Norman Monuments OF PALERMO AND ENVIRONS * . ■ Norman Monuments , OF Palermo and Environs A STUDY BY ARNE DEHLI, ARCHITECT Author of “St. Marks and Venice” and “Ravenna” ASSISTED BY G. Howard Chamberlin, Architect BOSTON TICKNOR AND COMPANY 2it Tremont Street LONDON B. T. BATS FORD 52 High Holborn LIEPSIG KARL W. HIERSEMANN Konigstrasse 2 TO (R. £). (Rofietfson, &e<\. THIS STUDY IS DEDICATED BY THE AUTHOR BOTH IN RECOGNITION OF HIS PROMINENT CONNECTION WITH THE REVIVAL OF MEDIEVAL ARCHITECTURE IN THE UNITED STATES AND IN APPRECIATIVE REMEMBRANCE OF THE YEARS SPENT IN HIS OFFICE AND THE KIND INTEREST TAKEN BY HIM IN THE PRESENT WORK. PREFACE. HE brief study of the Siculo-Norman Monuments of Palermo and Environs which is here commended to the kind attention of the architectural profession and others interested in historical monuments of the past may, perhaps, require a few intro¬ ductory remarks. Above all, I feel impelled to apologize for the title. It will become apparent on a perusal of the illustrations that those monuments, which show sufficiently important distinguishing features, as against the mediaeval monuments of continental Italy, to entitle them to be classed separately (as Siculo-Norman), show an almost complete absence of elements traceable to the influence of the coeval “Norman” style of France and England. It is another instance of the confusion which, in many cases, marks the classification of “styles” in our handbooks, and of the recklessness with which dividing lines have been drawn and designations applied. I trust that I shall have an opportunity to return to the discussion of this subject in one of the periodicals as soon as professional engagement shall permit; however, as matters stand, I consider it expedient, for practical reasons, to make no change in the current designation, deefning it sufficient to explain my general point of view in the following brief remarks. From an examination of a majority of the more important monuments of mediaeval archi¬ tecture in Italy I have come to the conclusion that the classification with an “Early Christian” (Roman Basilica) and a “Byzantine” style is misleading. True enough, there is a distinct type called “Roman Basilica;" and another “Byzantine,” with Sta. Sophia for the typical monument. But there are also a great many other types with detail varying from “Classic” to pure “Byzantine,” and there are, or were at the time, perhaps, from this epoch, throughout Italy, more basilicas with “Byzantine” than with “Classic” detail. The prevailing theory that this detail must have been introduced from the East is scarcely tenable. It seems far more rational, for a variety of reasons, to assume that the disintegration of the “Classic” style and the formation of new types occurred about the same time in Italy, Greece, Asia Minor, Armenia, Syria, Palestine and Africa, and therefore to classify all these monuments as the local types of one epoch. I think PREFACE. viii there is ample evidence to justify the assertion that the so-called Byzantine detail was predomi¬ nant throughout Italy, even in Rome, up to the eighth or tenth century, and that its influence is strongly felt in a great majority of the monuments produced during that general building activity which dates from the eleventh century, or even earlier, and of which I take the “ Siculo-N orman monuments to form a part. This activity seems to have been general throughout Italy. It derives its impetus mainly from the growing city republics (of which Pisa indeed gave material assistance, also, in wresting Palermo from the Saracens), and forms a new epoch, which the archaeologists have attempted to annex to their system of “styles” in various combinations as “Italian Romanesque and Gothic.” It is a fact, however, that it lacks, generally speaking, most of the essential features of Romanesque, and especially of Gothic, and that, moreover, every disposition of the early Renais¬ sance was developed during this epoch, both as to ecclesiastical and secular edifices. Nay, furthermore, the current phrase in our handbooks that the architects of the Renaissance “adopted the Classic forms and modified them in their own spirit ” amounts in reality to this, that, in the main, the structural forms of the architecture' of the previous epoch (1000 a. d.— 1400) were retained and treated in a Classic spirit. The mullioned window, the ornamented pilaster, the baluster, the corbel, the all-over-ornament, the colonnette, the grotesque, the arch as a statically active element, the rustic work in its new importance, the ornamented column and the spiral fluting, and the richer orders throughout — all that separates Renaissance from Classic Rome was a direct inheritance from this epoch. In the same way transalpine Romanesque is derived from the earlier period (about 400-1000), and /constantly fed by it, as the monuments plainly demonstrate. It would be of importance generally, and in particular as affecting the Sicilian monuments, to have a careful examination made of the monuments south of Naples, which are at present comparatively unknown. It ought to be made by some architect who is utterly indifferent to personal comfort, and not too particular as to personal safety. So much for history. In rendering the subjects generally we have made correctness and clearness the first and absolute conditions, knowing from experience the unfortunate effects of the common tendency to produce “ attractive drawings.” A careful comparison of much published matter with the originals has made it apparent that much has been sinned in this respect. The interiors of the Palermitan monuments are singularly rich and of a truly devotional character, and Fergusson is certainly right in considering them the gems of medieval decorative art. They are wonderfully rich in suggestions for the practical designer: and for those interested in establishing the relationship of architectural traditions here is a gold mine indeed. PREFACE. IX It is, perhaps, reasonable to believe, that the present co-existence in our architectural practice of the formal apparatus of almost all historical epochs, far from signifying confusion, as our pessimistic theorists will have it, on the contrary marks the advent of a new era in architecture ; that of individual freedom of expression , similar to that accomplished in music and finally proclaimed as a leading principle. This implies that an edifice as an independent artistic organism must, first of all, truly express the character of the functions to which it is erected, as they appear to us in their highest meaning and importance. We recognize this in historical types by ascribing to them a general character, such as devotional , palatial , fantastic , grotesque , etc., and we know that it is within our power to give to the smallest detail a distinct character of its own, which we can feel, but only imperfectly describe, because art has its own language and appeals to other emotions than the written or spoken word. Under these circumstances historical monuments assume to us a new and increased impor¬ tance, because it is from these that we must study the inherent meaning and expression of forms and combinations, and they will then by degrees become, naturally, the means of expressing our own artistic purposes. Thus springs from the study of the ancient monuments, the modern growth in which our own times are finding their artistic expression. This I take to be the simple and natural law of human progress, in art and other fields. Tradition, springing partly from necessity, partly from our inborn veneration of the time-honored is at once the feeder of progress, and the guarantee of its continuity and stability; while “ revivals” are revisions of old ideas from new stand-points. These considerations open up a new view of the enormous importance of historical study and material as legitimate means of artistic expression. They are distinctly at variance with the position of certain theorists who, in their elaborate forecasts of the “style of the future,” degrade architecture to a contemptible “compromise” or patchwork, made up of the fragments of past ages, denying to artistic purpose its mission as primus motor of all artistic creations. It is with a firm belief in the truth of these principles, which I believe to be, consciously or otherwise, ever guiding our efforts, that I bespeak a more active interest and support for architectural publications at the hands of our profession, than has heretofore been extended, and launch this very modest contribution to our historical material. ARNE DEHLI. New York, December, 1S92. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. FULL-PAGE PLATES. GELATINE VIEWS. CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE PHOTO-GRAIN VIEWS. PALERMO MONREALE PALERMO Doorway. Clustered Columns. View of the Choir. View Across the Choir. Detail of the Choir. East Chapel. Mosaic Capital.' Arch and Capitals. General View. Palazzo Reale. S. Giovanni. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEWS — Continued. PALERMO CEFALU Chiesa det Vespri. S. Francesco d’Assisi. Cathedral. PALERMO La Martorana. Sta. Maria della Catena. Capella Palatina, Interior. AMALFI ROME . MONREALE SALERNO Cathedral. Basilica. Cathedral, Apse. “ Door. “ Pulpit. MEASURED DRAWINGS. SAN CESARIO, ROME. STA. MARIA IN POMPOSA . CLOISTERS OF S. DOMENICO, PALERMO PALERMO . CAPELLA PALATINA, PALERMO Altar Front. Circular Window in Atrium. Super Capitals. Bronze Censer in Museo Nazionale. Stirrup “ “ Dado in Marble and Mosaic. Details of Dado. Foliage. Mosaic Patterns on Reveals of Windows. Column in Nave. Mosaic Band Course on Exterior. Doors in Chancel. Bronze Doors. LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS. XVI1 1 7 18 1 9 20 21 22 2 3 2 4 2 5 26 2 7 28 29 30 34 35 3 6 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 MEASURED DRAWINGS-Continued. CAPELLA PALATINA, PALERMO LA MARTORANA, PALERMO CLOISTERS OF MONREALE CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE Details of Bronze Doors. Organ Gallery, Front. “ “ Side. “ Details. “ “ Panel. Glass Mosaic. Chancel Railing. Mosaic Floor. “ “ Details. Fragment of Marble Panel. Font. Clustered Columns. Columns around Fountain. Elevation on Court. Shafts of Columns. Elevation and Developed Ornament of Column. Developed Ornament of Column. Capital. Capitals. Chancel, Sketch and Railing. Mosaic Floor in Chancel. From Bronze Door, West Entrance. “ “ Doors, South “ 49 LIST OF ILLUSTRATIONS . PLANS AND CUTS. FULL-PAGE CUTS. INTERIOR OF LA MARTORANA .... PLAN OF THE PALATINE CHAPEL . PLANS OF THE CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE TEXT CUTS. CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE LA MARTORANA CATHEDRAL OF PALERMO SANTO SPIRITO PALATINE CHAPEL . CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE CATHEDRAL OF CEFALU PALAZZO ABATELLI CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE Clustered Column Capitals .... Details of Main Door Main Entrance Capitals .... Details of North Door Capitals .... Twelfth Century Mosaics Exterior View Campanile Interior View West Window West Doorway Exterior View Interior View Interior View Mosaic in the Cupola . Ambo .... Mosaics in the Apse Interior View Exterior View Exterior View Capitals I. INTRODUCTORY. is difficult to begin even a matter-of-fact discussion of the great Siculo- Norman Monuments of Palermo and Environs, without joining the long line of visitors who from time immemorial have paid their tribute to the beautiful spot that holds “happy” Palermo. Seen from the gulf which is facing east, or nearly so, the view is closed to the north by the famous Monte Pellegrini, rising precipitously to a height of nearly two thousand feet, while to the south a comparatively low prom¬ ontory ends in Monte Zafferano, rising to an imposing height at its extreme point. Across this lower ridge passes the railroad to Termini and Cefalu. Extending along the shores of the gulf, the Conca d’ oro, a wonderfully fertile little plain, hardly five miles in width, the alluvial formation of the river Oreto, rises gently towards the dark mountain range, towering- back of it like a dark wall. 1 he city occupies the centre, stretching up and northward close to Le Falde, a grass-grown slope at the foot of Monte Pellegrino, where the great annual feast of Santa Rosalia — Palermo’s patron saint — is celebrated. A cave with a spring, credited with miraculous healing powers (La Grotta di Santa Rosalia), is found near the top of the mountain. In the centre, on the mountain slope, directly back of the city, looking in a southwesterly direction, we easily descry, on a prominent foothill of the mountain range, the apse and stunted tower of the Cathedral of Mon¬ reale, with the town clustered around it. The river Oreto, like most Sicilian rivers, is almost dry in summer, the wanton devastation of the forests having brought about this result. The Conca d' oro is mostly covered with orange and lemon gardens, and extends to the south across a lower ridge, on which is the town of Bagheria, and to the o Borman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. north to Mondello, leaving isolated as it were, between it and the sea, the two promon¬ tories, Monte Pellegrino to the north, and Monte Zafferano to the south. The vegetation is semi-tropical in character, including cacti, magnolias, numerous species of palms and even bananas, although the fruit of the latter seldom ripens. The climate is delightful; the winters are excessively mild and pleasant, a gray sky for a whole day being almost unknown, and a summer sojourn, even in point of temperature, is very far from being the dreadful thing most people imagine it to be. It seems to me that one must see these countries in summer in order to form an idea of them at their best. The beautiful blue sky, with rarely even a speck of a cloud in it day after day for weeks and months; the deep, everchanging colors of land and sea; and then the life of their people, doubly interesting in Palermo, whose changing fates have brought so many races and creeds into her fold; they are gayest, richest, most thoroughly them¬ selves on a radiant summer’s day, and they shrivel up at the cold breath of winter. A student of the architectural monuments of Palermo will need the light of the brightest day for his work in those scantily-lighted churches, and yet will experience none.of that enervating sensation which similar latitudes are very apt to have in store for visitors. The Arab invasion has left numerous traces in the popular life of Sicily, and Arab types seemingly pure, or nearly so, are frequently encountered. “II conto," abbreviation for “ 11 racconto ” in Palermo, is supposed to be of Arab origin. On summer after¬ noons, when work is stopped on the docks, the dock hands, fishermen, boatmen and similar folk congregate in the shadow of some wall, where an improvisatore of their own number is prepared to let chairs at the moderate price of two centesnni apiece. Then mounting a large flat box he deliberately hangs his hat and coat on a nail driven into the wall back of him, and in his shirt-sleeves proceeds to harangue the crowd, holding in his hand a long wooden sword. Naturally it is a tale richly flavored with wars, murder and bloodshed, with gallant deeds and beautiful women. The gesticulation is simple, yet expressive and violent at times, when with rolling eyes he makes repeated violent feints at the villains, stamping his forward foot like a fencing master. Like Piedmont, Lombardy and the Romagna, Sicily has a peculiar dialect. Many of the Italian dialects are absolutely unintelligible to those speaking the pure Roman and Tuscan tongues, and especially is this true of the Sicilian, which I was told contained a very considerable admixture of Arab elements. To illustrate the IRovman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. 3 extent of the difference between pure Italian and Sicilian, I might mention the fact that a high official of the Sicilian railroads, a Piedmontese, was known to have spent fifteen years in Sicily and still was unable to understand the dialect — of course it is not to be supposed that he had tried very hard. I also met North Italian army officers who, while stationed in Sicily, had made the unexpected discovery that their duties implied the acquisition of a new language. II. HISTORY. THE Norman conquests in Southern Italy are nearly contempo¬ raneous with the Norman conquest of England. At the same time as William the Conqueror with his Normans was fighting at Stanford Bridge, another Norman—Robert de Hauteville, surnamed “ Guiscard,” the shrewd, and his brother Roger ( Ital. Ruggiero) had just made an ineffectual attempt to conquer Sicily by taking a hand in a quarrel between two Arab Sheiks. The beautiful island having been a constant bone of contention as far back as we know and even can surmise anything concerning its inhabitants, and having furnished throughout the entire duration of the Greek and Roman empires a record of wars and bloodshed equalled by no other spot on earth, — it was finally conquered by Emperor Julian’s general, Belisarius, and made a Byzantine province, with Greek religion. After three hundred years of Byzantine rule Sicily was conquered by Ased-ibn Forat and his Saracens, and Palermo made the capital. This was in the year 831. The Byzantine period, like the succeeding Arab, has left no architectural monuments in Sicily, and, I think, no reliable record of any. The Arab epoch in Sicily was stormy but prosperous, and when the 4 IRorman 'Ifionuments of Palermo anb Environs. Norman conquerors of Apulia turned their eyes towards Sicily its agriculture and its commerce were in a most flourishing condition, and the arts and manufactures were favorably known throughout Europe. Their first expedition was unsuccessful, but they soon returned and completed the conquest of Sicily about 1090. Count Roger died at Palermo 1101, and his second son, Roger II, succeeded 1127 to the entire Norman conquests in Sicily and Southern Italy (Apulia) and was crowned King at Palermo in the year 1130. It is a most interesting fact in connection with the Norman rule in Sicily that it occurs in the midst of the crusades. The idea of freeing the holy land from the infidels was uppermost in every mind, and among Christians no words were too strong to express the contempt and abhorrence in which Islam and its followers were held. Even between Greek and Roman Catholics the breach was a wide one, and of religious tolerance not even the name was known. Yet, in Sicily, we meet a Norman ruler, Roman Catholic by religion, faithful and munificent to his Church, but granting the fullest liberty to Greek Catholics,— nay, establishing their high ecclesiastical dignitaries, building their churches and endowing their monas¬ teries in the most liberal manner, and, more remarkable still, granting wellnigh perfect freedom of worship to Arabs, permitting the retention of their own judges, and even appointing many among their number to the highest positions at court. This remarkable spectacle presents itself to us in Palermo at the beginning of the twelfth century. It is outside the scope of these pages to more than refer to the historical facts bearing on the questions which I am about to discuss, but they are easy of verification by referring to any historical work treating of this epoch. Thus it came to pass that Italians, Greeks and Arabs dwelt in peace with their Norman conquerors within the same walls, each with his own creed and representing in science and in the arts different traditions. Called to exert their skill in works that should lend magnificence to the Norman court, the individual freedom accorded to each seems to have been great, and the monuments they raised, thus, apart from their beauty, acquired additional interest because they reveal so plainly the different traditions of Borman Monuments of Jpalermo anb Environs. 5 art which were instrumental in creating them. We know very little, historically, about this period outside of important dates and similar official history; and what we do know is probably to a great extent unreliable. So it was only comparatively recently that the story of a conspiracy preceding the Sicilian Vespers (1282) was exploded by one of their own historians (Amari), and to this day the traveller is gravely informed by the custodians of two different churches in Palermo that the curfew of each gave the signal for the massacre of the French! It would be of the greatest interest, in this connection, to know the fate of the Byzantine population after the Arab conquest; we do know that Palermo and the surrounding part of the country were first conquered, the northeast corner (around Taormina) remaining Byzantine for some time after¬ wards, and still there seems to be every evidence that the practice of the Byzantine architectural traditions never died out in Palermo, but was so well kept up as to be ready for important work at the bidding of the Norman kings. Of course the possibility always remains that the Greeks and Italians, were “imported," in fact, we know that some actually were called to Roger’s court, still, on the whole, it looks as though a Byzantine and an Arab architectural tradition practically existed side by side at the close of the Arab rule. A modern author, Buscenir, writes that numerous Greek artisans were found in Palermo at the end of the Arab period while we have records of wholesale importations of Greek artisans in the year 1148 which, however, is after the completion of La Martorana and the Palatine chapel. The conquering Normans were evidently at first more familiar with the sword than with any other tools, and the influence of their native art on the early monuments of Siculo-Norman art is almost imperceptible. It appears more and more during the following decades, and I have risked for this element the term “transalpine,” as it is both Romanesque and Gothic, the period being just the one of transition between the two styles. Very likely Sicilian architecture received a great deal of this element indirectly through the so-called Italian Romanesque and Gothic. The reign of the Norman dynasty in Sicily was as brief as it was brilliant. Roger the Second was succeeded by his second son, William the First, 1154—1166, and the latter in turn by his son, William the Second, 1166-1189, (Ital. Guglielmo). The former has been given the surname of “ The Bad ' and the latter that of “ The Good ’’ by the chroniclers, but we may have some right to doubt the appropriateness of both. After William the Second’s death Sicily after a short struggle passed into 6 Woman monuments of Palermo anb Environs. the hands of the German imperial house of Hohenstaufen with Henry the Sixth, who died at Messina about the end of the century. From this on the history of Sicily for some time becomes more familiar to the general reader. Henry VI was succeeded by his son, the great Hohenstaufen, Frederic II, who reigned for more than half a century, and through whose exertions the Island prospered in a hitherto unknown degree. The reigns of his successors were short, and they soon gave way to the French House of Anjou. We remember in this connection the public beheading at Naples ot the last unfortunate scion of the Hohenstaufen, Conradino. The French ruled the island with the most intolerable severity and arrogance, doubly intolerable after nearly two centuries of a liberty, political and religious, otherwise unknown at that time. Finally the French yoke became unbearable, and in 1282, by what is termed the Sicilian Vespers, the French in Palermo were massacred, and in a comparatively short time the last French¬ man driven from the island. It seems that a popular festival, such as every traveller has frequently seen in the country churches of Italy, was in progress around the church of Santo Spirito (see sketch), now outside of the city to the southwest. The French had strictly forbidden the carrying of arms, and one of the guards in his arrogant zeal in carrying out this order rudely accosted a young Palermitan and his wife. After searching the man’s pockets and clothes without any result, he next proceeded to search his wife and thrust his hand into her bosom. This indignity was the last drop needed to make the pent up rage of the Sicilians flow over in a way their French masters had little thought of. A stone thrown by the injured husband, so the story goes, killed the offending guard, while the furious populace made short work of the guards and other Frenchmen present, and then, swelling and working itself into a frenzy, as such a mob will, proceeded to storm the public buildings and massacre all the French that could be found. The governor escaped in a boat with a few followers, but it is estimated that over two thousand of the French were killed during the night. Similar though less sanguinary expulsions soon followed in other cities, and the consequent attempt by the Anjous to retake Messina was unsuccessful. IFlonnan Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. 7 Here I shall leave this brief survey of political history. Sicily passed into Spanish hands, and her days of splendor were at an end. She practically remained in a feudal state until rescued by Garibaldi and his “Thousand'’ (Milk), probably with the secret connivance of Cavour and the English Government. United Italy is now making heroic efforts to rescue her from the state to which centuries of the most incredible misgovernment has lowered her, and is deserving of the highest praise for efficient work under the greatest difficulties. III. ARCHITECTURAL. IT becomes necessary to make a brief survey of the architectural traditions which met and blended into the monuments of Siculo- Norman art. The final dissolution of the Roman empire finds two new traditions or styles more or less developed from the elements of Greco-Roman architecture,—the Byzantine and the so-called early FROM THE CLOISTERS, MONREALE. Christian or Classic Romanesque. The principal monuments of the latter are found in Rome and owe their close adherence to the detail treatment of the parent art mostly to the great opportunities offered for the spoliation of the monuments of Ancient Rome. The origin of the former, the Byzantine tradition, is as yet more or less of an enigma. It appears in Eastern Europe in the fifth century fully developed, with original dispositions, original systems of construction and even a most original apparatus of detail forms. And so original are its creations, so rich and varied their motives, so thoroughly consistent their general treatment that it would be absurd to imagine them to be of spontaneous creation. One would hardly hesitate to pronounce them the result of an evolution lasting for centuries, and reasoning from 8 IRorman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. the appearance of the forms themselves, it seems most plausible to assume that they have been created by a blending of the Classic and Oriental principles of decoration, the tendency of the former being towards emphasizing the structural action of the ornamented members (supporting, binding and crowning), while the latter tend more towards ignoring it, covering the surfaces with patterns neutral as to direction (surface ornament, all-over patterns), often utilizing them for some iconographical purpose. H owever that may be, the future, and possibly some finds in Asia Minor or elsewhere around the Mediterranean, may establish the genesis of Byzantine art, but at present, and that suffices for our purpose, we note the fact that the developed Byzantine tradition was introduced into Ravenna and Rome (and possibly elsewhere in Italy) as early as the fifth century. Evidently it spread throughout Italy during the following centuries, and, in the eleventh century, appears in remark¬ able purity in Venice, where, true enough, it must have received considerable impetus from the frequent “importa¬ tions” which pious Venetians brought to the shrine of their patron saint from despoiled churches in the Orient. The powerful races which in the meanwhile had built up a civilization on the other side of the Alps gradually worked their way into Italy—the great object of their conquests,— but their architecture, in the new climate and under the new conditions generally, assumed new forms. We perceive their own transalpine elements and the influence of Byzan¬ tine art, which they probably superseded throughout — even in Pisa, in Florence, in the work of the Cosmati in Rome and throughout Southern Italy. The fondness for mosaics must be regarded as a Byzantine feature, and especially so marble mosaics in geometrical patterns (:musaici di fiietri duri), and the practice of inlaid mosaics on marble. We recognize two schools—Roman and Byzantine, — and remember in this connection the magnificent mosaics in Pompeji which easily account for the origin of the former; in fact I remember being struck by the apparent identity of certain predominant shades of color in Pompeji and in the Baptistery of Ravenna which suggested to me an unbroken tradition in the manufacture of the tinted glass ( smalti). Thus we find, at the time when the Normans gained foothold in Palermo, throughout the rest of Italy, then slowly rising from centuries of humiliation, an established IKlorman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. 9 architectural tradition with numerous local variations developed from the blending of the three mediaeval derivations of Greco-Roman art: the early Christian or Classic Romanesque, the Byzantine and the Transalpine traditions, besides which a fourth element, the Arab, is found at Palermo, and, on the continent, at Amalfi and Ravello on the peninsula of Sorrento. The latter was originally developed from the Byzantine, but with a system of decoration thoroughly Oriental, and, at the time of the Arab conquest of Sicily (830) was fully developed as a separate tradition or style. It is, therefore, quite natural that Arab artisans should be found in large numbers at Palermo at the time of the Norman conquest. The surprising fact is, on the contrary, that no monument from the Arab period of Sicily should have survived to give us an idea of the architecture of that period. From the descriptions of contemporaneous travellers we know that Palermo once possessed numerous and magnificent Arab edifices, but they all seem to have been destroyed or, like the mosque on the site of San Giovanni degli Eremiti, altered into Norman edifices. The Siculo-Norman style derives its elements from all the four styles or traditions above referred to, their precise relation in the different monuments being demonstrated in detail below under the description of the different examples. 10 IRovman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. IV. MONUMENTS. IN sketching the historical background of the Siculo-Norman style of Palermo and environs I have intentionally extended it over the next century, in order to raise the question as to where the style really terminates. I think it will prove an easy matter to show that some FROM THE CLOISTER, monreale. monuments, generally classed as Norman, really belong to a later period, and, in point of fact, show very few, if any, of the peculiar features of that style. The same difficulty will always recur in the discussion of a great many architectural monuments of past ages, owing to the fact that, since the rules ( canons ) of architecture ceased to be sacred commandments, the observance of which was superintended by the priests — as in Egypt and Greece™historical “styles” are no more the well-defined, and I might venture to say stereotyped, organisms they used to be. Architecture has since — at least so it seems to some of us — surely and steadily been working its way towards greater individual freedom of expression. As the ancient hierarchal state developed, step by step, into the complex political organisms of to-day, producing on its march a multitude of states, smaller and larger, and each with predominant features of its own,—so followed architecture, always pliably adapting itself to the new wants, practically and artistically, in each new case first groping its way, then by degrees evolving the corresponding higher architectural expression. The Siculo-Norman style in its original character had but a very short existence, as I shall attempt to show in the following pages. In its early monuments the general expression was singularly harmonious and distinct, in spite of the hetero¬ geneous element, and in this respect the Norman style may well teach us a lesson worth our attention. 12 Borman flftonuments of [Palermo anb Environs. The monuments of Norman art in Palermo, Monreale and Cefalu are partly Greek in plan, partly Roman basilicas and a few are secular buildings. Some of them are in a comparatively good state of preservation, while others are in the most distressing state of neglect and ruin. Of those showing a Greek disposition with three apses, Sta. Maria dell’ Ammir- aglio (St. Mary’s of the Admiral) and St. Cataldo are facing each other, or, rather the apse of St. Cataldo is facing the fagade of Sta. Maria, with the famous campanile between them, the cupola of which was taken down after an earthquake, in the beginning of the last century. They are both of very small dimensions. Whether they were built entirely isolated or had some connecting feature in the way of cloisters, or the like, there is no way of determining. St. Cataldo was until recently, as I was told, built into the old post-office of Palermo, and almost entirely filled up with rubbish. It was accidentally discovered during some alterations, when a hole was unintentionally broken through the cupola. The terrace, on which they are situated, was produced by recent grading. Sta. Maria dell’ Ammiraglio, now called La Martorana, after being annexed, in 1433, to a convent of nuns founded by Aloisia Martorana, was erected 1 143-1 146 (Fergusson has it 1113-39), by King Roger the Second’s great admiral, the Greek, George of Antioch. The latter had returned from his conquests in Greece which he had made tributary to his sovereign, and from the spoils of his wars he was able to erect and richly endow this church, while at the south end of the city he erected the “Ponte dell’Ammiraglio’’ (the Admiral’s Bridge), a row of pointed arches spanning a little brook, which was once the river Oreto. “ La Martorana ’’ originally was square in plan [see sketch], roofed over on the ancient thermal principle: the central square was covered with an octagonal cupola on pendentives and with four windows, while four semicircular vaults on single columns supported the cupola on all sides, leaving four corner squares with Roman cross-vaults. A beautiful Byzantine mosaic floor [ste details] is still preserved: and a high dado of marble with inlaid bands, vertical and horizontal, and panels of serpentine and porphyry, also with mosaics (similar to those of the Palatine Chapel and the Cathedral of Monreale), ran around the walls. Ebn Djobair, the Arab traveller, who visited it towards the end of the century distinctly refers to this dado [compare scale drawino- of dado in Palatine Chapel] in his description: “We saw tablets of colored marble the like of which have never been seen, ornamented with cubes of mosaic-gold and Borman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. 13 crowned with leaves of trees in green mosaic.” [See upper band of dado.] Of the capitals some are Byzantine, others Renaissance from later “restorations." The walls above the dado and the vaults and inside of the cupola are covered with the most exquisite Byzantine mosaics on a gold ground. The faces and hands of the figures are made of mosaic in natural stones, while the rest is glass-mosaic, which is a distinguishing feature of Byzantine as against Roman mosaics, the latter being of glass entirely. As in Venice and Ravenna so is in these interiors at Palermo a grayish veined Greek marble almost exclusively used. It formed a most admirable background for the inlaid marble mosaics, which were laid in rebates in the marble slabs, making a perfectly smooth surface. In the floor mosaics the green serpentine and the red or purple porphyry are the usual colors, besides the gray [see floor of St. Mark’s, Venice], while brighter reds, gold, blues, white and a variety of other glasses (smalti) are em¬ ployed with the serpentine and porphyry in the dado. Several examples will be found among the accompanying detail drawings. In this connection it might be of interest to note that the Cathedral of Monreale possesses in the chancel some fifteenth-century restorations or imitations of Byzantine mosaic floors. Professor Bonanno Zaccaro, who is charged with the restoration of the Palermitan mosaics by the government, maintains that the practice of this art never died out at Palermo since the Norman epoch; but evidently the Byzantine spirit, both in design and color, vanished entirely. These floors in Monreale [see details] have retained the rough Byzantine framework only, or perhaps rather a reminiscence of it, but lack the strong central features and the general subordination of design so well maintained in the real Byzantine designs. Tire ground color is white, not gray, and the general tone very light — in fact decidedly cinque cento in character. Some of the figures on the apses of the Palatine Chapel are also work of the Renaissance—perhaps sixteenth century. I may be permitted to mention, in this connection, that there are in Palermo most excellent works in mosaic with out-and-out Renaissance designs from the classic time, besides the inlaid TWELFTH-CENTURY MOSAICS IN LA MARTORANA. 14 (Roman flDonuments of Palermo anb (Environs. marble scroll work on the walls of the “Casa Professa,” “S. Cita," and others, from last century. To return to “La Martorana.” What has been preserved of the exterior is very plain [see sketch], Ebn-Djobair mentions a fagade: “Among the different parts of this building we noticed a very remarkable frontal, which we cannot describe, and on this account we prefer to keep silent, as it is the most beautiful work in the world.” Thanks to Aloisia Martorana’s nuns we have no idea wherein that beauty can have consisted. N either has the fagade of any of the other monuments of the N orman period been preserved, and the good Ebn-Djobair who, like many other travellers, likely preferred what he felt to what he saw in choosing subjects for his descrip¬ tions fails to give us much definite infor¬ mation. 11 may be permitted to suggest that, like the doors of the Palatine Chapel and some in the oldest parts of St. Mark’s, etc., the portal of this fagade may have had a very rich architrave or trim in sculptured ornament and mosaic, and per¬ haps some crowning feature—a pointed arch or the like with a tympanum in mosaic. La Martorana soon grew too small for the needs of the convent, to which it had been annexed, and, being built for Greek rites, it lacked the deep chancel so essential to Roman Catholic worship. This led to extensive altera¬ tions, carried on in the true Vandal spirit, only too characteristic of similar proceedings during the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries. An extension with a gallery, reaching to the campanile, implied the destruction of the fagade, while the added chancel demanded the demolition of the central apsis. Through the efforts of Duke Serra di Falco, Professor Salinas and others representing the Italian government, all men of the greatest ability and experi¬ ence, La Martorana has now been so far restored as to give quite an idea of its original splendor. The campanile would be a most remarkable feature if it could be Saute® ^ UMuJitXL' A MARTORANA. IFlorman .flfoonuments of Palermo anb Environs. 15 shown that the upper stories date from the same time as the church. The Byzantine and Arab elements of the two lower stories are apparent enough, while the upper stories are essentially French-Norman (transalpine); and no other transalpine features are traceable in the monuments of Palermo until quite some time later. Baedeker’s statement that these two upper stories were rebuilt later is probably true, at any rate, they can hardly be accepted as belonging to the Siculo-Norman style, in the strict sense of the word. St. Cataldo was built 1161 by Majone di Bari, the chan¬ cellor of William the First (the Bad). It is still smaller than La Martorana, and offers no additional points of interest. A Byzantine mosaic floor, similar to that of the latter, is toler¬ ably well preserved, otherwise all the interior decorations have been destroyed. A plain Byzantine altar table is standing in the central apsis; and the capitals show a more Arab treatment, although generally Corinthian in design. A capital on one of the square posts supporting the organ gallery in the Palatine Chapel shows the same treatment, and will be found among the detail plates. The material employed in constructing these buildings is the local stone as it is exclusively in use at Palermo to this day: a porous limestone or tufa, similar in color and texture to the Roman travertine, although, perhaps, a trifle more close grained. The color, also, is about the same, a light brown, possibly a shade lighter than the Roman variety. Like the latter it is quarried by means of saws, being soft in the ledge, and hardens quickly in the sun. In cases where a sort of rough mosaic of brown and black has been employed (as on the apses of the cathedrals of Monreale and Palermo and on the cloisters adjoining the former), the black pieces appeared to be of a similar texture to the rest. The pink limestones (calcare) or common marbles used for carnation in the mural mosaics are found in Sicdy, while the glasses (smalti) are imported from Murano, near Venice. The quarries of serpentine and porphyry, which were found in the Orient, have been exhausted, and the mosaic artists of to-day are depending upon fragments taken from ruins. Mr. Bonanno stated that some of the large tablets in the floors and dados CAMPANILE OF LA MARTORANA. 16 Merman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. of Norman buildings would to-day be worth large sums. In La Martorana there are several small columns of porphyry, some three or four feet long, which most likely adorned some part of the building now demolished. The next and last monument of a Greek disposition is the little church San Giovanni degli liremih (St. John of the Hermits), situated near the Royal palace and within a stone’s throw of parts of the ancient walls of Palermo, just excavated. The ground plan shows the form of a T with five cupolas, one at the intersection, one over each of the short arms and two on the nave, and there are three apses. The arches supporting the cupolas are pointed. The south wall shows the skew- backs of a row of low Roman cross-vaults which may have belonged to some cloisters or a porch, and on the same side, continuing the line of the short arm of the T (perpendicularly to the nave), is an oblong hall with the base stones of a central row of columns running longitudinally north and south. This part may have been an Arab Mosque and is reported to have served the monks in after times as a refectory. A few feet away from the northwest corner of San Giovanni are the cloisters, their south wall being nearly on a line with the north wall of the church. They are of a much later date, and, like the two upper stories of the campanile of La Martorana, might be better classed as Italian Gothic. In the centre of the space they enclose is the rough brick structure of a fountain with a canopy resting on four arches, perhaps the ruin of a work of the Renaissance of which the marble incrustation has been removed. A piece of wall with a couple of windows has also been preserved. San Giovanni shows no interior decorations whatever. Undoubt¬ edly it was once adorned in a similar manner to La Martorana and the Palatine Chapel. The bell of San Giovanni is associated in the popular belief with the Sicilian Vespers. It was shattered by a Bourbon cannon ball during one of the numerous INTERIOR OF LA MARTORANA IRorman fftonuments of Palermo anb Environs. 17 riots preceding the conquest of Palermo by Garibaldi and his “ mille . ’ The picturesque old custodian was then a “capitano of a band of young fellows of revolutionary proclivities. He is somewhat of a botanist, and the little garden surrounding the church and ruins raises beautiful flowers in abundance. Frequent visitors, and especially ladies, generally receive liberal presents of the old man’s pets, and, judging from some months’ experience, 1 should say that Baedeker's cruel little note: “ The custodian peddles worthless antiquities” is unjust. Generally I found the different custodians in Palermo and Monreale a vast im¬ provement on most of those I met in Continental Italy. On a little square or court, accessible by a crazy little passage from the Toledo or Via Vittorio Emmanuele which intersects the city from east to west and the continuation of which is the road to Monreale, is a little Norman church, San Antonio. It is about the size of S. Cataldo and of a similar disposition. A few remnants of the dado and mosaics have been preserved, although a restoration in fifteenth century Gothic, including the substitution of a Gothic vaulting system, has destroyed the original character of the edifice almost entirely. It is supposed to date back to about the year 1200. Ot churches of the Roman basilica type we find in Palermo the Cathedral and the Palatine Chapel and, at Monreale and Cefalu, the cathedrals. The Cathedral of Palermo was begun 1169 by Gualterius Offamilius (Walter of the Mill), an Eng¬ lishman who was then Archbishop of Palermo and Chancellor of King William the First (the Bad). Outside of the apsis and, perhaps, parts of the west towers nothing remains of the original faqade, while the interior was ruthlessly destroyed by a WEST DOORWAY. CATHEDRAL OF PALERMO. blundering Neapolitan architect, Fernando Fuga, 18 Ulorman flftonuments of Palermo anb Environs. who “restored” the church about the end of last century. The portals, towers, south facade and doors are Italian Gothic with a certain Byzantine feeling in the detail treatment. Very interesting are the tombs of the kings of which the two of the German emperors were brought from Cefalu. They are sarcophagi under baldachins supported on columns of porphyry, and with decorations in mosaic. The exterior mosaic work of the apsis (brown with black) shows transalpine motives throughout, and this enables us to fix the year 1169 as one of transition from the original Siculo-Norman (essentially Arab-Byzantine) style to the one principally derived from transalpine sources. It would seem that the latter ought to be classed with the style of Continental Italy, commonly termed Italian Gothic. There are two other churches, both very much defaced, one from restorations and the other from neglect, which might properly be classed as of this period. Both are situated at the southern outskirts of the city, one San Giovanni dei Leprosi towards the sea and near the Ponte dell' ammiraglio and the other Santo Spirito , memorable from the outbreak of the Vespers in 1282, a little more to the west adjoining the cemetery for the victims of cholera. San Giovanni is often mentioned as the oldest Norman church of Palermo, but this would be contrary to internal evidence. True enough, it possesses the peculiar octagonal dome on pendentives, but the clerestory is supported by round piers of com¬ paratively large dimensions, of which even the caps and bases point to transalpine floman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. 19 influence or even French workmanship. The exterior treatment has been effaced by repeated restoring. The other church, Santo Spirito [see sketch], also shows strong French Norman influence. The roof is of wood, there are three apses, and on the outside a mosaic decoration, similar in character, although simpler than that on the apse of the cathedral at Palermo. San Giovanni dei Leprosi, as the name indicates, was attached to a hospital for lepers, and as the disease subsequently disappeared from Palermo the hospital was turned into an educational institution of some kind and is now a complete ruin. The surroundings are of the poorest, and the church itself, although in actual use, is only accessible through a tannery. 20 IRorman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. The Palatine Chapel, the gem of Siculo-Norman art, was built by King Roger the Second and dedicated to St, Peter, It must have been commenced shortly after Roger’s coronation and was finished and richly endowed in the year 1143- The general disposition is that of a Roman basilica with a raised chancel, divided, like the rest of the church, in nave and aisles, and three apses raised above the level of the chancel. The clerestory walls are resting on ten columns of cipollino and Egyptian marble with pointed arches, and the roof is of wood, flat and slanting over the aisles, and vaulted with honeycombed Arab decoration over the nave, while a dome of masonry, resting on pendentives, surmounts the chancel. The internal dimensions are 125 feet long by 42 feet wide, the apex of the cupola is 57 feet above the floor of the church, and the columns supporting the clerestory walls are 16 feet high. Like the Cathedral of Palermo the Palatine Chapel has under the chancel a crypt. The chancel is divided longitudinally by solid railings of marble and mosaic, and the space directly in front of the apses is separated from the chancel in the same manner, leaving a gate three or four feet wide in front of each apse as in La Martorana; the chancel, again, is separated from the nave by a low perforated marble railing, the latter being perhaps two feet, while the solid railings are INTERIOR OF T ROYAL THRONE I PALATINE CHAPEL, the Chancel. J THE BACKGROUND. about five feet in height. As in all the other Norman churches the apses of the Palatine Chapel are facing east. At the westerly end of the Chapel a platform, raised several steps above the level of the floor, and with solid railings similar to those in the chancel on both sides, was arranged for the kings. Two entrances, one on either side of this platform, with ancient bronze doors of great beauty, lead to what is now a narrow vaulted passage, and another entrance, on the south wall near the westerly end, to a portico opening on the arcades of a large court in the Royal palace. This portico with mosaics is Norman, otherwise nothing seems to have been preserved to suggest the original treatment of the exterior. 22 Merman {Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. The Royal palace itself has been so frequently altered and added to, that of the original Norman nucleus now little remains except a towerlike portion called S. Ninfa, on the east front, which shows a treatment of the wall-spaces with blind pointed arches something like the exterior of La Martorana, the general relief being very slight and the windows small. A work published at Palermo in 1840 by Nicola Buscemi states that the Palatine Chapel originally was situated at the main entrance of the palace, on the side facing the city (the eastern or southeastern side), which would make the apsis and cupola the most conspicuous feature. Further, that it was detached from the palace and had a richly ornamented exterior. At the westerly end of the south portico (at the southwest corner of the chapel) he mentions remains of an ancient campanile, besides traces of a portico along the west front and a superincumbent pediment in the rooms of the palace on the story above. Buscemi goes on to suggest that maybe there was another campanile at the northwest corner, which would give us the plan of a Latin cross with a portico surrounding the entire building west of the transept, and with two towers occupying the width of the twelfth-century mosaic in the cupola of tke porticos (or projecting outside of them) on PALATINE CHAPEL. 1 A J 0 the westerly fagade. The projections of the short arms forming the Latin cross form passages and are almost imperceptible on the inside of the chapel. The floor, dado and interior decorations generally, of which several details will be found among the plates of this work, are similar in treatment to those of La Martorana, and are of the most exquisite workmanship. The best mosaics are to be found in the chancel and the apses, although they are all excellent. Those in the nave are supposed to be the work of the pupils of the original Byzantine masters. The capitals, like those in St. Mark’s in Venice, are all gilded, and the wooden ceiling is decorated in tempera colors and with cufic inscriptions. Its general tone is a dark bluish-green, and, with the exceedingly small windows scantily lighted from IHonnan fllbonuments of iPalcrmo anb Environs. 23 the porticos outside, the interior is very sombre, which, added to the wonderfully rich and resplendent decoration makes it the very spot for sentimental travellers to dream in. Originally it was undoubtedly as light as La Martorana or the Cathedral of Monreale. The two pairs of bronze doors at the west end are almost identical [see plates] and seem to belong to the same period, like the organ gallery (ambo) in the southeast corner [see plates]. This gallery is not peculiar to the Norman style alone, similar ones being found in several churches around Naples (Amalfi, Ravello, Salerno and Benevento), and their general style of decoration is closely related to that of the Cosmat family in Rome about the same time [see altar, pulpit and bishop’s throne in SS. Nerone ed Achille and in S. Cesario in Rome], I take it to be a general Byzantine feature which also seems to recur in some of the Tuscan work of this epoch, notably in the Baptistery at Pisa and in San Mimato al Monte in Florence. The mosaic floors, dados and solid railings of the Palermitan monuments all seem to belong to this class: a ground of gray or white marble slabs with large panels of colored marbles, mosaic bands of geometrical patterns let into the marble, and sometimes a plain framework of one member with a carved row of conventional leaves. The seats and woodwork in the chancel are of comparatively recent date. The famous candelabrum of five tiers of figures in sculpture of white marble, at the projecting corner of the organ gallery, somehow seems more of a transalpine Gothic character but may belong to the same epoch. The Royal palace has another Norman relic in a room with a Roman crossvault covered with mosaics from this time. It is called “La Stanza di Ruggero” (Roger’s chamber). From the Royal palace, which is situated near the cathedral on a slight elevation at the western boundary line of the city (at the Porta Nuova), a road leads in a south- l THE PALATINE CHAPEL, 24 Borman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. westerly direction past La Cuba — once a favorite residence of the Norman Rings, at first gently rising to the village of La Rocca, then, in zig-zag up the steep mountain side to Monreale, hardly five miles from the city gate. Here, on a lofty eminence affording a beautiful view of the Conca d’ oro and Palermo below, is the famous Cathedral of Monreale with the cloisters adjoining it to the south. The convent, a Benedictine abbey, to which both belonged, is mostly in ruins and what is left is devoid of interest. The cathedral and convent were erected by King William the Second between the years 11 74 and 1182, and richly endowed by him. The plan is that of a Roman basilica, or one might say of this one as of the Palatine Chapel, that it is practically the plan of San Giovanni or La Martorana with a nave and aisles added. It is very much larger than any of the other Norman churches except the cathedral at Cefalu, being 330 feet in length by 130 feet in width and very high in proportion. The transept is more marked than in the Palatine Chapel, and there is no cupola. The church suffered greatly through a conflagration in 1811, but has been admirably restored. The exterior has lost most of its original splendor, still the apses with their mosaic decoration, part of the treatment of the north side and an elaborate portal under the west porch, are still preserved. The transalpine element is here decidedly in the ascendancy as against the Palatine Chapel and La Martorana, and the west portal with bronze doors from the hands of Bonanno da Pisa (executed 1186) can hardly be said to show any peculiarly Siculo-Norman features. The interior, perhaps, owes its effect more to the Mosaic decorations than to any¬ thing else. The proportions are hardly good and even the mosaics themselves are inferior to those of La Martorana and the Palatine Chapel — still a mosaic decoration will make up for a good deal, and the effect, in spite of all, is imposing and grand. 26 IRorman flfoonuments of lpalermo anb Environs. In the chancel the floors are fifteenth-century imitations of Byzantine mosaics [see above] with a plain marble floor in the church proper. Dado and walls are treated much in the same way as in the other monuments, and the capitals of the columns are classical in treatment, in fact, it seems hard to believe them otherwise than Renaissance or modern work. The church has now an open-timber roof with polychrome treatment, perhaps rather too loud. It was erected after the fire, at the expense of King Louis of Bavaria. The famous cloisters adjoining the cathedral, with coupled columns and clusters of four in the corners, and with the charming fountain and a separate little square of cloisters around it, as it were, in one corner of the open space, cer¬ tainly is one of the most charming relics in Palermo. If they are to be classed as Siculo-Norman, the Byzan¬ tine element in them is decidedly not very predominant and the Arab element is almost wanting. The trans¬ alpine element predominates to such an extent as to make the general character of the design Gothic, and, as Fergusson remarks, they are INTERIOR OF MONREALE. apparently “in the style universal in all the countries bordering on the Mediterranean Sea”; and he mentions those of Elite, Fontifroide, Arles, etc., as well as those of San Giovanni in Laterano in Rome. San Paolo fuori le Mura, in Rome, has also similar cloisters. This likeness is very apparent in the general character, and the Roman examples also show some Byzantine feeling in the detail, yet the latter element is decidedly more prominent in Monreale, where, for instance, numbers of the peculiar symbols found in the marble grilles of Ravenna occur on the decorated shafts of the clustered columns and where many of the capitals decidedly show Byzantine or classical instead of the Gothic motives; and finally the isolated pedestals on the inside of the fountains [see detail plate] are Arab in feeling. For this reason it seems to be reasonable to class them as belonging to the very last period of Norman stvle. Borman Monuments of Palermo anb Environs. 27 Now as to the date. The detail plates show the plan of the columns, abacus and superincumbent arches, and it will be noticed, in the first place, that the archivolte is moulded — which is peculiar to the later style, — and, in the second place, that the heavy roll (torus) m the centre of it projects beyond the line of the abacus. This fact, taken in connection with the disproportion of the dainty columns and capitals to the exceedingly heavy—not to say somewhat clumsy — arches, which they support, convinces me that the columns are later work than the arches. The latter are entirely in keeping with the architecture oi the cathedral, with its exterior mosaics of brown and black, and I consider it probable that the mouldings of the archivolte were continued on the piers separating the openings down to the sills. These piers, then, I take to have been replaced by the present columns, but probably not very long after the completion of the church. Cefalu is situated on the north coast of Sicily, about forty miles from Palermo, and directly under an enormous overhanging rock, which, to a stranger, seems a constant menace to the little town, if only on account of fragments loosening and dropping off from it in the course of time. One is followed from the railroad station' 28 IRorman Monuments of Palermo an£> Environs. into the town by a hundred or more beggars, who signify their willingness to carry one’s bag by pulling at it from behind, while they are fighting among themselves for the chance to pull it. The town has a hotel where visitors will be disposed to wish their worst enemies to eat and sleep, and the only substantial looking building is the barrack of the garrison. One is apt to look upon the officers one meets at the hotel with a feeling that duty sometimes has to be done under discouraging circumstances. The Cathedral of Cefalu is similar in plan, and also in many other respects, to that of Monreale. The dimensions are 243 feet by 92 feet. It is rather neglected, except that the magnificent mosaics in the chancel and apse have been preserved. They are fully as good, if not better, than the best work of La Martorana and the Palatine Chapel. The exterior is remarkable for the preponderance of the cisalpine forms. The charter of foundation bears the date of 1145, but it seems hard to associate the west front and towers with this time, in fact one would be disposed to put it more than fifty years later. The cloisters have been almost destroyed, and their fragments do not seem to justify the comparison with Monreale sometimes heard. The tombs of the Emperors Henry the Sixth and Frederic the Second, which are now in the cathedral at Palermo, were formerly in Cefalu. There is still another ecclesiastical work from the Norman epoch in Palermo, namely, the cloisters of San Domenico. It has supercaps, a peculiarly Byzantine feature [see churches of Ravenna], and their carved ornament is partly Byzantine, partly Romanesque and partly pure Arab. The columns are of later date and of inferior workmanship. The whole work is sadly neglected and is possibly nothing but a blundering work of reconstruction from promiscuous fragments. S. Francesco de’ Chiodari has a pleasing front, recently restored, but must be classed as belonging to the succeeding Italian Gothic. Of the civil architecture of the Siculo-Norman period very little has been preserved, and this little offers few points of additional interest. La Cuba, on the road to Monreale—possibly erected about 1180,—is now ■ a cavalry barrack, and La Zisa, on the same side of the city, is private property. IRorman ®onuments of Palermo anb Environs. •29 The latter shows the same flat treatment of the exterior, with pointed arches and very small windows, as S. Ninfa and La Martorana. A vestibule or porch, with a fountain and some Arab vaulting, are otherwise the only remaining features of interest. Palazzo Sclafani, is said to have been erected in 1330, but reminds one more of the style as it appears on the apses of the Cathedrals of Palermo and Monreale. In Pal. Abatelli [see sketch] and “ Lo Steri ” (Palazzo Chiara Monti) the transition to Italian Gothic is completed. This finishes our brief survey of the Siculo-Norman style in Palermo and environs. With the possible exception of San Giovanni degli Eremiti no monument of this style appears to have been even commenced previously to the coronation of King Roger at Palermo, in 1130, and during the following twenty years those edifices, which eminently show such distinguishing features as have entitled them to be considered a separate style of architecture were completed. These distinguishing features, as we have noted above, were principally due to a peculiar blending of Arab and Byzantine elements, the latter greatly preponderating. The low vaulted interiors, with ample wall spaces, resplendent with decorations in marble and mosaic and the repression of sculptured detail, both in quantity and treatment made these monuments singularly rich, yet dignified, and, in spite of what purists of style may say to the contrary, harmonious in artistic expression. The artistic traditions of the Arabs, at least as far as architecture is concerned, seem to vanish from Palermo almost completely about the middle of the twelfth century, while Byzantine motives in sculpture and mosaic, and especially a certain flat treatment of the former which may properly be considered as due to Byzantine influence, retained their hold in Sicily and throughout continental Italy up to the advent of the Renaissance. The vastly predominant influence however is henceforth that of transalpine Gothic—a fact which a glance at contemporaneous Italian History will show to have been a natural consequence of the French and German Conquests. At Palermo this influence soon made itself felt and we have attempted to demonstrate how it gradually permeates the original Siculo-Norman style, substituting high Gothic proportions for the original Byzantine ones, introducing sculptured detail and ornament in quantities more corresponding to Gothic taste and finally by 30 florman monuments of Palermo anb Environs. substituting the bold, structurally active Gothic ornament (of classic tradition) for the flat Arab-Byzantine (of Oriental tradition). When this change had taken place there in reality remained in the Mediaeval Monuments of Palermo no distinguishing features which entitled them to be con¬ sidered a separate historical style as against the coeval monuments of continental Italy. Norman rule in Sicily can only be regarded as a most wonderful incident in history: a handful of Norman adventurers organizing—thanks to their shrewdness, tolerance and sense of justice—a powerful state, and drawing from centres of developed art — we know not with certainty which — the skill to erect in their honor monuments which, at least as far as their interior decorations are concerned, perhaps surpass anything preserved from the Middle Ages. FROM THE CLOISTER, MONREALE. GELATINE VIEW. be m j' fflSHJKjt&iKBjJKJS HS® 55H8ffi*HK5 WiiH®j&i HijSHHjSEi !c£2^^fflP^jat^jpas»«Wr^a^Sfia®jfg S®K )!(>:<»! iV'V; SseeS K I®! |l|k HHS i® - PLATE I. DOORWAY, CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE. (REVERSED VIEW) GELATINE VIEW. PLATE II. DOOR OPENING FROM CHAPEL AT EAST OF CHOIR INTO THE VESTIBULE OF THE PRIESTS' QUARTERS, CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE. (REVERSED VIEW) f GELATINE VIEW. PLATE IV. CLUSTERED COLUMNS IN THE CLOISTER, CATHEDRAL OF MONREALE. (REVERSED VIEW) 1 > '. j IV. PALERMO: S. GIOVANNI. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW. III. PALERMO: PALAZZO REALE. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW PALERMO.—LA MARTORANA. X. PALERMO.—STA. MARIA DELLA CATENA. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW. XIII. PALERMO: CAPELLA PALATINA, INTERIOR. XIV. PALERMO: CAPELLA PALATINA, INTERIOR. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW. F-- imp & XVII. ROME: BASILICA OF SAN LORENZO WITHOUT-PONTIFICAL CHAIR. XVIII. MONREALE: CATHEDRAL, APSE. PHOTO-GRAIN VIEW. MP H ''. Blisa g|§ll XIX. MONREALE: CATHEDRAL, DOOR. XX. SALERNO: CATHEDRAL, PULPIT. _ MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE I. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE III. oisfers o. o Scale • I .T-—. , Super Capitals- Scale- Scale- & ins- MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE VII. Dado in Marble and Mosaic. MEASURED DRAWING. TVLjght Red. w—white. C — cream. h = hlacK. ft-buff. P — Red Porphvrv'. 5= Serpentine. a= Light Blue. ,0'old. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE IX. w==~w}iile • rf=fi'old* i glass- Scale • It— 12 ins- =d n.- blacK- b—buff- v= Serpenlme p- porphyry; Delnils of Dado- See Scale DraVirn MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XI. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XIII MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XIV. Copella Polatina’ Palermo- White Marble- o 6 12 IncL.es- -Scale for above p. Light Mosaic Band Course on Exterior- MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XV. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XVI MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XVII, Details of Bronze Doors- s« s^ie ur^-- "While Marble. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XVIII. 32 MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XIX. Capelin PalotinaPalermo- Organ Gallery (-Side) MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XX. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXI. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXIII La Marlarana» Palermo MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXIV Chancel Rodino- B— MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXV. Lfi MffftbTfina 0 PP enrio* Border of grey marble- Mosaic Floor- Scale- S“ Serpentine • P*= Porphyry- g- grey marble - See Iwo Delail SKeels- 3 feel- ■ —i is in 3 - MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXVI MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXVII. Palermo- Fragment of Marble Panel- measured drawing. PLATE XXIX. La Martorana- Palermo- font- Pedestal of Columns around fountain Phaft of Column- MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXXII. Elewrton on Court"• MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXXIV. js ins. Scale- ± fool- MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXXV. Elevrfion .and Developed Omnment of Column MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXXVII. Devotion and Developed Ornament of Column- MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XXXVIII. vScjaLe • Developed Ormmenf of Column- Cloisters of Monreale- Cloisters of Monro ale- MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XLI. 2, Feet- Cloisters of Monreole MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XLIII. © 0 ) H § U to c QJ O g 6 & 51 MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XLIV. Catb 3c From Mosaic Floor in Chancel- ~ Century Restoration/) ■Ml MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XLVI. i i M * £ § Jo'S $ D cd ’O II il 1 h 9* > i Ss A l rom Mosaic Floor In ChnnceL MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XLVII. MEASURED DRAWING. PLATE XLVIII Omnment" From Bronze Doors on South Entrance- MEASURED DRAWING.