was magic even to their makers *-n.Ti'yC+Xr#tf

O     .       ■

I would, if I could, say something to increase our reverence for this architecture as something not to be entirely understood. We cannot by taking thought be Egyptian or Japanese, nor can we again be Romanesque or Gothic, and when w e consider the century of critical inquiry which has been devoted to this art, and the artists of the same century enthusiastic in subjecting the monu­ments to the process called “ restoration,” it might be

well to enquire ^:f any of us have ever yet seen a Gothic building r As a spectacle, yes; but, as the builders under­stood it, no. As 1 have already said, attempts are con­tinually being made to sum up Gothic architecture in a formula, as the architecture of pointed arches, of ogival vaulting, of subdivision" amT subordination^ and s<3~uir; t>ul, as we find "Tt in fact, it was the product of gtTeiT historical circumstances, as well as of the special principle of Gothicness, whatever that may have been.

As general characteristics, we may say that Gothic architecture was developed by free and energetic experi­ment ; it was organic, daring, reasonable, and gay! The ~ measure~of life is the'measure of GotKlcr " ~

“The most penetrating criticism "*8f'Gothic architecture that has been made is that of Prosper Merimee, who pointed out that a great cathcdral like Amiens is a highly strung organism with its most vital parts, the flying buttresses and window mullions, exposed to the weather. Such a cathedral is more like an engine than a monument, in that it is only kept in order by unceasing attention.

The great cathedrals seem to have been built on such a scale that they might almost gather the entire adult population of the city within their walls. As to these marvellous buildings, the half of their glories and wonder rannot be told. They are more than buildings, more than art, something intangible was built into them with their stones and burnt into their glass. The work of a man, a man may understand; but these are the work of ages, of nations. All is a consistent development^ stone is balanced on stone, vault springs from vault, interlacing

ACTIVE STONEWORK

tracery sustains brilliantly dyed glass as branches hold sun-saturated foliage, towers stand firm as cliffs, spires are flung into the air like fountains. In these buildings all may be explained as devised for ritual use and for the instruction of the people; all as material and structural necessity; all as traditional development; all as free beauty and romance in stone. From whichever point of view we may approach them, the great cathedrals satisfy us, and their seeming perfections are but parts of a larger perfection. Nothing is marked, nothing is clever, nothing is individual nor thrust forward as artistic; they are serene, masterly, non-personal, like works of nature—indeed they are such, natural manifestations of the minds of men work­ing under the impulse of a noble idea.

In buch a church the ircades of the interior, which sustain the vaults, circle around the altar and abut against the western towers. By means of vigorous ribs of stone which spring from the pillars and spread over the internal area, a light web is suspended, so that the great space is covered by a tent of stone, one of the most wonderful of man’s inventions. The push of these ribs, collected at certain points, is met by the exterior abutting arches called “ flying buttresses,” which, acting as props, carry the weight to the ground, and thus counterpoise the thrusts of the interior. The interspaces between the several points from which the vaults spring are practically relieved from work, and here the windows were put. As, generation after generation, the masons worked away in perfecting their scheme of construction, every part of the fabric wax gathered up into a tense stone skeleton. This resulted in, or was itself occasioned by, another ideal w hich aimed at

i₄4    LANTERNS OF GLASS

turning the whole inactive wall-space into windows, so that the cathedral became a vast lantern of tracery; then, by picturing the spaces by means of transparent jewels of glass, the interior was lighted by angels and saints in­numerable. In the porches and screens were placed hundreds of statues, all parts of a connected schcme, an encyclopedia of Nature, History, and Theology.

We must remember, too, that these Gothic buildings were not few and unrelated ; cathedral towers rose over strong town walls, and crowded, many-gabled houses, while out­wards the country was so closely set over with fair abbeys and villages that the voice of the bells was hoard from church to church as they called to one another throughout the whole of Christendom. Moreo\ er, the ritual had been perfected by the daily practice ;*? a thousand years, and was linked to a music that belonged to it as the blast of trumpets belongs to war. All were parts of a marvellous drama, the ceremonial life of a people.

If we seek for causes for the formation of Gothic art out of its immediate antecedent, we shall find the firsl ai.d chicf in the general historical facts of the period. In such a time of growth and consolidation a corresponding change in the arts must follow. The transition in architecture coincides with great changes in the constitution of town communities and the status of the workman. Romanesque architecture, outside Italy at least, was monastic and feudal, and the builders were attached to the soil. Gothic on the other hand, is the architecture of towns, guilds, and masters who were free to pass fronj place to place.

The mutual binding together of groups for a common

CRAFT UNIVERSITIES

purpose belongs in some degree to all societies, and guilds of craftsmen probably continued in existence in Italy, at least, from Roman days. In Constantinople, as we Lave seen, the guilds were highly organised, and there is some evidence to suggest that the mediaeval guild system, which ultimately spread from Italy over France, England, and Germany, derived much from the East. For instance, the order of the Arti in Florence, in the thirteenth century, follows very much the model of the corporations of Con­stantinople in the ninth; and at the same time the guild regulations of Paris were very similar to both. It is a curious fact, moreover, that in the thirteenth century latumos, the Byzantine word for mason, was used in France and England. I suppose that workers in the West derived their customs and organisation from groups of Byzantine artists working in Italy ; and that it is to the existence of such groups in North Italy that we owe the easy trans­mission of Lombard architecture over Western Europe, which ultimately led to the establishment of similar guilds and the development of Gothic. When the towns of Northern France became communes, the guilds becam*^>. regular schools of craftsmanship. A mediaeval town was a sort of craft university, and Gothic art is the art of the Masons’ guild.

The more direct action of the East upon the West in the age of the Crusaders, which undoubtedly was one of the causes of the upheaval of the soil which made new growth possible, was brought about in many ways—by pilgrimage, by commercial enterprise, and, above all, by the unconscious absorption of new ideas by Western knights who were long in power iu the East.

146

RELIGIOUS ORDERS

Another leading cause of the change to Gothic must have been the great monastic expansion, associated as that was with St. Bernard’s criticism of the older barbaric ornamentation, and the falling back upon the first principles of structure which resulted from it. The monastic reforms, passing in waves over Europe during the twelfth century, led to an enormous volume of building being undertaken in the erection of great establishments for the reformed orders.

The reformed duniac Order was established by Odo of Cluny, c. 920. In 1076 the Order of Grundmont was instituted. The Augustinian, or regular, canons were greatly spread abroad in the first years of the twelfth century. The Cistercian ()rder, an offshoot of the Cluniac, was founded in 1092 at Citeaux. Orderic, wrif ing twenty- seven years afterwards, says that in this time the mother- house had given birth to sixty-five abbeys. They were given “ such names as God’s-house, Clairvaulx, Charity, and others like, so as to attract those who heard the names pronounced.”* The Carthusian Order was instituted by St. Bruno, born 1040, who, with a few followers, retired (c. 1080) to an Alpine pass, and there built their first house, called the Chartreuse, the prototype of all other Charterhouses and Certosas. Savigny, the mother-house of the order of Tiron, was bui't about 1112. This order was absorlxxl by the Cistercians in 1148.

Another order was that of the Premonstratentians, founded by Norbert, chaplain to the Emperor, who withdrew to a solitary place near Laon called Prcmontre,

*      Theoe and other French names, as OherlieD, Bonport, VsJbecoit, &c., may be comp'ared with our own lfeaulieu, Vallecrucis, &c.

BUILDING ENERGY

and founded (in 1120) a community under a strict form of the rule of St. Augustine. “ So (hat from the time of the Apostles scarce any one,” says Herimann of Tournay, “ has done more -service to the Church, for although it is not full thirty years since his conversion, we have already heard of about one hundred monasteries built by his followers. Norbert placed a few of his monks to serve the poor little chinch of St. Martin at Lion, and there are now about five hundred monks in that monastery, and ten other houses have sprung from it.”

It is said that the l&ishop of Laon, from XX13 to 1150, built ten abbey churches, “one for Benedict, four for Bernard, five for Norbert.”

At the same time that there was this great activity 111 founding abbeys, there was a like energy expended in castle-building, bridge-building, and the buildings necessary to town life. There can be no doubt that the defelopment of castle-building was made by the great war-dukes themselves. The Tower of London had its prototype in the Tower of Rouen, and it is probable that the Conqueror schemed its defences n detail. It is not to be doubted that Chateau Gaillard was planned by Richard I. Our Henry III., it appears from the Rolls of accounts, was a veritable austheto-nianiac, only happy when he was engaged in building operations. Sufficient evidence makes it clear that interest in building and other forms of art was universal in the Middle Ages. In many places we find amateur carvings done by prisoners of rank, as at the Tower and Guildford Castle, and these show the sarnr characteristics as other examples of contemporary art. Indeed, it seems impossible to find a scratching on a w^l¹

older than the eighteenth century that does not show feeling for arrangement and beauty.

Such facts as these may partly explain the great outburst of the building art., which we call Gothic.

When, in the first half of the twelfth century, the building art of the He de France began its triumphant development, it gathered up the traditions of many schools. The chief influences at that time acting on the native Romanesque were— Byzantine, acting through the South of France; Lombardic, and Rhenish Romanesque, acting from the East and North; and Norman from the West. To the Byzantine influence is probably due the introduction of the pointed arch. A distinct German influence is to be traced in Tournav, Noyon, Cambrai, I^aon and Soissons. Noyon Cathedral, begun soon after 1131, is one of the first churches which may properly be called Gothic. From the time of St. Medard, Noyon and Tournav had been held conjointly by the same bishops, but in 1145 Tournay had its individual See restored. Tournay Cathedral is a magnificent Romanesque church having apse-ended transepts and a group of four towers surrounding the crossing. Now the Toumay type of transepts was followed in the building of Noyon, but here they are without ambulatories. Cambrai Cathedral (1x48- 90), however, had circular-ended transepts with arcades exactly like an eastern apse, and at Soissons there remains a beautiful arcaded apse-ended transept (c. 1180). The early forms of Cambrai and Soissons were soon altered by partial re-building. The Cathedral of V alenciennes, how­ever. preserved its original design until the m hole church

APSED TRANSEPTS      149

was destroyed a century ago: “The transept of Valen­ciennes " was one of the most famous architectural monu-. ments of the North-west of France ; it was built c. 1160­80 (Fig. 62). As at Toumay and Cambrai there was a

Fig. 6?. Plan of destroyed church of Valenciennes with apsed tianvpts.

lantern tower over the crossing. There cannot be a doubt of the ultimate Byzantine origin of the whole group through Cologne and Tournay. The use of circular- ended transepts continued in the North of France until the beginning of the thirteenth century, when was builf the remarkable Cistercian abbey of Chaalis, with radiating chapels opening from the apsidal transepts. (See Fig. 63.)

At Laon, although the transepts themselves are square- ended, they are flanked by four high transeptal towers recalling the Toumay arrangement, and from the eastern pair of towers open two circular-ended chapels of excep-

Fig. 63. nan of church of Cistercian abbey oi CUaalis, near Senlis.

tional height and importance, which almost seem like <t modification of the apsidal transepts of Toumay.*

Another sign of German influence appears in the four- gabled towers in the neighbourhood of Soissons. The

*      The little early church of St. Wandrille near Caudebec has rounded transepts, and the transitional church at Meung is a simpler version of Cambrai. Altogether this is a very important clas\

central tower of Braisne follows this type, as also did that of the abbey church of Notre Dame, Soissons (Fig. 64).

The alternation of the piers of the nave arcade, whereby coupled bays were formed, may also be traced to Lombardic and German sources, whether derived directly or through Normandy. The most recent inquirers, like AnthymeSt.Paul, Dehio and Von Be/old, and Enlart, are disposed to assign a large share in the transitional movement to Normandy, and Mr. Bilson has shown how Norman work in England provides most important links in the chain of development. To Norman builders we owe the adoption or invention of the ogival or cross-ribbed vault. Dehio says that, on the threshold of the twelfth century the Norman school was the first to attain the goal which had been the aim of all the schools of North France, And Enlart rather grudg­ingly writes: “ The ogival vault was in use in the He do France and Picardy about 1120. If the most ancient examples are not four.d here, it is probably in the Norman schools that we should search for them. It seems that in England such vaults were constructed from 1120, and perhaps earlier.” In a foot-note the evidence as to the Durham vaults is admitted but without bringing out its full weight, which shows that ogival vaults were built here from 1003 to 1096. (Rnlart’s Manual, p. 440, and see above, p. 132.) At Laon, Norman influence is to be seen in the arcades across the ends of the transepts, a treatment found at St. Stephen’s, Caen, and at Winchester. At St. Germer(c. 1140) and Poissy(c. 1140) Norman influence may also be traced. The vaulted triforium gallery which we find at Novon, Laon, Paris, and elsewhere was also a Norman feature, but not exclusiv ely to.

H2   RAPIDITY OF

The development of Gothic in the North of France

Fig, 64. Destroyed abbey church of St. Mary, Soissons.

probably followed trade-routes along the river vallevs of the Seine, Oise, Maine and Aisne. The country churches

DISTRIBUTION

*53

of this district even more than the cathedrals show the intense building energy that was put forth during the twelfth century. About Soissons, Laon, Senlis and Beauvais beautiful churches are to be found at every mile or two. There must have been great prosperity in all this region when such works were produced.

One of the noteworthy facts of the growth of Gothic was the rapidity of its advance. Fast as rumour the seed ideas flew, and a harvest of churches, great and small, sprang up over a vast field.

CHAPTER VII

GOTHIC CHARACTERISTICS

Wk must now pass to a more technical examination of some of the chief characteristics of Gothic architecture.

One of the most typical principles of construction is that of supportin. the vaults by diagonal ribs, the con­struction in France called “ voSHTiitr croisees ogives''''; this principle; as we have just seen, .Romanesque builders had already largely used. The word “ogive is "used by Villars de Honnecourt, in the thirteenth ce7i1;urvTas~a1lf?rnTe for diagonal vaulting ribs.* The ogival vault is made up of ribs crossing diagonally over every compartment, and of shells of stone covering in the triangular spaces left between them, something like stone umbrellas. A few years ago it was thought that these vaults were the special mark of the Gothic style, that they were invented in North France, and that Morienval is the earliest church where the system was applied, but it is not now considered that this church dates from before 1120-5.

The simplest form of an ogi\al vault is that in which a

*      Ogive comes from the =ame root as augment. Goiiefroi s Dic­tionary cites *' Les voussures de boin azur ei toutes Ies augivet. dore.” Our English “ogee" seem⁰ to be the same word.

BEAUVAIS CATHEDRAL. THE APSE AXD FLYING BUTTRESSES

VARIETIES OF VAULTS 155

rompartment is crossed by two diagonal ribs, and this is called “ quadripartite vault’ng."

The high \aults of the French churches, built in thp last halt’ of the twelfth century, usually had six cells to a compartment; that is, an additional transverse rib was put at the intersection of the diagonal ribs, and the cells of the vault were modified accordingly. This form proliably

Fig. 65. Diagiams of vaults.

priginated in the adding of a strengthening arch to a quadripartite vault. When, in the latter half of the thirteenth century, the aisle vaults of Beauvais were strengthened, they were changed Into quasi six-celled vaults. In some early vaults there arc arches of a similar kind, ard although existing examples do not seem to be earlier, or so early, as some true six-celled vaults, it is likely that such approximation to them did once exist.. There were, several reasons ivhich led the builders to accept

156  PLANNING VAULTS

ttiis form, bat it was probably retained chiefly for the following one : in Fig. 65, a, A is an apse with its vaulting iibs; in the next bay, B, the diagonal ribs were not thrown right across, but butted against the point where the apse ribs converged, so as to form a resistance to their thrust. Bay B is thus vaulted in three cells, and if we now treat bays C and D in exactly the same way (alternating the direction of the diagonals), we get the arrra.igement in the figure, where C and 1) together make up a six-celled vault. W "VV are the windows. It will be seen that this system makes coupled bays which are approximately square. Moreover with such vaults every coupled bay nearly repeats the width of the great bays opening to the tran­septs. By me.ans of making fhe great transverse ribs into arches more substantial than the rest of the ribs and accentuating the vaulting shafts below them into an echo of the main piers of the crossing, it was possible to inter­weave an arched order rising the whole height of the walls with the lesser order of the nave arcade. Several examples show that this was aimed at. In Lyons Cathedral the larger alternate piers of the arcade are all like the four piers of the crossing.

The bays around the apse are always comparatively narrow, and this opeued up the way to another method of spacing, which later became the normal one, and is shown on the right, Fig. 65, b. Bay B has now become one of the apsidal bays, and about half the width of the ordinary bays C and I), which are each vaulted in four cells.

In English vaults, from about 1260, intermediate ribv are often found to the four-celled vault, thus subdividing each triangular web of the filling, as shown in D, Fig. 66.

ADDITIONAL RIBS

'57

This naturally resulted in the systematic use of ridge ribs, as shown in the figure. Some writers have said that this addition of ribs is a fault of prin­ciple; but that cannot be admitted, although there may have been lack of boldness.*

I’he essential principle of the Gothic vault is the placing of ribs where the surfaces chance their directions, that is, at the diagonal intersections. Thus the transverse rib found in all Gothic vaults is itself but an intermediate, and in narrow spaces a surplusage.

It helps, however, to support the vault web, and in wider spaces justifies itself. English bunders preferred still further support, and it cannot be thought that French masters of the best period would have hesitated to use the expedient on principle. Indeed, the great vault over the crossing of Amiens, which belongs to the first building of this part, allows us to say that the master, in this case, did feel the need or additional support, and obtained it exactly as it is done in an English vault of the same time. Will the critics adverse

Fig. 66. Diagrams of vaults.

*      Professor Moore says, “The three ribs, transverse, diagonal, and longitudinal, arf the only crmstruciivs ribs of any vault" ; others he calls superfluous, " ribs which have no necessary function ”

153  STANDARD ARCHES

to English Gothic say that the Amiens master adopted an English invention ? In Tig. 66, A shows a bay of a quadri­partite vault. B shows the same with an additional trans­verse arch, which turns it into a pseudo six-celled vault. C is a true sexipartite vault as explained above. D is a quadripartite vault with additional ribs.

The i>o!nted arch was used by Byzantine builders, and its use spread over the East. In the West it is found in the eleventh century. One of several reasons for its adoption must have been that such arches could he constructed with less elaborate centring than circular arches. Doubtless many were buJt on little more than two timbers inclined at an /\ angle. Compare what has been said above 011 page 36 as to the elliptical brick arches of Egypt.

Early French masters in their use of the pointed arch generally conlined themselves to those whose curvature varied within a narrow range, and they appear to have standardised three or four varieties, between the semi­circular and equilateral arches. When a relatively high space had to be occupied by an arch they usually stilted it, that is, raised the actual springing level above the capitals dow n to which the arch mouldings were continued vertically. Standard arches were called three-point, four- point, five-point, and so on ; terms which were already in use at the time of Villars de Ilonnecourt. If the span of an arch is divided into three, four, five, &c., the centres of the curves of the several arches are in each case placed 011 the two points farthest from the springing* of the arch. The three-point arch is relatively low, the four-point arch is steeper, and the five- and six-point arches still more nearly approach the equilateral form.

FLYING BUTTRESSES

In a square vaulted compartment, if the diagonal ribs are made, as they most frequently were, semicircular, they would rise higher than transverse arches of the three point form, and the vault would be slightly domical; this was the earlier form of vault.

Four-point transverse arches rise just exactly to the same height as semicircular diagonals, and give level ridges; this was the later form of vault.

It may be that these forms of arches were preferred foi some such reasons; but in any case, working with arches the geometrical relations of which were known, sim­plified the conduct of works without elaborate drawings, and the sketch-book of Villars de Ilonnecourt shows how much building recipes of this sort were valued.

More than the vaults themselves, the French way of staying them with flying buttresses was characteristic of the progress of Gothic? TTfe first Hying buttresses were simple quadrant arcKesJTike"those around the apse of the St. Germain~3e^H^:es^PSi^^onsecrated^Tx03. They reached an extraordinary development at Chartres ViRt'

"■■■"I ¹¹  *              *      I, I IIJU...I III-  IT...

'Reims, and above all at Beauvais. They seem to have Been n general use from about 1160, at Ourscamp, Laon, &c. But ’ i England there was a long period after their introduction by the Sens master at Canterbury before they were generally adopted, and they were haltingly used until Westminster Abbey was built, after 1245. The buttresses of this church closely follow French models.

It is possible that this hesitation may have come from a dislike of their essential weakness as being exposed to rapid decay; but, notwithstanding this weakness, great Gothic

\6o  WATER CHANNELS

construction depends on the bold use of the “ butting arch.” This reluctance delayed the general use of high vaults, so that the middle spans of noble churches like Byland Abbey and liipon Cathedral were not \ aulted. y Others, like Rivaulx (choir) and Iff St. Hugh’s choir at Lincoln, were vaulted, but without external support. In both these cases flying buttresses were added later. Even in the middle of the thirteenth century, when Salisbury nave was built, the supports were all kept under the aisle roofs.

Buttresses had begun as pilas­ters of slight projectiop, and became strong piers rising above the aisle roof from which the flying props were thrown to sup­port the clerestory, then pinnacles were added to increase their weight and resistance to lateral pressure. They increased until they seemed like pierced walls standing at right angles to the main building. Finally, channels were wrought in the upper side of their sloping backs, down which ran the water from the main roof, which was then thrown clear of the building bv far-projecting gargoyles. At the same time the original walls

Fio. 67. Sketch section of one side of navp, Amiens CatueJral.

CELLULAR CONSTRUCTION 161

between them disappeared r 1 arched openings filled with glass. (Plate 30).

In churches like Ami<ns Cathedral or St. Urbain at Troyes, there is hardly any wall left; and in these buddings a tendency is to be remarked to substitute thin double Fcreens of stone for thicker work. The construction tended to become cellular (see the triforium und clerestory of Amiens, Fig. 67). Building thus w th double screens connected by piers is, for rigidity and lightness, the last word in construction of masonry. Brunelleschi made use of a similar principle in the double shell of his dome at Florence,

It should be pointed out that French building admitted of the extensive use of ironwork ties and chainagc. The windows were subdivided by strong grates of wrought-iron, some of the horizontal bwrs of which ran on through the piers continuously. At the Sainte Chapelle a chain was imbedded in the wails right round the building, and the stone vaulting-ribs were reinforced by curved bands of iron placed on each side and bolted to them.

(_In the plans of French churches we find a largeness and unity of conception to which the English churches afford little parallel, and it must be remembered rhat the general disposition of areas and masses is the first of constructive problems.

One of the most remarkable churches I have ever seen is St. Frambourg at Senlis. This is without arcades, a simple “vessel,” with an apse rounded like a poop. It is 150 feet long and 32 feet wide, vaulted in four great sexpartite bays, and one half bay next the apse. A single

162  SIMPLE PLANNING

row of lancet windows high up in the vault, and one great

circle in the west gable, admit the light. Outside are sturdy buttresses and a plain, steep, tiled roof.

Mantes Cathedral (c. 1200) is similarly expressive of one idea. Here there is an arcade which con­tinues from the west front around the apse and back again. The aisle runs around in the same unbroken way, w ithout any pro­jecting chapels. At the west end two strong towers stop the thrusts of the arcade. The exterior has a steep tiled roof with red, black,green, and yellow tiles ar­ranged on it in a great diaper.

At St. Leu d’Essc- rent, again, we find a similar plan; but two towers stand '11 the position of transepts over bays of the aisles

Fig. 68. Plan of church at Chars, Oise.

CRUCIFORM PLANS     163

Bourges is th<‘ greatest church of this class. Here there ire double aisles and double arcades circling around the iltar and continued to the west end, where they are blocked by towers.

Another great type of French plan is formed by the transeptal churches.

In some of these, as, for instance, Notre Dame, Paris, in its original form, the transepts hardly ap­pear on the plan, but stand in a line with the aisle walls ami only become marked above. The fine plan of Chars, Oise (1160­80), is a good type of this form, and it is

interesting in com-

•      -.1 xt ► Fig. 69. Plan of east tiansppt and thtvet of

panson with Notre ⁰⁹ _{the church of St> Q}^_ntin.

Dame. This class is

intermediate between the simple vessel and the cruciform type of church. The transepts, if they were arcaded like the nave, sometimes had two towers to each, one at the end of each aisle, as at Lion, Chartres, fkc.

At Tournay, Cambrai, Soissons, and Noyon the cathe­drals follow another perfect constructive type. Here the transepts were apsidal, like the east ends. These apses resisted the interior pressure like horizontal arches (.vr Fig. 62),

/

The office of towers, in the economy of these great buildings, was to frmish larp,e buttressing masses. For the purpose of stopping the arcades at the west end, one great tower sometimes took the place of two side ones, as at St. Quentin and St. Germain dcs Pre's, Paris. At Touraav there are four towers in the re-entering angles of the transepts which take the pressure ai the crossing. And pairs of towers are often built in the re-entering angles cast or west of the transepts, as at Notre Dame at Chalons, St. Martin at Laon, &c.

In the rearing of apsidal chevets set around with chapels the French masters were, occupied with a great problem that we in England hardly touched. Not onlj have we the results to prove this, but in the Study-book of Villars de Honnecourt we have positive evidence that this, to his mind, was the very centre of his art.

The germ of this system may be traced back through the Romanesque age to Roman architecture. Buttressing a wall in this way by a series of convex chambers is a per­fect constructive expedient. When applied to the circular bead of a church, forming so many chapels, the whole seems more like natural crystallisation than mere planning. For a full account of the development of apses it is neces sary to consult the pages of Viollet le Due. One remark­able apsidal termination, however, which he does not notice, is that of St Quentin (c. 1235). This, it seems probable, may be the work of Villars de Honnecourt him­self ; it certainly :s the contrivance of a man who had seen much and tried to combine many excellences. Not only the chapels, but the arcades opening ’^r,to them, are in this case bowed. The vaulting of the ambulatory is carried

APSIDAL CHEVETS      165

higher than the chapels to allow room for low cleresWy windows. The apse is thus surrounded by a double tier of convex chambers, as is plainly seen from the outside.

Fig. 70. Church of St. Yved at Braisne, near Soissons.

In this church the apse starts from a narrow secondary or eastern transept (Fig. 69). The exteriors of the huge ap- sidal chevets * of Beauvais, Bourges, and Le Mans are just &s marvellous as the interiors, the great sweeping walls of

*      Chevet means head, and is applied in France equally to square etidings.

166  PARALLEL APSES

windows being set around with a very scaffolding of pin­nacled buttresses and ramping arches. (Plate 30.) The most perfect of all the schemes of planning apsidal chapels is that followed at Toledo by a French master; it has been well descriljed by Street.

The conventual church of Braisne, close to Solssons, follows an interesting type of plan, which, while approx^-mating to the usual arrangement of apsidal chapels, derives rather from the three parallel apses (Pig. 70).

At Mons, near Laon, the church, a noble one built about x 180-1190, has three such apses. At Yilleneuve-le- Vicomte is a still simpler instance of the same type, there being in this case 110 transepts (Pig. 71). The destroved

Fig, 71. Church of Vilte. _{abb t},_hur(._{h of V}aucelles, of which neuve-le-Vicomte.    ^      ⁷

the plan was taken by V. de Honne- court, is an extremely beautiful solution formed, it seems, by combining the apsidal form and the plan of Braisne together (Fig. 72). Some echo of the snme idea may be seen in the plan of St. Quentin (Fig. 69).

In England, desiring chapels, but not the French means of obtaining them, we hit on a compromise, as in the nine altars of Fountains and Durham. The general use of the second transept in England came about in the same way. Both gave room for chapels, but did not require the great science necessary for the erection of apsidal chevets.

At the end of the twelfth century the circular type of plan was used in the ohsqjel of Liget near Lot bee, built

AIMS IN PLANNING     167

by our Henry II., c. 1176. The Temple churches belong to a similar class. Fig. 73 is the plan of the. chapel of the Templars at Laon built c. 1134.

Gothic buildings, as they have come down to us, have been subject to many additions, changes, and chances;

Fig. 7?. Dretr. >yed abbey church of Vaurt-lles, nea.' Cambrai.

moreover, hardly any one was built throughout in a time sufficiently short to give it absolute homogeneity. On comparing a number of examples, however, it becomes clear that they were schemed on large lines to satisfy given purposes with materials readily obtainable. The builders valued spaciousness and height, lastingness, and fair work­manship, but ideas of a picturesque conglomeration of parts, or of abstract proportion, probably never occurred to them. If we turn from the cathedrals to the little.

village churdics we find that they w<?re in the first case built as directly for their purpose as a carl or a boat would be.

A large majority of the mast famous churches have been “ designed ” to make use, in a greater or less degree, of old foundavons. Chartres Cathedral is founded on a pre-existing crypt, and is terminated by an old west front. Westminster Abbey is largely built over old founda­tions, and when rebuilt by Henry III. in 1245, had to fit in between a Norman nave and a lady chapel built in 1220, as well as to .connect properly with the old cloister. Angers Cathedral is famous for being vaulted in one great span of “fine proportions”; recent ' cha;¹ Lao™¹*¹”³ excavations have shown that the walls belong to an anterior building which had amides, but these were cleared away. In Fig. 74, A A shows the eleventh-century church, B B the church as rebuilt from the middle of the twelfth century. Under such circumstances there is little opportunity for planning abstract propulsions.

The regular course of works in rebuilding a church was to build in sections from the east end. While the choir was be'ng built, the nave remained in use; when it was finished and dedicated, the nave was undertaken; that finished in turn, chapels were added, or the choir was lengthened eastward, or they be^an to build ah over again, once more, at the east end. One of the most interesting

LAW OK PROPORTION 169

Frr;rrvHrT«

*,;,C i T >

examples of transformation known to me is at Wetzlar, on the Lahn. The choir having been rebuilt in the fourteenth cen­tury, while the nave re­mained Romanesque, a new west front was be­gun a hay in advance of the old one; hut the new work was never finished, and the nohlc Romanesque front still stands behind the ela­borate screen of the un­finished new facade.

It is vain to look, as many have done, for any general doctrines of proportion in work so conducted. More­over, n the relation of voids to supports, and heights to substance,

Gothic “ proportion ” was governed by a law

of its own. The prill- Fig. 74. Plan of Angers Cathi'dtal, show- ciple was exactly that ^{in£ h}"^{w the final form B w}“ ^{conditl ,1,ed b}J

~      •'     the earlier plan A.

ol natural growth.

Structure was always tending to overpass the limits of stability. In the narrow field left for choice there may have been a preference for planning lead^;,ig dimensions on

GOTHIC ADAPTABILITY

a series of squares or triangles, and the recurrence of similar relations echoing one another is !ikelv to produce some harmony in all arts.

In the studies of V. de Honnecourt attempts are made to

triangulate the proportions of human figures and animals, and Diirer was interested in similar problems. However this may be, whether for structural reasons or otherwise modifications in Fm; 75. section Of the great normal geometrical setting out hajot the abbey of St. MarLn de i were readily made. Thus, in Champs, Paris.      the magnificent double-aisled

hall of St. Martm des Champs, Paris, the curves of the vaulting are set out as in the figure, at least Choisy says so.

The popular view of Gothic is that it is the architecture of traceried windows; and, indeed, the principle of con­struction involved in branching over w ide spaces v ith stone bars is as important as any in the Gothic code, and it made possible the final conception of making the walls a structure of posts and bars filled by screens of stained glass. Single lancet windows had grown to be of great size, seven or eight feet wide at times, and, as in the apse of Chartres, forty feet high. They were very strongly barred with iron. Subdivision by slender liars of stone naturally followed, and the association of lircular lights above toupled lancets opened the way to tracery.

Traceried windows proper, of two lights with cusped circles above, seem first to have been used in the apsidal chapels of Reims, begun in 1211.

ORIGINS OF TRACERY

171

The evolution of traceried windows, as followed b) Prof. Willis, at first seems to be a perfect demonstra­tion From an early time sub-arches are found under a containing arch, and piercings, growing bigger and more complex, were made in the shield of stone between the sub-arches and the containing arch. This, indeed, seems to be a true account for triforium arcades (compare Noyon and Amiens), but, as a matter of historic fact, the origin of traceried windows in the great French school of ogival art depended on the association of a rose window wi+h lancets beneath. This at first may seem a small distinction, but it will be found to explain several survivals in early French windows. The clerestory win­dows of Chartres will best make this clear, and in this case there can be no doubt of origin. In each bay two lancets and a big rose are brought together into one composition under a containing arch which is less a relieving arch over the windows than part of the general pier and arch construction. (See V. le I)., vol. v. p. 381.) In the parallel design of Laon cloisters the containing arch is absent altogether. In the apse windows of Auxerre (Fig. 76), this bringing together of a rose and two lancets

Fig. 76. Apse windows of Auxerre Cathedral.

is still perfectly obvious. At Bourges we find a similar treatment in the narrow bays of the apse and in the wider bay* of the choir roses are set over three lancets. At Lyons three little roses are piled above three lancets, but all are still separate.

In Fig. 77, from the hospital of the Abbey of Ours-

Fig. 78, From V. de Honne* Fig, 77. Rose and two lancets     court's sketch of the construc-

from Ourscarap, c. 1190. *^{ion of earl}y traceried windows

at Reims Cathedral, c. 1212,

camp (c. 1190), the rose and lancets have hardly yet become one window, but in the combined arches we find the certain germ of the tracery bar.

Now let us turn to the famous windows of Reims. Here the containing arch is that of the bay. The rose combines with the two lancets as in the last instance, but not with the containing arch. In roses, as in Fig. 77, the piercings are made in a slab, or slabs, set in the circle It is the same in the circles at Reims (Fig. 78),

STILTING OF ARCHES 173

Very curiously, when cusps were introduced, at a little later time, into the heads of lancets they were inserted in separate thin pieces, and this treatment was a survival from the cusped slabs of roses.

In this view of their origin the form of h _-hly stilted French windows, as in the example from Reims, rinds a complete ex­planation and justification. They are rose-headed couplets.*

In the similar windows at the rose obtains additional by means of two strong crockets w'hich push against it (Fig. 79). This again speaks of the original ViKars de Honnecourt’s sketch of Reims windows makes it clear that such support was necessary for the lower part of the rose, for he shows it as constructed with joggle .oints

as ill A, Fig. 78.       Fig. 79- Construction of

In the nave clerestory of Amiens, ^ear*y traceried window.. c. .   , " . . . 1 £2o, Amiens Cathi dral.

begun in 1220, the principle ot

subdivision is carri ‘d a step farther, and we getla.’gefour ■ light windows of bar-tracory all cusped in the cirrles. Window's such as these were used in the Chapter-house at Westminster, begun in 1245. At Chartres we find little lancets pierced in the spandrils on either side at the bottom of the transept roses. This is carried a step farther at Chalons Cathedral (Fig. 80), and at last the rose and the

*      Sep the west window of St. Nicaise, V. le D., vol. viii. p. 60, and the four li^ht windows at St. Denis, vol. v. p. 354.

*74

GREAT ROSES

lancets were merged into one glorious traceried window l^:ke the nurth window of Amiens.

Perfected windows, with the tracery filling the arched

Fig. 80. From the rose window in the north transept of Ch&lons Cathedral.

head and the upright lights cusped, are perhaps first found at the Sainte Chapelle, Paris, 1240-8. After the windows had spread over the whole bay up to the arched vaulting rib as seen from within, a further development was made in the middle of the thirteenth century by

SQUARING OF WINDOWS 175

making them fill up the square-headed bays of the exterior, thus being bounded only by the buttresses and the main comire. In this case the heads of the windows are pushed up into “ pockets ” left in the thickness of the

Fig. 81. One quarter of rose window, Notre Dame, Paris.

wall behind the vaulting ribs. Yiollet le Due gives instances of this treatment, and Fig. 82 is a parallel treatment from the triforium windows of Amiens (r. 1250­1260). The open arcade crowning the west front or Notre Dame, Paris, is another beautiful example of similar method. The square spandrik of rose windows were also

176 WINDOWS AND GLASS

opened out and combined w ith the circles. Fig. 81 is a quarter of one of the transeptal Roses of Notre I)ame.

On consideration of the many surpassing excellences to be found in Gothic windows, both in their stone frames and the glass which fills them—the essential and high

Fig. 8a. Trifcrmm windows from the transept of Amiens Cathedral.

part that they serve in the economy of the building, the scale, frequently upwards of a thousand square feet, whereby the figured glass may be seen by a concourse of people, and, above all, the way in which such a window lends itself to, and becomes a part of, the glory of light— I am forced to say that the window of dyed glass is the most perfect art-form known. So any one must feel who

UOUKGKS CAT 11KD UAL, GLASS. CHRIST OF THE APOCALYPSE

Facep, 176

a      b

Fig, 83, a, t. Stained glass from south transept of Chartres Cathedral (after Lassus).

Fig. 84a. Chartres, upper part of window called Notre Dame de la Belle-Verrifere.

Fig. ?4i. I .owur pa-t of rami' w ndow rt rhartres (af'er Lassus).

18o  A MOSAIC OF FIRE

has watched the chang'ng hues of the windows of Chartres, Bourges, or Re ims, through a summer’s afternoon, from the hoar when the shadows of the flying buttresses fall in great bands across the burning glass, to the twilight when they fade and hardly glimmer in the gloom of the vaults. (Plate 31.)

Such windows were not depicted merely in transparent colours, as we arc apt to th;nk ; but from the thickness, texture, and quality of the old glass it holds the sunlight, as it were, w’thin t, so that the whole becomes a mosaic of coloured fire. Up to the middle of the thirteenth century the usual colour scheme was of crimson and azure, cleared by small fragments of white, yellow and green. The * pitch " of the colour is the intensest con­ceivable, and stimulates the sensibilities like an exultant anthem. One feels that this dazzling mixture of blue and ruby was made use of by a deeper instinct thar taste. Such windows seem to fulfil an active part in oa^fhedral ritual - an incense of colour.

The windows of St. Louis’ chapel, of which some large portions are now in the South Kensington Museum, were celebrated in the saying: “ Wine the colour of t he windows in the Sainte Chapelle.”   _

Figures 83 a, b, and 84 a, b, are outlines of windows at Chartres. In the former, with daring symbolism, are the Evangelists mounted on the shoulders of the Prophets. Below are little figures of donnrs. The other window called La Belle Yerriere has the Virgin and Child sur­rounded by adoring angels, and beneath stories from the life of Christ. In both the Virgin and the Prophets there is an obvious s+rain of Byzantinism. In Fie. 85 from

IV. 1!. L. del

CHARTltKS CATHEDRAL. Cl. A S.-:. FIGI'liE OF DON'OI!,

GUY BK JIOXTFOKT

PICTURES OF TRADES 181

I .'ton may be observed the same tradition. Figures of donors, appear on many of the lights of Chartres; in the circles of the clerestory are mounted knights, amongst which is Guy deMontfort. (Plate 32.) In the south transept

Fig. 85. Portion ol window from La'tn.

are the Lord and Lady of Dreux and all the little Dieux. Other windows given by Guilds show pictures of daily business, a batcher killing cattle, a blacksmith shoeing a horse, carpenters, masons, a far and mantle shop, and so on. Stained glass was well developed in France in the twelfth century. Thtophi.us tells us that at that time French glass was the most famous.

182

STONE ROOFS

Spire construction, again, also seems necessary to the lull Gothic idea. Spires are in reality steep stone roofs. The scale of building became too vast to apply this method of covering to the chief spans, but we can see in such an example as Loches the germ of a constructive possibility never, it may be, fully explored. At St. Nicholas, Caen, again the apse is covered with a stone- built roof, and smaller apsidal chapels here, at Norrey, and at Bourges Cathedral are covered in s similar way. Spire-building had reached an extraordinary development in France during the twelfth century, but in England it was rather timidly handled until the end of the thirteenth century.

Stone-slab roofs were frequently used, especially in the south. The vast cathedral of Toledo seems to have been covered with ingeniously designed stone roofs of low pitch as were also other Spanish cathedrals. The outer aisle roofs of Notre. Dame, Paris, are covered with large slabs resting on arches. The magrrficent pavements of engraved stone slabs may also here be mentioned. Those of St. Omer and of St. Nicaise, Heims (now at St. llemi), are the best known.

A line characteristic ot first French Gothic is found in the use of monolithic columns, which often have the classic entasis. At Vezelay the shafts themselves bear mouldings of slight projection close to the base, like their antique prototypes. The free use of the monolithic column must be includ(*d among the expedients of all the highest architectures. The capitals and bases of such cylindrical columns are usually very noble.

The eastern limbs of the cathedmls were enclosed

L~

CHOIR AND PULPITUM 183

between the pillars by high stone screens forming choirs. The finest existing enclosures are those of Paris and Amiens. At the west end of the choir was the pulpitum or jube, a double stone screen carrying a loft, on which stood the nave rood, the choir organs, and a great lectern. The lower stage was an arcade, in the centre of which was the choir door, and right and left nave altars. The forms of thcjubes of Paris, Chartres, Strasbourg, and Amiens are known from sketches taken before their destruction, and several of the lovely sculptured panels which adorned the front of those at Chartres and Bourges still exist. (Plate 33.) In the choir the high altar usually stood on the chord of the apse, and behind it, between the two central eastward columns, was the retro altar, or altar of relics. A paint­ing preserved at Arras is the best authority for the original form and furnishings of sucb altars. Six slender columns of bronze or silver stood, three on each side of the high altar, carrying rods to which were suspended curtains, and bearing figures of angels who held the instruments of the Passion. Above and behind the altar was a silver reredos, or “ table,” as it was called. The early silver reredosand the altar of St. Denis are exquisitely delineated in a painting of Jean Van Eyck.

At Amiens, behind the al+ar, was a second double stone screen Jike another pulpitum with little winding stairs to mount to a platform, on which were exposed the precious shrines and other relics of the church At the Sainte Chapelle there was a somewhat similar arrangement of great beauty, more like a baldachin, and with open spiral stairs. Above the high altar at Bourges was the “ ciel,” or tester, above which again rose the choir rood, with images

ALTARS

of St. Mary and St. John all painted and gilded. From the tester hung the tabernacle of the sacrament. On the left of the altar 'was a watching chamber from whence priests guarded the altar and its treasure through the night.

At Arras a large tabernacle for the relics was supported between the two eastern pillars and directly above the relic altar, so as to be seen beyond and over the high altar. In front of the high altar at Bourges stood a tall, seven- branrhtd candlestick. Across the choir ran a beam sup­porting lights, and to it was suspended the Lenten Veil, which divided the presbytery from the choir, on either side of which were the stalls for the clergy, and in the midst the eagle lectern. On feast days fine tapestries were hung in the arches above the stalls.

The bishop’s throne, which earlier, in basilican arrange­ments, stood at the back of the apse, was later placed at the side of the altar.

It is difficult to get a clear idea as to the typical form of west fronts, hardly one of which is complete or homo­geneous. St. Denis, Senlis, Notre Dame at Chalons, and Chartres best represent the transitional forms; and of these the Chulons church, with its two western leaded spires and rose window, is the most complete; while the scheme of Chartres must have been the most stately and furthest advanced of its age (Fig. 91). I^aon, Paris, and Mantes are a linked group built, 01 begun, about 1200. Of these Laon was the earliest, and set the type. A rough view printed before the destruction of the stone spire which, before 1793, surmounted the south-west tower (it is doubtful whether its companion was ever completed),

&TKA*Uf>i:itG- CATHEDRAL. THE VULITITH, NOW D£STUOY£D

I'ace p. 18i

WEST FRONTS

185

allows us to gain some impression of what was aimed at in all these facades. When complete it would have risen nearly three squares high. The lowest square is occupied by the sculptured doors with the rose and two lateral windows alwve; the next tier by a gallery over the rose, and two towers pierced through and through with tall openings, while the acute crocketed spires rising from these towers would form the third stage.

Holy Trinity, Caen, possesses one of the complet.est of west fronts, but the lower part is plain Normal., and the towers are of transition work; only the spires, which are magnilicent, are fully G-othic. Coutanees, also in Nor­mandy, has a remarkable west front. The portal front of Notre Dame, Paris, is the classic example of work balanced in its enthusiasm and power; here strong horizontal bands are more marked than in any other example; but we must remember that the towers were certainly intended to bear high spires as at Laon, which would have greatly modified this effect.

In most of these fronts, as also at Reims, spoken of in another place, the peak of the gable is masked between the two towers by a horizontal arcaded gallery. At Rouen, Reims, and elsewhere the contrivance by which, through having immense openings pierced in them, the towers were designed not to block the light in the church, resulted ta extraordinarily open construction. At Laon the pinnacles and staircases are open cages of pillars, and the whole tower is seen against the sky like the silhouette of a traceried tabernacle.

Of facades a little later in date the ruins of St. Jean des Vignes, Soissons, is a fine example.

Early French Gothic building is characterised by simplicity, directness, and clearness. The details are larger than corresponding work in England. Arches, shafts, apd capitals are not, as a rule, channelled into a multiplicity of mouldings. It was felt that beyond a certain point “detail” must change its character into carving, and again, beyoml a point, that ornamental carving must give way to sculpture. French sculpture of the great period is only to be ri\ allod bv the finest Greek

Fig. 86. French Goth'c mould'ngs.

work; and the ornamental carving was bolder, freer, and more varied ^J.han ours—directly inspired by Nature, but not servilely imitative.

In the mouldings of French churches of the best period all evidence of the -squared courses and orders out of which they are hewn does not disappear; the profiles glorify, but do not disguise, the masonry. In Fig. 86, A is a vaulting rb from Chartres, B is an arch profile from Lyons, both standards of excellence. In Fig. 87 the cutting is exces­sive, except in the case of the base C from Noyon, w hich is typical of fine French bases. 1) is a window jamb, E an arch impost, and F a string moulding, all from Norrey.

The question of moulding is one of the most difficult to explain. Up to a point, moulding has some practical justification, as in the rounding of an edge, but this takes us a very little way. Generally it is a means of bringing

Fig. 87. D, E, F, Gothic mouldings from Normandy. C, Base from Noyon.

delicacy into the scale of a building, and, in the main, moulding is a method of emphasis and of shading in the solid. Here, quick hollows give an expression of force; there, soft rounds form transitions and middle tones.

Alongside of the structural development of Gothic

i b 8 “OVER-GOTHIC”

building into functional members, the general law of concentration and activity went far beyond structural implications into a code of expression to which we usually and disguisingly ^ive the name of “ decoration.” Of course, ** decoration ” tended to become the symbol of the pride of a bishop and the wealth of a merchant; but, at the best, it was the vehicle for other ideas than richness. As Gothic construction was energetically pressed forward, arches were sharpened, vaults wero nuide wider, all excess ol mu*t na was taken from pillars, and wir.dow-lights drew together by much the same law that makes the honeycomb an example of bar tracery. Rut beyond all these due results of the Gothic principle of construction, the builders desired an expression of tense nervous energy, till works like the fronts of Reims,* Strasbourg and Abbevilje seem electriffid, and as if the stone lt&pt into spray of dame. (Plate 34.)

It is necessary to separate clearly the essential Gothic of structure, the art of thrust and parry, from this over-Gothic of expression; the one dealt w ith universal laws of building constant for all time, and the other, towards the end, passed into highly specialised forms of local and momentary meaning, and was at times even morbid and hysterical. It is, however, just these special “Gothic” forms, never properly apprehended, as copying them proved, which made the stock-in-trade of those who professed to supply modem Gothic art.

Organic Gothic, let me repeat, must last for ev er as a theory of building; phenomenal Gothic, as it in fact existed in the past, was possible only to thp moments which produced it.

We can trace the historical development of what T have

EXPRESSION FORMS   189

called over-Gothic, but the question is everywhere obscured at any given t’me by the inheritance of “decorative features,” that is, expression-forms, from the art which went before it.

Arches built in orders had bead mouldings cut into their angles ; piers had sirr ilar definition given to their edges; pillars were channelled up into many shafts; horizontal courses were hollowed and rounded into mouldings. Then the hollows next the beaded edges of arches were deopened and other beads added till roll-moulding and deep hollows in strong contrast ribbed the whole,■ the shafted edges of buttresses and pinnacles were connected above with moulded arches to give the shafts something to do; arcades were carved out of w all-surfaces to make the wall itself seem active; from the springing sides of arches grew a strong spur called a “ cusp ” ; spires were set around with little spires—“children,” as Villars de Honnecourt calls them ; crockets like budding ferns pushed out scrolls along the sloping edges of gables and spires; parapets were pierced, showing the sky set in their foils like azure glass; gargoyles thrust themselves farther out and Turned their dragon heads ; toy pinnacles were added to the pinnacles, as they themselves were added to the parent spire; gables rose steeper; window tracery ate up more and more of the wall; stone foliage grew in the hollows of the mouldings, statues of saints and angels were made to inhabit every cranny, and the work was illuminated with bright colour and gold.

Such was Gothic art on the crest, and up to this moment every addition had increased the expression of joyous activity ; for, at an early time, and within bounds,

TABERNACLE-WOR K

the expressive result is most lovely of that which later became a parasitic growth whirh went far to strangle the style. At the high tide of Gothic there was sufficient intellectual motive, realised or inherited, to give this overlay a justification, were it only that quality of romance which lights up all forms of thirteenth-century effort.

As an instance of inherited custom, it may be said that tabcmacle-work as associated with sculpture had a traditional meaning, which can be traced far back into itomanesque art. In miniatures and reliefs, when the action of the figures represented was taking place within a building, it was usual to indicate gables and domes and towers along the lop margin, and to carry down pieces of wall or columns on the sides. Early examples of archi­tectural canopy-work like those above twelfth-century representations of the Virgin (compare Fig. 84) clearly show this origin. In such situations i-abemarle-w ork is a general expression for the heavenly temple.

In their use of imitation traccrj-ornament we can, perhaps, hardly follow or understand mediaeval artists. It seems to me that stained-glass windows of the great time —whole rows of them, as we see at Chartres, Uourges, Strasbourg—wore, when lit up by the sun into living emerald, ruby and sapphire, so marvellously beautiful, so full of the life of light, that it came about that little fig ires of windows, used decoratively, were more than mere patterns, they were symbols of windows and of all that windows meant. For instance, there is in South Kensington Museum a romantic silver drinking-cup (c. 1320), whose sides are pierced with tiny traceried

FRENCH AND ENGLISH

windows which are filled with transparent enamel, so that the wine was lit up with stained-glass windows.

Comparison of French and English art shows that ours was but a provincial variety of the great ogival style, a patois, as Viollet le Due says of the art of Normandy. English Gothic is not the most typical, and it is a derivative of French art. But, for all that, it is exquisitely beautiful —something more wildling, less self-conscious, and, it may be, even more tender and pathetic. It is so, at least to English eyes, for they must bring to the interpretation of this art some similar faculties to those possessed by the men who built the monuments of our land.

CHAPTER VIII

FRKNCH CATHEDRALS

In the century from about 1150 to 1250, Gothic building in the North of France made extraordinary progress. Absorbing at first what it needed from neighbouring schools, it soon surpassed them all, and the product is on a different plane from the rest, and forms the typical Great Gothic of the cathedrals. . St. Etienne at Beauvais, and St. Denis are important links in the transition. St. Etienne (c. 1120) is still somewhat rude, and stands on the Romanesque side uf the style boundary. St. Denis, that is such old parts as still remain, is on the Gothic side. It is refined, clear, and energetic. Every artistic possibility was brought to bear on the church, and stained glass, sculpture, bronze, and mosaic adorned the most advanced construction of the time. It was begun in X137, and in 1143 mass was celebrated at the high altar during a storm, when the ribs of the incomplete vault were seen to sway in the wind.

Noyon and Senlis Cathedrals have much in common with St. Denis. The data in i-egard to Noyon have lately been re-examined by Lefevre Pontalis. In 1131 the earlier church was destroyed by fire. The erection of the

NO YON  193

choir of the cathedral probably took place between c. 1140-57, as in 1157 the Archbishop of Reims trans­lated the relics of Eloi, the local saint, into a new shrine. This part of the cathedral agrees very closely with the apse of St. Germain des Pres, Paris, which is known to have been consecrated in 1163. The east-end and the circular-ended transepts of Noyon were probably com­pleted c. 1170, while the nave may be dated c. uyo. After a fire in 1293 the vaults of the nave fell in ; they were soon afterwards rebuilt with new flying buttresses.

At the east end Noyon is distinctly transitional in type. There are pointed windows in the apse, but in the ad­joining wider bays they arc circular-headed. The columns around the eastern apse are rather slender monoliths with vigorous capitals. As in several of these transition churches, the triforium is entirely vaulted; such gallery vaults sustained the high vault... The nave triforium has pointed arches with sub-arches and a pierced trefoil in the spandrils. The clerestory has coupled round headed lights, recessed trom the outside under a containing circular arch. The columns of the ground arcade are alternately circular and compound. The main vaulting shafts rise from the ground at the alternate piers, and support transverse arch ribs of considerable size. The other shafts start from the caps of the columns. This seems to show, as Viollet le I)uc has observed, that the vault was at first of the six-celled variety. The repetition of the great arches of the crossing obtained by r jnning down the alternate vaulting shafts to the ground is most satisfactory. The aisle circumscribing the. apse has circular chapels projecting from it. Behind them, as

N

seen from outside, rises the circular wall of the trifo- rium with its own range of windows, and behind that again the apse proper. At the west end are two noble towers, and a triple porch forming an open naithex, there are also delightful cloisters and a chapter-house. The porch, built c. 1270, has had all its sculpture hacked away, but the vestiges show that; this must have been admirable. All that is left is some exquisite foliage and three little panels on the mid-post of the door, types of Christ who stood above—the Phoenix, the Lion, and the Pelican.

In 1155 was begun Notre Dame, Senlis, and this also is of earliest pointed work, severe and strong. At first it was planned as a simple “ vessel ” w ithout transepts, which were not added till the last days of Gothic. The piers are alternate ly grouped and cylindrical, the trito- rium has a large single opening to each bay, the arches are in square orders with beaded angles, the apse is surrounded by chapels. The church was completed in 1184, except the upper part of the west front, and it was dedicated in 1191. The extraordinarily elegant fleche was built about 1240.

Much more important than either of these is the great cathedral of Laon. It had already been in course, of erection for some time in 1174, and it was pro­bably begun about 1160. It had long been a puzzle that this church should have a square end to the east; but foundations have been iound which show that at first it had an apsidal termination, the chord of which was at the third bay from the crossing. Signs of thi.s are still

perfectly dear *n the work. At this point the capitals of the great columns begin to curve, and two other capital* eastward on each side are also curved on plan, showing that they were rebuilt from their former position in an apse which must have had four columns and five bays (Fig. 88).* The first work seems to have been finished to the west, including the three sculptured portals, by about 1200, and the lengthening of the east end must have been under­taken directly after, as practically the same style is main­tained throughout. The arcade of cylindrical pillars with bold capitals about three feet deep, is very fine. There is a vast triforium entirely vaulted, and galleries across the ends of the nave and transepts make a con­tinuous upper storey. The central space is covered with six-celled vaulting, and to the exterior there are fine flying buttresses. Over the crossing is a low lantern- tower, and at the ends of the aisles of nave and transepts rise six singularly beautiful towers which were intended to have high spires of stone. One at least of these spires was in existence when Villars de Honnecourt made his drawing of it—“the most beautiful tower he had ever seen ” (Fig. 89). It lasted until the Revolution. Around the base from which these spires sprang are open pinnacles which are inhabited by stone oxen, who push out their heads between the pillars and look down upon the town. These towers open to the galleries across the ends of the interior with tall arches which rise as high as the clerestory; they thus are not mere attachments, but form an integral part of the building. The w indows (before later altera­tions) were wide lancets of nearly equal size, in ground­* Tne square extension would give more room about the relic shrine

stage, triforium, and clerestory. The four arms of the extended church were lighted by as many great roses, three of which arc still filled with splendid glass. The great, triple-bayed porch, and the west front generally, has much beautiful old sculpture. This facade of T>aon set the type follow ed at Paris and Mantes of squaring across the top with a gallery. The west front of Reims has a similar termination. At Noyon, between the two towers is seen the preparation ior a very tall open gallery, which connected them and heightened the front.

In the original plan of Laon we have a completely organic distribution of parts. ^rrhe avenues of arcades of the interior are buttressed by the six towers, north, south and west, while to the east they continued around in a semicircle. Over the crossing the lantern-tow er gave light and significance to the central point of the church, and almost beneath it stood the high altar.

It was chiefly in regard to Laon that Viollet le Due propounded his celebrated theory as to the civic use of cathedrals, and the opposition between cathedral and monastic ideals. His view, which he supported by reference to the curi jus hall-like plan of Laon, necessarily fails in regard to what has now been shown * to hav e been its earlier form. It has been combated by Q^icherat, Anthjme St. Paul, and others, and can no longer be sustained.

Laon is an especially interesting centre of early Gothic monuments; but a building usually cited as amongst the earliest of transitional works, the chapel in the Bishop’s

*      V. le Due in a note to another passage she ws that he knew of the e<trii«!r form,

oosi ‘.niv.i jiaa.m •0611 •s£‘₁lhyj jist.uo’i ^; Jiooa j.shav ''ivJiaMiixvo sxas

iaxx \

palace, has recently been proved to have been erected after 1155, instead of directly after 1112.

Sens Cathedral was biing built in the period 1144-68. Viollet le Due showed, in his article “ Transept," that it was at first built without a crossing, having onlv two chapels opening from the aisles, the great arcade and vault being continuous from the east to the west. There were no eastern chapels, except probably a central one, as at Canterbury. The high vault is in sexpartite com­partments, falling alternately on compound piers and columns coupled transversely. A substantial arch divides off each compound bay of the vault from its neighbours. The triforium is un mportant. The capitals are very noble; although so early, they are finished works, classical of their kind. The church contains some good early glass, and at the west door there are beautiful sculptures. (Plate 36.) Adjoining the church is a magnificent thir­teenth-century Synod Hall, now terribly restored.*

There is the closest resemblance between Sens and the work at our own Canterbury, begun in T174, by a Sens master. Every shopkeeper at Sens knows of the architect of Canterbury.

Notre Dame, Paris, was begun about 1162. In the chronicle of Robert de Monte, under 1177. we read: “For a considerable time Maurice, the Bishop of Paris, has been labouring earnestly and profitably for the building of the chnrch of that city, the head (eastern limb) of which is now finished with the exception of the great roof (wajori teciorio); if this undertaking be completed there will be

*      The building accounts of Sens, as yet unpublished, are preserved in the public library at Auxerre.

none to rival it on our side of the Alps.” The high altar was consecrated in 1182 and the church was finished, inelud­ing the lower half of the west front,about 1225. (Plate 35.) jl,* . ' ' r d * A -> As flrvt built the scheme was

very large and simple, the apse having double aisles surround- ingit, which continued through­out, but no chapels. The rows of great cylindrical columns of the interior arcades form the most perfect of supports and the capitals are severe and fine. The transepts are of slight pro­jection and without aisles. The trlforium is vaulted and the second aisle allowed of its having external support, as it in turn supported the central vault.

Notre Dame thus rises in three graduated storeys; each tier was lighted by a row of ^{v v w} ^ similar lancets. The high vault

FiG. 90 Plan of Notre Dame, Paris. ,

is in six-celied compartments,

and further supported by bold flying buttresses. At the west end rise two towers, each one stalling over the double aisle. Soon after the completion of the church a series of modifications were undertaken at the east end. The cleres­tory lancets were now subdivided into two lights each, with circles above radiating chapels were added to the ambula­

tory, and the nave chapels and present transept ends were built. The clerestory windows were "lazed with figures of bishops eighteen feet high, which are now entirely destroyed. The rose windows are especially fine, both in the tracery and the glass. Whittington a century ago said : ‘‘The three marigold windows which still retain their painted glass are the most magnificent I have anywhere seen” (see Fig. 81). The original form of plan with transepts in line with the aisles may be compared with Fig. 68. The vaulting as just said is sexipartite. As the columns and vaulting shafts of the main arcade do not mark, this fact, Professor Moore, in accordance with his theory of Gothicness, makes the suggestion that the church was built for four-part vaults, but at the last moment they made the change to the existing form. Y. le Due, however (art. Offive), shows how the whole vaulting scheme follows from the geometrical conditions of the form of the apse and choir, and in another place he shows how the vault system of the nave is marked in the alternating piers of the nave-aisles, as may be seen on our plan. The towel’s of the west front must have been prepared for spires which were never erected. (See Fig. 91, on w hich there is a great statue of the Virgin between the towers. And see Appendix.)

Mantes Cathedral is in much a smaller version of Notre Dame. The monolithic columns of the apse with their fine jutting capitals, the vaulted triforium and the roof covered with coloured tiles arranged in a great pattern, are all particularly interesting.

At Soissons in the circular south transept, of which I have already spoken, the three main divisions of the

202 SOISSONS AND ST. REMI

grot-iml storey are each subdivided into throe by slender monolithic columns; the triforium repeats the same arrangement, and it is vaulted like the ground storey. In the clerestory aye three lancet windows to each bay. A fine circular chapel opens in a south-eastern direction from the curved transept. The rest of the church was rebuilt about twenty years later than the date of this transept.

' r

Fig. 91. Notre Dame, Sainte Chapelle, and dock tower of Palace. From Froissart MS. at British Museum.

Here the clerestory windows are coupled and have foiied circles above. The whole church is now terribly restored. but there is a fine porch opening east of the north transept.

Of much the same character as the south transept ot Soissonsis the fine apsewith its radiating chapels of St. Remi, Reims. The earlier church, of Romanesque work, was com­pletely recast in the latter half of the twelfth century,and the width of the central span gives this apse particular distinc­tion. The triforium is vaulted ar<d each bay is lighted with

CHALONS AND AUXERRE 203

three lancets; the dercstorv has also three lancets to each bay, and all these windows are filled with fine early glass. Each of the radiating chapels, instead of opening by a single areh from the ambulatory, has three arches on slender columns. On the outside there are powerful flying buttresses. The Romanesque Church of Notre Dame, Chalons, was altered about the same time as St. Remi, and it would seem by the same master, so closely do the two choirs resemble each other. The fine west front is of something the same type as Chartres.

Still another cathedral in the same line of descent from St. Remi is Auxerre, begun in 1215. Ilere only the Lady chapel at the east end of the apse opens to the ambulatory through three arches; there are no other apsidal chapels, but the outer sides of the ambulatory bays are all div ided into three sub-bays. The apse is especially noble as seen from without, standing high above the river. The west doors are exquisitely sculptured (c. 1265); the windows have magnificent glass, later in character than the Chartres and Bourges windows, with their backgrounds of sapphire, here there are deep murrey purples and fair apple greens. The large collegiate church of St. Qutntin before mentioned. Fig. 69, stands in this same series.

The beautiful early Gothic- choir of Vezelay may also be mentioned here.

The Cathedral of Chartres dates in the main from a rebuilding following a great fire in 1194. The west front, however, is largely of work anterior to that date, and the planning of the rest, including the magnificent chevet, was conditioned by the crypt of the older church. There is a

double ambulatory around the apse, with circular chapels opening- from the outer one. The important transepts have aisles, over the ends of which stand towers, two to each transept. By one of the great strokes of French genius, each of these towers, which of course cover the end bays of the clerestory on both sides of the transepts, is pierced with large openings on its three free sides, similar to the clerestory window on its inner side, which is so well lighted by this means, that from withir it is not noticeable that the buy is blocked. This treatment is a develop­ment upon Lion, and became the standard one for cathedrals of the first rank. At the west end are two great towers with spires, one of which w'as built before the fire, which it escaped, and it siill remains one of the most stately in the world. Two other low towers flank the apse: eight towers n all. The mighty flying buttresses have here attained a high stage of development. The vaulting of the interior is no longer sexpartite but each bay is complete in .itself. The clerestory windows are of great size, two wide lancets, with a rose above, filling oat the entire bay. Most of the superb stained glass is intact, save for a recent restoration. The special glory of Chartres is, perhaps, to be found in its portals. At the west end are three doors (c. 1150 60), and open porches of the thirteenth century spread right across each transept, all of them being crowded with the finest sculptures. Chartres is a work which stands apart between the first and second phases of Gothic, but it derives much from Laon. Th<* placing of the towers is similar, and it was but a step to fill the great open tower arches, like those of Laon, with clerestory window s. The transept porches have their pro-

COMPARISON WITH LAON 205

totypes in the west porches of Laon, where some of the details, like the spirally fluted columns under the statues, and the Jesse tree 011 the arch, are almost identical. The rose

windows in both      ,       1

churches are also     la

clearly related; so is        M

the clerestory at      IH

Chartres to the clois- JpSlfft,, Mm

ter openings at Laon.

A volume might lie Jj ™ ; ft    ^ f

filled by the several articles which lmv e been written upon the original form of the

west front. Excava­tions, as well as the plain indications on the side walls, show that there was a nar- thex or porch which occupied the space be­tween the towers, and it is said that there is evidence enough to

show that the present

, Fig, 92. Chartres Cathedral, west front, finely-sculptured west

doors were formerly at the back of the porch instead of at the front. These precious doors are in any case one work with the lower part of the south-west

tower. The lower part of the north-west tower had been built still earlier, and in advance of the then existing church, but apparently in preparation for the arrangement which was to follow. After re-examination' my own view is that these doorways were built where thev now stand together with the windows above them and the S. W. tower. The three wide lancets above, the doors must, it seems, belong to mid-twelfth-century work, for in one of them is a wonderful Jesse-tree in stained glass which, as shown by- Mr. Westlake, so closely resembles the Jesse-tree placed by Abbot Suger in St. Denis (c. 1142) that he believes both are from the same atelier and the w ork of the same artist. (.The date of the St. Denis window is certain, for it bears a small “ signature ” figure of Suger himself.) The upper part of the we»t front, containing the rose window, belongs to the heightened thirteenth-century church. The north-west spire was built in its present form early in the sixteenth century; before that time there was a tall leaded ^pire erected about 1390.

Reims Cathedral opens the period of perfect maturity. A more ancient church having been burnt, the present structure was begun in 1211, and the choir was occu­pied in 1241. The nave and the west end soon fol­lowed, and the great west porches were built about the middle of the thirteenth century. The west front is a miracle of imagination and workmanship, and the planning and proportions of the interior arc of the greatest beauty. The supports, neither too massive nor slender, still stand perfectly upright. The plan is one of the most unaltered left to us, and the crown oi rad’ating chapels became the

KU1.MS CATHEDRAL. HOOIt TO KOiiTH TKANSKI'T, c. 1230-40

REIMS

207

type for all later efforts. The triforium is but a small wall arcade, and the windows from this time became all in all. At Reims perfected tracery first appears. One pattern of a two-light window with foiled circle abov e, all in “ bar-tracery,” having been designed, it was repeated throughout the church, some seventy 01- eighty times, the same in the aisles and chapels as in the clerestory above (Fig. 78). The lights in the clerestory are very wide and tall, the two lights filling out the whole bay, and each one being eight or nine feet wide. Thirty -one double­light windows fill the clerestory of the central alley, nearly all oi' which retain thirteenth-century glass of the greatest splendour. It is to be noticed how the plane of the windows is kept towards the inside of the walls here, and in other places where there is fine glass, so that the glass may be seen as well as possible in an oblique view (Fig. 67). At the west end and in both transepts, as in Chartres, there are fine roses, those of the transepts following the I^aon type. The columns of the ground storey are formed of central circles wilh four attached shafts, one of which is continued upward as the main vaulting shaft. The transverse arches of the vault are much bigger than the diagonal ribs, and each compartment is in four cells. There are tw^ro large western towers and two others at each transept which follow the Chartres model. There is an elegant fleche on the point of the apse roof, and a taller fleche once rose over the crossing. It is unnecessary to suppose that this and the transeptal towers were ever ntended to be of the exaggerated height suggested by Viollet le I)uc; there is, indeed, no prepara tion beneath for such structures. The finely designed

208 REIMS AND WESTMINSTER

fljing buttresses are weighted by huge open pinnacles, in each of which dwells an angel with wide-spreading wings. There are three sculptured doors at the north transept, besides the w estern porches, to the sculptures of which w e shall return later. (See Plates 37 and 46—49.)

Reims is undoubtedly the prototype of Westminster Abbey, which shows evidence of close stud} of the French coronation church.

Tlit- old cathedral of Amiens was burnt in 1218, and its reconstruction on a vast scale was at once undertaken. Owing to local rircuinstances, and contrary to usual practice, the west end was begun first. This west end was pushed forward with great rapidity, and was completed, together with its sculptures, before 1230. By 1236 the nave was opened for worship, and by 1243 the west towers had received their bells. The eastern work was then earned on wi+h equal energy. The central upper window of the east end is dated 1269, and the cathedral was sub­stantially completed, when, on the 16th of May in this year, the body of St. Firth in was translated into his new shrine, in the presence of the King of France and the son of Henry III., afterwards Edward I. This largest of French churches ranks also among the most perfect. The structure clearly shows that Reims had been studied, the design of the nave-bavs, with their pillars, arcades and aisle win­dows, being practically the same. The transverse vaulting ribs are here also larger +han the diagonal ribs.* The

*      xt ha' be**n pointed out above, p 156, that this tradition in French work arose from the desire to echo the great arche» of the crossing throughout ‘he church. In English work the crossing arches are not so related, except at Durham, a Ncrmac example.

BoUIHiKS CATIIKDKAL. WEST l'OUCIlES

greatest differe nce is in the much more important tri­forium, and in the four-light traceried windows of the clerestory, which are substituted for the abnormally wide two-light windows of Reims. The special wonder of Amiens, after the portal, is the row of windows in the transepts, three on earh side (c. 1250). They are here of six lights, and the triforium arcade beneath them is also glazed, on a second plane of course, towards the outside of the wall. This same treatment is continued around the choir. The area of glass is thus, _tn this eastern limb, enormous. The end window of the north transept is of the most intricate but lovely tracery, the last step before decline. Amiens is built on a transeptal plan, but there are no transeptal towers: instead of these, enormous buttresses take the interior pressure. At the west end, again, there are not the ordinary towers standing over the last bays of the aisles, but comparatively unimportant towers with colossal buttresses rise above the two lateral porches. These are oblong on plan, being much narrower from west to east than towards the facade, and it is plain they could never have been intended to be carried up to any considerable height. The facade was probably from the first intended to finish in the square form of the present front. Over the crossing was, as at present, a slender flcche of wood covered with lead. The idea at Amiens was to enclose the biggest possible reservoir of air and light, and towers were deliberately given up. Alto­gether, notwithstanding its great reputation, the sight of Amiens is ever a fresh surprise. (See Plates 44,45,53-55.)

Another vast cathedral was begun at Bourges at about

o

210

BOURGES

the same time; but here Notre Dame, Paris, instead of Reims, was taken as the model. In this immense church there are no transepts, and no towers other than those at. the west front. Double aisles surround the apse, and con­tinue right down the nave. Five gabled and splendidly sculptured porches at the west front give access to the nave and aisles. (Plate 38.) At Paris the two aisles are vaulted at the same height, but above, the inner one there is a vaulted upper storey. At Bourges, however, this upper gallery is suppressed, ai.d the additional height is given to the inner aisle, which is very lofty, and has clerestory windows above the outer aisle. Here, as at Paris, the high vault is of the six-celled variety. At the apse the windows are pushed high up ijito the vault, leaving but a thin web of stone at the back of the ribs between them; ’n these webs are circular piercings, through which the light of the win­dows may be seen. The clerestory windows are of two- and three-gronped lights with foiled circles above, but all separate, and not combined into bar-tracerv. Owing to there being no transepts, the long array of flying but­tresses is here a more marked feature than anywhere else. The simple va->tness of this building is wonderfully im pressive, and the early glass in quantity and quality is only rivalled by Chartres.

Beauvais Cathedral is only a fragment, but the mightiest fragment in the world. Only the eastern liii’b and cross­ing were ever begun, and 011 the site where the nave would have been built still stands the nave of one of the most interesting early churches in France, completed about 1000, and known as the Basse CEuvre, in relation to its

From a drawing by Mr, T, M. Hooke

KOUEX CATHEDIIAIj. ( HOIK

BEAUVAIS

211

towering neighbour, the Haute (Euvre. The chevet was begun in 1247 and finished in 1271. Height anil slightness, however, had been pushed beyond the limits of even tem­porary safety, and a part of the great vault fell in 1284. The dimensions, indeed, are enormous—the spans of the three bays of the eastern limb are 29.fi, 28.9, and 25.9 between centres respectively. The width of the central '-pan is 45 ft.; the crown of the vault is 150 ft. above the pavement, and the exterior ridge rises to 210 ft. It was repaired by means of subdividing the bays and other additional works. These repairs were not completed till about 1324, when the apse windows were glazed. The transepts were not completed till 1548, and, notwithstand­ing their former experience, a great lantern and fleche were reared over the crossing, rising to the height of 475 ft. Completed about I555j this fleche, the last word of Gothic art, fell in 1573. In spite of its many modifications, the interior of the chevet is of the most satisfying beauty, and the exterior, as seen from the east, is quite perfect. It follows the Bourges type ^:n the great height of the ambulatory, which is lighted by clerestory windows over the chapels. It resembled Reims in being prepared for transepts with terminal towers. It is unequalled in the window areas of the chevet—below, through the ground arches, are seen the windows of the chapels and the clerestory of the aisle; then ahovc, around the bow of the apse and along the clerestory, are great foiled windows, no less than 50 ft. high, close beneath which is a tall trifocium passage also pierced a jour.

Rouen Choir belongs to the first quarter of the thirteenth

century. (Plate 39.) At the west end a supremely noble tower is of an earlier period as perhaps are two doorways as well. The circular chapels at the east end also appear to follow an older plan. Indeed, it is probable that th<° plan is altogether the old one with extended transepts and a few other alterations. The western towers are not at the ends of the aisles, but stand clear to the north and south, making a wide extended front, as was the case in some English cathedrals. A fine lautem which supported a tall leaded spire rises over the crossing. There are two towers at the ends of each transept, following the Chartres type. The evidence as to the west front was much obscured in the last century by the addition of other buttress masses like those two of the early sixteenth century which flank the central door. As shown in Cotman’s engraving, the design of the lower stage of the west front with an arCade above the doors was easy to follow. After special examination my final opinion is that this work with the two doors mentioned above was built after 1200. (Plate 40.)

At the end of the twelfth century, in the last years that Rouen was held by English kings, “ a work ” was in progress, possibly the west front and north-west tower. Then, in 1200, came a great fire. “ In this year,” says our Hoveden, “was burnt the whole city ot Rouen, with the Archbishop’s church and many others.” Four miserable years followed, and then Philip Augustus pushed John out of his Norman realm and capital. The building of the present church followed immediately, and it was virtually completed about 1235. The present transept,-ends belong to the latter half of the thirteenth century, and the Lady

NORMANDY AND ANJOU 213

chapel followed, about 1300. The later works are esqui* site example^ of the most mature Gothic construction.

The chevet of Le Mans must just be noticed as another example of High Gothic. It shares the characteristics of Norman Gothic as well as of the more strictly French style. The rebuilding of the Romanesque church was begun about 1218, but the noble transepts, with their great traceried windows, were not reached for another century, and the low Romanesque nave, with a severely beautiful west front, still remains to us. The apse is magnificent, and there is a new departure in the buttress scheme and outer chapels which was later elaborated ftt Toledo, which Street and other writers regard as the great consummation of apse planning. At Le Mans the buttresses over the inner ambulatory radiate in the usual way, then over the outer ambulatory, for there are two as at Bourges, each flying buttress forks into two, forming a Y The glass of I>e Mans ranks with the best.

In Normandy and Anjou the early Gothic work ha* well-marked differences from the French school. One of the earliest transitional examples is Lisieux Cathedral, partly built by the bishop who held the see between 1141 and 1182, and probably begun c. nfro. Coutances, with its tall central tower and extraordinarily romantic western towers and spires, all of early Gothic work, is one of the completcst cathedrals in existence. With these must be mentioned the apse of the Abbaye aux Ilommes at Caen, and also the two superb spires of its western front.

Angers Cathedral at the beginning of the twelfth century followed the ordinary form of a Romanesque church. About 1145 a work of transformation was begun

214 ANGERS AND COLOGNE

hv which all the interior arcades were swept away, and large buttress masses having been built outside what had been the aisle walls, the whole was covered bv a vault in a single span of about fifty feet wide. The simplicity of the plan, consisting of an unbroken cross, covered by great quadnpartite vaults (those constructed over the nave were built about 1150), looks more like a separate departure than a modification of any vaults which had up to this time been erected in the He de France (see Fig. 74).

Even of the churches which I have seen, I have spoken in this chapter only of those which are of special interest in the development of Gothic architecture; but I can hardly leave the subject without at, least writing the names of Autun, Avallon, Nevers, Strasbourg, Lausanne, Geneva, Dijon, Troyes, St. Omer, St. Lo, Tours, Abbe­ville, Bayeux, Mont St. Michel, and Cologne, which is hardly the less French for having been built beyond the boundaries of France. This last, the biggest of all Gothic churches, which was begun in 1248, is very much a combi­nation of Amiens and Beauvais. The upper part of the nave and the west front are modern, and the whole has been parsed through the mill of restoration, but nothing can destroy the beauty of the great -choir and apse. Cologne murks the end of a period.

■mwm

CJI UtTKES CATllHDIiAL. SCULPT8S!KS OK TIIE VW08TKKX JJOOHS

Face p. 214

CHAPTER IX

FRENCH SCULPTURE AND FAINTING

Twice in the history of Art has sculpture reached a mark which placed it apart from that of all other periods. Tim finest Greek or Gothic sculpture takes its place as the crown of architecture. I^ach had the power of combining many works into a great ■whole; in both the subject- matter is of high epic character, and the workmanship worthily answers to the intention.

The concourse of saints which peopled the deep porches of a Gothic cathedral, gleaming in fair colour from out of a shadowed atmosphere, must have intensely moved the beholders. We may readily see in Chaucer, and in other mediaeval writings, how sculptured stories were seen as living dramas. Indeed, to the mediaeval mind sculptures had something of the supernatural about them. They were creations; and it may be doubted, with all admira­tion for the stone and bronze dolls made by modern hands, whether the finest art can be produced \\ ith less imaginative emotion. As an instance, notice Dante’s description of the images of the Virgin and the angel, “ wherein Nature’s self was put to shame.’’ “ There, sculp­tured in a gracious attitude, he did not seem an image

216  VISIBLE SPEECH

that is silent, one would ha vs sworn that he was saying ‘ Ave.’ And in her mien this language was impressed ‘ Ecce anciila Dei ’ as distinctly as any figure stamps itself in wax.” Still earlier, Herimann of Toumay, telling of the shrine of St. Piat, savs that on it were represented the five wise and the five foo ish virgins, “ who all seemed to weep and to be alive ; these shed tears liite water, those like blood.” Dante in two words defines the purpose of sculpture as “ visible speech.”

Sculpture of the earlier Byzantine school gradually spread over Europe; two of the best examples of the middle period are our own Ruth well and Bewcastle rrosses, works probably of the eighth century, in which are figures and groups arranged according to a well- ordered iconograpl ical tradition. With the Secondarv Byzantine school the interrupted energy in image-making burst forth anew, and in the form of ivories and metal-work fifjure-designs were soon distributed over the West from Constantinople, and many schools soon arose in the bronzc- woi'king centres of Germany, in North and South France and in North Italy.

We cannot follow the development of sculpture through the Romanesque period in detail, but I must make a pass­ing reference to the bronze font at Liege, of which then* is a cast at South Kensington, which is the most remark­able work of art, in an historical sense, of any known to me. It is known to be the work ot Renierus, a goldsmith of Huy, near Dinant, and was cast about 1115, It is a circular vessel, surrounded by subjects from the life of John the Baptist in high relief, and standing on twelve oxon. Long inscriptions accompany the scenes. The

LIEGE FONT

217

group of the Baptism of Christ is of extraordinary beauty. Three “ ministering angels" obedient, solicitous, rejoicing, express the most perfect angelic naturalism. John, preaching to the people to bring forth the fruit of repentance, is of equal beauty. The listening group of “ publicans,” with a Roman soldier, is exquisite. I must confess that I do not understand the lineage of the style of sculpture of this outstanding work. It is so free, and there is no touch of archaism. As bronze-casting it doubtless derives from the German schools, and Byzantine influence is evident in the composition.

In the following short account of French sculpture I have, instead of trying to describe indescribable b< auties, endeavoured to give a synopsis of the sequence of the chief groups and u. brief summary of the subjects treated.

In France a great school of sculpture had been developed ,n the royal domain by the middle of the twelfth century. The array of figures at the royal doors of Chartres are the best known examples; but tw o lovely figures from Corbeil now at St Denis, are even more perfect.

The question of the relationship of the master of the west portals of Chartres to the school which worked at Arles was raised by Yoge, but Lasteyrie seems to hav« shown conclusively that the Chartres group did not derive from Arles. At St. Gilles some of the earliest of these southern sculptures go back to near 1150 and the sculptor Brunus has signed some of the figures. The sculptures at Arles, however, were not wrought till about 1180-90. At the same time it does seem to me <hat the Southern school may have had an independent origin.

2i8 CHARTRES, ROYAL DOORS

The figures of the securely dated Gloria doors of St. James of Compostella (1188) are very different in their sentiment of dramatic action to the placid figures of Corbeil and Chartres; moreover, they are quite as advanced as any

Fig, 93. Tomb of Louis, eldest son of Saint Louis, at St. Denis, c. 1260.

other works of the same date. The scheme, however, is evidently derived from Chartres.

The west portal at Chartres belongs to the period 1150-75, but a door at St. Denis, entirely similar in style, went hack to 1142. Several other portals exist which follow the same type ; one of these at Le Mans Cathedral, which was set up sometime before 1180 (probably c. 1170), is of special interest to us, as it is probably the prototype

OTHER TRANSITIONAL WORKS 219

of the west door of Rochester, which, in any case, is an offshoot of this school.

The sculptures on the triple portal of Chartres comprise some 720 figures, large and small. In the middle ty m­panum is Christ in Majesty, surrounded by the symbols of the Evangelists, with the Apostles below. Around the arch are angels and the twenty-four elders. The tym­panum of the iight-hand door is devoted to the life and glorification of the Virgin, the arch sculptures represent the seven liberal arts. The tympanum of the north door has the Ascension for its subject, and the sculptures of the arch are the zodiac and the labours of the months. The twenty-four great statues standing against the pillars of the doors are the ancestors of the Virgin, as has been recently show n by Viige and Male. Here and there are traces that the sculptures were formerly covered with bright colour and gold. (Plate 41.)

At Reims there is a small portal which has been preserved in the north transept, which is an exquisite transition work, and still richly coloured.

The tympanum of St. Anne’s door, one of the three western doors of Notre Dame, Paris, that to the south, was also preserved from the antecedent building. This has such close aflinity with one of the Chartres door-heads that it is thought it must be either the work of the same master or of a pupil; it was wrought about 1185. The two figures of a bishop and a king kneeling before the Virgin are Maurice de Sully, the bishop, and Louis VII There are fragments of the jamb statues at the Cluny Museum.

220  SCULPTURES OF

The west port'll at Senlis is probably the best example

FIGS. and 95. i,mgies caLed ChiMebert I. (wrought c. 1150; and Clovis IX. fXHIth Century' from tjmbj at St. Denis.

of earliest Gothic sculpture. In much it follows the rojal doors of Chartres, but it is a whole step in advance. In

the tympanum is a strikingly beautiful and solemn Coro­nation of the Virgin, Her Death, and Assumption. The column figures are typical characters -under the old and new laws—Abraham with Isaac, Moses with the pillar which bore the brazen serpent, Simeon with Christ in his arms, St. John Baptist, and others. The heads have been very badly restored, but types so similar are found at Chartres and Reims that we can only suppose that they were copied, with slight differences, one from the other. This work seems to date about 1190. Considerable vestiges of colour still remain. These sculptures, according to E. Male, follow the scheme of Isidorus by which Adam, Abel, Noah, &c\, were all in certain aspects types of Christ.

The next step seems to have been made in the triple porches at Laon. Here the column-figures, the old ones having been destroyed at the Revolution, are now entirely modem. The ancient central tympanum represents the Virgin’s Coronation; around the arch is a fine stem of Jesse. The north porch has in the tympanum scenes from the life of the Virgin; the arch sculptures are of tvpes of the Virgin, which, as M. Emile Male has shown, follow' those given in a sermon of Honorius of Autun; the Virtues and Vices, &c. The south door represents Christ in Judg­ment; in the arch-orders are angels carrying souls to glory, and the wise and foolish virgins. Above, around one of the windows, is one of the finest sets of the seven liberal arts. A good deal of colour remains, and the subjects had written titles. The little north door has some pretty reliefs, which, I believe, have not been iden­tified. Comparison with the north door at Reims shows that the subject was the Martyrdom of St. Nieaise.

Amongst some fragments preserved in the chapel of the bishop’s palace is a queen’s head (Sheba ?) of the greatest beauty; except for some marks of violence, the surface is in good condition, and still shows faint traces of paint.

There are two charming pairs of figures on the west front of St. Martin’s, Laon, where angels with candle­sticks guide bishop-saints to heaven.

In referring to these last three I have stepped aside from chronological order, to which I will now return.

At Chartres, beside the western portals, which belong to an earlier building, there are vast triple porches to both the transepts, each containing a crowd of statues. The design of the porches, and several of the details, show close affinity with the w ork at Laon. The whole north porch is dedicated to the Virgin. On the central door-post, is St. Anne w ith the Virgin in her arms; in the tympanum is the Coronation of the Virgin, and in the arch are ancestors of the royal line. The large free-stand'ng figures are Old Testament types of Christ. Abraham, Moses and Samuel are almost exactly like those at Senlis; the Story of the Creation is figured on the outer arch. In the tympanum of the left-hand bay is the Nativity. In the archcs are the Virtues and other subjects, and in the exterior arch heavenly Beatitudes. Two of the exterior statues against the pillars were, before 17931 impersonations of the Church and the Synagogue. The jamb statues are groups of the Annunciation and Visitation. (Plate 42.) Above the right- hand door is Solomon judging between the two women. In the arch are angels carrying sun, moon, and crowns, also types of the Virgin in the stories of Gideon, Esther, Judith.

CJIAKTKES CATHEDRAL. JAMBS OF LEFT-HAND AND CENTRAL DOORS OF NORTH PORCH, THE VISITATION ETC.

CHARTRES TRANSEPTS

Tobit, and others. Around the exterior arch are the signs of the zodiac and labours of the months. Amongst tho standing figures here are a beautiful pair of the yueen of Sheba and Solomon. On the outer pillars are local saints.

In the three porches of the south transept the central bay contains Christ in Judgment above the door, and below are statues of the Apostles. In the arch are the nine orders of angels. In the left-hand porch the tym­panum is given to the first martyr, and the standing figures are of martyrs—Saints Vincent, Laurence, and Stephen, deacons; Saints George and Theodore, warriors; St. Clement, Tope. (Plate 43.) The right-hard bay is assigned to confcssors. The tympanum is given to St. Nicholas and St. Martin, and below are statues of the same saints, and of the doctors Jerome and Gregory.

For the last word on the attribution of these statues, and the best account of Cathedral Iconography generally,

I      must refer to M. Emile Male’s “ L’Art Religieux,” 1902. It must suffice to say that the whole assemblage is incom­parable in magnitude and in beauty, save only with Reims. Certain statues of the porches have been named after historical personages -the King of France, Richard Cceur de Lion, the Count of Boulogne and Countess Matilda, &c. Male points out that the reliefs under the so-culled Philip Augustus and Richard treat of Saul and David. Under the Count of Boulogne is a figure 'nscribed “Jesse.” Another group of statues represents Eli and Samuel with Samuel's father and mother, the names of w hom appear on the explanatory reliefs. As Male has shown there was nothing of caprice in the ieonograpliical schemes of the Cathedrals, they were evidently prepared by the most

224 SCHEMES OF SCULPTURE

learned theologians of the day. It is quite clear al.-o that

i igs. 90 ana 97. Effigies called Louis III. and Carlom&n from tomia at St. Deii's JXIIIth Centun’).

the French sculptors studied such antique statues as came under their observation. The Chartres sculptures probably

CHAHTltES CATHEDRAL. .IAMBS Of LKFT-II \M) AND CENTRAL DOOltS OF SOUTH 1’OliCJI, ST. GEORGE, ETC.

date from about 1210 (in 1204 Chartres acquired the head of St. Anne, who appears on the irumeau of the north porch). One plan seems to have been adhered to from the first, but development may be seen in the workman­ship. Among the most mature of the statues are the local saints of the north porch, and Saints George and Theodore of the south. There are many traces of colour.

Some reliefs from the life of the Virgin preserved in the crypt, which came from the destroyed pulpitum, are of the highest order. The Nativity, and the Three Kings sleep­ing, should on no account be missed.

In quality the sculptures of the west portals of Notre Dame, Paris (c. 1220), are unsurpassable, but they were much injured at the Revolution. Christ Judgment filled the central door. The great broken lintel figuring the Resurrection (fragments are in the Cluny) was superb in composition and execution, and on the basement is a very interesting series of Virtues and Vices. The Virgin's, or north door, is more perfect and very lovely. The high tympanum is divided into three bands ; below ar<' three prophets and three kings of Judah: next comes the Assumption of the Virgin, and above, her Coronation. The smaller subjects on the jambs and basement are marvellously vivid inventions of the signs of the zodiac, and labours of the year. Notice especially the May, a young man with a bunch of roses and a spotted thrush; and June, a mower sharpening his scythe. There are also two reliefs of Sea and Land, the latter a stately seated woman holding types of vegetation in her hands. Traces of painting may still be discerned. The doors of the

Fit*. 98. Effigy of Phillipe III .it St. Denis, c. 1307.

Fig. 99, Effigy of Jean II. at St. Denis, c. 1364.

228  SOLOMON AND SABA

twelve other prophets occupy the faces of the four but­tresses. On the mid-post of the south door stands a very noble figure of the Virgin over some reliefs of the Fall of Man; above her bead is the Ark of the Covenant. On either side of the Ark, on the lowest band of the tympanum, are three seated prophets; this is especially like Paris. On the sloping sides of this porch the statues refer to the life of the Virgin—the Annunciation, the Visi­tation, and the Presentation, the Three Magi -and llcrod, also Solomon, and the Queen of Sheba. The identifi­cations are certain in every case, as the quatrefoil reliefs refer to the figures beneath which they are sculptured; thus, beneath Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, Solomon is shown seated on the lion-throne and v^relcoming the queen. In the tympanum of this door are figured the Bunal, Assumption, and Coronation of the Virgin. The north door is devoted to the local saints. The quatrefoils here contain the signs of the zodiac and the labours of the months—a magnificent set. Under the prophets the reliefs arc of their typical prophecies, which are rendered with great imagination. Notice the Desolate City inhabited by unclean beasts, the Heavens stayed from dew,and,indeed, all of them. High up t'"> the south side of the south-west tower is a colossal angel standing over a sun-dial, which may be compared with dial-bearing angels at Laon and Chartres. The sculptures of the south transept door are about twenty years later than those of the west porch, which were wrought soon after 1220. (Plates 44 45 and 53-5^.)

Of all sculptured fronts, that of Reims is the triumphant consummation in scale, perfection of execution, and faseina-

AMIENS CATHKDRAL. HEROD AND TWO OF THE MAGI FROM SOUTH DOOR OF WEST FRONT

tion. As to design, it cert&iniy follows tliat of Amiens. It is held that a concourse of masters from the various French schools gathered here, and the work seems to be the out­come of a furnace of intense creative energy. Here again three vast gabled porches stretch across the front. The tympana over the doors are pierced with rose windows, and the sculptures of the Coronation of the Virgin, and the rest, which usually fill them, are thrust up into the gables above, where they are surrounded and canopied bv a marvel of tabernacle work. Small reliefs fill narrow flanking gables at the extreme ends of the front; and it looks as if, as has been suggested, these had been prepared for the tympana and were pushed aside by a change of plan in favour of piercing them with windows. On the mid post of the centre porch are the Virgin and Child, probably the most pcrfect mean between the earlier and later Virgins at Amiens. Along the deep slanting sides of the porch stand statues eight or nine feet high setting forth the story of the Virgin’s life. To the right two pairs show thp Annunciation and the Visitation; in the latter the figures are strikingly Greek in character. Opposite these is the Presentat ion in the Temple, Marv with the Child, Simeon, Anna, and Joseph (Plates 46-49). The Virgin in this and in the Annunciation resembles those at Amiens and Chartres. At the outer angles

D •

arc; Samuel and Saul, whom he anointed king, in reference to the use of this cathedral for coronations. Beyond these, again, on the face of the buttresses, are particularly romantic statues of Solomon and the Queen of Sheba, who evidently find their place here, as at Amiens and Chartres, on account of the saying of Christ: “ The Queen of the

South . . . came from the ends of the earth to hear the wisdom of Solomon ; and, behold, a greater than Solomon is here.' The north porrh is devoted to local saints. Here the martyred Nicaise, with an advance on Amiens, carries only the crown of his head, instead of the whole head, as do the local martyrs there. The Bishop’s face shows a perfect characterisation of patient suffering; he is led forward by two smiling angels.

It is the south door that has the series of types of Christ—Moses, Samuel, and others—which have before been spoken of as like those of Senlis and Chartres. The doorways of the north transept are also full)’ sculptured, the middle one \> Ith the stories of Saints Nicaise and llemi, and the left-hand one with a noble Last Judgment, treated as at Amiens. In the archivolt are small figures of the wise and foolish Virgins. Above the former is a gate with open doors: above the latter the doors are closed.

The west front of Bnurges has five great sculptured doorways, of which the rtlirfs rauk amongst the finest, but most of the standing figures have been destroyed. Above the central door is Christ in Judgment, beneath whom is a delightful smiling Michael weighing souls, and proces­sions of the Blest and Lost. The former seem to be led by St. Louis and St. Francis; the personages in this group are smiling w'th almost excessive evidence of felicity. It seems to have been Bourges from which German sculptors took this trait; which they further exaggerated. The reliefs in the spandrils of the wall-arcade below are marveli of design and cutting. In one are Adam and Eve amongst the fruit-trees of Paradise; in another a fawning dragon-

KKIMS CATHEDRAL. LKFT-1IAXI) JAMB OF CENTIf A L POUCH. THE QUEEN OF SI I Eli A, S A 311 'EL, THE PK E*SEN TAT J OX, ETC.)

AUXERRE AND ROIJEN 231

serpent licks his lips before Eve; and another shows the Deluge drowning mankind; Ruskin picked out these as the finest spandril reliefs he knew. In the I^ouvre are fragments from the pulpitum, being subjects from the life of Christ in a particularly noble style of h^:~h relief.

The west portals of Auxerre and Sens must also be counted among the great, examples of sculpture; also the north-west door and the transept doors at Rouen. In the last are scores of little quatrefoil panels filled with stories from the Creation onwards (Plates 50-51).

A treatise by I)r Franck-Oberaspach has lately shown that the exquisite sculptures of the Church and Synagogue on the south transept of Strasbourg must be considered as the work of a master vho had worked on the porches of Chartres. The wonderful “ Angel pillar,” or rather Judg­ment pillar, in the same cathedral seems to be by the same hand, and is plainly a development of the statue-bearing pillars of the north porch of Chartres. There are three tiers of figures, being the four Evangelists, four angels calling to judgment, and Christ accompanied by three angels bearing instruments of the Passion (Plate 52).

Of the two figures which symbolise the strife between the New I^aw and the Old, the Church is radiant and with a touch of scorn; the Synagogue, with eyes bandaged, droops her head till the crown falls and the staff she leans on breaks like a reed. Of later date, and of the German school, are the sculptures of the western portal. but two features must be referred to. Filling the gable over the central door is a finely designed Solomon on his throne of seven steps with as many pairs of lions. The twelve statues at one of the doors figure the story of the wise

PAINTED STATUES

and foolish Virgins. On one side the wise are led by Christ, the Holy Wisdom, and on the other the foolish are attracted by Folly, a fair-seeming youth with a fine mantle in front, but naked behind and his bark covered with toads and serpents. The same artist may have done a similar series at Freiburg, where there is also an inte­resting set of isolated statues of the seven Liberal Arts all prettily coloured.

T have noted that most of the sculptured stories or cathedral fronts still show many traces of the colour and gold with which they were once illuminated. The best preserved of these painted statues in place are probably those in the south porch of Lausanne Cathedral, which have their garments diapered and bordered with dainty patterns. At Reimgj^gne or more .of the figures show a similar treatment, and the shafEs““bet'ft'6li$fi them have traces of chevron patterns. A visitor to Paris in the time of Charles VIII. noted that the west front of Notre Ijame was ornamented with gold and painted with divers colours. The Christ of the central door and the Virgin above in the middle of the front were especially splendid, but all the sculptures were decorated. Fig. 102 inay help us to realise this. Piet ing together the fragmentary evidence makes it clear that all exterior sculpture was intended to be painted as pari of the traditional finish and to protect the stone from decay. It is to this skin of paint that we owe the preservation of so many of these works, which in most cases have suffered little or nothing from the weather, but only from violence.

The method of treating a great scheme of sculpture

REIMS CATNEDIJAL. JOSEPH: FliOM THE PRESENTATION GKOU1',

PLATE .XLVI

It El 31$ (’ATI IK DUAL, S1MKOX : FUOM THE PRESENTATION CKOUl*, l'LATE XL, VI

AND FACADES      233

like a west front, was to wash the ■whole with ochre; to

Fig. 100. r.ffigy of Robert        Fig. ioi. Effigy of Marguerite

d'Artoi* at St. Denis, c. 1317. d Artois, St. Denis, c. 131$.

paint certain niches and hollow-s red, green, and blue; to

fully decorate the images and write inscriptions on the scrolls they bore; and then to touch certain details with gold. The finished front was fair and sparkling exactly like a colossal painted ivory triptych. From the front the colour and gold spread to the lead roof, the crest was gilt, and at times the slopes were diapered w ith a big pattern. The fleche would be fully decorated, and at Chalons the west spires had the leadwork covered with figures and canopies painted much in the style of colossal enamel work.

The effigies of French tombs are fully as fine as the ex­terior sculptures. The effigy of I^oui.s, son of St. Louis, at St. ])enis, is beautiful beyond all praise. Smiling, his hands are energetically pressed together, as it" he saw a vision (Fig. 93). Our Henry III., who attended the funeral of the prince, appears amongst the mourners on the tomb. The figure' of a youthful knight, Robert d’Artois, 1317 (Fig. ioo), and Philippe III. (Fig. 98), both in the same church, art* equally noteworthy. .* The Robert d'Artois was the work of Jean Pepin, bourgeois de Paris et tombiev. A still more famous master was Andre Beauneveu, imager to Charles V., who wrought the king’s tomb and those of Jean II, (Fig. 99) and Philippe de Valois. I give after the Annales A rchadktgiquet Figs. 93—101, from the tomb effigies of St. Denis. In Fig. 94, which is a memorial effigy wrought about 1150, we have in the cast of the drapery an evident reminiscence of Byzantine design. The same tradition appears in the effigy of our Henry II. at Fontevrault. Figs. 95, 96, 97 are also ideal memorial effigies; the Figs. 98, 99 of Philippe III. and Jean II. were evidently portraits; the former was wrought in 1307 by Jean d’Arras and Pierre de Chelles.

RKIHS CATHEDRAL. CENTRAL POUCH. ANGEL OF THE ANNUNCIATION GROUP

102.

It is interesting that the names of several of the Gothic sculptors have been preserved. Robert do Liunay, imager of Paris, who was killed at the battle of Poitiers, wrought for the chapel of S. Jacques aux Pelerins, about 1320, large statues of Christ, Apostles, and Angels. The Apostles were placed against the twelve pillars of the chapel, which being destroyed in 1X08, five of the statues found a resting-place in the Cluny Museum. Jean le Bouteilier, another Pari.i image-maker, made the beautiful Biblical stories of the choir enclosure of Notre Dame, completed in 1351.

Still another famous sculptor was Jean de Cambrai, the sculptor of wonderful images on ^r7"_Flo ' the tomb of the Duke of Berry, once at Bourges, Painting a and now destroyed, but of which beautiful   ^from

drawings made by Holbein have been preserved.

At Dijon is a group of sculptures by Claux Sluter and his nephew. These comprise the celebrated W’ell of Moses and the Tombs of Philippe lc Hardi and of Jean Sans Peur.*

It appears from the names of several of the great artists working in Fiance from the middle of the fourteenth century, and from the character of the work wrought at this t^,rne, that the leading influence was then Flemish rather than French. The most famous artists of the time bore such names as Pepin de Iluy, Andre Beauneveu of Valenciennes, Claux Sluter, Jean de Cambrai, Hennequin de Liege, &c. In England, in 1367, when Edward III. erected a tomb to his wife in

*      See S. Lami s important ” Diet. Sculpt. Franfais.” 1898.

236 TOMB OF QUEEN PHILIPPA

Westminster Abbey it wa« ordered from one “ Hawk in de Liege ot France,” doubtless the last named, and is of the fashionable Flemish style. In paint ing the climax of this

Fig. 103. Daughters of Sion, from stained glass at OrUiis (Xlllth Ontury).

school was reached by the great world artist Jan Van Eyck, of Bruges, who himself served the French king.

In France a good deal of critical attention has been given to the national painters of an early date. Several important books have been devoted to them, and it is there fully understood that these painters are of as much

AUXEKKK CATHEDRAL. SCULPTURES OF THE WEST PORCH

Face p. 236

AUXEKUE CATHEDttAL, SCULPTUKES OF TIIE POKCII

FRENCH PAINTING

237

mportance to the history of French art as a Giotto ana other early masters arc to that of Italy.

From the tenth or eleventh century, vestiges of wall-

Fig. 104. Moses, from stained glass at Orbais (XHIth Century).

paintings still exist, such as fine Majesties and Virgins in apses, rows of prophets, lJible histories, &c., mostly large in scale, hieratic in treatment, and presented in fair, frank colours, and in a style tiowing from Byzantine sources. Poitiers und its neighbourhood is the best district in which to study early French wall painting. St. Savin, vhich

2₃B  KARlY PAINTERS

may be seen in an excursion from Poitiers, is a splendid Romanesque abbey church, which is almost entirely covered with paintings, as also is the circular chapel of

St. Jean de Liget in the forest of Loches:

At the end of the thir­teenth century, Master Etienne d’Auxerre was in the service of Philippe le Bel. In 1308, Philippas Itizuti of Rome was Pictor Regis. He, his son, and another, “ three painters of Rome,” are mentioned as late as 13x7. “He is probably the same as the Philippus Rusutus who, at the beginning of the fourteenth century,signed

p      , j v Tr j u . ^one of the mosaics of the

Fig. 105. A study Ly V. do Honnecourt.

fapade of S. M. Maggiore, Rome.” One of the most ^:mpoitant painters of this time was Master Evrard of Orleans, who worked in the royal palaces up to the middle of the fourteenth century; he, it is said, was also a sculptor and an architect.

Figs. 103 and 104 from stained glass may suggest in some degree the thirteenth-century style of drawing and composition. Fig. 105 is a sketch by Villars de Ilonne- court.

About 1350 Jean Coste painted a palace chapel for Jean II. “ in fine oil-colours; the field of fine-patterned

STRASBOURG CATHEDRAL. CENTRAL PILLAR IN THE SOUTH TRANSEPT

FOURTEENTH CENTURY 239

gold and the vestments of Our Lady in fine azure.* Of this King John, taken prisoner at Poitiers by the

Fig. 106. Portrait from incised grave-slab at Chilons-sur-Marne.

Black Prince in 1356, there remains a portrait on a gilt ground raised in patterns, which may be the work of Coste,or more probably of Gerard d’Orleans. In 1368-80, Jean de Bruges was Pictor Regis to Charles V. An

Fig I J7. Portraits from incised grave-slabs at CMlons-sur-Marne.

•PORTRAITURE

241

inventory of 1399 notes a painting in four leaves having the portraits of Charles V., Jean his father, the Emperor his uncle, and the King of England, Edward III. This precious picture, containing a portrait of Edward III., is unfortunately lost.

Another important master was Jean d’Orleans (1361­1408), Pictor Regis. But the most famous master of the fourteenth century was Charles V.’s painter, “Nostre aime Andtieu Beauneveu, nostre ymager,” who is mentioned by Frois-sart as “ Maistre de ses oeuvres de tai’de et de paintre ” to the Duke of Berry. lie has already been spoken of as a sculptor. That accurate portraiture was well understood at this time we may gather, if it needs proof, from the account that when Charles VI. was about to marry (1385), painters were sent abroad to bring him portraits of marriageable princesses. Isabella of Bavaria was approved an belle, jeune et gcnte. Figs. 106, 107 are from engraved tomb slabs of a still earlier time (c. 1300), and can hardly be othei than portraits. They come from the cathedral of Chalons-sur-Marne, the rioor of which seems to have been almost entirely covered by such graves.*

In 1425, Jan Van Eyck entered the service of Philippe le Bon. Of the native artists painting in the middle of the fifteenth century, Lhe most famous is Jean Fouquet of Tours.

Little remains to us of the heyday of art from 1250 to 1350 on the walls and vaults of the cathedrals. Oik of the most interesting series of paintings was onlv

*      On some supposed portrait sculptures of St. Louis ai«i other royal persons, see Gai. des Beaux Arts, 1903, p. 177.

recently discovered on a cupola at Cahors, which was decorated, about 1300, with colossal prophets, fifteen feet high, standing in tabernacles, and painted on a bright red ground in an egg medium. The painted books of the great time, however, are as perfect as when first the azure was laid and the gold was burni ihed. It is from these we may best gpin an idea of the painted interiors of the period when France led the way n art, :n painting no less than in sculpture and building. Window-glass, tapestry and wall-decoration were but offshoots of that art which Dante says “ in Paris is called illuminating.*’ Since this short note on French painting, in which I follow ed in the mu the volumes of Gtflis Didot and Laffilee and of Paul Mantz, has been in tvpe, a collection of “ Prmii-tifs ” which has been gathered together at the Louvre has exdted much interest. This exhibition could, of course, only deal with movables, and the earliest work shown is the portrait of Jean II., which is assigned to Gerard d’Orleans, who, it is thought, painted it in England (c. 1359), when he shared the captivity of the king, and that it formed part of the four-fold picture of royal portraits mentioned above. In the catalogue of this collection a claim is advanced that the famous Wilton diptych is a French work painted at Calais on the occasion of the marriage of Richard II. with Isabella of France in 1396. This is not at all so certain. It has always been held that this picture is considerably earlier than the date of this marriage, and there is probably more work in England to which it can be likened than there is in France; for instance, the magnificent West­minster portrait of Richard II. known to have been painted

LIII

AMIENS CATHEDRAL. RELIEFS OF THE VIRTUES AND VICES, FROM THE WEST FRONT ; BUILT BY ROBERT OF LUZARCHES

in, or before, 1396, for a place in the stalls of the Abbey Church. In this superb work, surely the finest fourteenth- century portrait in Europe both for dignity of design and fine colour, the background was patterned over with raised gilt gesso, as is the Wilton diptych. In the almost unknown paintings of the Majesty and the Coronation of the Virgin on the tester of Richard’s tomb, also painted in or before 1396, we have a similar treatment, which was in use in England at latest from the time wften, in 1300, Walter of Durham, Edward I.’s master painter, decorated the Coronation chair. Again, we are far from knowing ail the able painters who worked for the luxury-loving King Richard II. A chance entry in the St. Paul’s documents shows that in 1398 Herebrecht of Cologne, citizen, and painter of London, was engaged in painting a splendid picture of St. Paul surrounded by a tabernacle for the High Altar of the Cathedral. I am not so much expressing doubt as to the Wilton picture being by a French master, but to the assumption that it was painted in France on the occasion suggested. The exquisite Westminster re table (c. 1260-70) was, it is possible, painted in Paris and sent to Henry III. as a gilt from St. Louis, the fleur-de-lys and castles of the decoration suggest this, so also do the inlays of blue glass patterned over with gold, a method of decoration extensively used in the Ste. Chapelle. Mr. S. C. Cockerell has pointed out to me that a curious pattern on the painting, resembl’ng somewhat a Cufic inscription, is a favourite decoration on books painted for St. Louis. These methods and patterns were also in use n England, ana perhaps after all we have the greatest claim to this f ne work.

CHAPTER X

FRENCH MASONS |—* .

In France much attention has been devoted to the study of the mediaeval masters of masonry, the memory of whom has nowhere been so completely lost as here in England. Durand, writing of how Amiens Cathedral was built (G. Durand, “ Cathedrale d¹ Amiens,^M1901), says that that which we understand by architect did not exist in the Middle Ages—neither the name nor the thing. The plans were drawn by the master mason if the work was of stone, by the master carpenter if of wood. The execu­tion of the work was confided to a master mason or a master carpenter.

Thevet, in 1584, gives the life of one such master mason in his collection of illustrious Frenchmen.

Felibien also collected much information. One of the first works in France which the latter assigns to definite masters was the church of St. Lucien at Beauvais, rebuilt about 1078 “ by two workmen, Wormbold and Odon, who are only mentioned as cementarii, for the word ⁶ architect¹ was then little used, and they gave the name of ‘mason’ to those who made profession of the art of building.'¹ In 1887 appeared C. Bauchal’s “ Biographical Dictionary of French

AMIEXS CATHEDRAL. THE SIGNS OF TllE ZODIAC AND TIIE LABOURS

Architects,” which is so thorough that it would be vain to attempt to make extracts from it. In it we can follow in many cases the succession of masters at several cathedrals over the space of centuries. In the case of Troyes, particulars as to some seventy workers are given. I shall only here touch on a few leading cases, in the main gathered from sources published since Bauchal wrote.

An ancient inscription, connected with a labvrinth, inlaid in the floor of Amiens Cathedral, set forth that Master Robert of Luzarches, master of the work, began it in 1220. This labyrinth was an octagon filling the floor of two bays of the nave. At the centre was inlaid a cross of bronze, and also incised effigies of Evrard, the bishop who began the work, and of three masons who built it. This central slab was preserved when the laby­rinth was destroyed in 1825, and a copy of the whole composition has recently been laid in the place it once occupied. Robert of Luzarches was followed by Master Thomas de Cormont, who was succeeded by his son, Master Regnault, who, as the inscription read, “ put the writing” in the year 1288. Over the south transept door is the remnant of a still rarlier inscription in large letters (c. 1240) stating that the first stone was laid in 1220, and there the name of Robert again appears. A deed of 1260 mentions Master Renaud, fementar>iis, master of the fabric. The third master was, therefore, in charge from before 1260 to after 1288, and to him must be attributed the higher parts of the choir. The inscription of 1288 marks the date of the laying down of the marble floor of the nave, necessarily one of the last works. When I first

saw Amiens much of the original pavement was still in place; now all has been renewed.

One of the most perfect Gothic churches in France, or the great period, was S. Nicaise at Reims, destroyed a century ago. but of which good illustrations remain to us. It was begun in 1229 at the west end; a nearly contem­porary chronicle of the Abbey of S. Nicaise says that “ Hugo Libergiers, pronaon ecclesiae, perfecit. Robert de Coucy, caput ecclesiae, construxit.” The latter also, we are told, made the chapels of the choir and the high vault of the cross. Master Hugh died in 1263, and was buried just within the entrance. In Reims Cathedral the grave-slab of this master mason is st'll preserved. The engraved lines of the finely drawn figure are filled with lead. He holds in his hands a model of the church and lii.s measuring- rod, while on the field are depicted square and calipers. Around the border is inscribed :

“Cl GIT MAISTM HUES LIBERGIER5 <1UT COHENS A CESTE EGLISE EN l’aV M<VXXIX. . . . ET THI'.SPASSA L ’aV MCOLXIII. . .

In the cloister of S. Denis, Reims, Felibien noted the gravestone of Robert de Coucy, “ Maitfre de Notre Dame et de S. Nicaise, qni trtpmsa en Pan 1311.” We have thus a complete record of the two masters who built this church.

Of the masters of Reims Cathedral we have again full accounts. In its nave was al»o a labyrinth the position of which can still be seen in the disturbed paving, and a written account of the figures and inscriptions which it rontained ha« been preserved. At the middle was a figure probably of the Archbishop by whom the work was begun. At the four comers were four figures of master masons,

248 MASTER jEHAN D’ORBAIS

Jehan le Loup, master of the works for sixteen years, who commenced the portals; Gauchier de Heims, master for eighteen years, who wrought the vaults and arches, and also the portals; Bernard de Soissons, who made five vaults, worked 011 the great rose (“ et ouvra a l’O "), and was master during thirty-five years; a^Tid Jehan d’Orbais, master of the works; The church was begun in 1211, and the choir was taken possession of in 1241. M. Demaison, in a recent criticism of the data, has arrived at the result that Jehan d’Orbais began the chevet (“co f”) und died about 1231. and Jehan le Loup completed it (from 1231 to 1247) and built the north portals. Gauchier followed 1247-1255, and was succeeded by Bernard till 129c. during which time he carried on the nave ard raised the west front as far as to include the rose, the technical name for which, as known by other documents, was “ TO.” It will be seen that the names follow in the same order as that given in the MS. description, only beginning with the last name 1 n following the angles of a square.

While Reims was in progress it was visited (about 1225, by Villars de Houneeourt, a master probably of Cambrail who has left an interesting MS. book full of notes and drawings, preserved in Paris. It is supposed that Villars built the church of Vaucelles about 1230, that he was then called to Hungary, and on his return built the choir of St. Quentin Cathedral, consecrated 1257. His vellum sketch-book gives us a remarkable view of the range of his interests. He draws the ^<l counterfeit ” of a lion from life, makes many studies for sculpture, notes geometrical and mechanical suggestions such as how to make an angel bow at the Holy Name, and gives us a plan of a double-aisled

VILLARS DE HONNECOURT 249

apse, which he says was “ found¹¹ in the course of a dis­cussion with Pierre de Corbie.

From the notes which accompany the drawings it appears

tn<?s*nuy.

II&awtz fcs oxibx(as&i& oow if t&S'

Jtvut&tuatvit «n      tnr&uxuxcfty

I tW6ucec^*&^«t^t Vt?9^-¥t3t3? leiuswiV^

) *

This is a flan of the apse of'' Madame Saint Mary ”

Fig. 109. Drawing by Villars de Honnecourt of apse of Cambrai Cathedral.

probable that the book was prepared to be handed on either to descendants, or to his Guild, or for “ publication.” The style of the notes is very similar to that of the recipes of the monk Theophilus. The directions begin : “ If you desire to make ”—“ I will tell you how¹¹—“ When I was in Hungary,'’ See. The volume opens, “ Wilars de Honecort

salutes jou, anil implores all who labour at the different kinds of works contained in this bouk, to pray for his soul and hold him in remembrance.” Amongst his drawings from buildings we have the north-west tower of 1-aon I have been in many countries, but in no place have I seen a tower equal to that of Laon”—the plan of the chevet (del chavec) of Cambrai Cathedral, “as it is now rising from the ground,” the eastern ends of Meaux Cathedral and of the abbe\ church of Vaucelles (the last dedicated in 1235 and now destroyed), the rose windows at Lausanne and Chartres, the pavement labyrinth in the latter cathedra!, and many details of Re ims. (Figs. 89,105,109.)

At Paris the present cathedral was rebuilt from 1x63 to 1235. It was hardly finished before it was injured by fire, and large additional works hdd to be undertaken, including the transept gables and the outer wall of the chevet. An important inscription on the lower part of the south transept shows that this was the work of Master Jean de Chelles, mason, a.d. 1257. There is much fine sculpture about the door here, which we must suppose was the work of this mason. A deed of sale dated 1265, shows that Jean de Chelles was followed by the celebrated Pierre de Montereau, who is described as laf homos magisttr fdbricce ecclence B.M. Paris.

In 1307 a Pierre de Chelles of Paris, probably a son of the formt-r, was the king’s ma*on and master of the works at Notre Dame. In the same year he agrred to make the tomb of Philippe III.

' An inscription on the sculptured screen which enclosed the choir of Notre Dame told that it was commenced by

PIERRE DE MONTREUIL

Master Jean Ravy, masson, of Notre Dame for twenty-six years, and was completed by his nephew, Jean le Bouteiller, X351. The Sainte Chap pile (begun 1240 and dedicated 1248), the lovely work of St. Louis, so admired by our own Henry III. that a contemporary poem says he would have liked to have carried it off in a cart, i« always said to have been built by Pierre de Montereau (or more properly Montreuil); but of this there is no proof, nor is there any proof of his having directed the works at the Refectory of St. Martin des Champs. He was undoubtedly the master mason of the Ladv Chapc*l at St. Germain des Pres, and it has lately been discovered that he was also master of the works at St. Denis, of which, in a document of 1247, he is described as the “ cementarius.” Large reconstructions at St. Denis were undertaken in 1231. Pierre, this “doctor of masons ” (“ Doctor Lathomorum ”),* as he was called on his tombstone, which Felibien saw at St. Germain des Pre's, was born about 1212, at Montreuil, near Vincennes, and died in 1266. The grave of another of St. Louis’ master masons, Eudes de Montreuil, was at the church of the Cordeliers. The vet gives his portrait from his incised gravestone, and says that he was St. Louis’ favourite master, who went with the king to the East and built the towers of Jaffa. He died in 1289. “ Many,” says Thevet, writing in 1584 (his sympathies evidently went with the old regime), “ will wonder at the inclusion of his portrait, lor he concerned himself with things mechanical, and was not of those who puff themselves up. Michael Angelo,

*      Woltmann says the title of Doctor is a frequent equivalent for Master in italj , ne cites a mosaic at Spoleto si&nea Uy ^u .Doctor oolsturnus. *

PARIS. THE VIRGIN FROM THE NORTH TRANSEPT DOOR OF NOTRE DAME. PROBABLY BY PIERRE DE CHELLES

THE KING’S MASONS

industrious as he was, would not have done as rnunh work in sixty years as Elides in twenty.” (Fig. in is drawn from Thevet’s plate.)

Bauehal suggests that Eudes may have been related to the last named Pierre; they were both king’s masons. Eudes received four sols a day, with 100 sols annually for his robes, also his ibod and keep for two horses at the palace. Another king’s mason to St. Louis in Paris was Guillaume de St.-Patu. One of the most famous Paris masons of the fourteenth century was Raymond du Temple, Mayon du Ro^;, or Maitre des (Euvres de Mac^onnerie du Roi. He also was master of the works of Notre Dame. At this time the royal works in Paris were under the charge of a mason and a carpenter. Two others were responsible for the works in Champagne, two others in Languedoc, and two others in Normandy. A fine engraved monument in St. Ouen, Itouen, shows a master mason w ith his apprentice, and bears the inscription: “Cy gist Maistre Alexandre de Bemval, Maistre des (Euvres de Matj-onnorie du Roy, nostre sire: du Buillage de Rouen et de ceste eglise, q>ji trespassa l'an de grace mil, ccccxl, le v. jour de Janvier.” One of the last of the great Gothic masters was Martin Cambiche of Paris. lie built the great transepts of Beauvais, receiving forty sols a week, from 1500 to 1537. After this, Jean Vast constructed over the crossing, an immense lantern- tower, four hundred and seventy-five feet high, the vaulting beneath being pierced so that the whole fearful height was visible from the floor of the church.

Rouen Cathedral was begun to be rebuilt after a fire in 1200. The first-master seems to have been Jean d’Andeli,

cementarius and magister of the fabric of the church. Jean was followed by Ingelram, master of the works, in

1214. After him Durand, le machon, vaulted the nave in

1233; and on the boss of the last bay of the vault is

inscribed, “ Durandus me fecit.” * In 1251 Gautier de St.

^#       Is this the same Durandus as the French Master of that name who built Beaulieu Abbey in Hampshire early in the thirteenth century ?

Hilaire was master, and the north transept portal was begun in 1278 by his successor, Jnan Dair, who was followed by Jean Davy; one of the last two was probably the mason of the great south portal, and the Lady Chapel (1302-1320) is attributed to Jean Davy. One of the stained-glass windows of the ambulatory was signed by Clement of Chartres. In one of the north ehoir-chapels of St. Ouen, Rouen, is the tomb of a master who most probably began that work, soon after 1300. (Fig. 111.)

On the grave-slab of Libergiers before mentioned (xee Fig. 108) we have a portrait of the master in his cap and robe of office. The former is to be especially remarked, as where it occurs, as it often does, in mediaeval art, it marks men of the degree of doctors or masters. The degree of mastership in the Masons’ Gu'id was closely parallel to that of the master of arts in the university, that is, the Guild of Letters.

By serving a seven-years apprenticeship he became a bachelor or companion, and, on presenting a proper work- thesis, he was admitted master. ()ur curious courtesy title, “ Mr.,” does not mean employer, but graduate of guild ; however, the two meanings came together, as only a master might be an emplojer.

In a careful study by Gustave Faquiez (1877) of the methods pursued in building, he concludes that masonry was the most important of the building arts, and that the master always belonged to that craft. A master carpenter, however, gave the plans for the woodwork involved, in consultation with the master of the works.

The king, great personages, and religious establishments

256 CRAFTSMANSHIP HONOURED

had their ow n master masons and master carpenters; such directors of the royal buildings were attached to the

Court, and sworn. These king’s masons were, of course, held ra high consideration, and were constantly in close contact with the king. Thu son of Raymond du Temple, king’s mason, was god­son of the king and a student at the Univer­sity of Orleans. Ap­prenticeship done, several of the crafts imposed the test of t he master work (chef (Tceuvre), the wardens of the guild being the exan iners. If success­ful, the new master gave gloves to the wardens and a repast to the guild, and so became a “past-mas­ter.” When we admit that the great cathe­drals of France were technically designed by men bred as working masons, it is not to be ii)ferred that mastership was less esteemed, but that workmanship was more valued. It is, 'ndeed, thp most significant fact in regard to Gothic

F10.112. Gravestone of a master mason, in the Cluny Museum, Paris.

<rr\

=h

at L         -I /

^ho’

^1Ce» O ^Q>

art that it marks the triumph of craftsmanship in an age which understood and honoured ir.

The mason’s tools, the weapons of his craft, were to him what the sword was to the knight, and he loved to have them sculptured on his tomb and charged on his seal. Fig. 112 is a thirteenth-century grave-slab now in the Cluny Museum.

See also Fig. 113 ; this, one of the most interesting of existing memorials, s at Caudebec on the grave of the mason who, we may suppose from his long service, ~ built a great, part of the church with his O²¹ own hand and died in 1484. On one side of a long inscription is engraved the _{Fig                                    From}

figure of the master, and on the other side grave-stone of master is the plan of his work, with his tools— mason at Caudebec. plummet, mallet and trowel. The inscription begins: “Guillaume Letellier, master mason of the church, who had the conduct of the works for thirty years and more, and erected the choir and chapels.” It is worth} of remark that his surname is probably derived from his occupation—the stonecutter. Tw o facts show that he was the first master; tha⁺ he built the east end, always the point of beginning, and that the plan was put on his grave.

Fig. 114 shows the seal of one of the early fourteenth- century master mason.-* at Strasbourg, charged with three mason’s axes on a bend. Fig. 115 is from 0 w -idow at (‘hartres.

The impression tha^f the Cathedrals cannot be assigned

258 HONOURS FOR MASTERS

to particular builders, and that mediaeval masons were

little honoured in their day, is curiously far from the

truth. Masonry, including sculpture, was the representative

art of the age, and the captains of masonry

received most honourable public recognition.

Along the lintel of the great central portal

of St. James of Compostella is cut a careful

inscription about eighteen feet long to the

effect that in mclxxxviii the doors were com-

fig. 114. seal pleted by Master Matthew who directed the

of master ma^on _WOrk from the foundation. This inscription of Strasbourg. .    , . ,

is more than a mason s signature. It can only be accounted for bv recognising it as a public honour voted to one who had magnificently exercised his craft.

Forming a band at the base of the south transept ot Notre Dame, Faris, below the beautiful sculptures which adorn the doorway, is an inscription in largp raised letters giving the date of 1257 for the beginning of the new work, and end^:ng with the name of the master mason (“ Lathomus ”) — kalij’N’si lathomo vivente TOhannk magistro (Fig. 117). The formula '‘Vivente’’ is offcn found on tombs, and it is possible ihat this is an honorary memorial inscribed after the master's death.

At Amiens across the south transept above the door of the “ Vierge Doree” on the cornice is a decayed bard of letters seven inches high—en l an a l ikcaenatio valojt mcc

& XX . . . IFV REMlsT LE PREMIERE PU RE 1ASIS . . . I,F CORS

. . . bobert. . . . The inscription is in mid-thirteenth century letters, and. according to tradition, refers to Robert of Luzavches the first mason; a tradition which the analogous examples show that we may safely accept.

HONORARY INSCRIPTIONS

At Strasbourg, above the great west portal was formerly an inscription w hich told that in 1277 the glorious work was beguu by Master Erwin von Steinbach.

As we have seen, on the practical completion of the Nave of Amiens in 1288, a striking memorial to the first three masters and the contemporaneous Bishop was laid down in the centre of the pavement labyrinth. At Reims

Fig. 115. From stained glass at C harties.

e similar memorial was dedicated to the first four masters, and a confirmation is given by this fact to the view that these four masters substantially completed the entire work.

At Westminster Abbey there is a remarkable example of such an inscription. On the marble cornice of the (Confessor’s Shrine, precisely the most honourable position in England, were set letters of blue glass mosaic, three inches h'gh, giving first the date 1279, then the words

HOC OPVs E.ST FACTVM WtVOD PEXRVS DVXIT IN ACTVM ROMANVS

civ is, followed by the name of King Henry III. as having ordered the work. On the mosaic pavement laid down before the altar in 1268 appears the name of the arti.vt Odericus of Rome.

A number of masons’ drawing* from the Middle Ages

Fig. 116. A, Original design for the west front of a great church of the thirteenth century. B, Suggested interpretation of same.

have been preserved in France, Italy, Germany, and the Low Countries. The earliest of these, after the studies of Villars de Ilonnecourt (of which an example is given in Fig. 109), are some drawings of a west front of a large church which exist as palimpsests in a book at Reims, and which cannot be later than the middle of the thirteenth century. They are drawn in correct ortho­graphic projection, and two seem to be alternatives for

AN ORIGINAL DRAUGHT 261

the same elevation. The one of these, of which Fig. 116, A, is a reduction, is the least interesting, but I wish to offer an explanation of the tracery shown at the central porch. According to Didron (Annales, v.) this represents a window drawn in this position because there was no other room on the parchment. O11 comparing, however, this design as it stands with Libergiers’ west front of St. Nicaise it seems clear that the scheme is a reasonable, and indeed almost an inevitable development from it. The right hand side, B, of Fig. 116 and the plan above show how I would interpret it.

Fig. X17. Inscription in honour of the master mason of Notre Dame, Paris

CHAPTER XI

GOTHIC ART IN ENGLAND, SPAIN, SWITZERLAND, BELGILM, AND GERMANY

It is impossible in short concluding chapters, dealing with the Gothic style outside France, to do much more than to try to indicate the relationship of its several branches to the parent stem.

The development of Anglo-Norman Romanesque has never been fully trac ed, and it is possible, as has been said above, that in the two generations following the Conquest steps in development may have been taken here earlier than in Normandy. Before the middle of the twelfth century, however, it is certain that France had taken the lead, and that from that time the English style was in a subordinate position. Many writers contest this on the ground of taste; they say that they do not like the ex­aggerated buttress-scaffolding of French High Gothic, and prefer the subtle, shy charm of English examples. But when we inquire in detail, of precedence, of scale, of the science of construction and energy of production; and of the development of ancillary arts like stained glass, sculp­ture in stone and bronze, enamelling, ivory carving, manu­script painting, and, indeed, every one of the sectional

ABBEY OF VILLARS (BELGIUM). AX EXAMPLE OF THE MONASTIC TRANSITIONAL STYLE

ENGLISH TRANSITION        263

arts which make up the drama of architecture, we must confess that the source and strength of Gothic is to be found in North Franc e, and that England followed it, in the transition fiom Romanesque, step by step at one remove.

Fountains Abbey affords the best opportunity for a studj of the English transition, as there a large mass of building work was being continuously carried on for a great number of years, and from contemporary accounts the dates of several parts of the w ork can be accurately inferred. In 1132 some monks of St.. Mary's Abbey, York, deciding to adopt the Cistercian rule, settled at Fountains, and sent messengers to St. Bernard of Clair- vaux, who sent back with them Geoffrey, a monk of that place, to teach them. The present buildings were pro- ^r bably not begun for a few years, but there cannot be a doubt that the plan was laid out under the direction of Geoffrey. The greater part of the church seems to have been built under his supervision, as there are certain un- English features about the nave and tran*epts which are best explained by reference to Burgundian examples. In 1147 there was a great fire, end examination of existing buildings makes it clear that the church belongs to the time before the fire, say 1135 -45, and thut the chapter­house belongs to the pert rebuilt soon after the five, c. 1160. ^rrhe refectory was most probably built between 1185-95 with the south part of the western range of buildings. A great eastward extension of the church was undertaken at latest about 1210.

The nave has a decidedly Norman character, but this in th« main is given to’t by the plain scalloped capitals.

The great arches are pointed, and the aisles are covered by poinrted. barrel-vaults set like a saddle transversely over each ba\. In genera) refinement the work is in advance of anything thai up to that time had been seen in England. A few of the capitals have simple carved leafage ; if this treatment had been carried throughout the “ Norman ” effect would be almost entirely absent, and the work would be at once classed a* transitional. The tran­septs, which are equally early, appear even more advanced, for the pi linted arches here spring from an impost-moulding instead of from the Norman form of capital, and each bay is lighted bj a pair of windows with a circle above them. The central spans of the early church were never vaulted, but were covered by wooden roofs. Over the crossing appears to have been a low lantern tower. The whole church must have been a very logical and refined building, and we may see in it how the Cistercian puri­tanism was an element in the preparation of the way for Gothic. The details of the chapter house are much more elegant and ornamental. The entrance doorways are still circular, but are finely moulded, and the whole work is in a style complete and masterly as tar as it goes. No barbaric element survives, and it marks the climax of transitional work. In the refectory (c. nqo), the details are still more elegant, and the proportions are tall and slender. The windows are fine, sharply-pointed lancets; those ii the gable-ends coupled in pairs, with one shaft between them common to the two. It is a beautiful piece of first Gothic.*

V The monastic orders spread the seeds «f Gothic over Karope (sue Plate 57).

RIPON

265

Fountains is but a chief work of a great Northern school of monastic building, comprising Hievaulx (nave), Kirkstall, Byland, Jervaulx, and many other examples.

Ripon Cathedral, of old a collegiate church, is another fine and early example of this transition Gothic. It is proved to have been commenced before the death of Archbishop Roger of York in 1181. Some details al Kipon, as, for instance, the corbels of the choir-aisles, closely resemble work at Fountains. One of the most interesting parts of the church is the Chapter house on the south side of the choir, which all writers assign to a date earlier than Roger’s work. A recent examination has convinced me that it is in every way all of a piece. Some details of the church, unblighted by restoration, can l>e seen in the present library. The curious nave should be compared with that of Nun Monkton. Scott’s theory of its first form may be accepted, save that there should surely be a lower tier of windows opening in the wall passage. The early work is of high interest and beauty.

We have in Gervase’s account of the burning and re­erection of the choir of Canterbury Cathedral clear evidence as to the dates of every part of that structure. Certain touches in the account suggest that Gervase was himself the monastic clerk-of-vvorks associated with the master •ma>on, William of Sens. “The master” began to prepare fur the new work, and to destroy the old, in X175. In X176—7 he completed the bays of the high vault from the tower to the east crossing. In the next year he

completed five more pillars on each side, and was preparing to build the vault when he fell from a beam. TW master, thus hurt, gave charge of tne work to an in­genious monk, who was the “ overseer of the masons ” (Gervase himself?); but the master from his bed com­manded all things, and thus was completed the vault of the eastern crossing. Then the master gave up the work and returned to France, and William, an Englishman, acute in workmanship (masonry, of course), succeeded him. The monks entered the new choir in 1180. In 1181-2 “our mason” erected the pillars of St. Thomas’s chapel, and in 1184 completed its vault and roof. In the story of Gervase we nave a typical history of mediaeval cathedral-building. We start with a pre-existing church made up of Lanfranc’s nave and Anselm’s choir. The choir is burnt; the clergy camp out in the nave ; masons are called i^1- to advise, one being a Frenchman from Sens, who is made resident master, and a monk is appointed as “ overseer of the masons that is, agent on behalf of the clergy for the accounts. ** The work is carried on section by section; and the first mason is succeeded by a second before the building is completed. The “ design ” is careful contrivance to fit the new portion to pre-existing con­ditions. In this particular case the puzzle of extending the choir through a space contracted by two old side- chapels which were retained was solved with brilliant skill. Gervase himself tells us that the master, not choosing to pull dawn the side-cliapels, gradually and obliquely drew in his work, “ all which may be more pleasantly seen by the eyes than taught in writing." 'ITiis. indeed, is as true now as when Gervase wrote, and a most

WILLIAM OF SENS       267

beautiful composition of lines results from the economical adaptation. There cannot be a doubt, as is allowed by Willis, that we owe the planning of the entire scheme, including the portion finished by the English mason, to William of Sens.

Canterbury is a French cathedral built on English soil, and the resemblance to Sens itself is strict. The interior of the eastern transept is in general appearance the most advanced part, of the work. The large circular windows, undivided, except by iron bars arranged iu a pattern, and filled with splendid stained glass, are particularly in­teresting. Viollet le Due gives a similar circle, divided only by ironwork, from Dijon. The open arcades in the upper storey of the interior of the ends of the transept were followed, with variations, at Rochester and Salisbury. The large area of stained glass in the church is particularly fine in quality, and is almost identical with work at Sens and other places in France, and must be allowed to have come from that country. Didron assigns it a date between the glass of S. Denis and Chartres, and grants that it is of unsurpassed beauty. The clerestory windows of the choir and apse were filled with a continuous series of single figures representing the ancestors of the Virgin.

In the eastern limb of Lincoln we have another fine example of a Gothic work begun in the twelfth century. St. Hugh began to rebuild the “ head ” of the church in 1192. Unfortunately the actual head of the church, an apse of singular form, lias been destroyed, and only its foundations have been more or less recovered; but at least the lower part of the existing presbytery and its aisles was

probably well advanced by 1200. From a “Life of St. Hugh,” written some time before 1235, it appears that the church was complete to the transepts, including the great circular windows, at the time of writing. V iollet

le Due, it is said, did not see much trace of direct "French influence at Lincoln ; but this surely means that he saw the influence of the Gothic of Nor­mandy. In Fig. 118 is given what I suppose may have been

Fig. h3. Lincoln Cathedral, the complete form of the east quoted original form of the east ^ _{q{                      Tht}, _{[)lan of}

the apse may be compared with the apse of the monastic church at Vaucelles. near Cambrai, now destroyed (Fig. 72), probably however it was adapted from Canterbury Cathedral. The beautiful rose in the north tiansept of Lincoln looks like a combination of the roses of Chartres and the small interior roses of Notre Dame. Wells Cathedral was also in progress at the end of the twelfth century, and the east end of Chichester is another early work.

From this time there was slight development for the next thirty or forty years. Salisbury, which shows little growth, was begun in 1220, and represents the mid-point between Lincoln, which on the whole, is the finest and completest of our cathedrals, and Westminster Abbey, begun in 1245. It seems probable that this slow develop­ment for a period may be accounted for by King John’s loss of Normandy in the first years of the thirteenth

WESTMINSTER ABBEY        269

century. Westminster Abbey certainly shows renewed contact with French influcnces. K now ing Westm inster, my attention was arrested at Beims last year by several striking resemblances between the French coronation church and our own. Works at the Abbey were begun in July 1245. Four years afterwards we learn that the master mason in charge was one Magistcr Henricus cementarius. In 1250 the king commanded that six or eight hundred men should work at the church. About 1254 Henry was succeeded by Master John of Gloucester, the king's mason, who carried on the works to 1260, and was in turn succeeded by Master Robert of Beverley, king's mason, under whose charge the work of Henry III. at the church was completed. John of St. Albans, the king’s sculptor, is also mentioned in the rolls; he probably wrought the fine figures in the chapter-house and the transepts. In 1269 Edward the Confessor was translated to his new shrine, and the “ new work ” was consecrated. After the building of Westminster, direct imitation of French work is not e\ident.*

In my necessary use of terms of comparison, I am far from speaking slightingly of English work. I only speak of less or more as of the magnitude of stars or the mass of mountains. Both schools of the one art are natural and fitting, perfect of thrir kind. I would, if I could, make use of a comparison of superiority which would not involve inferiority. Moreover, Gothic art in England was a true development continuously influenced from France, but not artificially imported.

*      I have given snme account of the king’s mason' and the building in " Westminster ALbey and the King’j Craftsmen," 1906.

In Spain, also, the general law of Gothic expansion was followed, and the French style was more or less made use of in the houses of the new monastic orders. Later, some of the great cathedrals were rebuilt in the matured French manner. Toledo, which has a particularly noble chevet of radiating chapels, the scheme of which Street considered the most perfect anywhere to be found, was begun in 1226, and constructed by a French master. The plan, as Street says, closely resembles that which V. de Honnecourt gives in his book as contrived by himself and Pierre de Corbie, and Enlart suggests that it may be actually derived from this source. In this admirable plan which was to some extent anticipated at Le Mans, there are two ambulatories around the apse with vault compart­ments alternately square and triangular in each. Ten pillars between the two aisles answer to six in the apse itself, and against the outer wall there are eighteen responds, between which open semicircular chapels opposite the square vault-compartments, and email square ones to the triangular intermediate vaults.

The Cathedral of Burgos is also fine French work, and follows Bourges. The Door of the Apostles has a noble series of sculptures in the tympanum, in the arch orders, and in the jambs. From a photograph it looks as if it must have been sculptured by a master who had worked at Amiens, or on the north doors of Reims. In the tympanum is the Majesty supported by St. Mary and St. John, and angels carrying the instruments of the Passion. In the arch orders are » particularly remarkable series of angels and seiaphim, and at the jambs one of the finest series of the Apostles anywhere existing. There are

AND SWITZERLAND

also many fine sculptures distributed over the west front, 'ncluding a Gallery of the Kings. At Leon the western porches and sculptures, wrought about 1275, closely resemble those of Chartres.

Savoy and French Switzerland are almost as much provinces of the Gothic style as Normandy. In Geneva and Lausanne are two fine early French cathedrals. The former resembles Lyons, and its toWers stand over the transepts. It seems to have been begun as a Romanesque work, and to have been modilied as it advanced. Around the interior of the choir is a blind arcade on fluted pilasters, the capitals of which are beautifully carved, and two of them have figures from the series of the liberal arts, and are nscribed musica and (geo)mrtria. The transepts are two bays long, the end bays being under the towers. The crossing is much less from east to west than from north to south, and the transepts are narrow and were evidentlj intended to bear towers from the first. The first work includes two bays west of th^ crossing, and there is a preparation in them for sex- partite vaulting, but quadripartite was substituted, and the evidence disappears in the western hays. The west end finishes with a narrow vaulted bay, and always pro­bably h;id a western gallery as at present. The aisles are narrow and the vaulting rises much more, longitu­dinally, than do the transverse arches separating the compartments, which look like a series of domed vaults. The windows are broad lancets. A beautiful contrivance is found in the little lights which, around the apse, open to the triforium passage, only one to each double bay of

272 GENEVA AND LAUSANNE

its. arcade, hut enough to make it glitter. This noble church has of late years gone through the terrible ordeal of

restoration, and restoration, both here and at Lausanne, has been as “ thorough ” as any in the w orld. By the ex­penditure of infinite thought and pains, conscientious and scientific, bv means of com­missions, reports, and the labours of eminent archi­tects, these buildings have been withered and blasted like our Lichfield, Chester, Worcester, and the exterior of Hipon.

Lausanne has western towers, a central lantern, and a fine rose window in the transept—all probably sug­gested bv I .aon. Two other smaller towers, east of the transept*, flank the apse, which finely stands over­looking a deep valley. In the south porch are some good sculptures (Plate 58). Coire, another early Swiss cathedral, is a mixture of French, German and Lombard elements. It follows the North-Italian type in having a high presbytery over a crvpt which is fully visible from

Fid-119. I .ausanne Cathedra'., ground plan.

LVIII

LAUSANNE CATIIEDKAL. THE SOUTH TRANSEPT IJEFORE “ KESTORAT I ON ”

COIRE AND ZURICH     273

the nave, and its floor is only about two feet below the nave level; the crypt is vaulted on ogives, but the curva­ture being very flat the centre is sustained by a column which rests on a figure seated on a lion; a composition so identical with pillars at the entrance to the crypt at Modena that they are almost certainly by the hand of the same master (Fig. 59). The nave arcade has simple pointed arches, and the ogival vaults are on pointed trans­verse arches. All the arches and ribs are in square orders,

Fig. 120. Coire Cathedral; early altar front of marble.

and the capitals are rudely carved. The plan is almost exactly like that of Zurich Cathedral, comprising a short- aisled nave, a square raised choir, and a small square presbytery to the east. In Zurich, however, the aisle has two compartments to one of the nave; but at Coire the aisle-vaults are much elongated east and west. Zurich, moreover, has a fine vaulted triforium, and ail the details are characteristically German. There is a good deal of doubt about the dates of the several parts of Coire, but it seems certain that the superstructure of the nave is an offshoot of early Burgundian Gothic. In the south chapel

274  BELGIUM

there is a very interesting alter-front, being a large white marble altar slab, can ed with interlacing patterns identical with those which we in England call Saxon. (See Fig. 120, of which Fig. 121 is an enlarged detail.) Coire is still un­restored, and altogether a most interesting puzzle. Zurich, on the other hand, has been scraped to the very bone.

Fig. til. Coire Cathedial; detail of altar front.

i\ledia?val art in Belgium developed by continuous inter­change with France. In the twelfth century Tourna\ Cathedral and the bronze-working centre of Huy led: in the thirteenth century France repaid the debt in such building* as Notre Dame, Bruges, and the Hospital of St. John in the same city. The latter has a finely sculptured door (r. 1270) with the Virgin's assumption, and coronation represented in the tympanum. These buildings are

BRUGES. HOTEL DE VILLE AND BELFRY

particularly interesting in bf ing built of brick. * In the four­teenth century Flemish artists,as we have seen,again took the iead, and art even in ran-, became Franco-Flemish. (PI. 59.)

In Germany, at monastic centres, there had long beeh sporadic cases of building in the Gothic style before it had anv marked influence on the general native Romanesque, which, indeed, was carried on in places through the fourteenth and fifteenth centuries.f The perfected French style was frankly adopted and imported at Cologne in 1248. The plan is founded on that of Beauvais, and possibly the master had a knowledge of the plans of the church of Amiens. The windows of the earliest part are copies of those at the Sainte Chapel!e. Sir G. Scott has preserved an interesting piece of cv idenee as to the sources of Cologne, showing that “Beauvais rather than Amiens was the type from which it was imitated.” “The pinnacles over the eastern chapels at Beauvais are of a very peculiar form, consisting of a pinnacle standing on four detached shafts and placed over another pinnacle, of which the pyramidal part runs up in the midst of the shafts of the upper one, and terminates under its canopy. Now the late M. Zwimer, the architect to Cologne Cathedral, showed me a model of just such a. pinnacle that showed the original form of those round the apse there, but he had substituted solid pinnacles for the sake of strength.” The nav e of Strasbourg is also a pure French work ; the towers of Laon are copied at Naumberg and Bamberg, at the latter of which the sculptures of Reims are closely imitated.

*      Of later date are many magnificent churches and towers, a’l of brirk.

t Of the monastic transition, Arnsburg is parallel to our Fountains.

CHAPTER XII

GOTHIC ART IN ITALY

Thf artistic pre-eminence of France at the end of the twelfth century, and the activity of the Cistercians, resulted in a sort of missionary propaganda of Gothic architecture in Italv. About 1200 was built, close to Rome itself, the church and monastic buildings of Fossa- nova. The ehaptcr-house, built about 1225, is fairly accurate Burgundian Gothic. Casamari, south of Rome, also a Cistercian house, consecrated in 1217, is a simple but elegant work of lancet Gothic, entirely vaulted. In 1224 the same Order built the Abbey of San Galgano, about twelve miles from Siena. This is a beautiful Burgundian churrh, vaulted, and in a pure pointed style.

When the two great orders of friars, the Dominicans and Franciscans, needed large churches for their increasing congregations, they were planned very much on the Cistercian ty^ie, were covered 'with ogival vaults, and are generally Gothic, although of a modified form, and, as fitted the circumstances, bare and plain, but logical and stately. Sta. Maria Novella in general arrangement is like a French Cistercian Church a century earlier.

Siena Cathedral was begun in 1245, the same year as

•4 ^

BOLOGNA. MONUMENT OF llOLANDIXO, c. 1300

our own Westminster Abbey. It is remarkable as being a square-ended church ; and as the work in 1257 was under the direction of a monk of San Galgano. and as he was followed two years after by a second Cistercian, it can hardly be doubted that the plan itself was of Cistercian o) igin.

The church has now a central dome which rises above a i.ejcagonal area on six pillars, but it is not on the axis of the transepts, and the plan is in many ways irregular. This dome is evidently an afterthought, anil must have come about much as did the octagon at Ely. The details of the church are considerably modified from the Cistercian type, and it is built throughout in alternate courses of black and white, a sunival from work of the Romanesque period. This treatment is here, however, so strongly marked that it is difficult not to see in it some allusion to the Bahana of Siena, blazoned per fess argent and sable. The whole campanile, even to its pyramidal top, and the pinnacles set around it, is carried out in these alter­nate courses. It is a careful and critical version of the general type of Lombardic tower—a tall shaft, perfectly square, with first a high ground-storey and then a suc­cession of six low storeys, in which, beginning at the bottom, there is a regular gradation of openings, first a single one, then a pair, then three, and so 011 up to six at the top. It sounds simple, indeed childish, but the result is of rare beauty. The lantern of the central dome has been altered, but a representation of the original form and of the campanils fortunately appears in the pictured allegory of Good Government in the Palaz/o Pubblico, painted in the first half of the fourteenth century. On

the apex of the dome was a large leaded glotje, and the dome is to be compared with those at Visa and St. Mark’s, Venice. The church was completed in its first form about 1270. In 1340 a vast new nave was undertaken, but it was never carried very far. From c. 1360 the choir was rebuilt, about 1375 the west end had two bays added to it, and c. 1380 the present west front was com­pleted, following Orvieto.

When the Gothic influence spread beyond the centres where it was planted by the new monastic orders, it became Gothic with a difference. The pointed arch, the ogival vault, and other methods of construction, were accepted and grafted 011 the native traditional methods. The results were more like varieties of pointed Romanesque of a refined type than like the Gothic of the North. This is particularly the case in the .South. (See Plates 60-C2.)

One of the first churches which showed a more complete acceptance of the Gothic style was San Francesco at Assisi, the foundation-stone of which was laid in 1228. The friars markedly associated themselves with the spread of the new style. The upper church is boldly vaulted in one span, with tall two-light windows in each bay, and resembles in some degree the nave of Angers Cathedral The under church is covered by a low vault on stout chamfered ogives. The whole of the interior wall-surface is the field for splendid wall-paintings, some of which were already begun as early as 1240, and were completed by ;he altogether magnificent series, by Giotto,of Bible pictures and scenes from the life and teaching of St. Francis, including in lour great compositions the allegories of the

HITKTTO CATHEDRAL. SOUTH ITALIAN WOIIK WITH GOTHIC AXl)

LO.M BAI ID 10 JXFLUEX0E

NICCOLO PISANO 279

three vows of the order, Poverty, Chastity, and Obedience, and the glorification of St. Francis himself. The church was consecrated in 1253. In the doorway, and, above all, in the architectural features of Giotto’s paintings is to be traced the influence of the * Cosmati ” school of marble workers.

By 1260 Niccolo Pisano, the greatest master of his age in sculpture, had been ' ifluenced by the new impulse. His pulpit in the Pisa baptistery is signed and dated 1260. It is supported on cusped semicircular arches rising from columns, the alternate ones of which rest on lions in the Lorn bardic manner. Earli side above is formed by a sculptured slab crowded with figures evidently studied from Roman reliefs, vet frank and vivid through and through, and penetrated with Art’s new life. The Siena pulpit, undertaken six years later, is almost identical in general design, but the Gothic element is still more in evidence. In the former one the Virtues at the angles are obviously studied from antique originals. Fortitude is a Hercules, and Charity is a Roman matron. The Virtues at Siena have become crowned \irgins. A third pulpit, that of Pisa Cathedral, is again very similar. It was the work of Giovanni Pisano, from 1302. The central pillar here is formed by a group of the three theological Virtues, and the four cardinal Virtues support it round about. These Virtues have appropriate emblems. The main pillar stands on a pedestal, on which are sculptured the seven Liberal Arts. The influence of French Gothic art on the sculpture of Italy is as marked as that of the building style. At the Baptistery of Parma there are figures of Solomon and the (jueen of Sheba, which ran

only have been done by an artist who knew the similar figures at Reims. French stained glass was also adapted.

There are several churches with charming Gothic, or part Gothic, frontispieces in Pisa. San Michele d: Borgo is a Gothic translation in small of the cathedral front, having three tiers of cusped arcades standing free from the wall above a plain basement, in Vhlch are three round-headed doors. A pretty feature here >s a triple tabernacle containing a statue of the Virgin, which rests on the lintel of the central door, and the little gables of which rise above the door arch and veil its form.

Another front of this kind is that of the Church uf San I’ietro, which is simpler, more logical, and indeed strikingly beautiful. But the most important Gothic monument is the great isolated cloistered court, the Campo Santo, the walls of which, within, a^e continuously covered with frescoes. The Spina chapel, now so terribly- restored, must also be mentioned.

We cannot stay to trace the Gothic school in Verona, Milan, Venice, and, indeed, all over North Italy, but must at once turn towards Florence.

The Dominican Church of Santa Maria Novella, Florence, is said by Villini to have been begun in 1278, but some reasons have been brought forw ard which suggest that this date applies to the erection of the nave, and that the eastern limb may date from about 1246. If this is the case, it is one of the earliest Gothic works in the city. The tine church of Santa Tnnita was rebuilt from c. 1250, it is said by Niccolo Pisano, who in that year went to

l’Al.ER.MO. WfxnpW OF S. AGOSTIM) SK LLl*-\’ WOKS WITH GOTHIC lNI’I.UEXCK

Florence. The other great Friary Church, that of Santa Croce, was begun in 1294. Its fine painted roof is just now being brought to light.

About 1250 was commenced the Bargello, which is a noble example of the castellated palace of the time, reasonable and strong. 'Hie style is the development of the local Romanesque with an infiltration of Gothic details.

In 1298 the l’alazzo Vecchio was begun. The general form of this building is probably as well known as that of any in the world. It is a great mass of masonry, almost a cube; the upper storey, containing a gallery for defence, is carried by a far-jutting machicoulis, from the projecting face of which rises a tall tower which is crowned within its battlements by an open belfry, the whole about 300 feet high. The supporting of this tower four or five feet in advance of the wall beneath looks fearful in its daring, as is said, “it is built on air.” It should be observed that the crowning turret, with its heavy bell, does not stand on the centre of the tower, but is pushed back for some distance, so as to weight the inner wall; and the corbel'ing is set much closer directly under the tower than elsewhere. The masonry is squared, but the face has a fortresslike roughness. The windows are of white marble and v ery beautiful, of two lights with cusped heads, and divjded by a shaft under a round-headed open­ing, the arch being slightly pointed on the extrados only. The space over the coupled lights is charged with a fleur- de-lys or a cross alternately.

In our National Gallery there is a careful view of the state of the Palace about 1510, when it was painted by Piero di Cosimo on the background of the portrait of

282

ARNOLFO AND

Soderim, the chief magistrate of Florence. In front is the masonry terrace, the Ringhvra or Rostrum of Florrnce, since removed, with steps only opposite the door. At the comer of the terrace is the Marzocco, gilded. At the angles of the battlements, directly over the corbels, are other gilt lions in little niches. These have now entirely disappeared. The shields of arms between the corbels were brightly coloured. The copper roof of the belfry was also gilt, and shone over the city like a pyramid of tire. Vasari says that Arnolfo was the architect of this wonderful building, but this is doubtful. It is not in that master's characteristic manner, while it is, on the other hand, in the traditional Florentine style, being a slight advance on the Bargello.

Arnolfo was bom at Colle about 1232, and worked for Niccold at Siena. Between 1280-1290 he was engaged at Orvieto on an important tomb, which is ornamented with mosaic patterns and twisted columns inlaid with mosaic in the style of “ Coemati ” work, as well as with fine sculp­tures. The name of Arnolfo, and the date 1285, appear on the marble mosaic altar-tabemacle in St. Paul’s outside the walls, Rome ; and most writers agree that this is the same Arnolfo who was given the charge of the proposed new cathedral of Florence in 1296. Arnolfo was a sculptor, and everything goes to show that he had become a follower ot the Roman marble-w orkers, and this explains his scheme for a cathedral of coloured marbles for the Florentines.

At the time of which we are writing this Cosmafi work became a great fashion, and artists in this school of work­manship were brought from Rome by our Henry III. to decorate his new abbey church at Westminster. In

1268 the rich mosaic pavement of the presbytery was laid down, and the base- u   ^

ment of the Confessor's Shrine was made about the

same time, by Peter, Civis      | **»-. I *- ®T

Rumanm. The tomb of y  MS

Henry III. is also a fine example of this work, and there is a fourth in the small tomb of his little daughter Katharine.

Another famous work which was in the Strawberry Hill Collection has entirely dis­appeared. This was the shrine of Simplicius,Fausti- nus and Beatrice, erected in Sta. Maria Maggiore, M        EH

Rome, by Giovanni Capoc- M  uB

cio. It was tom from the f church and sold to Sir Km William Hamilton, from    Ml

whom Walpole obtained it. fppjggsggp Ml There is, at the Society  MB

of Antiquaries, a large and M %

admirable drawing of it ■■     .

made while it was in its |||

original position. At the Fig. 122. Altar of •• ('osmati” work sale of the Walpole Collec- ^form-^{Iy in s}-^{M             Rorn}'“'

tion it was purchased bv a Bond Street dealer, and I cannot trace it further. It was a shrine and altar ciborium in

one, the shrine, being upborne on porphyry columns, and rising to a total height of twenty-five feet.

On the base of the shrine was a mosaic of Capoccio and his wife offering an image of the altar-shrine to the Virgin, and beneath it an inscription, “ iacobvs ioannis capoccii

ET VINIA VXOR EIVS FKKI FECERVNT HOC OPVS PRO RKDEMP- TIONE ANIMAKVM SVARVM ANNO DOMINI MCCI.VI.”

ITie foundation-stone of Santa Maria del Fiore, Florence, one of the largest cathedrals in the world, was laid on September 8, 1296, as is recorded 011 a stone bu’lt into the south wall opposite the campanile, which also names Arnolfo as having been the master. A grant of 1300 provided that Master Arnolfo da Colle del Cambio was to be exempted from a tax because he was Capn-macstrn of the works, and surpassed every one else in his art, so that Florence was in expectation of having the most beautiful temple in all Tuscany.

Arnolfo died in 1301,* probably leaving a model of the church. It is thought that the church, which appears in Simone Martini’s (?) painting in the Spanish chapel repre­sents this model. At least Vasari says it docs, “ and because he says it, it is not necessary to believe the con­trary!” The plan of the church is one of the most perfect of structural schemes, and it is much larger and simpler in its parts than any of the Northern cathedrals. Three limbs, with apsidal terminations, project from the central octagonal space to the east, north, and south; while to the west the na\e is formed by only four immense bays.

*      The aate is variously given up to 1310, but the registration ot death in March 1301 has been found. A. Cocchi, “JLe Chit.se di Firenze," 1903.

The resistance of the three apses against the octagon of the dome is increased by each being surrounded by a continuous row of chapels, and in the re-entering angles other rhapels rise against the alternate sides of the octagon as high as the three principal apses.

Did this plan originate from some traveller’s account of Santa Sophia, with its central dome sustained by great apses, and those by lesser apses, or is it a bold aggrandise­ment of Pisa Cathedral, with its dome and transeptal apses ? As a matter of fact, it resembles the trefoil form of the Tournay type and the remarkable plan shown in our Fig. 63, and is e member of the group derived from the transversely-apsed Byzantine churches. The great central octagon was doubtless adopted from the Baptistery of Florence.

I11 1334 Giotto di Bondone was elected master of the cathedral and of all other public works, and laid the foundations of the campanile in the same year. Giotto was born at Colle, in 1266, one year after Dante. About 1280 he went to Assisi as assistant to Cimabue, and there developed an independent position. In the great series of paintings which cover the Church of St. Francis can be traced Giotto’s ’nterest ii* architecture, and they show, as has been said, that he too had become a follower of Arnolfo and the Cosmuti school. The marble Cam­panile of Florence, one of the most perfect structures in the world, seems at first to be very d fficult to account for by the ordinary rules of architectural heredity. This difficulty) perhaps, arises more from the unaccustomed material and details than from the general conception, which to some extent agreed with a line of Florentine

campaniles of which a precious and beautiful example still stands at the church of Ognissanti. A small MS. drawing, made about 1425, of the old church of San Lorenzo shows a campanile still more like that of S. M. del Fiore.* As further evidence of Giotto’s direct contact with the Roman marble-workers, whose style is so evident in the decoration of the campanile, we have the fart tLat Giotto was called to Rome in 1298 to execute the Navicdla in the portico of St. Peter’s. Thi, was a magnificent composition ii 1 mosaic, thirty feet by twenty feet, of which a fine early drawing, preserved in the Pembroke Collection, was recently published by Mr. Strong. According to Vasari, Pietro Cavallini, one of the best- known artists of the later Cosmati school, worked under Giotto on this mosaic. Giotto died in 1337, before the construction of the campanile had been far advanced. It is believed it had only been carr'ed up to the first row of reliefs, seven of which, including the Architecture, Painting, and Sculpture, may be assigned to him. (Plates 63-64.) He was followed until 1343 by Andrea Pisano, whose work on the baptistery has been mentioned before. In 1350 Francesco Talenti was the master, and he in 1358 completed t he top storev and cornice of the campanile. The cupola of the church was begun in 1420 by Urunelleschi and finished in 1436.

Another curiously romantic w ork of Florentine Gothic, which must not be passed by w ithout reference, is the Church of Santa Maria di Or San Michele. On its site, from 1290, was a loggia, or open market for the sale of grain. On one of the piers was painted e picture of the

*      Sffi Cocchi.

Lxrv

OR SAN MICHELE 287

Virgin, which became famous as a miracle-worker. In 1337 the foindation-stone was laid of the present building, which was to serve a dual purpose, as a shrine for the precious picture and as a grain store. It is uncertain who designed it, but it is known that Francesco Talenti, Neri di Fioravanti, and Benci di Cione had a part in the work, boon after 1348 Orcagna began the Tabernacnlo, a wonder of sculpture, inlaid marble-work, and mosaic, and soon after its completion the open arches of the loggia were, in 1365, filled with elaborate traceried windows. This strange building to the exterior is like a stunted tower, for there is a second storey above the church which gives it considerable height. The interior is finely vaulted, and the small apertures of the complex traceried windows are filled with bright stained glass, giving something of the effect of Cairo lattices. The walls were pictured all over, and the vaults painted blue und starred.

The Ponte Vecchio, one of the noblest monuments of the city, was rebuilt in 1345 on arches of very fine form, the parapets terminated by tow ers at either end, a.id w ith shops on both sides.

One of the last but not the least interesting Gothic buildings in Florence, the construction of which, indeed, overlapped the early days of the Renaissance, is the Loggia dei Lanzi, built from 1376 to 1390, and decorated w i*h charming reliefs of the. Virtues, 1383-7.

Orvieto Cathedral, or at least its splendid facade, is a work of the Cosmati school. (Plate 65.) The church was begun to be built in 1290 on a plan more Basilican than •>/ Gothic. An interesting jioint is the way ii 1 which lateral

2*8

ORVIETO

resistance is obtained by a series of chapel-niches opening out of the aisles and effectually buttressing the work The east end has been altered, but the interior of the nave is nobly fashioned. The capitals, which are especially

Fig. 123. City gite an! thu baptiste.y of Florence from a MS.

beautiful, preserve some reminiscence of Lombard style The roo^f is carried on low-pitched king-post trusses, after all. the finest roof of a’.l, save vaulting. The masonrv is biJIt in striped courses within and without. J The lateral windows are simple lancets. The nave in the main seems to derive from Viterbo, where the columns and capitals are similar.

OKVIETO CATHEDRAL. DOOK JAMB. AX EXAMPLE OK LATE “COSMATI” WOKK

The facade, however, is the .special glory of the church. In 1310 Lorenzo Maitano (bom c. 1275), of Siena, was elected Capo-ma.estro for the purpose of building this front, and continued to hold the position till his death in 1330. Two original designs for the facade exist which so closely resemble the present one, yet with differences, that there is no doubt that they are by Lorenzo himself. The work is most famous for the reliefs which cover the four main piers w hich stand between, and right and left of, the three west doors. These reliefs treat severally of the Creation, of the Acts of the l’rophets, of Christ’s Life, and of the Judgment. 'The scenes in each are connected by tendrils of foliage much like a Jesse-tree, which, indeed, doubtless furnished the suggestion. One of the reliefs is indicated on one of Maitano’s drawings, and it is not to be doubled that he gave the general idea, and possibly he executed those on the two central piers himself. The lateral reliefs are, however, much more elegant, and speak of the coming of the Renaissance. They may be the work of Andrea Pisano, who was chief master here in 1347-8, or of other masters of his school, or of Orcagna. Mr. Langton Douglas, whose examination of the subject I ha\e in the main followed, thinks that they were executed before 1321 ; but if a comparison is made between the beasts and trees which apptar on these reliefs with those on the Florence campanile, it can surely not be doubted that the Florence reliefs are their prototypes. In any case, amongst all the lovely things in Italian Gothic art, these sculptures, in imagina­tion and in execution, are pre-eminent. Nowhere are gentler or more commanding angels, nowhere are

290

MOSAICS

more terrifying devils and more remorseful sinners than hert.

Above the four piers which have been spoken of stand four fine bronze symbols of the Evangelists. One of these—the bull—fell about ten years ago. but w as care- fu’ly repaired. It is seven feet long, and weighs twelve hundred pounds. The harmony of this glorious front has been fearfully injured by restoration, and the doing o\ er of the priceless mosaic* by contract-work with clue corrections to make them acceptable to modern taste. The original mosaics were begun in 1321. What they were may be seen at South Kensington, where is preserved the Nativity, which filled the tympanum of the right-hand door; one of the most spontaneous and smiling expressions of early Ita'iaa art. Thp colour is exquisite, in parts defined and made glittering with gold, and again melting harmonies of pearl, amethyst, and aventurine green. Notice the fighting cats iu the corner, omitted in the trade copy now in p'ace. This panel now bears the signature of Orcagna, and tht date, but this seems to be a forgery.

Some years ago an Italiarj writer impugned the sub­stantial validity of this mosaic, saying that it was largely made up with ne w work, and that some original portions were re fixed at the Cathedral. I have since made an ex­amination of the mosaic at Orvieto and can saj that it is altogether so hideous that not an inch of it can be ancient.

Sienese art was especially important n the fields of sculpture and painting. Let us return to it for a moment to consider the latter.

Even more perfect of its class than the cathedral is the Palazzo della Signoria, and its special glory is its

paintings. It was built in 1288- 1309, and its slender, springing tower was added from 1338-79. As a town- hall it stands proudly with those of Florence and Bruges; they are the three great municipal buildings of the world.* It is of brick, very simple in its parts, and it is difficult to say in ■what its power consists. The ground storey is formed by a row of pointed arches, then there are two stages of three light windows, all alike, and a fourth storey .n the middle, crowned by a fine battlement. The mast-like tower rises at one end. The inside is all glorious with paintings, which cover the walls l.ke tapestry. In the great Council Chamber Simone Martini, from 1315, painted the “ Queen of Siena." A superbly designed Madonna is enthroned in front of tabernacle-work like an altar-piece, beneath a canopy upheld by attendant ,-saints. To her, kneeling angels offer bowls of flowers, and beneath is an inscription in which she says to the citizens that good judgments delight her more than offerings of flowers, and that he who judges wrongfully will she condemn. On the opposite wall is the portrait, larger than life, of the war-leader of Siena, riding alone in a wide, dark land­scape, spotted over with castles,

In the Sala della Pace, Ambrogio Lorenzetti, in 1337­1339 painted the most noteworthy series of <-;vic paintings in any country. Here he represented the Government of Siena and allegories of the effects of good and bad government. In the midst of a series of single figures of the Virtues f sits an aged king or rather crowned Siena, to

*      The Town Palaces of Perugia, Todi. Como and others are hardly inferior; the vast hall at Pailua is magnificent.

| Peace, Fortitude, Prudeni e on his right; Mercy, Temperance Justice on his lelt: ahove him Faith, Love, and Hope.

whom approach the chief citizens of Siena. On his right is enthroned Justice; above, Wisdom holds the scales; below is seated Concord with a big plane (!) for emblem. In the allegory of the results of Good Government js a detailed, and doubtless perfectly accurate, view of Siena itself with all the life of its streets, and beyond the walls are the occupations of the country. Hovering over the gate floats the ligure of Securitws. One of the details is especially interesting to us: a house is being built and we see the scaffolding supported only by horizontal poles jutting out from the walls, and without any uprights.

Simone Martini (c. 1284-1344), and Ambrogio Loren- zctti (c. 1285-1348), followed Duccio, the first of the great individualist painters. Bom about 1255, and living to 1319, he Himself, in 1302, painted a noble picture for the town palace.* In the work of Duccio, and even of Simone Martini, direct following of Byzantine originals is perfectly evident. A group of the Annuncia­tion^ an enthroned Madonna, or an Angel, often appear^ to be taken directly from some Greek mosaic or book painting: the whole scheme of composition is adopted '' from the Byzantine traditional treatments, as are also the methods of painting, figures painted on a darK ground, trees laid over dark “mats,” and so on. Indeed, panel pictures themselves began as Greek icons, and the custom of painting 011 gold grounds, which spread over Italy,

*      Some slight idea of these Italian Gothic paintings nay be formeJ in the National Gallery before the "Coronation of the Virgin,” by Lorenzo Monaco, which is as brilliant in colour as a French minia­ture, and another “ Coronation assigned to the school of Giotto. Then, are excellent copie.? of the "Allegory of Government" on one of the staircases at South Kensington Mustum.

France and England, must have been taken over from gold-ground mosaics. Mr. Frothingham has shown that early in the thirteenth century many Greek artists were working in Italy, and that a series of paintings still exist at Subiaco, wrought about 1220, by two Byzantine artists, Conxolus and Stamatieo.

The Italian school of Gothic building-—save for some examples, especially those in which a late “Cosmati” strain has become rigid and mean—almost perfectly balanced the romantic and intellectual factors. As compared with the finest Northern Gothic, its works have not the same springing structure and inspiration, but they seem to belong more to this world,and to be less remote from modem eyes. We must remember also that this style was only fully completed by paintings which for beauty and human expression have never been matched. The memory of the old basilicas entirely covered with paintings or mosaics was, in Italy, never lost in any new Gothic ideal, and one of the first conditions of a building was to provide broad spaces for continuous histories in colour. It was not thal some selected buildings such as the Palazzo Pubblico of Siena, S. Francesco of Assisi, the Arena Chapel at Padua, and the Spanish Chapel of Santa Maria Novella in Florence, were painted, but all walls were incomplete until they nad received their proper stories or patterns. The walls of Sta. Maria Novella, Sta. Trinita, Sta. Croce, and Or San Michele, alike give indications of the necessary treatment of church interiors.

One of the most beautiful interiors in Florence is a tiny square vaulted chamber, the Spexeria of San I a Maria

PAINTED CHAMBERS

Novella, with paintings of the Passion, said to be by Spinello Aretino, c. 1400. At the Arte della Isana you pass uj> a fine stone stair with a lion on the newel and an parly Madonna on the walls, to a vaulted hall decorated with a symmetrical series of large single figures on e red ground, in tabernacles, all ^:n fresco. In the Bigallo there is a small chamber completely painted. Here is a central picture of Miseritordia protecting Florence, which is entirely sheltered bv her mantle. The city, surrounded by its walls, shows a good view of the baptistery and other buildings, and on either hand is a crowd of suppli­cating people. There are a dozen other subjects in square compartments, one of which shows the orphans of the city being received at the Bigallo itself, at the existing door with its Madonna relief. The ceiling, heavily beamed and raftered, is painted with gay pattern-work of chevrons, chequers and bands of ((uatreioils in white, black, red and green. The room is perfectly plain and square, but the painted walls and ceiling give out a certain stimulus to the imagination; it is not a mere box but a precious coffer.

The houses, net less fhan the public buildings, were adorned with their appropriate paintings. Of one traditional method of decorating a room there is a beautiful fourteenth-century example in the Villa Bardini outside Florence, to vhich it was removed from the Mercato Vecchio. Arounv¹ the top of the wails are painted the heads of a cusped arcade. Below the level of the springing of these arches is a curtain of diapered stuff represented as i? hanging in broad folds in front of the areadf\ Showing above the curtain, the arch spaces are

PAINTED EXTERIORS

filled w’th the foliage of orange and olive trees as if seen through the arches. At the side of a window of the room is the figure of a girl turning bark the painted hangings. Over all is a large geometrical lattice pattern, in broad white lines, through the apertures of which is seen the curtain and the tree-tops. This last at once flattens the rest of the pniniing and gives it mystery, so that the whole becomes a fitting decoration for a room. A. somewhat similar treatment, but later, and not so romantic, may be seen on the model of a room from the Palaz/o Machiavelli at South Kensington. In other cases the painted hangings seemed as if woven with heraldic devices or diapered over with beasts or plants.

Nor was this colour restricted wholly to interiors. The walls without were touched and accented here and there with gold and painting, as we have seen of the Palazzo Vecchio. Here would be a series of reliefs on coloured grounds like those at the I^oggia dc' I *anrl, in another I lace coats-of-arms and badges of the guilds. Some fronts were entirely painted like that of t he Bigallo. In several places .still remain old coloured shrines. Even the city gates were illun inated, to the outside with painted coats- of arms, and within, in the tympana of the an:hes, with pictures. Inside the Porta Romana is an early Virgin enthroned,and at the Porta San Giorgio another, supported by St. George and St. Lawrence. Above the city sparkled the golden mosaic of the front of San Miniato (Fig. 123).

From early days the building style of Florence has had a character of balanced reasonableness which sets it apart even from neighbouring schools. The Romanesque work

of the baptistery and Han Miniato is already clear and large-minded, with nothing of Lombardic savagery, as, indeed, Vasari noticed. The Gothic style is equally measured, and the transition to the Renaissance was accomplished here with hardly any disruption of continuity; indeed, the Riccardi and Strozzi Palaces, and even the Pitti Palace, are variations on the traditional style of which the Gothic Ferroni Palace is an example.

Wp have now followed the main currents of Mediaeval Art to the Eve of the Italian Renaissance; to follow the period to its close in the West is beyond the limits of my task. Although the high day of that “Frenchness" which is the essence of Gothic wa« over-past by the middle

BEAUVAIS. HOUSE FRONT, c. 1556. TIMBER WORK SET WITH COLOURED POTTERY

of the fourteenth century the change was slow, and lovely works were still being produced when an active propaganda was undertaken for the repudiation of the national arts, and the substitution for them of what was called the “ True Antique Style.” (See Plate 66.)

I turn away from this short study with a sense of the necessary incompleteness of all history as a mere record of happenings. I am more content, however, to have tried to suggest the unity in diversity of the stream of art which flowed down the centuries, every age showing a different manifestation of one energy as the old tradition was ever new shaped by the need and experiment of the moment. If I may venture to draw out a lesson from the retrospect, it is that we, too, forgetting the past must press forward; for in the future are hid the possibilities of many mighty schools of art as true and strong as the greatest of those that are gone.