'..Ji **■ ■'■ '-''■ ^ :>•- -;.-Nl ' -r ?'■ V-" ' '/■- ^ ‘ -Vi '-• . ' ,.'^- ' ■ ■■ \ ‘ V ; *» >v V is '.V *‘" - i* ■■■ • vi ' ; .,.V4 ■,• ■- i^rs* V » • t f . 4 ^ # * r* / DISCOURSES UPON LONDON : POINTED BY SAMUEL BENTLEY, DORSET STREET. A SERIES OF DISCOURSES UPON in ^nslnnli FROM THE NORMAN iERA TO THE CLOSE OF THE REIGN OF QUEEN ELIZABETH, WITH AN APPENDIX OF NOTES AND ILLUSTRATIONS, AND AN HISTORICAL ACCOUNT OF i$la0ter anti if tec iBa0ou0« BY THE BEV. JAMES DALLAWAY, LONDON: JOHN WILLIAMS, EtbravR of ^rcl^ttfcturc, 10, CHARLES STREET, SOHO SQUARE. 1833. Digitized by the Internet Archive in 2015 https://archive.org/details/seriesofdiscours00dall_0 C O N T E N T S. I. Introduction of Gotliick Arcliitectiire^ 2 ^age 1 II. Of the various modes of Ecclesiastical Archi- tecture in Italy^ Sicily, France, Germany, and the Netherlands, Spain and Portugal, to the close of the Fourteenth Century, 73 III. Florid Gothick — account of Gloucester Cathe- dral .... 129 IV. Analysis of Cathedral, Conventual, and Paro- chial Churches . . 193 V. Military Architecture of the first and middle centuries after the Norman Conquest, with an examination of Castles in England, and their several component parts 267 VI. The Tudor age of Architecture, until the close of the reign of Queen Elizabeth 333 Collections for an Historical Account of Master and Free Masons . . . 397 . 437 Index Page 179 n. for 7000 tons read 7400 lbs. 213, line 14, /or Norwich read Chichester. DISCOURSES ON ARCHITECTURE IN DISCOURSE I. It is a fact concerning which controversy is no longer entertained, that the aboriginal Goths had no share either in the invention or perfection of that peculiar style of architecture which bears their name. It is not worth the dispute, whether the Gothick power was ever annihilated in Europe, or whether they sub- sisted in the conquered countries as a separate people. By the Goths, no individual nation is alluded to, but the Northern conquerors in general, before they were incorporated with the people they had subdued. Gothick, there- fore, should be considered merely as a term to convey reproach to everything in literature and arts, which was not strictly accordant with the antique model, adopted and applied by 2 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. those who had introduced the restored Gre- cian. In Italy, the last mentioned had its origin, as appropriated to architecture, in the school of Palladio ; and with us it was un- known in the present sense before the days of Jones and Wren. The earliest Christian churches were not erected before the fourth century, which were very diminutive, and placed over crypts and caves, in which the Christians first assembled for public worship. One, dedicated to Saints Nazian and Celsus, at Ravenna, was built by Galla Placidia, the daughter of Theodosius. Those of St. Martin and St. Clement at Rome, were of the same age.^' The Goths were not inventive architects. The beginnings of that particular architecture, since called Gothick, are traceable in those buildings which were erected in Italy even before the arts had totally declined, and long before any Gothick invaders had established themselves there, f Neither the Goths nor Lombards were exclusively the inventors of the architecture which bears their name ; for the ancient Paganism of the Northern nations had no influence upon church-building. The * Cicognara, Storia della Scultiira, dal suo risorgimento in Italia^ sino nl Secolo di Napoleone. 3 tom. fol. Venezia, 1813. -I* Barry’s Works, vol. i. p. 123 — 134. ECCLESIASTICAL. churches constructed by Constantine and his immediate successors, were all of them formed upon the plan of the Roman Basilicae.^ A total decay of the arts had even pre- ceded the dissolution of the Roman empire ; and the establishment of Christianity, with its privilege of building churches, was contem- porary with the Gothick incursions. In this coincidence has originated a popular notion, that the barbarians annihilated the Grecian architecture in order to introduce a style pe- culiar to their own country, and that their edifices are called Gothick” merely because they are as widely discriminated by their pro- portions and ornaments from the classical mo- numents of Athens, as the Goths were from the Greeks in their talents and national manners. One of the chief causes of the substitu- tion of the style we now call Gothick for the solidity of the Greek and Roman forms, was the scarcity in Germany, Flanders, or France, of columns or other members of architecture, which were so copiously supplied in Italy, * Moller, DenkmaMer der Deiitschen Bankunst, G. Vo7i Moller^ Darmstadt^ fol. 1821. 72 plates in outline. Heyne ( Comment. Goetenhurg., t. 13, p. 22) remarks, that the Gothick architects residing at Rome, were in reality the first who emigrated into France, and other Goths who pro- fessed the arts from Aquitain and Spain, and concludes “ ita si artifices Gothos audias nequaquam necesse sit, arcessitos ex septentrione, statuere.” B 2 4 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. after the triumph of Christianity over the ruins of Paganism. In that country were found materials before used, and wrought into just proportions, which could be adapted; and that, with no great degree of skill. The Italian architects, therefore, did not trust to their ima- gination for their designs. But the Northern nations, possessing very few Roman remains, had a free and unconstrained recourse to their own conceptions. It was not in their power to employ precious materials which they did not possess, nor to imitate models which they had never seen, so that they adopted every licence in their style ; and their pillars and vaults created surprise, by exaggerated dimen- sions, which could impose an idea of magni- ficence or even elegance.^ At the beginning of the eighth century all Europe formed but one Gothick kingdom. Is there in any nation, a perfect church extant, which can make a just pretension to so early a date ? In France and Italy there are very few * Cicognara. The Monk Fridigode, who wrote the life of St. Ouen, observes, that his first church, built at Rouen in the sixth century, was constructed “ manu Gothica but the authority admits of doubt. Certain, however, it is, that from all we can know, concerning the first efforts of archi- tecture, after the fall of the Roman Empire, they were marked only by rudeness of execution, and a depraved appli- cation of classic materials. ECCLESIASTICAL. 5 really Gothick vestiges anterior to 800, the celebrated aera of Charlemagne.* Upon no subject of antiquity have so many discordant opinions been maintained, as upon the origin of what is called Gothick architec- ture. It has given birth to bold conjecture and wide disquisition ; and where so many are ready to teach, few are satisfied with what they learn. Bentham, Gray, and T. Warton, were long held as the ablest discriminators of this question, and considered as having given the clearest idea of the regular progress of the Gothick, from barbarism to perfection. Many idle cavils have been made about the time when the Goths ceased to exist as a nation. They probably introduced their rude manner of building into every country of which they had gained the possession : a circumstance evi- dent in the peculiar styles of Italy, Germany? Spain, France, and England. In each of these there is an ostensible analogy without an ex- act resemblance. Considering the question as hitherto undecided, we may find no great diffi- culty in ascertaining the aera of its first intro- * In the eighth century, Pepin began to rebuild the abbey church of St. Denis, which was completed by his son Charle- magne. The crypt is certainly a part of the original edi- fice. The capital of one of the columns bears a curious sculpture of the interior of a church in bas relief, with the emperor sitting in a curule chair. 6 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. duction into this country, when the manner of building was changed or improved, when it reached perfection, and when a love of exu- berance finally effected its decline. Gothick is said by Torre to have been first applied as a designation by Cesare Cesariano, the translator of Vitruvius, in his Commentary, 1521. He wrote likewise “ Saggio sopra VAr-- chitettura Gottica^ con pin proposito^ Germa- nica dmommatar Cesariano was one of the architects of the cathedral of Milan in 1491. Maffei’, Muratori, and Tiraboschi have de- monstrated that neither the Goths nor the Lombards introduced any style in particular, but employed the architects whom they found in Italy. The leading causes, therefore, which have occasioned the disuse of Grecian architecture in the first ages of Christianity, may be as- signed to the ignorance and inability into which the artists had fallen, before the Goths had spread themselves over Europe. A know- ledge of architectural elements was still pre- served. The good taste of the ancients, both in decoration and proportion, was indeed lost, but certain principles of the art were known and practised. They were not unacquainted with the secret of arching a vault ; but of all the complicated forms adopted by the Greeks and Romans, they retained that only which ECCLESIASTICAL. 7 is made upon cross-ribs rising from four an- gles, and intersecting each other at the common centre. Such a mode was universal in their structures, and is found in the smallest closets, as well as in the most spacious churches.^ Simple combinations — such as to raise a walled inclosure, and to place pillars in the length within, connected by an arcade or archi- trave, serving as a base to a second wall for the support of a roof of timber— were known and practised before the Goths had appeared in Italy. The first Christian churches built at Rome, particularly that of St. Paul, by Constantine,f have been imitated as archetypes of the most ancient churches through Christendom. In the last mentioned, we have the earliest instance of arches constructed upon columns, instead of upon piers, which was universally the Roman method. The frequent resort of the bishops Gibbon mentions the palace of Theodosius, as the oldest specimen of Gothick. Shrines for reliques were pro- bably the real prototypes of this fine specimen of architec- ture. It was a most natural transition, for piety, to render a whole church, as it were, one shrine. The Gothick style seems to bespeak an amplification of the minute, not a dimi- nution of the great. Warburton’s groves are nonsense; it was not a passage from barbarism to art, but from one spe- cies of the art to another. The style was first peculiar to shrines, and then became peculiar to churches .” — Lord Or- ford. Walpoliana. -f Temples Anciens et Modernes, par Mai. 8vo. 1774, p. 122, where it is amply described. 8 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. of different nations to the Holy See, afforded them an opportunity of obtaining plans, which they adopted upon their return to their own country. The form of the Latin cross was at first simply followed in the ground-plan ; that the distribution of its parts has been infinitely enriched and varied, may be traced through successive aeras, as consonant to the genius of the several nations by whom it has been ap- plied. We may discover, by comparison, dif- ferences in architecture, which are distinctly peculiar to the several countries of Europe, and as strongly marked as those of the Gre- cian orders let me be allowed, at least, to qualify this assertion, by confining it to a cer- tain manner, analogous to the genius of the people who have used it ; — so that the Gothick in Lombardy, in Spain, in Germany, in France, but especially in England, may be generically distinguished as decidedly as the Doric, the Ionic, or the Corinthian. ^ ^ Those who have examined the superb edi- fices in Italy which are styled Gothick, as the cathedrals of Pisa, Orvietto, Sienna, &c. will find a bare resemblance of what they may have seen in other parts of Europe.^ They must doubtless have remarked that circular Consult “ Tempio Vaticano e suo origine da Carlo Fon- tana. Philippi Bonanni numismata Summoruin Pontihcuni Templum Yaticani fabricam indicantia. Romae, 1696.” fob ECCLESIASTICAL. 9 arcades and porticos are most frequent ; which if not composed of columns extracted and re- moved from Roman works, the deficiency was supplied by pillars imperfectly imitated from them and that the exuberance of style, called by them ‘ II Gottico-Tedesco,’ very rarely occurs in Italy. The facciata^ or grand western front, was the object of splendour to which all the other parts of the fabric were subordinate. It was in that part only that the artists strove to surpass each other, by elevation and bold- ness, by the multitude and originality of their sculptures. Cupolas f rise from the centre of the transept, and the campanile is always de- tached from the main building. In a few in- stances, as in the exquisitely slender towers of Florence and Venice, there is a certain species of beauty ; whilst those of brick, at Bologna, are equally astonishing, but positively ugly. The first-mentioned tower was designed and built by Giotto in the thirteenth century, in emulation of the stupendous spires which at that aera were erecting in Germany and the * When surveying the Duorno at Sienna, I remarked that the capitals of the external pilasters which supported the smaller arches, were composed chiefly of grotesque heads of beasts and monsters, instead of foliage. •f The term dome’’ is improperly used for ‘‘ cupola"' — it applies merely to a cathedral church, and is not synony- mous with an hemispherical roof, as at the Pantheon. 10 ARCHITECTUllE IN ENGLAND. Low Countries. In Italy not a single spire of equal construction is now seen. The aera of Charlemagne gave rise to many grand edifices dedicated to Christianity, the architects of which are not recorded. If we thus fix the epocha of Gothick architecture, though we cannot ascertain the first and most ancient specimen of it, we possess nearly all the rest of its history, when we know that it was adopted, with certain variations, all over Europe ; that great cities contended for the honour of having the largest and the richest church ; that the same style of architecture employed in the ecclesiastic, passed to other public edifices, and to the palaces of kings ; and finally, that till the end of the fifteenth century, the Gothick reigned with a more ex- tensive dominion than the most graceful or magnificent of the Grecian orders. It is of importance to remark, that the par- ticular manner which has been denominated Gothick, in any of these countries, did not ap- pear for five centuries after the first incursions of the Gothick nations into the south of Eu- rope. The Goths themselves built upon a different model. Of many opinions, lately published, concern- ing an intricate subject, some are plausible, some merely fanciful, or conjectural as to facts, and others replete with ingenious rather than con- ECCLESIASTICAL. 11 elusive reasonings, as being raised chiefly upon analogy. But I am unwilling to disturb the dreams of certain critics in architecture ; and it might be therefore hazardous to offer any hypothesis of my own. The several Italian authors on this subject describe this manner as la maniera vecchia^ non antica^ Gi^eco-Goffa^ Tedesca^ Gottica^ Longobai'dica^ Romanesca^ all which terms occur.* The last mentioned more especially applies to the architecture of the churches first dedicated to Christianity, by the Empe- rors Constantine, Theodosius, Justinian, and their successors. The dissatisfaction which has arisen respecting the term Gothick^ as ap- plied to architecture, within the last half cen- tury, has induced some writers on the subject to attempt an alteration, by which objections might be obviated. The Society of Antiqua- ries, in their accounts of cathedrals, introduced the term English Architecture^ but as confined to the pointed style ; and that not without controversy, for it was proved that its origin was derived from the French or Germans, and that we had, nationally, no exclusive right to that denomination. Lately, we have in a cer- tain instance the term Christian Architecture, which is by no means discriminative, and ^ Frisi^ “ siiir architettiira GothicaF Livorno, with a trea- tise in German annexed to the translation of it. 12 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. therefore not likely to obtain a general usage. If it be applicable only to temples of Chris- tianity, why are St. Peter’s, St. Paul’s, and St. Genevieve Grecian, or at least Roman tem- ples ? for they have nothing more in them of the earliest Christian churches, than the cru- ciform plan. None but a very distinguished author can hope to invent new terms in this science, which will either merit or obtain a general acceptation. Innovation is not always improvement. Basilicae were imitated by the first Christians in the construction of the first churches, who took the term from the Greeks, with whom they meant only the residence of the chief magistrate or king. The interior of them was formed upon the plan of the Greek Celia, especially of those in hypaethral temples, in which the Ionic and Corinthian orders were mainly employed, but the Doric, in the church of San Pietro in vinculis, at Rome. That of S. Paolo fuori delle mura, is the principal basilica as adapted to a church, which is now under an imperfect restoration, since the entire confla- gration in 1S22. It had a portico sustained by columns at the west end, and the nave was rounded off at the east end, or broken into angles, each having a large window, to remind the pious that Christianity had its origin in . the East. There were six churches in Rome ECCLESIASTICAL. 13 formed and adapted from ancient temples, and three others without the walls. But the largest temple, erected soon after the establishment of Christianity, by Constantine, was a perfect ba- silica, which remained nearly entire for almost eleven centuries, when it was taken down by Pope Nicholas V. in 1450. To that early period of ecclesiastical archi- tecture, succeeded three distinct styles. 1 . That of the cathedral of Ravenna, built by Theo- doric, king of the Ostro-Goths, in 526. If any regard should be paid to the assertions of Cassiodorus in his epistles,^ a new de- scription of architecture not only existed, but actually flourished, during his reign and those of his immediate successors in Italy. Whether that style were the true parent of one subsequently denominated Gothick, may be conjectured, but I am inclined to think not satisfactorily proved. The architecture common in Lombardy at that period, has a better though not a positive claim. 2. The lower Greek, or Byzantine, according to which churches were divided into from three to seven ailes of nearly equal dimensions, which style maintained itself to the beginning of the 13th century. It may be recognised by the many little pillars on the outside, by the cupolas and circular arches, by the small windows, the ^ L. 3. Epist. 29. 14 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGEAND. triangles and ornaments in the cathedral of Bologna, (where the old German is mixed with the lower Greek,) at Cologn, and at Padua ; in the cathedral and baptistery at Pisa, &c. 3. This particular mode of building was en- tirely superseded by the works of Masaccio and Brunelleschi. It has been asserted by ingenious German writers upon this subject, that they have the best claim to the invention of the Gothick, which existed before the reign of Charlemagne ; and this claim has been ably supported by a late English anonymous author. This assump- tion admits of certain doubts. Even those churches which remain the acknowledged works of that emperor, are only “ striking examples of barbarous deformity. Little confidence can be placed in the exaggerated accounts given by historic monks, who extol these shapeless edifices as beyond all praise, dwelling only on unprofitable magnificence, the marbles and rich materials, which had been subtracted from the temples and palaces of the Romans.” Clovis and his immediate successors, kings of France, were the magnificent patrons of church archi- tecture at the very beginning of the sixth cen- tury. Structures of extreme expense were erected from their treasures. But it appears, that in all these primary buildings they em- ployed no artists, but masons only ; and that as ECCLESIASTICAL. 15 solidity was their chief object, they were most careful in procuring good materials. It is evident that no layman, at that time, deserved the name of an architect ; all science was left to the practice of ecclesiastics. Moller asserts that neither the Goths nor the Lombards were the inventors of the architecture which takes their names, for the ancient Paganism of the Northern nations had no influence on the style of church building.” The cathedrals in Germany and France, like those in Italy, owe their effect to the facade, which is formed by a portico of pediments richly incrusted with the most minute orna- ment, an infinity of niches, statues, pedestals, and canopies, and one circular window of vast diameter between two towers of very elabo- rately clustered pinnacles, where not otherwise finished by a regular spire. This description applies in particular to St. Stephen’s at Vienna, Strasburg, Nuremburg, Rheims, Amiens, Notre Dame, and St. Denis near Paris, Coutances, and Bayeux, not to multiply instances. These ex- hibit prodigies of sublimity, lightness, and pa- tience of the constructors ; yet, as if the age of piety or wealth were passed away, most of them are left in an unfinished state.^ * The cathedral churches of Narbonne, Tours, Ulm, Stras- burg, Cologn, Prague, and Mayence, have not yet been com- pleted, in their facades or towers. 16 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Even the sumptuous cathedrals of Florence, Sienna, and Bologna, built of brick, are as yet imperfectly incrusted with marble; and one only of the intended spires of St. Stephen’s, Vienna, Strasburg, and Antwerp, has been con- ducted to its symmetrical height. It is worthy remark, that in Italy the Goth- ick is most analogous to the lower Grecian architecture, in the early instances which I have cited. Yet the baptistery at Pisa, built by Dioti Salvi in 1152, exhibits a style called by the Italian architects, ^ II Arabo-Tedesco,’ a mixture of Moorish or lower Greek with the German Gothick. It is a circular building with an arcade, in the second order, composed of pillars with rudely formed Corinthian capi- tals and plain round arches. Between each, there rises a Gothick pinnacle ; and above, it is finished by sharp pediments, which are enriched with foliage, terminating in a trefoil. The conjecture I have hazarded, that some of the members of Gothick ornament originated with Italian architects, suggested itself at Pisa.* There, they were introduced in 1152 ; and many instances cannot be brought that they were common in France before 1220, at St. Denis ; or in England in 1256, in the cathe- dral at Salisbury. See Note [A]. ECCI.ESIASTICAL. 17 The squaie at Pisa,^^ which from its extent and scrupulous neatness gives to each edifice its complete effect, presents in the same view a most rich group of the Lombard-Gothick pre- valent early in the thirteenth century ; and the warmest admirer of that style, indulging his imagination, could scarcely form such an assem- blage in idea as the cathedral, the falling tower, the baptistery, and the cloisters. They are in- deed the first and most perfect in their pecu- liar manner, and, for august effect, unequalled in Europe. In the northern nations, a re- dundancy of ornament soon prevailed ; whilst in France a more simple, and consequently a lighter style was observable : but in Spain tlie Gothick wore a gigantic air of extent and mas- siveness. From the Moors at the same time they borrowed or correctly imitated an exces- sive delicacy in the minute decorations of parts, from whence the term Arabesque” is derived, and is nearly synonymous w ith “ Sara- cenic” as usually applied. The foregoing sub- jects are here introduced, merely for the pur- pose of a general analogy. Sir Christopher Wren was the first who dis- sented from the general opinion, that the * Consult ^^Architecture of the Middle Ages^ — the Cathe- dral, Baptistery, Leaning Tower or Campanile, and Cainpo Santo at Pisa, by Edward Cresy and G. L. Taylor, Archi- tects, P. S. A.” fob 1827, in which the subject is discussed and delineated, with accuracy and skill. 18 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGI.AND. Goths were the inventors of the style which is so designated ; for he ascribes the invention to the Saracens, from whom, as he conceived, it was adopted by the Croisaders of the West. His hypothesis is that of a man of genius, and he has been followed in it by others of great talent — by Warburton and T. Warton. Never- theless, time and scrupulous investigation have revealed the error, for no such Saracenic works exist in Spain, Sicily, or any other place, to which the Arabian power extended.^ It is a just remark of the late Mr. Kerrich, Libra- rian of Cambridge, that “ the error has been, to suppose that this architecture came to us from some distant country, adult and in its full vigour, and that it was implicitly adopted and made use of, exactly, as received. And it was not till very lately, that these notions having been found not to be supported by facts, we began to look nearer home, to observe the buildings around them, and to consider the ob- jects themselves with the abilities required for their production.^f An author of equal talent has observed, that Moorish architecture which has been thus hastily assimilated with Gothick, is connected only by a few slight and super- ficial circumstances.” J The light Gothic was ^ Arclmolog, vol. viii. p. 191. t Ibid. vol. xvi. p. 892. ;j; ^^Architectural Notes on German Churches^’'"' 8vo. 1830. — “ Kerrichy Arclmolog.'''^ ECCLESIASTICAL. 19 called maniera Tedesca^' and the heavy style “ Lombardicar Any farther observations I might make con- cerning Gothick architecture on the Continent, are reserved for the next section, in which that investigation will be confirmed by numerous examples. And it may be here necessary to premise, that every instance of the mode or description of building under immediate consi- deration, will not be adduced in confirmation of fact or opinion ; but such only as are well known and conclusive. It may possibly occur, that certain readers may recollect other ex- amples, with which the author may be equally well acquainted, yet may not think them to be more applicable.^ In Bishop Heber’s late Travels over a great part of the Hindoo and the Mohammedan pro- vinces of India, we have very numerous exam- ples of the prevalence of the acutely-pointed arch, from its greatest to its smallest propor- tion, as applied in temples, mosques, and the gateways of towns and castles. Warburton, in his notes on Pope, has assert- ed, that Gothick architecture originated in Spain, where Moorish architects were employed or followed ; and that it simply imitates an avenue of lofty trees ; the sharply pointed arch being that formed by the intersecting branches; * See Note [B]. 20 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. and that the stems of a clump of trees are re- presented by columns split into distinct shafts. This observation is ingenious, but not wholly applicable, or original ; for the architecture styled Gothick in the northern parts of Italy, had a distinct origin and characteristicks ; and our own Gothick was not brought us from Spain, but from Normandy and France. He had over- looked chronological facts.^ From this summary view of architecture in the earlier centuries, since the establishment of Christianity in different parts of Europe, I pro- ceed to that prevalent, at different periods, in England only. Our Saxon progenitors, from their intercourse with Rome upon ecclesias- tical concerns, adopted, with however rude an imitation, the Roman plan of churches. We have likewise a fair presumption, that many temples and palaces of the Romans remained, at that period at least, undemolished in Britain.']' The western front of their churches J had a portico or ambulatory, and the eastern was ^ See Note | C]. t Gyraldus Cambrefisis. BedcR Hist. Ecclesiast. 1. v. cap. 21. That the Saxon small churches were mostly constructed of timber, is evident from the term used in the Saxon Chro- nicle. relative to the building of Ripon, 5etimbjae(5e. — Ingrarrds edit. p. 148. ^ Ducarel (Norman Antiq. p, 106. fob) is the first author by whom an enumeration is made of churches in England, which have a date, at least anterior to the Conquest ; and ECCLESIASTICAL. semicircular, and resembled the tribune in Ro- man basilicae. The principal door-case was formed by pilasters with sculptured ca^pitals ; and the semicircular head of the arch, above the square of the door, which contained bas-reliefs, was encircled by mouldings of great variety, imitated, with imperfect success, from many then existing at Rome, and, not without great probability, in England. These mouldings have been more particularly specified and classed as the indented — the zig-zag, like the Etruscan scroll — the embattled fret — the beak-head — the nail-head, and upon the capitals the pouch or semicircular drop-moulding — the small squares, some alternately deeper than others — and the flourished, with small beads, usually on the* capitals of pilasters. The latest device, which became common just before the Saxon style was abandoned, was a carving round the may have been erected during the two preceding centuries. Stukeley in Bucks, and Barfreston in Kent, are his two pro- minent instances. Avington in Berks presents, according to the able opinion of my late friend, the accomplished anti- quary, S. Lysons, Esq. a genuine specimen of the early Sax- on ; yet I believe, that such are most rare, and that many which have been adduced are, in fact, of the first Norman description, as applied to parish churches. It is most certain, that Saxon sculpture is much more frequent, and has been better preserved in crypts, fonts, and door-cases, than the architecture which it formerly embellished and characterized. In such, there is but little room to doubt between the true Saxon ornament, and that which succeeded in the next age. 22 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. heads of arches, like trellis placed in broad lozenges, and considerably projecting.'^ The classification adopted by King,f accord- ing to my judgment, is the most satisfactory. He has given three aeras of the undoubted Saxon style : 1. From Egbert, 598 to 872 ; 2. From Alfred to Canute and Harold, 1036 ; 3. To the Norman conquest. No less than thirty-seven specimens of Saxon ornaments are selected by him, from mouldings upon door- ways only, in which there is a certain variation. Of the first period is Barfreston before-no- ticed. 2. The nave and choir of Christ Church Cathedral, Oxford ; and Canute’s great entrance gate at St. Edmundsbury. 3. Southwell, Notts, and Waltham Abbey, Essex. He adduces the ruins of Malmsbury Abbey, Wilts, as having retained the most elaborate plan of Saxon ornament, which partakes of Consult Carter’’s Ancient Architecture in England. The great ecclesiasticks among the Saxons both studied and prac- tised architecture. Elfric, abbot of Malmsbury, is said by the historic monk of that place to have been ‘‘ sedificandi gnarus.” ( Wharton's Angl. Sac. vol. ii. p. 33.) Aldred, bishop of Worcester, and afterwards archbishop of York, had completed the nave of the conventual church of Glouces- ter before the Conquest, as it now remains. — ( Florent. Annales Vigorn. A. D. 1057.) Bentham, in his jB/y, (sect. v. p. 33,) adduces this and the former church at Westminster, as in- stances of the Norman style, adopted or imitated by the last Saxons. t Alunimenta Antiqua, vol. iv. p. 240. and pi. v. ECCLESIASTICAL. 23 Etruscan design, having a guilloche inclosing bas-relievos. The Anglo-Norman ornaments are thus classed: 1. The plain zig-zag, or that slightly projecting and placed in the hollow moulding of the arch. 2. The open lozenge, with or without a cable moulding in the mid- dle. 3. The billet moulding lying in cavet- tos, or small squares, some alternately deeper than others. 4. The embattled or Etruscan scroll. 5. The spiral column or moulding with a string of beads or pellets. 6. Hatched as if made by the single stroke of an axe. 7. A trellis of broad lozenges considerably project- ing. These are combined together upon door- cases, and sometimes with a course of animals’ heads, eagles’ beaks, &c. The last-mentioned occur as corbels, or as the capitals of small pillars.^ THE SAXON, 900—1050. The Saxon style is equally recognised by its seeming want of harmony of parts, as by its massive cylindrical columns, or square piers, and semicircular arches. If the several styles of Saxon, Norman, and Pointed are to be dis- criminated by the round or pointed arch, the semicircular form is peculiar to the two first mentioned. In the earliest instances, those of the mural arcades withinside the church were simply intersected, or interlaced ; or were pre- * See Note [D]. 24 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. viously, perhaps, introduced to ornament the surface of the external walls. These may be particularised as plain semicircles crossing each other, or as intersecting semicircles, resting upon pillars with a capital, or at least an aba- cus, by way of impost. The base, mouldings, and capitals, though of exact dimensions and similar forms in the mass, abound in variations in the minuter parts. The arches usually spring from the capitals, without an architrave. In fact, it would be difficult, at this time, to describe any entire building, which can be re- ferred, with certainty, to the Saxon aera, but its characteristic ornaments may be frequent- ly traced.* The nave of St. Frideswide’s (now the Cathedral at Oxford) is asserted to have been built by king Ethelred in 1004. Parts of St. Alban’s and Durham Cathedral claim to be anterior to the Norman conquest ; as does the whole of the east end of Tickencote church, near Stamford, in Lincolnshire. The capitals of the pillars and the soffits of the arches of St. Peter’s Church at Northamp- ton, afford an extraordinary specimen of inte- rior decoration. The chancel of Orford, Suf- folk, has a twisted cable wound round the pil- lar. In the nave of St. Frideswide’s (if it be Saxon) there is a certain variation from the Saxon style ; especially in the sculpture of * See Note [E]. ECCLESIASTICAL. The Saxon. 750. 25 the capitals, the double arch between the co- lumns, and the triforia : but the first churches of Ripon in Yorkshire and of Hexham in Northumberland, were undoubtedly founded by St. Wilfred, before the eighth century. The conventual church at Ely is placed in the reign of king Edgar (970), which consisted of a parallelogram (107 f. by 24), a nave or pace only, with the choir beyond it. Such was generally the ground plan of all the Saxon churches. Several learned antiquaries have insisted upon the priority of the conven- tual church at Ely, as a decisive example of the true Saxon. There were ten pillars on each side of the nave, alternately cylindrical and octagonal, the latter having a side and an angle in front. The arches were enriched with a variety of mouldings. Prominent instances of enrichment peculiar to this style, are those of door-cases and win- dows, as at Barfreston, near Canterbury ; Dur- ham cathedral and palace ; Tutbury, in Stafford- shire ; Romsey, Hants ; and Rochester ; not to mention others. But the doorway of the east end of the church of Kenilworth, in Warwick- shire, exhibits the caput bovis, fret moulding and paterae in the spandrils, ornaments more essentially peculiar to the Roman manner.'^ “ The church of St. Martin, near Canterbury, is supposed to be the oldest in England. Whenever the external coating 26 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Indeed, there is scarcely a county in England in which there will not be found individual churches, still exhibiting Saxon, or at least Anglo-Norman, remains, many of which are engraven. Doorways of the early Norman are not unfrequently discoverable in monastic ruins. Those at Glastonbury, Malmsbury, and Castle Acre priory, Norfolk, Thorpe Salvine, and Fishlake in Yorkshire, are particularly fine. To enumerate more would exceed my limits, for by examining the different capitals of the most complex designs, the variety will be found to be almost infinite, as in St. Frides- wide’s, now the Cathedral, Oxford. The rudely-carved scriptural figures, which often occur in bas-reliefs, placed under the arches of door-cases, where the head of the door itself is square, indicate a Roman original, and are mostly referable to an mra immediately preceding the Conquest ; but the very curious representation of the deluge, over the great doorway of the cathedral at Lincoln, seems to have been subsequent to it. Similar sculptures appear likewise upon fonts. That at Winches- ter cathedral, which Dr. Milner discovered to mean the story of St. Nicholas, bishop of Myra, in Lycia, is cited among the most worthy of remark. is broken away, the original walls of the chancel are seen to be composed entirely of Roman brick.’’ — Archaolog, xvii. 27. ECCLESIASTICAL. — -Saxon. « 50 — 1050 . 27 The most grotesque combinations of human and monstrous figures were frequently applied to the capitals of low pillars, which support the vaultings of crypts. Such are seen in those of St. Peter in the east at Oxford, and at Canter- bury. They are common in the most ancient churches in Normandy. We can scarcely con- ceive a more rude style of design or execution, than that of some bas-reliefs which are intro- duced into the semicircular heads of the door- cases of Saxon churches. At Quennington, Gloucestershire, are two, with several figures, and singularly curious.^ The general subject of those which are still extant in parochial churches, is Christ, either as sitting, and hold- ing an open book of the New Testament ; or standing, and piercing a dragon, intended to represent Satan, prostrate at his feet. The disproportion between the heads and bodies, in these carvings, is always very great.f The Saxon large churches were divided into three tiers or stories, consisting of the lower arcade, triforia or galleries, and windows. Such was the solidity of the walls and bulkiness of the pillars, that buttresses were neither neces- sary nor in usage. This assertion may require a certain qualification ; as in the nave of the abbey church of St. Alban’s, a projecting rib is applied to the centre of the piers, both within- * See Arclmolog. vol. x. p. 128. f See Note [F]. 28 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGEAND. side and without. The prominent external buttressj afterward in use, was not common till the reign of Henry the Third, at its earliest aera. After the Norman conquest, that style, called by the monks “ Opus Romanum,” because an imitation of the debased architecture of Italy, was still continued in England. The extent and dimensions of churches were greatly in- creased, the ornamental carvings on the circu- lar arches and the capitals of pillars and pilas- ters became more frequent and elaborately finished. Of the more remarkable specimens of what is confounded under the general term of Saxon architecture, the true aera will be found to be immediately subsequent to the Saxons themselves, and to have extended not more than a century and a half below the Nor- man conquest.^ The two churches at Caen in Normandy, built by William and his queen, are the archetypes of many now remaining in England ; but the most magnificent work of * DucareFs Anglo-Norman A?itiq. A satisfactory account of Saxon churches is given in BenthanFs B/y, sect. v. An- other very ingenious investigation of the arcliitecture of the Anglo-Saxons and Normans, by Mr. W. Wilkins, architect,’ of Cambridge, is seen in the twelfth volume of the Arclmo- logia^ p. 132. The valuable information it communicates is beautifully illustrated by many engravings, which present a clear view of the varieties adopted by the Normans in orna- menting their arcades. ECCLESIASTICAL. 29 this kind was the nave of old St. Paul’s, Lon- don. The vaults were void of tracery, and the towers without pinnacles, but ornamented with arcades, in tiers, of small intersected arches, on the outside walls. The Anglo-Saxon aera may be comprised from the reign of Edgar to the Norman conquest, 980 — 1066. Immediately before that period, Edward the Confessor had, during his life-time, completed Westminster Abbey, in a style then prevalent in Normandy, and with a magnifi- cence far exceeding any others then extant. f No less than eighteen of the larger monaste- ries, all of them Benedictine, had been found- ed by the Saxon kings, in their successive Of these towers, erected in the Norman sera, some remain as at first ; others have been heightened. They are St. James’s Gate, Edmundsbiiry ; Exeter N. Transept; Tewkesbury, Southwell, Norwich, Ely, and St. Alban’s. Upon some of these were placed spires composed of timber-frame and covered with lead. These cumbrous pyramids were often blown on one side by tempests ; and after threatening a fall for centuries, have been removed. Those of Lincoln were the last which have been taken down, in 1808. St. Paul’s was 270 feet high above the tower — burned down in 1561. “I" The six principal of these were — St. Germains, Cornwall; Colchester, Essex; Tewkesbury, Gloucestershire; St. Frides- wide, Oxford ; St. Alban’s, Herts ; Glastonbury, Somerset- shire. King selects the western portico of Tewkesbury as the grandest in England, in point of extent and effect. The dimensions of all the English cathedrals and more remark- able churches will be given singly and comparatively, in another part of this work. 30 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. reigns ; and it is evident, that the churches attached to each, were by far the most embel- lished part of them, with respect to architec- ture. There is yet reason to believe, that few of them were spacious. Bentham, in his essay, alleges that the chief and specific difference between the Saxon and first Norman consisted in enlarged dimensions, and a greater variety of ornamented carvings in the door-cases and arcades. If we look for specimens coeval with the Saxons themselves, and which may be attri- buted to them without controversy, we shall find them only in crypts and baptismal fonts, for many churches were taken down and rebuilt by the Normans, when these were preserved. The Norman aera may be stated to be from 1066 to 1154, that is, from the Conquest to the death of Stephen. In a general compari- son with the other nations of Europe, in that dark age, historians consent, that the Normans were eminent, if not superior, with respect to civilization and the arts. In architectural science, as promoted by their religious zeal, they had made a great proficiency, and many grand structures had been raised to embellish their own province, before they had gained an absolute establishment in England.^ * Stowe says (p. 132) that ‘‘ Hugh Lupus, earle of Ches- ter, sent into Normandie for Anselme, by his counsaile to build an abbey of St. Werburgh in Chester.” ECCLESIASTICAl^. 81 Triforia,^ or galleries, consisting of an open arcade, which at a subsequent period were placed immediately above the principal arches of the nave, were, in the more ancient examples, in- troduced in front of the upper windows only, having an arch on either side, and forming a gallery. Two instances occur, where the pil- lars are brought from the floor to the springing of the roof, at St. Frideswide’s, Oxford, and Rumsey Abbey, Hants. The Norman triforia were, in fact, a repeti- tion of the ground arches, of equal span, circu- lar form, and open ; and had, in some instances only, small round pillars attached to each side of the piers. Examples occur in Norwich Ca- thedral and Waltham Abbey. They are seen in the abbey churches at Caen, built by William the Conqueror and his queen.^ ^ ^ THE ANGLO-NORMAN AND NORMAN. 1050 - 1150 . Many discordant opinions have been ad- vanced, concerning what really constitutes Norman architecture ; and it has been con- founded with the Saxon by several able anti- quaries, not having sufficiently considered the specific differences. But a still greater confu- sion occurs when the Pointed Style, first prac- tised in this kingdom in the reign of Henry II. is called Norman. The principal discrimi- * See Note [G]. 32 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. nation between the Saxon and the Norman, appears to be that of much larger dimensions in every part ; plain, but more lofty vaulting ; circular pillars of greater diameter ; round arches and capitals, having ornamental carvings much more elaborate and various, adapted to them ; but a total absence of pediments or pin- nacles, which are decidedly peculiar to the Pointed or Gothick style. Among the prelates in the early Norman reigns, were found men of consummate skill in architecture ; which, aided by their munificence, was applied to the rebuilding of their cathedral churches, and those of the greater abbeys. It has been observed, that the Norman archi- tecture had three distinct kinds, in its progress through the first century, after the Conquest : — 1st. Waltham Abbey, Durham. 2nd. Peter- borough, Malmsbury. 3rd. Lincoln Western facade ; Choir of Canterbury. In the largest and earliest specimens, in Normandy, the round pillars are dispropor- tionately high, and the arches narrow, which style may be seen in Tewkesbury Abbey. The first operative architect upon record,^ of our country, is styled William Angim, by Ger- vase, the historic monk of Canterbury. He was a scholar of William of Sens (SoissonsJ, * In 1175. Styled by Gervasius de ixparatione Dorubern. Eccles. Magister Gulielmus Senonensis — Gulielinus Anglus, ( Magistri Operum.) ECCIiESIASTICAL. Anglo-Norman. 83 who had nearly completed the choir of that church, where his talents in invention and practice are conspicuous and admirable^ The English William added to the choir the tran- sept and the Trinity chapel. In the churches of Peterborough and Ely, the roofs of the nave are composed of timber frame. William of Sens was the first architect who boldly attempted, with success, to work ribbed and vaulted ceil- ings, in stone and toph. A Norman peculiarity is the covering the surface of walls with a projecting ornament, hatched lozengewise ; generally in the circular heads of arches, in triforia, as at Rochester and Chichester. This is called by Chaucer^ “ kac/c- ing in masonries^ No less than fifteen of the twenty-two Eng- lish cathedrals still retain considerable parts which are undoubtedly of Norman erection, the several dates of which are ascertained. We have the following enumeration of Nor- man bishops, who were either architects them- selves, or under whose auspices architecture flourished: Aldred bishop of Worcester, (1059 — 1089,) St. Peter’s, Gloucester. Gundulf of Rochester, (1077 — 1107,) whose works are seen at Rochester, Canterbury, and Peterborough, Mauritius of London, (1086 — 1108,) built old St. Paul’s cathedral. William de Carilelpho, Abbot of St. Vincent’s, in Normandy, cathedral * ‘‘House of Fame.*” D 34 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGEANI). of Durham from 1093, completed by Ranulf Flambard, in 1133. Lanfranc of Canterbury, (1080—1100.) Roger of Salisbury, (1107 — 1140,) the cathedral at Old Sarum. Ernulf of Rochester, (1115 — 1125,) completed Bishop Gundulf ’s work there : they were both monks of Bee in Normandy. Alexander of Lincoln, (1123 — 1147,) rebuilt his cathedral. Henry of Blois, Bishop of Winchester, (1129 — 1169,) a most celebrated architect, built the conventual churches of St. Cross and Rumsey in Hamp- shire ; and lastly, Roger archbishop of York, (1154 — 1181,) where none of his work remains. By these architects the Norman manner was progressively brought to perfection in Eng- land ; and it will be easily supposed, that the improvements made by any of them were adopted in succession:^ and this may be a satisfactory series. With equal extent and magnificence many of the churches belonging to the greater abbeys were constructed in this aera. Few indeed have escaped their general demolition at the reformation. * It is a circumstance worthy of remark, that so many of the great Saxon churches should have been consumed by fire. The monkish writers repeat ‘Mgne consumpta” — ‘‘ totaliter combusta,” and similar phrases. This was the usual pretext for rebuilding them, in the first Norman reigns. The church of Canterbury was three times burned before the most an- cient part of the present structure. Gervam, ECCr.KSIAS T[C AT.. 35 NORMAN. 1100-1150. The Conqueror’s Abbey at Battle, in Sussex, and those founded by Henry I. at Reading and Cirencester, doubtless very sumptuous edifices, have yielded to nearly complete dilapidation. Others exhibit a ruined front, which still ex- cites our admiration. Malmsbury, Wilts ; Dunstable, Bedfordshire ; Wenlock, Salop ; St. Botolph’s, Colchester; Waltham, Essex; are majestic in decay. St. Alban’s, Herts ; St. Pe- ter’s, Gloucester ; Peterborough and Tewkes- bury, preserved as churches, are nearly in a perfect state. Each of these will be visited with veneration, as conspicuous examples. After this enumeration of the larger cathe- drals, of which we have a certain testimony, it is necessary to give a distinguishing idea of what constitutes the peculiarities of the first Norman manner of building. In the facades, or western fronts, are placed a series of arches, of which a few are pierced as windows, and the others are left blank ; a tablet-cornice of the same description was likewise affixed to towers. Of similar instances of these, partly opened, the best example occurs in the cathedral of Nor- wich ; and withoutside, both there and at Ely, circular mouldings of large diameter are intro- duced. From the latter part of the eleventh to the middle of the twelfth century, door-ways D 2 36 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. I exhibited all the elaborate ornamental work- manship practised by the Normans. The great thickness of the walls required the door-cases to be very deeply moulded, and invariably sur- mounted by semicircular arches, of which there were several rows supported by a correspond- ing succession of columns along the whole depth of the wall. New ornaments were introduced, such as triple and quadruple cheveron work, billet, crenellated and festoon mouldings, round the archivolt, and down the piers. The win- dows were long and narrow, having cheveron work on the jamhs, withinside. Double win- dows, and then triple, succeeded, the centre one the highest. Those subsequently called lancet” were increased as far as five or seven. The principal arcades by which the nave is divided from the aisles, are much varied; they are circular at Gloucester and Tewkesbury; piers composed of different shafts at Durham, and those of a uniform shape, as at Peterbo- rough and Norwich. The Norman wooden roof was open to the timbers. It has been generally remarked, that there is no building of Norman archi- tecture with the centre aisle covered by the original vaulting ; but the chapel in the “ White Tower” of London affords, perhaps, a solitary exception. At Peterborough is a flat boarded ceiling, painted in a rude mosaic ECCLESIASTICAL.. Nouaian. 37 pattern of stiff leaves divided into lozenges and flowers of the same description. When the groined roofs had obtained more generally, the cross-springers-ribs were entirely composed of the tooth or indented moulding, which had a prevalence in small, no less than in the larger churches. The groined arches of stone were at first used only in undercrofts or crypts, but were applied to the roofs of the nave and transept in cathedrals, particularly in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, as at Sa- lisbury, with singular effect, Pointed arches certainly originated in vaultings, and the ne- cessity of having arches of equal heights and different widths ; and thus, from its first intro- duction into roofs, it was gradually diffused over other parts of the same building.” The centre or nave was highest in most of the great churches, and had breadth scarcely less than the span of the pier arches. No in- stance of a genuine Anglo-Norman building possesses, or was intended to possess, a stone roof ; which is indicated by the position of the capitals. Peterborough, Ely, St. Peter’s Nor- thampton, Steyning, Romsey, &c. are calculated and constructed for a flat wooden roof only. The Saxon abbots were always succeeded by Normans. Their chief ambition seems to have been that of entirely superseding the former architecture. As an instance of the degree 38 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. to which these innovations were extended, Turstin, a monk of Caen, in 1077, became Abbot of Glastonbury, and had begun a church, which his successor, Herlowin, likewise a Nor- man monk, completely took down in 1097 ; as not considering it to be sufficiently magnifi- cent so general was the prevalence of this “ novum cBdiJicandi genusT The cable mould- ing twisted round pillars, and the zigzag cover- ing them, as at Durham, were characteristic. The western front of Castle Rising Abbey, in Norfolk, has been cited as the most perfect Norman architecture now extant. Other west- ern fronts have been gothicized, entirely, or in part.f The first transition from this Anglo-Norman style appears to have taken place towards the close of the reign of Stephen (1185). It dis- covers itself in the arch, which had hitherto been round, becoming slightly pointed, and the heavy single pillar being formed into a cluster. This decoration had not long been adopted be- fore instances occur, in which we may trace the arch as growing more and more pointed ; and the clusters which were at first clumsy and ill-formed, acquiring a greater lightness and justness of proportion. Yet, the facings * Antiq. Glaston. Gale^ p. 333. f Of Norman mouldings and their varieties, see an ac- count in the 12th volume of the Archaco/ogia^ pp. 160-171. ECCLESIASTICAL. Norman. 89 of the arches still retain many of the orna- ments peculiar to the earlier aera. This taste gradually prevailing, led, towards the close of the twelfth century, to the formation of the slender pillar supporting the sharply pointed arch, which, from a certain resemblance, has been called “ the lancet.” In the nave of Llantony Priory, Monmouth- shire (1150), the columns have no capitals, and the arches are extremely acute, which evinces the imperfect state in which this innovation was originally adopted. But it soon became the purest style of simple ornament, applied exclusively to windows and galleries. The windows of that age were long, narrow, sharply pointed, and usually decorated both within- side and without, with small marble shafts, filleted or banded, conjointly. Where two only were pierced through the walls, a trefoil or quatrefoil became the first variation. Five is the usual number, having the central one enhanced above the others, and with the inte- rior arcade, as many insulated shafts ; at Sa- lisbury there are seven. Specimens not rarely occur in their perfect original state. In York great transept, there is one which is fifty feet in height, and eight feet wide, the largest in England; and a more beautiful and correct example of the true lancet style graduated, with the highest in the centre, will nowhere 40 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. be seen than in the south transept of Beverley, or the Chapter-house at Oxford. Of the ori- ginal simplicity of this manner, the triforium of St. John’s, Chester, is an early proof. This change to the pointed style pervaded the whole structure. As to the first deviation, which followed so closely upon the lancet as to be nearly con- temporary, it is necessary to speak. It is de- nominated the “ trefoil,” formed in the heads of arches by a circle and two half circles. I have observed no instance more perfect than in the gallery of Ely, and that of the elder Lady Chapel in Bristol Cathedral, erected not later than 1170. The trefoil soon became much expanded, and the open quatrefoils, spreading into many halves or lesser portions of circles, were introduced, which terminated in bosses or flowers. These were either ap- plied to the walls, more frequently in chapter- houses, or to door-cases deeply recessed ; and each may be seen to great advantage in Litch- field Cathedral. When churches were first rebuilt with lancet arches, the ornamental materials of the former round-headed, w^ere used in the new modifica- tion of form, apparent from the courses of stonework above them. Almost all the ca- thedrals of that aera present, at least, one striking example. But it is not an unsup- ECCLESIASTICAL. Norman. 41 ported conjecture, that the pointed arch ap- peared, among its earliest instances, in the four well known Round Churches built in imitation of the vestibule of the church of the Holy Sepulchre, at Jerusalem. At Cam- bridge, 1120; Northampton, 1180; the Temple, 1185; and Maplestead, Essex, of which the true date is not, I believe, ascertained. When the trefoil arcades and door-cases had superseded the chaste architecture of the twelfth century in its first and plainer form, either circular or lancet, a field for a new and distinct species of ornament expanded itself. The architect and master mason exhibited no inferior skill in carving, or on sculptured heads and bas reliefs, than in the design and execu- tion of the principal edifice. This assertion may seem to require expla- nation, as we bear in mind the extreme sim- plicity of the lancet ; but in the same building these specimens were concomitant. At the ends of the transept, and in the presbytery and chapter-house, were series of trefoil arches, with the spandrils carved with leaves and flowers, and sometimes with bas-reliefs. The capitals of the smaller columns were most richly ornamented. Bas-reliefs were even in- troduced upon the spandrils ; and at Ely, in a complete series of the history of a saint, as before observed. 42 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Plain mural surfaces were incrusted over with ornaments, very minute and lavishly ap- plied, yet producing an effect of richness, from mere exuberance, chiefly of fruits and flowers. It is not however to be inferred, that such ca- prices of Gothick invention are often copied exactly from each other, or that they occur frequently. The individual monk or artist indulged his fancy only where he had an op- portunity. The sculptured frieze in Edward the Confessor’s chapel, in Westminster Abbey, exhibiting the transactions of his life, is of a regular and fixed design ; as likewise the capi- tals of columns at Ely. Among the Cotton MSS. in the British Mu- seum,^ is one by Gervasius, a Benedictine monk of Canterbury, relative to the rebuilding of that magnificent cathedral after the fire in 1174, It is of greater curiosity from the ex- treme rarity of any MS. on architectural sci- ence of so early a date as the reign of King John. It includes a very minute account of Lanfranc’s original structure, as well as of the restoration made by Gulielmus Sennensis (of Sens in France), or of Gulielmus Anglus, who completed the work, and who is the first archi- tect or master-mason, a native of this coun- try, concerning whom anything satisfactory is * MSS. Cotton. Vespas. B. 2, 191, printed in the Decern Scriptores, coll. 1290. folio, 1652. ECCLESIASTICAL. Norman. 43 known. Lanfranc was a Lombard; and as I conjecture, the first mentioned William had learned his art in Italy. The columns and bases at Canterbury have a singular accord- ance with the contemporary church architec- ture in that country, particularly with those of Orvietto. Matthew Paris speaks of William of Co- ventry^ as a very eminent architect in the reigns of Henry the Second, Richard, and John. Of the style prevalent in the reign of Henry the Second, and immediately pre- ceding it, the remains of the chapel of St. Joseph, at Glastonbury, still exhibit a very genuine specimen. The western end of the Priory of Lanercost, in Cumberland, affords a good example of the simple style, in usage towards the close of the twelfth century, which is the undoubted aera of the introduction of the pointed arch into France, to the exclusion of the first circular form of the Normans and Lombards. We were among their earliest imitators. It has been stated, that the first appearance of the pointed arch may be seen in the church of Frindsbury, in Kent, built by Paulinus, the Sacrist, between the years 1125 and 1157.t * Might not this William Angkis be, in fact, William of Coventry, so denominated from the place of his birth / k Bi/j/. Topograph. Britann. No. vi. 44 Alien I TEC TU RE IN ENGLAND. In the reign of Henry the Third, this beau- tiful architecture (which may be accurately classed as the Transition style) had gained its perfect completion. Salisbury and Ely ca- thedrals, and Westminster abbey,* have been generally adduced as the most perfect exam- ples. It may be supposed, that the two last mentioned were constructed upon the same plan, as there is a singular accordance in their chief proportions. Whether this early Gothick originated in Palestine, or was in part pre- viously borrowed from the Moors in Spain, has given rise to conjecture, which is not strongly supported by any evidence ; but a more bold deviation from the established style could have been scarcely made. The Gothick or pointed arch (as it has been well observed) took its rise from the variations attendant upon all scientific pursuits. The principal feature of the first style was a combination of the circular with the pointed, an intermixture of ornaments, and a kind of contention between the two styles, which should prevail.f To the * At Westminster there is a series of windows above those of the aisles which are formed of spherical equilateral trian- gles, and likewise at Litchfield. They were adopted from French examples, but are by no means frequent. with us. 4 These ornaments were transferred from the Norman round to pointed arches, as seen at Chichester and Peter- borough cathedrals in several curious specimens. There is a })ointed arch in the tower at Kly, as e^lrly as 1180. ECCI.ESIASTICAL. 46 enormous round pillar succeeded the slender shaft, insulated, or clustered into a single co- lumn, with narrow lancet windows, the highest in the centre, and roofs upon simple cross- springers. The arches were now sharply pointed, the window increased to seven lights instead of one, and with small columns as mullions; and all the pillars, when of dis- proportionate length, broken into parts by jointed bands or fillets placed at certain dis- tances, as observable in Worcester cathedral, the nave of which is very fine. The “ Gothick or Transition'' style w^as completely established in England after the commencement of the thirteenth century. ^ •>> /■ • \ THE LANCET, OR EARLY ENGLISH. 1150 - 1250 . It will be conceded to the French antiqua- ries, that this new mode was not exclusively our own, but that it appeared earlier, at least by a century, in the magnificent cathedrals I shall notice as then recently erected in France. If the buildings in the Holy Land suggested ideas of this novel architecture, the French croisaders had the same opportunities of in- troducing it into France as ours into England, for they were associated in the same expe- dition. 46 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. It has been said, that in the second church of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, erected by Baldwin the Second, 1118 — ^1131, no point- ed arch was seen ; but that in the Moorish structures, equally obvious to the Norman conquerors, it is frequent: an evident proof that wherever the Normans obtained a domi- nion by conquest, they introduced their own national manner in the churches which were entirely constructed by them. Additions to the Empress Helena’s original church had been made by Charlemagne in 813, in the style of the Roman basilicae. But a manner of constructing churches, or at least parts of them, appears to have more immediately belonged to the aera of the first Crusades, if, as will be allowed, it took its prototype from the circular part including the “ Holy Sepulchre.” Four perfect examples are still to be seen in England. 1st, The most ancient, that of St. Sepulchre at Cam- bridge, is attributed to the reign of Henry the First, between the first and second crusades. It has an inner circle of low and large pillars and arches. 2nd, That at Northampton has both its diameters of the same extent, but the arcade has sharply headed arches, and the pillars are less massive. 3rd. The Temple, London, the date of which is 1180, has clus- tered pillars with capitals, and a mural arcade ECCLESIASTICAL. Lancet oii Earey English. 47 above them, both pointed, but the heads of the windows are rounded. 4th. At Little Maplestead, in Essex, which has the clustered pillar, and is of the latter part of the thir- teenth century. All these churches, though their original design was merely circular, have received subsequent additions of oblong naves, to which they are now vestibules. The dimensions^ of each bear the same pro- portion between the interior wall, and the cir- cular arcades, and were built by the Knights Templars upon their return from the first and second crusades. And to this aera we may attribute the pre- valence of an improved and reformed manner of building, which was uniformly and consist- ently executed. Then appeared longitudinal and transverse vaults with diagonal ribs.f In distinguishing the pure “ Lancet style ” from any other, it will be evident to the cri- tical observer, that the decorative particles were sparingly introduced, and that regularity of design and a simple uniformity are strictly * Dimensions, Cambridge, 41, 19 f. Northampton, nearly the same. Temple, London, 60, 30 f. Maplestead, 26, 12 f. See plans, views, and descriptions, Britton s Archit, Antiq. vol. i. p. 17. It is evident that these corresponded with the church architecture of the time, with respect to their pillars, arches, and ornaments, t See Note [H], 48 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. maintained. A late and most beautiful in- stance is the nave of St. Mary’s Abbey, in York, now dilapidated, 1270 — 1292.* T. Wartonf has denominated the ‘^absolute Gothic,” as being entirely free from any mix- ture of the Saxon or first Norman style. Westminster, Tintern, Monmouthshire, and Netley Abbey, Hants, are superior examples, which resemble each other so nearly, that it is a fair conjecture that they were all three the work of the same architect. After the total dereliction of what has been aptly termed the Romanesque distinction, as having grown out of an imperfect imitation of Roman models, in the architecture practised by the Normans, arose the Early English style,” which, from credi- ble evidence, made its first appearance in Eng- land after the middle of the twelfth century. But the English did not adopt much decoration so early as the Germans and French. “ We can imagine that they would abandon with re- gret, the beautiful simplicity and sobriety of their former style, in which they had so emi- nently excelled.” Now was first seen geometrical tracery in windows, with mullions of the nail-head and toothed mouldings. Of the same date and description are likewise the elaborate compart- ments and ribs, which are wrought upon the ^ Vetiista Mon, Plates, 4 Essay on Spense?‘. KCCIjKSI AST lCALi. Laxcet ok JDahly English. 4 ^^ surface of the vaults, after that the simpler forms were relinquished. The cathedrals of York, Lincoln, and Ely, contain at this time not only the most exquisitely wrought and variously designed specimens of Gothick sculp- ture, and minuter carving ; but those which remain to us in the greatest perfection. The patterns were composed of geometrical figures, with forms of foliage, all very delicately finished. But it is beyond controversy, that the first Norman architects, in the lengthened vista of their nave, which was not interrupted by the choir-screen, produced a sublime or imposing effect by their simple grandeur, and amplitude of dimensions. The transition from this noble simplicity to rich embellishment, was in certain instances, from the different seras of the build- ing, sudden and abrupt. In the galilee, or great porch, and the inside of the tower of Ely cathedral, we have perhaps the first instance of a mural arcade, or one placed merely for ornament against a wall, composed of tiers of subordinate arches, which are not interlaced. Of the last description, are many in the earlier Norman churches. They were double cylin- drical columns, with bases seated upon a single plinth, wherever they were applied. A very memorable period in the progressive history of church architecture in England, 50 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. were the reigns of Edward the Third and that of his immediate successor. In the middle of the fourteenth century, the first-mentioned monarch had designed, begun, and completed his collegiate chapel, dedicated to St. Stephen, within his palace, at West- minster. In skilful construction and exces- sive richness of internal decoration, it had no equal in England ; and was the rival of the Sainte Chapelle at Paris.* As the most gorgeous specimen of internal decoration, by the appli- cation of sculpture, painting, and gilding, this chapel, when in its perfect state, excited ad- miration, as an example well worthy of the best period of curious art. Paintings upon the walls, which were de- veloped a few years since, at the eastern end, were the histories of Job and Tobit. There were then seen portraits, most richly illumi- nated, of St. George, King Edward the Third, his Queen, and each of their children. These have been separately and scientifically de- scribed. Under the auspices of Wykeham, himself eminently versed in the science, we have the boldest instance of the second manner or pure Gothick. Very few Greek or Roman architects have carried technical ability and a strictly * See Note [I]. ECCLESIASTICAL. Pure Gothick. 51 correct calculation of the proportions between strength and burthen, beyond the master masons by whom churches in the fourteenth century were built. The vaults of several of the larger dimensions, are only from nine to ten inches thick ; and the outer walls, though more than fifty feet high, do not exceed two feet in thick- ness, at their summit. The equally clustered pillar, with a comparatively low and sharp arch, prevailed in the first part of the reign of Edward the Third, over which was placed an open arcade, as originally introduced into the Norman churches, and was adopted, as far as the idea only, from them. Of the beau- ties which characterise the style of this aera in particular, a complete specimen offers itself in the octangular louvre at Ely, which, and the chapel of our Lady attached to the cathe- dral, were the sole design of Alan de Walsing- ham,* and executed by himself between the years 1322 and 1349. It is certain that archi- tecture was understood and encouraged by eccle- siastics in that age, and it is pleasing to rescue the name of a single practical architect, so eminently superior to others of his own time. Whilst those who designed and completed the * He is styled in an old chronicle of Ely, vir venerabi- lis et artificiosus frater .” — LelarKTs Collectanea. The master- mason had no higher title than Latomus (literally stone-cut- ter), as it occurs in the same MS. Hoc anno 1319, obiit H. E 2 52 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGEAND. great churches on the Continent are recorded scrupulously, respecting their talents and works, our own, not greatly inferior to them, are rarely to be ascertained. Contemporary with Wykeham, lived Rede, Bishop of Chichester, an adept in the science and practice of architecture ; and many others of the prelates and abbots of that day prided themselves in giving certain proof of their architectural skill in rebuilding their churches, or very frequently adding to them and giving to them a pervading symmetry of style. Much of the fame of the illustrious W. Wykeham, whose establishments have insured the gratitude of posterity, and which is re- newed daily in the minds of individuals, was his skill in architecture. The two St. Mary Winton Colleges, and the grand nave of his cathedral, afford a perfect proof."^ Bishop Wayneflete acquired from him, his science and taste, whose great works he imi- tated in Magdalene College, Oxford, which he Latomns^ qui sub Johanne Abbate de Evesham aulam abba- thiae artificios^ composuit/’ What is said of Buschetto, the architect of Pisa, is equally true of many a Gothic master-mason. “ prudens Operator, et ipse Magister, Constituit more soleriter et ingeniose.” — Epitaph. * See Note [K]. ECCJLESIASTICAJL. Puke Gotiuck. 53 built, and the plan of Henry the Sixth’s Col- lege, Cambridge, for which he gave the design. Beckington, after he became Bishop of Wells, derived his knowledge from the same source, and added much to the splendour and conve- nience of his cathedral. That we have still the power of viewing so many ecclesiastical structures in their pristine state, is an obligation due to the prelates of the middle centuries, since the conquest, among whom this triumvirate were eminently conspicuous. In a preceding age, Bishop Quivil had given a complete design for the rebuilding his ca- thedral at Exeter, which, singularly pure and beautiful in itself, is more remarkable for the pursuance of the same plan for fifty years in succession. So scrupulous was this adherence, that although many innovations in architec- ture had taken place during the interval, the church appears to have arisen perfect at once, rather than to have slowly grown to its con- summate beauty. The stupendous fabric of York Cathedral has a nave which was erected in the earlier part of this century. Such a sameness of manner was effected in known instances by a total alteration of constituent parts, in so decided a degree as to produce an apparently contemporaneous character. 54 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. It is a well supported opinion, that in the second aera of decorated Gothick, the ornaments of the roof gave a tone and character to the whole edifice, and, in fact, pervaded the inter- nal plan. About the year 1315, an ornament was invented, as applied to the mouldings of windows. It was the placing of small bosses thickly in the grooves of the mullions, resem- bling nail-heads. An early and good specimen is seen in the south aisle of Gloucester Cathe- dral. The surface of the tower of Hereford is so covered. Later, in the fourteenth cen- tury, was introduced an arch singularly formed of four segments of circles contrasted, like an ogee, as commonly called. The cathedrals of Lincoln, York, and Ely, contain, at this time, not only the most exquisitely finished and variously conceived specimens of Gothick sculp- ture and minuter carving, but those also which remain to us, most entire. These ornaments were composed of foliage, flowers, or geome- trical forms, very delicately finished : on the columns and mouldings are embossed orna- ments disposed with taste ; and upon the grounds of the various compartments were paintings of religious or historical subjects, large and small portraits of eminent person- ages, with numerous arms, devices, and orna- mental scrolls, gilded and coloured with a splendour which imagination suggested, and ECCLESIASTICAL. Decorated Gothick. 55 ingenuity brought to perfection.^ Externally, the parapets were perforated in triangles inclos- ing open trefoils, or the round was exchanged for the square quatrefoil. In the groining of the roof, the interlacing was not greatly inferior to the tracery in the heads of windows, with horizontal lines and circular bands on the surface, and richly carved bosses at each juncture. A very common feature of this style is, a small round bud, consisting of three or four leaves which open just sufficiently to show the bud in the centre, placed in a hollow moulding, instead of the toothed ornament, before so common. In such, are likewise placed flowers of four leaves, as well as gro- tesque heads ; the capitals are various, and the crockets are carved with great boldness and beauty, more resembling the natural form than previously. This was the age of most richly ornamented buttresses. The west front of York, and the east of Howland, with the ruined east end of Walsingham, Norfolk, are among the most worthy of selection. Exeter Cathedral and York Minster exhibit a plain * See the Account of St. Stephen'^s Chapel, Westminster^ hy the Society of Antiquaries. Founded by Edward the Third, and finished in 1348. Length ninety feet, breadth thirty feet, height fifty feet. The whole of the interior was most richly painted and gilt. Walter Weston was the master- mason. 56 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. and decorated roof, both of them of a correct style. The western doors of York are of the richest execution and deeply splayed, having the flowered moulding with leaves, in the grooves. Other porches are finished by battlements or bands of high open work. In door-cases, we may observe a series of small niches with sta- tues, carried up like a hollow moulding, as in the south entrance into the choir of Lincoln, and another in the cloisters at Norwich. The windows of this florid style contained as many as nine lights, made by slender mul- lions having heads, wrought into circles, tre- foils, or quatrefoils, feathered or crocheted. But the Anglo-Norman, having been once relinquished, was never again adopted, either simply or with analogy. Until the close of the reign of the first Edward, the prevalence was decided, and all the previous confusion between the Anglo-Norman and the Pointed styles had ceased, and was universally abandoned about that period. With incredible lightness, the “ Early English,” or Lancet” style, exhibited elegance of decoration and beauty of propor- tions in the reduplication of their arcades and pillars. The art of quarrying large masses of stone was not introduced very early into Eng- land ; and shafts of a single piece, before the ^ Cresy’s Arch, of the Middle ECCLESIASTICAL. Decohated Gothick. 5T close of the twelfth century, when they were applied in slender columns, were generally of Purbeck or Petworth black or grey marble, used solely for the purposes of decoration. Of these, were several distinct and insulated shafts, but the whole collected under one capital, at first of the roll moulding only, but afterwards carved, to represent the leaves of the palm-tree, indigenous in Palestine and Arabia. The large middle shaft was surrounded by four or six smaller ones. When applied to the mullions and jambs of windows, they are in two pieces, banded in the middle by a fillet or ring of cop- per, the hinder part of which is inserted into the stone-work by a staple. From the win- dows in the transept of York cathedral, known as the five sisters, with those likewise at Wor- cester, and a single one in Our Lady’s chapel at Hereford, we may be inclined to think that the Lancet style,” soon after its introduction, was not surpassed by those in subsequent usage. ^ A very favourable view of the manner which distinguishes the first part of this aera (1320), as applied both to roofs and arcades, is seen in the cathedral of Bristol. f Both the aisles are * The whole height is thirteen feet seven inches ; the bases nine inches ; and the capitals one foot and three inches in diameter. — Wild's Worcester Cathedral. "" From small pillars in the side walls, corresponding 58 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. equal to the nave in height, and have internally roofs of a complex construction, of which none, exactly resemblant, were ever after adopted in England. But previously to another style of known peculiarities, the longitudinal and transverse roofs were combined and complicated ; and the conoid vaultings were studded with knobs of foliage at the interlacing of the ribs; the western front was fringed with pinnacles ; and those were again enriched with numerous statues ; and the flying buttresses f arcs-bou- tants)^ ionmeA. of diagonal ribs, inclosing seg- ments of circles, in order to give them light- ness, and were rendered ornamental by boldly with others in the insulated piers, spring arches about half the elevation of those which divide the aisles, having over them a cornice with ornaments of various devices and span- drils perforated in trefoils. Above these is the roof of the aisle, which, rising from each side, is united to ribs springing over points of the insular arches, thus forming two smaller open arches, and thereby increasing the lightness, novelty, and elegance of the design. The groins are extremely slen- der, and in the centres and angles rest on brackets of human heads.” ‘‘ Inserted in the lateral walls on the north and south are richly-ornamented recesses, the canopies of which are of so singular a nature, that any exactly similar will not probably be seen in any other cathedral. They have a very remark- able character, each being formed of four segments of circles, having deep crockets and a large finial at every point.” — Buckler's Cathedrals^ BristoL ECCLESIASTICAL. Decorated Gothick. 59 crocketed finials. Of this description are many attached to the French cathedrals, at an earlier period ; but they are among the latest instances, with us, of the “ Decorated style.” The first professors of the Decorated, pointed style, were ambitious not only of excelling each other in point of geometrical skill, but by the invention of an endless variety in designing ornaments which should be applied, more par- ticularly to their arcades and columns, in the spandrils, capitals, and friezes. This exuberance tended to the complete abolition of the “ Lancet,” or previous manner, after it had lost its characteristic simplicity ; and in the commencement of the reign of Richard the Second, it appears to have been no longer in usage. In order to form a criterion of this pure Gothick, let me observe, that the pillars became smaller and more numerous ; that both those and the arches were filled with mouldings pe- culiarly beautiful in their forms and effect, which were frequently enriched with foliage or other embellishment. A more complete speci- men than the nave of Winchester or Canter- bury, cannot be adduced. The general form of the arches became more open, and those at- tached to windows and niches were universally adorned with crockets tied at the top in a rich knot of flowers, resembling the blossoms of the 60 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. euphorbium ^ The windows, especially those at the east and west, were wddely expanded, and their heads ramified into infinite intersec- tions with quatrefoils or rosettes, which bear on the points of the arching mullions. The roof hitherto had not exceeded a certain sim- plicity of ornament, yet tracery was spread over the groins of the vault, which rested on brack- ets or corbels, carved into grotesque heads of kings and bishops. The large and lofty central tower (for the more ancient belfries were usually detached), and the cloisters richly pannelled, having a most delicately fretted roof, were added to many of the cathedrals and conventual church- es then existing. Withinside, the canopies of tabernacle work over saints or sepulchral effi- gies, the shrines of exquisite finishing, repeat- ing in miniature the bolder ornaments by which the building was decorated on a large scale, in the high altars and skreens of indescribable richness, continue to fascinate every eye by their beauty and sublimity. Even on the out- side of these magnificent works, as the western fronts of Wells and Litchfield, and on Bishop Grandison’s skreen so placed at Exeter, there are embellishments of equal merit. The facade ^ The foliage imitated on the hnials and capitals is that of plants which are indigenous in Palestine. When compared with the euphorbium, the resemblance will be found exact. ECCLESIASTICAL. Decorated Gothick. Gl of the cathedral of Salisbury, although of the preceding age, in which the * pointed style was frequently mixed with the round, and the orna- ments of either indiscriminately used, is one of the most ancient, simple, and regular now re- maining. The eye dwells with more satisfac- tion on a broad surface, relieved only, and not distracted, by ornament. Abbot Wheteham- stede’s skreen at St. Alban’s, Prior Goldstone’s skreen at Canterbury, Ralph Lord Neville’s skreen at Durham, and that by Bishop Fox in Winchester Cathedral, exceed in richness or correct proportions any specimen I could ad- duce of the first description, but they are of a later age. The shrines and tabernacles applied to burial chapels or sacella, or to the canopies placed over altar tombs, were subjects upon which the most ingenious architects displayed all. their talents— for the sculptors worked only in sub- ordination to their plans. The chapels and tombs were erected entirely upon architectural principles, and they afforded a very wide scope for variety and minuteness of ornament. It may be remarked, that while the great struc- tures of any century in particular bore a gene- ral, and sometimes a near analogy, to their con- temporary style of building, scarcely any two of these sepulchral monuments, although of the same ^ra, are exactly similar. Fancy was 62 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. indulged to produce the richest effect, uncon- trolled by rules, which are indispensably neces- sary to architecture upon a large scale. The fashion of canopied tombs prevailed (as in Westminster Abbey) much earlier than the reign of Edward the Third, who erected one at Gloucester for his unfortunate father. It has several tiers of open arcades, piled one on an- other pyramidally. Our cathedral and conven- tual churches still retain many very interesting specimens, and many were destroyed at the Reformation, when the edifices which enclosed them, were utterly demolished. For exquisite finishing and various workmanship, those of Bishop Gower and of Archbishop Bowet in St.. David’s and York Cathedrals are most remark- able for spiral Gothick. For size and mas- siveness, the series of prelates’ tombs at Win- chester and Canterbury, are noble examples. A very able and satisfactory investigation of the subject is given in Gough’s “ Sepulchral Monuments a work that reflects honour on the study of English antiquities. In this style successful efforts both of sculp- ture and painting were superadded to those of architecture, by the introduction of carved effigies, in niches or on sepulchral monuments, and of portraits or scriptural subjects, stained upon glass with radiant colours, with which windows of great expanse were most richly ECCLESIASTICAL. Decorated Gothick. 63 embellished. The history of these arts could not be given, in this part of my work, in a satisfactory abridgment. Volumes on these subjects are already before the publick, to which my readers are referred. The indus- trious Carter has left two volumes of illustra- tions of Ancient Sculpture and Painting in England;'' and sepulchral sculpture has been amply investigated and copied in the works of Gough and Stothard. Of paintings in oil or resinous gums, as a vehicle, upon the surface of walls, the most remarkable are in Westminster Abbey and Exeter Cathedral, as still extant ; but a series, more splendid from a profuse ap- plication of gold, was that discovered some few years since in St. Stephen’s Chapel, then the House of Commons, as I have already remarked. The history of stained glass in England, would require a distinct work to offer all the ^ information concerning it, which has been col- lected by myself and others. It may be merely necessary to observe, that it was first connected with architecture in the reign of Henry the Third, and reached its zenith in the fifteenth century ; and that we had eminent professors in the reign of Charles the First. That the art was ever lost is a vulgar error ; and it has been exquisitely practised, but on a new prin- ciple, in the present day. Philip the Third, in 1285, erected three 64 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. crosses on the road between Paris and St. Denis, the height of each of which was forty French feet (43.4), with niches containing statues as large as life, after the funeral of his father Louis, the canonised King of France. The crosses in England were imitated from them in 1296. Those above noticed were destroyed in the revolution 1790. The Foun- tain and Stone Cross at Rouen, although built so lately as 1500, nearly resemble those which were erected to commemorate Queen Eleanor.^ Of the Abbey Gates, which still remain to attract the attention of the architectural anti- quary, as they are not numerous, a list is sub- * In the third volume of the Monumenta Vetnsta^ the crosses at Geddington, Waltham, and near Northampton, are beautifully engraved in Imperial folio; and more pictu- resquely in quarto, in Britton's Arch. Antiq. The most elaborately wrought market-cross on the Conti- nent is that at Nurembourg. It is of the same age as that at Coventry, (so well described by Hollar’s etching,) and was probably its prototype. The destroyed cross at Abington, is said by Aubrey to have nearly resembled that at Bristol, in its plan and ornaments. In those later ones the statues were usually covered with gilding and colours. ‘‘ For ingenious invention, elegance of general form and proportion, and beauty of parts, no exterior of the ornamental kind of the architecture called Gothick can compete with Queen Eleanor’s crosses. The aspiring shape of the cross, between a pyramid and obelisk, assists the light elegance of its parts, and gives it a character of gracefulness. Geddington is now the most perfect in its remains, and Waltham the most curious in its details.” ECCLESIASTICAIi. Decorated Gothick. 6*5 joined.* There are several grand specimens peculiar to their several aeras, which are admir- able, and doubtless many of the dilapidated monasteries could once boast similar append- ages. The escocheon of the founder always held a conspicuous place among other archi- tectural embellishments. / , * St. Augustine’s at Canterbury; St. Augustine’s at Bristol ; St. Ethelbert’s, Norwich; Peterborough; the two at St. Ed- mundsbury, Suffolk ; Battle Abbey, Sussex. More particu- larly, these later instances in the fifteenth century, as at Mal- vern, Worcestershire, being nearly entire. But one of larger dimensions and greater beauty remains at Thornham Abbey, Lincolnshire. It is rivalled by another at Kirkham, in York- shire, which, previously to its partial dilapidation, was of a still more elaborate and elegant design. The entrance gateway formed under a lofty tower or campanile of Evesham Abbey, in Worcestershire, offers a singular example, and of much greater magnitude than any of the above mentioned. It was a last effort of Gothick, at the beginning of the sixteenth cen- tury. The entrance gates of Magdalene College, Oxford, and of St. John’s and Trinity Colleges at Cambridge, exhibit a remarkable style of architecture. NOTES AND EXTRACTS ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE FIRST DISCOURSE. [A] page 16. — I believe that I am the first traveller who published this conjecture, in 1800. During a short stay at Pisa, upon a first view of the Baptistery, I was led to form this notion, which I will acknowledge to have required a more minute investigation. Mr. Smirke followed me soon after- wards, and published a paper in the Archa^ologia^ vol. xv. p. 363, addressed to our common and most respected friend S. Lysons, director, in which my first idea is confirmed. His proofs, with the arguments he has deduced from them, ' were controverted by the late Sir H. Englefield, (vol. xv. p. 373,) with that correct knowledge of the subject which he certainly possessed. Within these few years past, two gentlemen to whose de- cision I bow with respect, have assured me, after a sedulous examination, that the Gothick ornaments, both of the windows of the Campo Santo, and externally, in the Baptistery, are adscititious, and not coeval with those original structures. [B] page 19. — To the names of Gray, Bentham, and T. V/arton, as classicks in the science of Gothick architec- ture, may be added that of Dr. Milner, of Winchester, who, whatever be the acceptance of his new theory of its origin, must be allowed to have been intimately conversant with the general subject. It is remarked by T. Warton, when comparing the Grecian with the Gothick, that truth and propriety gratify the judgment, but they do not affect the imagination.’’ — Notes on the Minor Poems of Milton, p. 9L It was T. War ton’s intention, had he lived longer, to have published the History of Gothick Architecture, for which no man was more eminently qualified, with, perhaps, NOTES AND EXTRACTS. 67 the exception of Mr. Gray. He announced that plan in 1781, in the third volume of the History of English Poetry. Diss. Gest. Rom. p. xxii. The intended work was to consist of Observations, critical and historical, on castles, churches, monasteries, and other monuments of antiquity, in various parts of England ; to which will be prefixed the history of architecture in England.” — Vol. I. Diss. 2, note. James Essex, architect, of Cambridge, purposed to have written the History of Gothick Architecture ; but he did not find leisure or encouragement sufficient to more than the commencement of a work, for which his practice had in a great degree qualified him. He published an Essay on ‘‘ Round Churches^^ in England. — A collection of Essays on Gothick Architecture^ was published by Taylor. 8vo. 1801. These were among the first efforts to introduce a knowledge and love of our national architecture, and pointed the way to the new opinions and the numerous and extensive investi- gations, which have been since given to the public. [C] page 20. — This fancy is older than Warburton. Stukeley, in his Itinerary, describing the cloisters at Glou- cester, remarks, ‘‘ that the idea of Gothic is taken from a walk between trees, whose branching heads are curiously imitated by the roof.” — Iter iv, p. 69- Spence, in his Anecdotes of Pope, (8vo. p. 12.) relates a conversation to prove that he suggested the original idea to Warburton. Both the theory and practice have been recom- mended in a quarto volume, with many plates, by the late Sir James Hall, which depend on surmises and reasonings on them, much more ingenious than satisfactory. He assumes as a fact, that the first Christian churches, founded in Eng- land, were solely composed of wicker work ; that such were the prototypes of those which were built with stone ; and that they furnished the original examples of every ornamen- tal form or particle, which was afterwards introduced. With deference to the ingenious author, such a position would be substantiated with difficulty. 68 NOTES AND EXTRACTS [D] page 23. — The Norman columns are various, both in point of form and ornament, but are of equal thickness from the base to the capital. The earliest known are rude cylindrical upon a high plinth, to which succeeded polygo- nal ones, and others formed by a combination of slender half columns round a thick pillar. Those of the second period are ornamented on the surface with a variety of mouldings, and sometimes channeled either perpendicularly or spirally. [E] page 24. — It is said to be a proof of genuine Saxon architecture, if the mouldings upon the face are likewise con- tinued upon the soffit of the arch, as in the remains of the conventual church at Ely. The Opus Roman um, or Ro~ manesqiie, is indubitably the original of the Saxon round or semicircular arch. There are not wanting in this age of architectural controversy, individual critics who deny this test, and the Saxon pretensions of Barfreston, Waltham, &c. [F] page 27. — The Saxons had, in fact, no style of their own, but introduced the debased Roman, as then practised in France, and chiefly during the tenth century. Edward the Confessor brought the improvements in that style from Nor- mandy ; and the most that we have now remaining, is coeval with him. William of Malmsbury distinctly marks the vari- ation of style brought here after the Saxon aera, by the eccle- siastical architects, who were introduced and patronised by the Norman bishops, ‘‘ novo edijicandi gemreP By certain German writers, it is contended that the Saxons, upon their invasion, brought with them their own debased Roman. [G] page 31. — Triforium ( Glossary ). Imo, in ipso muro, in modum claustri per muri vel parietis interiora, eo per- ductum, ut transitum praebeat locum ambire sive perlustrari et circuire, ex alto, volentibus.’’ From the original Saxon ?^ujih.j:ajie, thoroughfare. Triforium, according to Du Cange, is a surrounding border. — Decern Scriptores edit. Gervasii Hist. Doruhernensis ecclesice. Super quern murum, via erat TO THE FIRST DISCOURSE. 69 quae triforium appellatur, et fenestrae superiores/’ in Lan- franc’s building at Canterbury. In the earliest instances, this kind of passage was made only before the upper win- dows ; and the space afterwards so occupied, was left solid. The triforia were large in proportion to the work above and below them, and applied as galleries in the substance of the walls. The first known are said to have been those in the vestibule of the Holy Sepulchre at Jerusalem, built by Con- stantine Monomachus in 1018. The circular or basilic ter- mination of choirs originated in France. It was adopted by Norman architects at Peterborough, Norwich, Gloucester, Canterbury, Tewksbury, and Litchfield. The choir was more anciently in too short a proportion to the nave ; the space between the transepts was subsequently added. [H] page 47. — It is remarkable at Waltham Abbey, that the arcade of six massive cylindrical pillars have a corre- spondent number placed immediately above them, which are entirely open, and having no division or ornament placed against their sides, as in other instances ; but at Chepstow in Monmouthshire there are, in the nave, three stories or tiers of round arches. It was the same priory of Strighoel, built soon after the Norman Conquest. [I] page 50. — La Sainte Chapelle at Paris, was built by St. Louis, begun in 1248, and finished in 1274, from the designs of Pierre de Montreuil, one of the earliest and most cele- brated of the French architects, in 1275. The interior was so exquisitely carved and painted under the inspection of Raoul, the famous goldsmith, that it had, previously to the erection of St. Stephen’s Chapel by our Edward the Third, no rival in Europe, in point of splendid embellishment. Both these chapels have received a different destination — one for the archives of France — the other as attached to the House of Commons. St, Stepheri's Chapel hy the Antiqua- rian Society. Plates. 70 NOTES AND EXTRACTS [K] page 52. — ‘‘ In the year 1384, the munificent founder completed the building of New College, the north side of which, containing the chapel and hall, was an edifice which for extent and grandeur exceeded any then known, in either University. The elevation has all that dignity which results from proportion and harmony of parts. The internal pro- portions of the chapel, (antechapel, eighty feet by thirty-six; choir, one hundred feet by thirty-two, and sixty-five feet high before the lowering of the roof,) are symmetrical and correct, even so as to emulate those of a Grecian temple; and the lightness of the arcade dividing the antechapel, could have originated only in the genius of the immortal Wykeham. I speak of them as they were left by him ; and of the sub- sequent alterations, those in 1630 and 1684 had spared the architecture. From the decay of the roof in 1789, it was found necessary to renew it totally, and Mr. James Wyat was intrusted by the Society with the remodelling of their vener- able structure. “ To disparage by petty criticism, a work which few survey without admiration, would be an invidious attempt. It is with diffidence and respect for the eminent talents of Mr. Wyat, that I venture remarks, dictated solely by a love of truth. ‘‘ It will be previously inquired, whether it were Mr. Wyat’s intention to restore this chapel to a perfect correspondence with the style of architecture by which Wykeham’s age is definitely marked ? or was he at liberty to introduce the or- naments of subsequent architecture, by his judicious adapta- tion of which a beautiful whole might be composed With no great hazard of probability, we will suppose that these improvements had been gradually made during the lapse of the last centuries; yet it can scarcely be allowed, that Wyke- ham’s plan has been followed with accuracy. “ For the restoration of the altarpiece, as a part of his de- sign, Mr. Wyat has great credit; and we will not scrutinize too closely whether the scriptural histories, in marble bas- TO THE FIRST DISCOURSE. 71 reliefs above the altar, could have been made by any sculptor of any country then in existence. “ Considering that the very numerous canopies and pedes- tals were not to be restored to their original destination of containing images, would it not have produced a better effect if the series had been composed of fewer and larger niches ? There is now no bold mass of ornament ; and the largest, which is the organ-case, is violated by a conceit, which a very fastidious spectator might call a peep-hole. The whole is so coloured, as to convey an idea that it is constructed with stone; and candour must allow, that upon every principle, a stone organ-case is more novel than w^ell adapted. In the restoration of a Gothick chapel, we expect to be gratified by ornaments, taken from known authority, and applied, as we may suppose that they might have been by the original architect ; nor are we content with mere efforts of fancy. ‘‘ It is the opinion of a considerable critic {Gilpin)^ that the Gothick roof loses its beauty, in every degree, in which it is rendered more flat ; an effect sufficiently obvious upon a comparison of the great centre arch and the heads of the windows, with the expanse of the new vaulting, with which they have an imperfect accordance. ‘‘ In the canopies of the stalls, we are brought forward to the luxuriant Gothick of Henry the Seventh; and the applica- tion of the grotesquely-carved subsellia to the present read- ing desks, is a new idea with no adherence to costume. “ Viewing the present chapel, not as a restoration, but an imitation of styles, subsequent to that of the founder, where will the archetype of the organ-case be found ? The execu- tion of the whole is exquisite : and it might have been sup- posed that Mr. Wyat would have recurred, at least to the tomb of W. Wykeham, in Winchester Cathedral, built by the Bishop himself, for the purest of all authorities in the minuter Gothick or shrine work. In that church is an unri- valled series of sepulchral sacella, including the whole of the fifteenth century, from Wykeham to Fox. In the first- 72 NOTES AND EXTRACTS. mentioned tomb, all is simple and harmonious — the progressive richness of the two others, and the exuberant littleness, yet heavy in effect, which distinguishes the last, appear to have been imitated, by Wyat, without much discrimination. If, indeed, the question be, whether in this instance, he has imagined or collected what is most beautiful in the style called Gothick, the suffrage in his favour will be universal : but if it be referred to the single point of just combination, those will be found, who will not scruple to avow their dis- sent upon known principles and characteristics of the Gothick manner, familiarized to them by many examples. ‘‘ Yet whatever dispositions for censure may be indulged at the moment, no mind, especially a poetical mind, can quit this beautiful and highly-decorated scene, without sentiments of the fullest gratification .’’ — Observations on English Archi- tecture^ 8vo. 1806, p. 116. Of those parts of the Cathedral at Winchester, which are attributed to Wykeham upon just authority, the rebuilding of the nave is the principal. DISCOURSE II. ON THE VARIOUS MODES OF ECCLESIASTICAL ARCHI- TECTURE IN ITALY, SICILY, FRANCE, GERMANY, THE NETHERLANDS, SPAIN, AND PORTUGAL, TO THE CLOSE OF THE FOURTEENTH CENTURY. IN ITALY. When the architecture of Greece and Rome had lapsed into oblivion and decay, and its former splendour was faintly demonstrated by its ruined temples, the establishment of Chris- tianity induced a necessity for sacred edifices. The churches built by Constantine and his immediate successors were all of them formed upon the plan of the Roman basilicge.^ During his reign, and under his auspices, in the fourth century, arose the magnificent church of Santa * Gibbon (vol. iii. p. 292, 8vo.) quotes from the ecclesias- tical history of Eusebius an account of these early churches, with their splendid architecture and qrnarnents. With re- spect to ecclesiastical architecture in Italy and France, from the age of Constantine to that of Charlemagne, the most per- 74 ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY. Sophia at Constantinople, the admiration of the Christian world at that earlier period, as that erected upon its ruins by Justinian re- mains to the present day. To Constantine likewise are attributed the nearly equally spa- cious and splendid churches (basilicae) of the Holy Apostles at Constantinople and of St.John at Ephesus, both of which, although recon- structed upon the model of the Santa Sophia, are now to be discovered only by their ruins. He is likewise said to have founded the church of St. Paul, without the walls, at Rome, which was rebuilt or perfected by his successors — by Theodosius in 386, and by Honorius in 395. Each of these grand structures could boast an interior composed of marble columns of excessive height and beauty, transferred to them, being the richest spoils of ancient cities. In two of the instances above-mentioned, they spicuous account is that given in the Essay hy Whittington^ a work deservedly valued by all who wish for sound infor- mation on the subject of Gothick architecture, and to which it is more expedient to refer the reader, than to extract largely from it. I have already adverted to these facts in the introduction to \he first Discourse, p. 3. The first church of Santa Sophia, in its whole interior, was covered with y^aintings and mosaics in gilding and colours, with masonry not unworthy of the best state of the arts, after they had begun to decline. What remains in the second church built by Theodosius, unmutilated by the Turks, when they had adapted it to their own worship, is a splendid proof of original excellence. ECCLESIASTICAL. 75 » still are seen, and present to us, identically, many wonderful specimens. This slight notice of the earliest Christian basilicae may introduce the aera and style of the great church of San Marco at Venice. Of the origin of that singular structure, we learn that two nameless architects, from Lombardy and Constantinople, were employed in great works by the Republic or the Doges (1046 — 1072), and that the latter gave the design; which will account for the prevalence of the lower Greek manner of roofs, with cupolas and semi-cupolas, as peculiarly characteristic of this instance. This example stands alone ; and the change of style which took place in the suc- ceeding century precluded imitation. These Greek architects were employed in Italy to apply the fragments of classical edifices to buildings of their own irregular designs. The Duomo or Cathedral of Pisa appears to have been nearly contemporary ; its foun- dations at least having been laid as early as 1069. After its completion, arose the Baptis- tery in 1153 ; the Campanile^ (leaning tower) in 1180; and the cloister of the Campo Santo in 1275. * See Discourse I. p. 17. The exact declination of the Campanile is twelve feet eleven inches, English. It is an absurd fancy that the leaning tower was built so, intentionally, only to show how far a tower might gravitate before it fell. The 76 ARCHITECTURE IN ITAEY. Of the first-named, the plan describes a Ro- man cross : the nave has double aisles, styled collectively “ cinque navate the transept and choir have also double ones ; the termination is circular, and a dome rises from the transept. The absis or chevet of this cathedral was the prototype of those subsequently applied in Italy, and was certainly copied from the Ro- man basilicae. The columns in the interior are very numerous. Clusters of small arcades, so supported, are placed before the walls both of the facade and transepts, are alike numerous and conspicuous on the outside, and thus dis- criminate a style, of which this church in parti- cular has been considered as the prototype, in Italy.* These architects of the early Pisan school were Boschetto, Bonanni, and William the German ( Tedesco ), Nicola da Pisa, his son Giovanni, and their descendants Andrea and Tommaso, to the fourteenth century. The The largest bell weighs ten thousand pounds, and the total height is two hundred and seventy-eight feet. There are two hundred and seven columns, in all, attached to the exterior walls, which are circular, the capitals of which are all of them v/himsically different. — From a late survey hy E. Cresy, Architect. The Campanile, or Bell Tower of St. Jean, at Caen, is round, built with marble, having seven ranges of columns, the total height being ninety feet, with a declination of thirteen from the base: — 97.6 — 14.1, English. * See Note [A] page 113. ECCLESIASTICAL. 77 marble much more frequently used, was not dug in Italy. Greece offered to the plunderers a much more abundant quarry ; and the genius of the architects was most admired in the adap- tation of Grecian fragments to the churches which they were employed to build. The ships which were sent into the Archipelago by the Genoese and Pisan merchants, were usually laden upon their return with the spoils of clas- sic architecture, when the dilapidated temples near the coast were left an easy prey to these mercantile adventurers. To controvert this opinion, in part only, it must be allowed that there were very considerable remains of Roman architecture in Pisa. Towards the close of the eleventh century, we may fix the true aera of ecclesiastical archi- tecture in Italy, which is known to possess a distinct and individual character, varying equal- ly from the ancients and the style afterwards generally denominated as Gothick, which ulti- mately prevailed in other countries of Europe. Almost at the same period were constructed in Pisa, the Duomo, the Battisterio, and the Tower: at Venice, Florence, Sienna, Padua, Modena, Pavia, Piacenza, Orvietto, Bologna, Milan, and lastly the Vatican and the sanctuary of Loretto. Each of the large and magnificent structures opened an ample field to artists for the display of their talents in architecture, sculpture, and 78 ARCHITECTURE IN ITALY. the arts of design in general. Upon the sub- ject of the original foundation of these build- ings, severally considered, very satisfactory notices are afforded by Cicognara, in his interesting work.^ But the Lombard, or heavy Norman, had then obtained in Italy, and can be scarcely discriminated from the same Opus Romanum in the more northern parts of Europe. It is observed by the late well-informed and indus- trious investigator, Mr. Kerrich of Cambridge, That it maintained its usage there, in all its different styles and ages, there can be no doubt. The cathedrals of Piacenza, Parma, Cremona, and Pavia, are all of them \ of what we call Romanesque, or of the Transition style of architecture, and do not differ more from some churches in England, than our churches do from one another.” f The church of St. Francis at Assizi, seventy miles from Rome, built in 1240, is precisely similar to that of the same aera in England, at Tintern Abbey, where the vaulting is with few ribs, the windows highly pointed, and the tracery simple. In the churches of S. Maria Novella and Santa Croce at Florence (1279 — 1350), are windows formed with Gothick arches. “ The * Histoire de plus ctlebres ArchitecteSj — Paris, 2 tom. 8vo. 1830. par Quatremere de Quincy. ■|* Archceologia, vol. xv. p. 299. ECCLESIASTICAI.. 79 pointed arch alone does not constitute Gothick architecture, although it may be said to be pe- culiar to it. Its light pillars, long thin shafts, elegant foliages and vaultings — its tracery, and numerous other graceful and nameless forms of beauty, are originally essential to it, and full as necessary to its general character.”^ Gio- vanni da Pisa, the son of Nicola, was employed to build the small church of Maria della Spina, near the bridge over the Amo at Pisa. It is of the lightest Gothick, and so highly ornamented, and wrought to such perfection, that it was, according to Vasari, tenuta miraculosa. In later times, the term Gothick has been re- strained to the lighter style only in archi- tectural descriptions in every language of Europe.f The knowledge of construction gradually de- clined in Italy from the death of the old Lom- bardic or German architects, and finally ex- pired with Arnolfo Lippi, who began the church of S. Maria del Fiore, according to Gothick rules : this circumstance prevented the comple- tion of the cupola for upwards of a century ; and the arduous task was reserved for Brunel- leschi, the celebrated inventor of a style of architecture introduced by him into Italy, dur- ing the fourteenth century. It has been said, * MSS. Kerrich, Brit. Mus. f See Note [B] page 114. 80 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. that by his means his countrymen were first induced to abandon the Gothick style ; and that he brought back to the minds of the Ita- lians the love of Grecian, or, at least, of the best Roman architecture. At that period, the subject ceases to belong to the present inquiry, and has been introduced merely for its histo- rical analogy."^ IN FRANCE. The style of architecture of the earliest usage in France, and peculiar to that country, must be in a degree considered as the true prototype of our own, as we have borrowed nothing from the schools of Italy, — yet with decided varieties and deviations ; we may therefore be called either imitators or rivals. That regular pro- gress which, in English architecture, appears to form a gradation, is seldom found in France. Here it may be traced from the simple arches of Salisbury to the gorgeous turrets of Henry the Seventh’s chapel. In a general and com- prehensive view, we must yield the superiority to France, for loftiness both of conception and practice, with a single abatement, that the rich vaultings of our later Gothick far excel any thing of a similar description on the Continent ; and with respect to certain parts of the edifice, * See Note [C] page 114. ECCLESIASTIC AI.. 81 the cloister and chapter-house have a space and elegance, of which no comparative exam- ples are there seen. A greater simplicity pre- vails in the capitals of clustered columns, in the early French style. In this respect, a comparison of the nave of Salisbury with that of Amiens will decide this fact, although they will not be found to be strictly analogous. The excellence of the English Gothick school is seen more conspicuously in certain parts and details. In the best specimens of the French school, we are struck with the admirable effect of comprehension, in the architect, both of unity of design and consequent beauty. The elevation of the most celebrated churches rises firmly from the basement, and is composed of very bold and commanding masses. Of their great dimensions and space, it may be compe- tent to observe, that the western front of York could be placed beneath the roofs of the choirs of Beauvais or Amiens. Nor is the whole effect produced by magnitude alone. The fapade, which presents broad and imposing members in its porches, buttresses, and towers ; and the perforated tracery in the divisions and open- ings, scarcely ever practised with us, demands our praise of its admirable beauty. These are * See an accurate comparison of their relative parts in Whittmgton s Essay ^ p. 199. 82 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. slight and general observations, and lead us to a more historical detail concerning the progress and perfection of the art. The manner of building peculiarly Norman had prevailed in the north of France ante- cedently to the Conquest of England. We have evidence, that the church of St. Denis by the Abbot Sugerius, Notre Dame at Paris, Chartres, and Rheims, were in a state of com- pletion before that period, which fact the still remaining parts of each sufficiently confirm.^ Among the most genuine instances of archi- tecture in Normandy, f which may still be in- spected, are the two great conventual churches of St. Stephen and the Holy Trinity at Caen, erected by William the Conqueror and his queen, during their lives. And as it is the un- doubted prototype of our own, it may be more to the*purpose of this Discourse to confine re- marks to Norman examples in a great measure ; although it is certain that the same principles prevailed in every other province in France, which however were adopted with a certain discrimination. For the Roman ornaments were more frequently imitated, and the want of correct taste and barbarous massiveness were almost peculiar to a Norman structure. Com- parison has established this fact. The twelfth * See Note [D] page 115. f See Note [E] page 115. ECCLESIASTICAL. 83 century, indeed, produced three several revolu- tions in the architecture of France.^ At first, all was Lombard ; which then became inter- mixed with, or was in fact superseded by, the sharply-pointed arch ; and at its close, this was expanded, and, in several instances, orna- mented to a degree of perfection not even attempted in England before another century had elapsed. The highly decorated and florid style originated and reached perfection in Ger- many and France many years before we pos- sessed any similar demonstration of the change. In those countries, the golden age of this style continued from the middle of the thir- teenth to the latter end of the fourteenth century (1S50 — 1390). The circular style had reached its zenith be- tween the close of the eleventh century and the beginning of the next ensuing. The round and pointed are then seen frequently inter- mixed, particularly in the windows, which are, in fact, the distinguishing marks of an aera. Clustered columns are annulated, or tied toge- * A severe simplicity characterises Lisieux ; Coutances (1056) is distinguished by its elegance, abounding in deco- ration ; Seez (1080), at the same time that it unites the ex- cellence of both, can rival neither in that which is peculiarly its own.” — Cotman. The French antiquaries have consi- dered the crypt and chevet of St. Denis as of the earliest date now remaining. St. Germain des Prez and Notre Dame at Paris succeeded to them. Clugny was rebuilt in 1093. G 2 84 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. ther in the middle, as at Bayeux, St. Stephen’s, Caen, and Westminster Abbey, Salisbury, and the Temple Church. It is worthy remark, that in the Cathedrals of Notre Dame at Paris (1175), and Canter- bury (1174), the round Norman pillar, finish- ed by an irregular Corinthian capital,^ are most frequent. Such had previously appeared (1140) in the conventual church of Clugni, the dimensions of which far exceeded those of any other monastery, the total length being not less than six hundred feet. They are like- wise in the ruined chapel of Castel Vetrano in Sicily. The exuberance of Gothick fancy was dis- played in rude sculpture during the earliest Norman aera, and applied itself principally to the capitals of pillars, in naves, crypts, and chapter-houses. The subjects are multifarious : leaves, flowers, and vegetable representations in almost every possible combination of them ; satirical postures of the human and animal form, but rarely as in nature ; monsters com- bating with, or destroying each other ; Our Saviour thrusting a spear into the mouth of a serpent, or weighing souls, with Satan, as a monster, pushing down the opposite scale with a sword. These designs were anterior to, or * See Note [F] page 116. ECCLESIASTICAL. 85 contemporary with the most ancient in Eng- land, and the very fertile parents of similar invention, although less capricious or lux- uriant.^ I will now advert to those instances more particularly, which, by a certain selection, may point out the progress and change of architec- ture in Normandy, chronologically stated.-j- The earliest and leading peculiarities, and which were brought by Norman architects into Eng- land, were subterraneous chapels called crypts, supported by many short columns with carved capitals, always under the choir ; the basilic, or semicircular terminations of the choir, styled by French writers chevet ; two tiers of round arches in the nave, springing alternately from square piers and round pillars, and nearly * In the Chapter-house of St. Georges de Bocherville is a double capital sculptured with subjects of real curiosity ; it is a band of musicians, each with an instrument then in usage, and forming a concert. They afford an authentic evidence of the history of music as practised by the Normans in the thirteenth century, and are satisfactorily elucidated by Mr. Douce. Turner^ vol. ii. p. 13. The pillars of the church of St. Pierre in Caen have all the capitals sculptured in bas-relief, of which the Abbe dela Rue, in his ‘‘ Essais Historiques sur la Ville de Caen^'' has given a satisfactory explication. They represent subjects taken wholly from poetical romances. The double columns and capitals in the choir of Canterbury, built hy William of Sens, resem- ble those in the cathedral of the last-mentioned city. •f See Note [G] page 115. 86 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. equally divided. Of these, the upper one open- ed into a gallery for walking, or triforium, sometimes over the vaulting of the aisles, or confined to a passage within the thickness of the walls. The windows were single, narrow externally, but placed under an open arcade within, having the central one considerably the highest. These details occur in the Abbey of St. Stephen at Caen, built by the Conqueror. Jumieges, contemporary, and equally curious, was desecrated and destroyed in 1793 ; and Bee has been entirely taken down : Fecamp has escaped the storm. The above-mentioned are of the first aera ; but the same gradation from the most simple to the most complicated, which may be traced in England, does not occur in France. There were several distinct schools, of various charac- ters. The change was instantaneous. It were beyond the compass of these remarks to enumerate the peculiarities or excellence of such magnificent structures as the Cathedrals of Rheims, Beauvais, Chartres, Amiens, &c. and to enter into any detail concerning them.* The reader may pursue such investigations with great satisfaction in several scientific pub- lications which have lately appeared both in France and England. ^ See the opposite page. ECCLESIASTICAL. 87 Confining these descriptions to Normandy, the two great churches at Rouen command our attention, and will best serve to communicate an accurate idea of French Gothick when it had reached its ultimate perfection, or, per- haps, exuberance. It would be a difficult attempt to present to the mind of an English artist or amateur, who had never visited the Continent, an accu- rate idea of two such buildings as the Cathe- dral and Church of St. Ouen, at Rouen ; for although we have delineations of both, in parts, nearly as perfect as can fall within the compass * CATHEDRAL CHURCHES, DATES, AND ARCHITECTS, BEFORE THE CLOSE OF THE THIRTEENTH CENTURY. CHURCHES. DATES. 1 ARCHITECTS. Chartres 1029 F ulbert. Charite sur Loire • 1056 Gerard. Clugni . 1070 Hugues. Notre Dame, Paris . 1161 Maurice de Sully. Finished by Jean de Ravy, 1257, and Pierre de Montereau, 1270. Ingelramme. Finished by Waltier de Meulan, 1216. Bee 1212 Rheims Cathedral . 1215 Hugues Libergier. Com- pleted by Robert de Coucy. Cathedral of Rouen 1216 Ingelramme. Finished by W. de Meulan. Sainte Chapelle, Paris 1245 Pierre de Montereau. Lyons 1270 Robert de Lusarches. Notre Dame, Mantes St. Germain des^ 1280 Eudes de Montrieul. f Finished. Prez, Paris, Cha- ^ pel of Our Lady J 1288 ! ■< Foundations laid in 1227 I Pierre de Montereau. 88 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. of the art, such can never communicate the effect of an actual inspection.^ Nor will it fare better with verbal description, if it be extended beyond the mere statement of facts, as to the effect they produce upon the imagination, or the proofs they supply to comparative criticism. Omitting any account of an earlier edifice, the Cathedral, as it is now seen, was completed between the years, progressively, from the be- ginning of the fourteenth to the end of the next century. The points of entire distinction between the cathedrals of France and England, and which present themselves on the first view, are in the grand facade, or western front ; and, in some instances, in the transepts ; the portal, or great door of entrance ; the chevet, having a round or octangular end, with an hemispherical roof; the extreme height of the vaultings of the nave ; the vast expanse of the circular, or rose- windows ; and the numerous chapels by ^ Description^ S^c. de Notre Dame de Rouen — Description, <^c. de rEglise de St. Ouen ; par M. Gilbert, 8vo. 1816. Plates in PugirCs Norman Architecture, 4to. 1828. Three Views by C. Wild, folio, 1825 — being part of a series of twelve etchings of the interior and exterior of French Cathe- drals, which, for accurate perspective and picturesque effect, are as yet unequalled. Twelve of the English have been likewise completed. Jolimont, Cathedrales Franfaises, fob 1826-30. — Litho- graph es, en Livraisons. ECCLESIASTICAL. 89 which the choir and side aisles are sur- rounded. We can scarcely imagine an architectural ef- fect of greater sublimity than that of the fap ade of the Cathedral of Rouen, or sufficiently ad- mire the profusion and excellence of the carved ornaments of which it is composed. A stately expanded mass occupies two hundred and fifty feet at the foundation, and rises to a pyramidal roof of one hundred and seventy, flanked by two towers, which are each of the height of two hundred and thirty feet, in which respect only they are similar. These are, indeed, ma- jestic proportions.'^ The grand entrance may serve, in this description, as an example of many others in France, in point of style, although it is by several exceeded in the effect, as pro- duced by more elegant proportions. It requires a minute investigation, but I shall only at- tempt to give a general idea, for the purpose of national comparison. The grand porch occupies the central divi- sion. It is placed between two large pillars of a pyramidal form, with finials of open work, having a lofty pediment ; so wrought, with a delicacy and variety beyond the scope of detail. Niches richly canopied occupy the whole space, adapted, as may be required, to the several parts. * See Note [H] page 117. 90 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. and literally peopled with carved figures, from the size of life to diminutive forms. The architects of the middle centuries (1250 to 1450), in order to avoid the inconvenience of immense folding-doors, and yet to give the entrance a proportion suitable to the size of the building itself, made the inner opening of the gates such as convenience required; but the exterior merely to produce an effect. The opening, which widens in an oblique, splayed direction, from the inner gate to the outer face of the wall, is usually ornamented with co- lumns, statues with their bases and capitals, and foliage-work most curiously embossed, and thus is made to form a covered porch, having at once the effect of grandeur, richness, and solidity. Of the western fronts of our English cathedrals, two only, those of Peterborough and Wells, have any analogy to many in France with respect to their composition or architec- tural ornaments ; but the great portals, with receding arches, are not seen here in any in- stance of consequence. The portals of Rouen, Rheims, and Strasbourg, present to us pre- eminent examples. In the tympanum, over the head of the door- case, was frequently placed a large group of sculpture in bas-relief This of Rouen desig- nates the tree of Jesse, or the genealogy of the Virgin Mary, by almost innumerable figures. ECCLESIASTICAL. 91 Two grand component members of this mag- nificent edifice are the towers, of great dimen- sion and height. The intervening space between them is decorated in a higher style than in other parts, by a parapet and an acutely-formed pediment, composed of a succession of small open arcades, the arches of which are found terminating with trefoiled or trilobed heads. This fret-work conceals the high-pitched roof, placed between four large and lofty turrets, with pinnacles, likewise of open work, all of which, admitting the thorough light, produce the most airy effect. The northern tower is the more ancient, but it owes its present ele- vation to a singularly high pavilion roof, such as were prevalent in France early in the sixteenth century. The southern is of a totally different construction, as an octangular tower, with very large open windows, rises from it, and is finished by a rich perforated balustrade. It was entirely completed by the second Car- dinal George D’Amboise, in 1542. Each of these towers has an elevation of two hundred and forty feet, and the central, with its spire, now in rebuilding, of four hundred and thirty feet English. Time has treated the decorative parts of this beautiful fapade as it usually does a beautiful woman ; yet the former charms are not wholly obliterated. The decay of years has worn off 92 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. the polish, but the grace remains. Notwith- standing that mutilation prevails, the degree of original excellence cannot be mistaken. As a general observation, it may be remarked that the towers, with or without spires, in other provinces of France, are very rarely uniform or complete : those at Rheims are certainly a beautiful exception to this statement. Upon entering the interior, the great length will excite more admiration than the breadth or height.^ To the English visiter, the circular termination of the choir presents a new and imposing effect ; whilst the three round or rose windows, f wdth their radiations of richly-co- loured glass, excite an intense and lasting sur- prise. The last-mentioned are fifty feet in diameter, and may be considered as superior to those in the church of St. Ouen, and the design of the geometrical tracery still more elaborate. This circumstance is elucidated by a comparison made between Rouen and York Cathedrals. Nave of Rouen, f. 269 by 27.4 inches, and f.91 high ; of York, f.250 by 103, and f. 91 . 6 high. The difference of length is only f.l9; of the width, f.75.10; whilst the height is nearly the same in both. But great interior length diminishes the width to the eye, and the impression of space is less at Rheims than in the . Notre Dame. "1“ In the French descriptions of their cathedrals, we have the terms Oeil des ailes,” “ Rosa vitrea and of a chapel in St. Germain des Prez, “ Fenestris egregiis et magna glo- riatur Rosa.” Forty feet is not an unusual span. — Topog. Gallic, p. I, 93 . ECCLESIASTICAL. 93 Of the last-mentioned edifice,* unparalleled in architectural ornament, a similar and slight notice may tend to a clearer comparison of the system with which Cathedrals were construct- ed in England, and upon the Continent, in the fourteenth century. The facades of Rheims, Amiens, and St. Denis, are more pyramidal than those in England ; the triangular gable-ends are profusely covered with statues, and the space between the towers is nar- rower. In comparing the ground-plans of the two churches of Notre Dame at Rouen and Paris, a memorable distinction occurs. The last- mentioned has two double aisles, the exterior of which are subdivided into numerous chapels, and the outline of the wall is plain ; whilst the semicircular end of the other is clustered with small oratories of a round or octangular form, which last plan is the more prevalent. Flying buttresses are finished by very tall and richly crocheted pinnacles. At Amiens, the space be- tween the semicircular and diagonal ribs is * The foundation of the present church of St. Ouen is attributed to the Abbot Marcdargent, in 1318 ; and its com- pletion to Alexander de Berneval, a celebrated architect, who died in 1440. The spire of the Cathedral has been twice set on fire, in HIT, and in 1804. Since the last restoration in wood, and of a discrepant design, the new spire, now completed, has been made entirely of cast iron, upon the model of Salisbury. — Gilbert y Description^ &c. 94 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. occupied by window-frames of stone placed closely together, which are elliptic, with qua- trefoil heads. The western facade of the church of St. Ouen, in its lateral towers, has been left incomplete : their intended plan is octagonal. Over the por- tal is a gallery with a perforated balustrade, and the space immediately above it is occupied by a rose window, the compartments of which are unequalled in point of delicacy. A parapet of open trefoils runs round the aisles and nave of the church, and the central tower, octangular in the upper part of it, is almost wholly composed of tall open windows and arches of tracery, terminated, like the south tower of the Cathe- dral, with a crown of fleurs-de-lis. This armo- rial figure is peculiar to France, and is often introduced into its ornamental architecture. One of the most beautiful porches is that which opens to the south transept. The roof has several pendents (culs de lamps the octagon sides of which are wrought into canopied niches, containing small statues. It is surrounded by pendent trefoil arches, springing from carved bosses, and forming an open festoon of the freest tracery. Every artifice of construction, and open work of infinite variety, are exhibited here. Over the door-way is a large bas-relief from the history of the Virgin Mary, which will gratify the most curious inspection. The ECCLESIASTICAL. 95 interior view from the great western door will excite an instant surprise by the boldness of its architecture, the scarcely credible work of human hands. A profusely decorative style spreads itself over the vaulting in various an- gular compartments, with bosses, heads, and wreaths at the joinings, and in such an abun- dance and lightness, as to have the appearance of embroidery in stone.” ^ From the extreme length of this nave,f the height of the vaulting, J as well as the breadth, appear to be much diminished in optical effect, yet there is an exquisite uniformity in all its parts. Of the dividing arcade, the component members are columns elegantly clustered with small flowered capitals, and pointed arches. Above them are the triforia, continued through every part; the second tier of windows is brought down immediately behind them, and a thorough light is so universally admitted, that we lose the idea of a solid wall. These columns, about mid- way, have a very large canopy and base for statues, which were destroyed by the insurgents in 1793; but the effect of them, even though so far denuded, is very picturesque, particularly in their profiles. At Milan, such are placed at the springing of the arches, instead of capitals. * See Note [I] page 118. t F. 264. 4, by 36. 10. J F. 100. 96 ARCHITECTURE IN FRANCE. One of the greatest advantages which this style of church architecture supplied, was the space which could admit of the worship of a multitude, and an abundant supply of enriched or pure light : a provision contrary to the plan and system of the ancient Grecian temples. Light, so modified, was a chief consideration in giving the windows so near an approxima- tion, scarcely consistent with the safety of the walls.^ I have perhaps digressed too far in thus indul- ging a pleasing reminiscence, having inspected both these sumptuous buildings in 1826, with some attention. An acquaintance with their principles and effect may give us clearer views and a better knowledge in examining the cathe- drals of our own country, and discriminating, by a true comparison, what we have originated, adopted, or improved upon. Towards the end of the thirteenth century two of the best specimens of Gothick were built from the designs of Pierre de Montereau, of the Sainte Chapelle, and Our Lady’s Chapel in St. Germain des Prez, at Paris. The church of St. Maclou, at Rouen, may be cited as an unique example of the French filli- grain style of embossed work, which was at its zenith at the close of the fifteenth century. They chiefly consisted of the imitation of fruits * Fenkres presque coulinuks. ECCLESIASTICAL. 97 and flowers. When I saw them in 1826 , they were nearly in a state of decomposition on the outside, and within, sadly clogged with washes of white-lime. Such carvings in the German large churches, are not inferior in point of high finishing and delicacy. In France, during the course of the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, the ornaments were more and more attenuated ; their Gothick filla- gree became a web and woof composed of stone. The bosses of the key-stones spread around the groins in large circles and roses, perforated and filleted with a singular effect. Bas-reliefs of sacred subjects are seen on the outside of the low skreen, placed behind the altar. But the most elaborate and beau- tiful open carved work excites admiration in the noel or circular staircases. Extraordinary specimens remain at Rouen, Strasbourg, and D’Alby."^ Surprise produced by the sublimity of the vaulting, or the intricacies of decorative art, in which the French churches exceed ours, will not compensate to the eye of taste for the heterogeneous and frequent introduction of modern altars, stuck against large pillars, * The grand facade of the Cathedral of Orleans was built from the designs of M. Gabriel, so late as 1723. It was the last, but very interesting effort of expiring Gothick, in France. — Jolimont, Description. II 98 ARCHITECTURE IN GERMANY. totally destroying all the relative proportions ; poorly painted pictures ; and figures in bro- cade dresses as large as life. Such is the sacrifice made to the superstitions of the com- mon people ! In England, we enter the naves of York or Salisbury, of a commanding and unencum- bered space. Architecture reigns in sublime and simple grandeur. There is no distraction caused by subordinate or mean objects : taste, judgment, and science are satisfied ; and the heart of man is elevated to a pure veneration in the house of God. PRESENTIOREM CONSPICIMUS DEUM.” IN GERMANY AND THE LOW COUNTRIES. The proposed analogy would not be com- plete, if these cathedrals were passed by with- out a short investigation. In the earlier ages, as in other countries, the debased Roman style prevailed in all the German churches. In the second style, the semicircular arch is still retained, but the towers and pinnacles are pyramidal, the windows pointed, and the roofs very highly pitched. Another style succeeded during the middle centuries, when were erect- ed the grandest works of architecture which Germany possesses,"^ and which are anterior to * See Note [K] page 119. ' ECCLESIASTICAL. 99 those in England, if not in France, for which the late German writers contend plausibly, if not with complete success. In the eleventh century, the cathedrals of Spire, Worms, and Miintz, were built, and are still admirable for their solidity and magnificence. A German professor (Wieseking) advances a very high claim to the invention of the Gothick in that country, or, at least, that it was there employed earlier than in others. He asserts that St. Bernard, bishop of Hilde- sheim, was the inventor of the ancient German style, according to which the cathedral of Naumberg was commenced at the close of the tenth century ; then followed, in 1009, the cathedral of Minden; and in 1064, that of Hildesheim was completed. Soon after 1100, it was introduced into Spain by San Domingo della Catrada, in the churches of Leon and Lugo. In the same century. Bishop Fulbert adopted it in France in the cathedral of Char- tres. The German architect Lapo, Master Nicholas of Pisa, with his son Giovanni, brought it into Italy, mixed with the Lower Greek, soon afterwards ; and it was employed alone at Urbino, Arezzo, Assizi, and Bologna. William of Sens, in 1175, first used it in Eng- land at Canterbury ; and it is worthy of re- mark, that a few, exactly similar, are seen in Sens Cathedral. H ^ 100 ARCHITECTURE IN GERMANY. Of the succeeding aera are those of Cologne and Strasbourg, Friedbourg and Oppenheim, which last is much dilapidated. A whole cen- tury, from 1377 to 1478, passed, during the uninterrupted building of the cathedral at Ulm, not exceeded by any church in Germany in its stupendous height, profuse ornament upon a large and small scale, and sublime interior effect."^ The porticoes and the rose windows nearly resemble those already described in France : one of the last-mentioned, at Strasbourg, ex- ceeds in diameter any other known instance. But the construction and amazing height of the spires are peculiar, and are solely of German origin and adaptation. The sculptured orna- ments are finished with extreme delicacy, and almost universally confined to the representa- tion of trees and fruits, flowers and leaves, fan- cifully combined in garlands and wreaths. The open trefoil occurs externally, but niches and statues more rarely ; they are chiefly of kings or bishops, of gigantic proportions, so as to be viewed from the ground. The towers, with their single spires, of Stras- bourg, Vienna, and Antwerp, are the most cele- brated. We have an account of those intended ^ Commenced in 1377, and finished, with the exception of the tower, in 1478. Length, 416 f. ; width, 166; and 141 f. liigh, inclusive of the thickness of the vaulting. — Mollei'. ECCLESIASTICAL. 101 at Cologne, which would have rivalled them. Strasbourg has a total elevation of five hun- dred and seventy-four feet from the ground. A square, solid tower has, first, an elevation of three hundred and thirty-four feet ; then suc- ceeds an octagon, flanked by four external octa- gon staircases, which are perforated through- out, and strengthened with cramps of iron ; and lastly, a solid pyramid most richly croch- eted at the angles, and finished by a kind of open lantern : the whole structure is exactly twice as high as the highest pinnacle of the two towers of the western facade at York. The most curious spire in Germany for its lace-work in stone filling the interstices be- tween each rib or panel, is that of Fridburg in the Brisgaw : it is likewise of extraordinary height, four hundred and fifteen feet with the spire. At Malines is the most regular and beautiful tower, built in 1452, three hundred and forty feet high without the spire, which would have been one third more. In most instances, the roofs or gables are so very highly pitched as to occupy half the struc- ture, not concealed by parapets, as in France. They are covered with glazed tiles of many dif- ferent colours, placed in mosaic figures. No- thing can exceed the peculiar but unharmoniz- ing effect of this fanciful combination. Such 102 ARCHITECTURE IN THE NETHERLANDS. are the leading features of the greater German churches, particularly that of Vienna. The tower of Strasbourg with its spire was the stupendous design of Erwin de Steinbach, who superintended its execution for twenty- eight years ; his son continued it ; and it was brought to a wonderful conclusion by John Hiiltz, a native of Cologne.* By progressive stages, it occupied no less time than the interval between 1277 and 1439, a lapse of one hundred and sixty-two years. IN THE NETHERLANDS. The spire of Antwerp exhibits a similar plan, and rises to an almost equal degree of elevation, four- hundred feet. Had the total completion of the fafade at Cologne taken place, or that of Mechlin been completed according to the plan engraved by Hollar, Strasbourg would have been rivalled in sublimity and rich work- manship.-f- The deficiency of a corresponding spire is equally apparent at Antwerp as at Strasbourg, which last mentioned is exactly twice as high as the highest pinnacle of the towers of the * Begun in 1439- It is full 530 f. English in height, and consequently thirty feet higher than the top of St. Peter’s at Rome. ‘h See Note [L] page 120. ECCLESIASTICAL. 108 western facade at York. As early as the year 1^48, the German architects began to build the cathedral of Cologne upon its present plan, and in 1276 the porch of the minster at Stras- bourg, under the direction of Irwin von Stein- bach : two structures which, though unfinished, will be the admiration of all ages, from the boldness of their design, the beauty and ele- gance of their parts, and the excellence of their execution.* In Austria, the spire of the church of St. Stephen, at Vienna, is advanced to nearly as high a point (four hundred and thirty-two feet German), There is a great difference in its plan. It is not connected with the facade, but rises from the foundation, solid, but sloping gradually to its apex. Excepting that the upper division is thickly pannelled and ca- nopied, and the spire itself studded with crockets, it is comparatively heavy, having no thorough light. \ The roof of St. Stephen’s, which is so highly pitched as to occupy the sight nearly as much * Moller. Cologne cathedral is the unrivalled glory of this class of buildings, the most splendid, and perhaps the earliest exhibition of the beauties of this style.” Essay, p. 67, published anonymously, written by Professor Wheley of Cambridge. The lover of Gothick architecture will find am- ple satisfaction in the correct plans, descriptions, and engrav- ings of several of the Flemish and German cathedrals lately published. 104 ARCHITECTURE IN THE NETHERLANDS. as the lower division of the whole fabric, has a singular, and by no means a pleasing mode of ornament. Glazed tiles, of many colours, are formed into squares and lozenges, and various mosaic patterns, and have a very inharmonious effect under a bright sun. On the contrary, in France, although the roofs are scarcely less elevated, they are carefully concealed by very lofty parapets of open work, in crocheted pinnacles. In Flanders, at Malines and Ypres, the ca- thedral architecture has more of the regular simplicity of the English. The tower of the former, finished in 1452, is three hundred and forty-eight feet high, without the intended spire, which would have been one-third more. Ypres has a tower and transept in the style of York or Lincoln. In Holland, the towers are square, then an octagon having very high and sharply-pointed pediments ; and sometimes very large pinnacles, which are, but in a small degree, lower than the central spire. The windows are made of disproportionate tallness, as at Gouda, in order to receive the exquisitely rich stained glass, of which the far-famed manu- facture was established in that city. The octangular hemispherical tower by which Another is finished, attached to the cathedral at Utrecht, has furnished Sir Christopher Wren with his idea of the Campanile at Christ-Church, ECCLESIASTICAL. 105 Oxford.* But the Maisons de Ville, or town- houses, in many of the cities in Flanders, en- grossed, in a peculiar degree and extent, a style of grand and most richly-ornamented archi- tecture, superior even to that conspicuous in their churches of the higher order. Many might be enumerated, but the instances best known are those at Brussels, Ghent, Lovain, and Sedan. In France, there is one eminent rival — the Palais de Justice at Rouen, which is of a style somewhat dissimilar. A leading pecu- liarity in Flanders is seen in the extremely lofty towers, which rise from the centre of the front, and sometimes are conducted to a height of nearly four hundred feet : these are all of the fifteenth century, and in the manner first intro- duced and patronized under Philip, Duke of Burgundy. The external surface of the whole building is literally incrusted with minute filligrain in stone. IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL, When the Arabs, by their extensive con- quests of the richest countries, had acquired immense wealth under the Califs and their suc- cessors, they adopted and cultivated the study * Etchings of ancient Cathedrals, Hotels de Ville, ^'c. in France, Germany, Flanders, Holland, and Italy, by J. Coney, imperial folio and quarto, 1830 . 106 ARCHITECTURE IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. of the most splendid architecture, both in point of the stateliness of exterior dimensions, and the exuberant ornament of the apartments. They caused the learning of the Greeks to be transfused into their own language, and excelled in mathematics and all the dependent sciences ; and the perfection to which they attained in architecture was solely accomplished by these means, the earliest instances having their date in the eighth century. All representations of human or animal forms having been interdicted by the Mohammedan law, other ornaments were substituted, such as coloured glazed tiles and mosaics, and also that species of decoration called from their usual application of it “ Ara- besques,” which is certainly of Egyptian origin. “ Although the Arab or Moorish style may not present an appearance of strength and security, yet it gratifies the eye by picturesque decora- tions, and it is worthy remark that all its parts are perfectly symmetrical, and never degene- rate into heaviness and incoherence.” But in Egypt, at Cairo, Fez in Morocco, Ispahan, and Damascus, and more especially in Hindoostan, there are still to be seen numerous specimens both of the ancient remains and modern structures, in mosques, mausolea, and palaces. The only pure specimens of ancient archi- tecture, as practised by the Arabs, which are ECCLESIASTICAL. 107 familiar to us, are those in Spain, and a few in Sicily ; and from these, proofs may be col- lected of the usage of pointed arches long anterior to the introduction of them, as a deci- sive criterion, in the first Transition style from the heavy round arch of the debased Roman, peculiar to the Saxons and Normans in all the great churches which they built in this kingdom.^ In the church architecture of Spain and Portugal, the Moorish and the Norman-Goth- ick appear as distinctly applied in various structures of different aeras. Sometimes they are mixed in the same. The affinity which may be discovered be- tween the Gothick style and that which charac- terises all the Moorish, or more properly the Arabic buildings, seems to prove that, after the irruption of that people into Spain, it prevailed to a certain degree, even posterior to the domi- nion of the Saracens, in that country. There were, in fact, no similar examples to be found among the ruins of Greek or Roman architec- ture, which were then remaining all over Eu- rope ; and that manner and those proportions which so far resemble such as were adopted * ‘‘ The Moorish architecture of Spain, from which some writers have endeavoured to derive the Gothick, is certainly not Gothick, and is connected with that style only by slight and superficial resemblances.” — Essay^ Anon, (Wheley.) 108 ARCHITECTURE IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. by the constructors of Al-Hamra, Al-Canzar, and the mosque at Cordova, the cathedral of Monte Reale at Palermo, and of similar edi- fices, were only taught by the Arabs or other Eastern nations, where these prototypes abound. The Califes erected stupendous temples both in Spain and Sicily, and likewise in the south of France, before the Saracens were expelled from thence by Charles Martel.^ The cathedrals at Toledo and Segovia have been much celebrated. It has been observed by Swinburne,f that the style of one race of Saracens, the Moors, who possessed the south-- ern part of that kingdom, was totally differ- ent from the Go thick. The characteristic of their architecture is a horseshoe, or more than a semicircular arch, at first suggested by the crescent, the emblem of Mohammed, which prevails in all their works, from the mosque of Cordova, built in 800, to the palace of Al- Hamra, in Grenada, begun about the thir- teenth, and receiving additions till the end of the fifteenth century. The ancient mosque of Cordova does not exhibit the slightest resem- blance to the Gothick, but there are a few pointed arches in the Al-Hamra.J A splen- dour of ornament, in the most perfect style * Cicognara, 1. ii. p. 230. -f Travels in Spain. J Murphy'' s Arab. Antiq. in Spain, imperial folio, a most splendid work in point of embellishment. ECCLESIASTICAIv. 109 of the East, was seen within these walls, which is not yet totally obliterated. It abounded in mosaics and tiles for floors and wainscoting, of porcelain richly enamelled with gold and azure, mosaics of gold, white, purple, blue, and green, intermixed, in gorgeous display of beauty.” In the cathedral of Cordova, which is of a square ground-plan, a subdivision internally is made by many aisles, divided by eight hundred and fifty columns, nine feet from the base to the capital, originally Corinthian, of a diameter of one foot and a half only, and resting with- out a base or plinth. There is a cathedral, nearly of the Gothick character, at Burgos, as having been built by Gothick architects, John and Simon of Cologne, after 1442. In Portugal, at Leira, there are several specimens of Norman design : at the monas- tery of Alcobapa, the whole is narrow, having a nave with an arcade of thirteen Gothick pillars, like those of the fourteenth century. Murphy, in his scientific account of the Batalha, has discovered that David Hackett, an Irishman, was employed by John the First, king of Portugal, in the next century ; an anec- dote honourable to the English school. The plan of this cathedral, with the mausoleum, is in the Gothick of that time ; the ornamental parts only are upon the Moorish model. 110 ARCHITECTURE IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. The monastery of Alco-Baza in Portugal was founded in 1170, and nearly resembles the Norman style, excepting that the arches are pointed. The eastern end is circular, and the style in conformity to the Norman, with a great similarity in the sculptured orna- ments.^ The fapade of the church of Batalha has a deeply splayed doorway of retiring arches. There are many arcs-boutans, or flying but- tresses, against the walls of the nave, having richly-crocketed semicircles on the lower side.f As a corollary to the foregoing observations, let me observe, that by so great a contrast as that which is usually seen between the height and breadth in most of the cathedrals on the Continent, and so frequent a perforation of the walls, the magical effect of the perspective is produced. But the architects had a difficulty to counteract, and an indispensable arrange- ment to consult. The narrow roofs of the nave and aisles might be protracted to any given length; which, if the church had not been divided by internal arcades, could not have been stretched from wall to wall with any degree of practicability. The numerous cere- monies of the Catholic religion, of which pro- cessions composed so great a part, required * Murphy's Tour in Portugal. f Murphy s Batalha, folio. ECCLESIASTICAL. Ill temples of the most extended length, which was capable of being tripled by the parallel division of the whole space into three parts. The disproportion above stated will be found, in the French and German churches, more fre- quently, because unmixed with the circular or first style, upon a due comparison with those of England. The lovers of Greek architecture will indeed contend, that our first surprise is produced by a total absence of regular proportions, which we gradually lose upon a strict examination. The contrary is the effect of a classical struc- ture, of which St. Peter’s is readily adduced as the most memorable instance. It is principally the want of breadth which makes the length appear excessive, and which seems to elevate the roof to so extreme a height, in the more stupendous of the foreign edifices. This comparison does not exemplify a more pure or correct taste in any of the nations which offer it, to the disparagement of the rest. If, in architecture, taste consist in a just relation of parts, in forming a whole, which accords with the idea we give to the Orders ; and the choice and imitation in ornament be collected from the rich or simple beauties of nature ; it is certain that the Gothick archi- tects, of whatever country, have exhibited much ingenuity and skill in every instance, 112 ARCHITECTURE IN SPAIN AND PORTUGAL. but taste, correctly speaking, in few of them only. It should at the same time be kept in mind, that it has no analogy with classical architecture, nor can it be fairly judged of upon the same principles ; nevertheless, there is a character of originality, which, in its gene- ral and complete effect, surprises till we become enchanted with its influence. ^ ^ ^ NOTES AND EXTRACTS ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE SECOND DISCOURSE. [A] page 76. — The antiquarian reader will consult Thea- trum Basilic(R Pisancd, Josephi Martini, fol. Romae, 1705 ; and the work by Flaminio del Borgo. See likewise Durand Paralele des Edifices. In Gunn’s Inquiry into the Origin and mjiuence of Gothick Architecture, 8vo. 1819, we have a suc- cinct and satisfactory view of the early Italian architecture. Among the architects of the eleventh and twelfth centuries Boschetto ranks first, for the cathedral at Pisa, begun in 1063, and completed in 1092 : Dioti Salvi (or Allievi) who constructed the Baptistery 1152, Nicola da Pisa, and his son Giovanni, (who long presided over the schools, and who were probably the masters of Cimabue, Raimondo, and Bonanni,) and the two friends and fellow-students, Di Lapo and Arnolfo, were all Italians, and, excepting the last, who was a Floren- tine, most probably Pisans. The twelfth century was also a remarkable aera for buildings and masonry, both for secular and religious purposes. The towers, which are a striking feature in the older cities in Italy, were constructed, some for ornament, others for defence — of which that of the Asinelli at Bologna, (1109,) and De’ Frari at Venice, (1234,) are among the more conspicuous.” ‘‘ The first masters in whose works remarkable proficiency appears, were, next to those of Pisa, two of the school of Sienna, three of Florence. Among the Siennese was Lo- renzo Maitani, the architect of the Cathedral of Orvictto, a work which assigns to him the first place among the artists of the thirteenth and fourteenth centuries. He not only plan- ned, but for forty years (1290 — 1330) superintended the progress of that astonishing structure. The early builders I 114 NOTES AND EXTRACTS {magistri lapidum^ as they were called,) were commonly skilled in all the sister arts, and he directed the- execution of the sculptures, bronzes, and mosaics, with which they were then embellished. It were to little purpose to enumerate his contemporaries and fellow-citizens.” pp. 59? 60. [B] page 79.— It should be remarked, that the interior of the Cathedral of Milan, which is of the close of the fourteenth century, is of the same Got hick style which prevailed in France and Germany during that sera:, the architect was called Zamodia Tedesco, the German. May not the distinc- tive appellation Tedesco ” have been given to Zamodia, as the first architect from Germany who introduced their national Gothick into Italy ? The Italian architects of that asra were denominated from the place of their birth, as Nicola and Giovanni da Pisa. It is not certain that Lapo or Jacopo, who has been so styled, was, in fact, a German architect : he built the cathedral at Arezzo in 1240. W e have nothing which might authorise a strict compari- son with the Cathedral at Milan, as to the immensity of the work, or the astonishing and endless labour which has been expended upon it. Without ascending the roof, no idea can be formed of the vast profusion of elegantly-carved ornaments, the Gothick work, or the astonishing number of statues and alto-relievos which are found there, some very small, others of a gigantic size — -generally speaking, good. They pos- sess, of cour.se, different degrees of merit, as having been made in different ages. There is a singular application of them, which is seen, I believe, nowhere else they stand upon the very summit of pinnacles and finials. The Louvre, in the centre of the church, is very large, and of grand effect, but is disfigured by a wooden spire. The flying arches are literally feathered with crockets.” — MSS. Kerrich, Brit.Mus. [C] page 80. — A general view of that peculiar modification of the Gothick style, which prevailed in Italy before the period limited to 1437, may be more usefully presented in a tabular form. TO THE SECOND DISCOURSE. 115 Dates, Dimensions, and Architects of Cathedrals, ^c. in Italy, Sicily, and Calabria. NORMAN AND GOTHICK. NAMES. DATE. ARCHITECT, &C. Genoa Messina . Palermo, MonteReale Benevento Padua Arezzo . 1125 1180) 1185) 1198 1231 1240 to 1260 Founded by Martino Doria. Founded by Ruggiero Count of Sicily, in 1 100. Bishop Ruggiero, his nephew. Nicola da Pisa. j- Lapo or Jacopo, a German. Spoleto. Orvietto . Naples Sienna Milan . 1290 . 1260 . 1338 . 1387 Lorenzo Maitani. Giovanni da Pisa. Lapo da Sienna. Zamodia. The churches in Sicily, which were erected either by Count Ruggiero or his successors, who formed the Norman dynasty, have not been, as yet, examined with scientific minuteness. None, for its great curiosity, deserves more than the Cathe- dral of Palermo. [D] page82. — -It appears that, after the age of Charle- magne, in 835, Rumualde, an architect, constructed the Ca- thedral of Rheims ; Azon built that of Sees in Normandy, in 1060 ; in 1222, Robert of Lusarche began that of Amiens, which was finished after his death by his scholars, Thomas de Cormont and his son Renault. ( Le Noir.) St. Denis, built by Eudes and Mathieu de Vendosme, and the facade by Suger, contains, in the crypt, the most ancient instance of sculp- tured capitals and ornamented building in France; and in the whole structure are seen complete specimens of the three aeras of its architecture. [E] page Architectural Antiquities of Normandy, by J. Sell Cotman, accompanied with historical and descriptive notices by Dawson Turner, F.A.S., two volumes, imperial folio, 1822. 116 NOTES AND EXTRACTS A Tour in Normandy^ for the purpose of investigating the Architectural Antiquities of the Duchy, by D. Turner, two volumes, octavo, 1820. Pugin and Le Keux’s Engraved Specimens of the Archi- tectural Antiquities of Normandy^ quarto, one volume, 1827. Description Historique et Critique et Vues de Monumens Eeligieux et Civiles les plus remarquahles du Departement du Calvados (Caen), par T. de Jolimont, fol. 1825. DucareFs Ayiglo-l^orman Antiquities, fol. 1767, translated, with copious Notes, by M. Lechaude, Caen, 1823. Whittington's Historical Survey of Ecclesiastical Edifices in France, octavo, second edition, 1811. Boisserie, Histoire et Description de la Cathedrale de Cologne, avec de Recherches sur Architecture des Anciennes Cathedrales, imperial folio, with a volume of plates. 1827. [F] page 84. — They are likewise to be observed at St.Georges de Boucherville, and St. Hildebert de Gournay. Sometimes two isolated columns rise from one base, and are crowned by one capital. At the church of Than, near Caen, the termi- nating arches of the nave are larger than the intermediate ones; at Jumieges, they alternately spring from round pil- lars, and from square piers with semi-cylindrical columns affixed to each of their sides ; and at Pavilly they are sup- ported by clustered columns, with unadorned capitals and enormous hexagonal bases. [G] page S5.—Cicognara has observed (1. ii. p. 228) that the ‘‘ oltra montani,” or architects in the countries north of Italy, during the later centuries, had the ambition to enlarge, im- prove, and embellish the style of their ecclesiastical architec- ture; for they had persuaded themselves that the greatest possible beauty in an edifice consisted in the labour, difficulty, and expense of erecting it, and by loading it with ornaments of the most capricious description. They are best described in his own language, as the variety of discriminative terms may be curious to the intelligent reader : — - Alti loggiati, TO THE SECOND DISCOURSE. 117 strani capitelli, di archi acuti che intercano arcati circulari ; di colorme longissime, isili, armodate, ritorte, spirali, aggru- pate; ponendo intorno alle maggiore porte dei tempj lunghe sfuggite di colonetti capillari, a guisa di prospettivi ; dando alle fenestre una configurazione di fissure furtive, piu die aperture capad a? introduzione libera e larga della luce- — cosi constituerono quel ordine,” which prevailed from 1350 to 1500, in the greater French and German churches. In Italy, Gothick architecture appears to have been intro- duced at a very early period, and to have acquired a degree of richness which the Gothick buildings of this country did not assume till many years afterward.” Examples adduced are, a window in the Cathedral of Messina in 1120, and the Baptistery at Pisa, WB^—ArcfKZologia^ vol. xv. p. 363. [H] page Sd-— -Dimensions in English foet. Cathedral, Rouen. — Total length, f. 442 by 89. 11 inches. Nave, f. 210 by 27. Transept, f. 177. 8 by 27. Choir, f. 110 by 35. 6 inches. Louvre, f. 164. 8 high. General height, f. 91. Aisles, f. 45. 6 high. External heights: W. towers, f. 230. Fa 9 ade, f. 180 wide, and f. 230 high. Spire, 380. Church of St. Ouen.— Total length, f. 451.4 inches by f. 89, including the aisles. Vaulting, f. 100 high. Nave, f. 264. 4 by 36.10. Transept, f. 140.10 by 36.10. Choir, f. 110.6 to the chevet, and f. 76. 6 beyond it. Pillars of the nave, eleven on either side, f. 15. 6 apart. Those of the louvre and central tower are f. 10. 10 in diameter. There are one hundred and twenty-five windows, and three roses. The octagon tower is f. 240 high. We may acquire a more immediate knowledge of these proportions, by comparing them with others in our own large churches. Church of St. Ouen, nave, f. 36. 10 wide ; f. 108 high, Westminster Abbey, f. 38, and 101. Louvre, under the central tower, f. 164. 8 high. At York, f. 180. Choir of Gloucester, f. 34. 6 wide ; f. 86 high. Of York, f. 43, 118 NOTES AND EXTRACTS and f. 101.6 high. King^s College Chapel, Cambridge, f. 290 by 45, and f. 78 high. Henry VIItNs Chapel, West- minster, f. 103. 4 by f. 35.9j and 60.4 high. Proportion of the excess of the height beyond the width, in several choirs and chapels. Westminster Abbey, f. 62. 8. Gloucester, Choir, f. 51.6. Hen. Vllth’s Chapel, f. 40. 7. King s Coll. Chapel,f. 33. York . . f. 58. 6. Rouen Cathedral, f. 45. St. Ouen, f. 72. Comparison is the only true scale by which an architec- tural judgment can be formed. In the church of St. Ouen is a slab with two portraits in brass, of an old and a young man, in lay habits, each of which points to a plan upon a tablet in one hand, and with a compass in the other. Inscription Alexandre de Berneval Maistre de CEuvres des Ma9onerie de ceste eglise M cccc XI. [I] page 95 . — Actual measurement of the component parts of several chief Cathedrals in France, taken in French feet, and adapted to the English. Notre Dame, Paris. — Western towers, f. 221 high. With- in the walls, f. 492. 6 long. Nave, f. 243. 9 by 42. 3. Two double aisles with galleries over them, of equal dimensions. Choir, f. 157. 1 by 37. 11. Vaulting, f.ll2. 8 high. South rose window, f. 45. 6 in diameter. Rheims Cathedral. — Fagade, f. 140. Towers, f. 253 high. Length, f. 438. 8 by 93, including aisles. Vaulting, f. 116 high. Nave, f. 37.11 wide. Transept, f. 150. Aisles, f. 22. Triforium or gallery, f. 10 high. Chartres Cathedral. — Old spire, f. 342 ; new, 378 (the highest double spires in France). Length, f. 376 by 103. Vaulting, f. 106 high. Nave, f. 222 by 46. Transept, f. 195 by 40. Pillars, f. 8.6 in diameter, with statues of the Apostles f. 8 high. Choir, f. 114 by 46. Bayeux Cathedral. — Length 296 by 76, and 76 high. Nave, f. 140 by 48. Aisles, f. 17 wide. Transept, f. 113. TO THE SECOND DISCOURSE. 119 Choir, f. 118 by 36. Central Tower, f. 224 high : the western, f. 230 each. The finest French cathedral, in point of dimensions, is that of Amiens. [K] page 98. — An Essay on the origin and progress of Gothick architecture, traced in and deducted from the ancient edifices of Germany, from the eighth to the sixteenth century, by Dr. G. Moller, architect, &c. (excellently translated, 8vo. 1824.) The original work was published at Darmstadt in 1819 — 1822, in fourteen numbers, imperial folio, containing eighty-four plates, all of which are of Cathedral Churches in Germany. In 1830 was published at Cambridge what the very well informed author (Professor Wheley) calls merely . a subsidiary Essay on German Churches^ with Remarks on the Origin of Gothick Architecture,^’^ 8vo. It is, indeed, replete with novel and most satisfactory intelligence upon those subjects. He observes, that ‘‘ the adoption of the pointed arch in vaulted roofs arose from the requirements of vaulting, and from the necessity of having arches of equal heights with different widths ; and it appears that the succes- sion of contrivances to which these circumstances gave birth, is found more completely developed, and probably more an- cient in German edifices than in our own.” “ Some of the modes of building which had been only hypothetical suppositions, when applied to English churches, were found to have existed as common architectural prac- tices in Germany.” — Essay, ( Wheley,) p. 3. Moller attributes to the architecture of Germany two dis- tinct styles — first, that of the southern provinces, which were more immediately under the Roman power, and was borrowed from them by a rude imitation ; second, that which originated in the twelfth and thirteenth centuries, the leading peculiarity of which was the pitched roof of extreme height, instead of the flat gables, which rendered lofty internal pointed arches under the triforia essentially necessary ; pinnacles, filled up with the form of ornamented windows, surmounted by gables. 120 NOTES AND EXTRACTS. and finished by pyramids. ‘‘ The main forms, as well as the whole system of their ornaments, are in perfect harmony in these churches, and rest upon the pointed gable, the pyra- mid, and the pointed arch. A similar harmony of form reigns in all the best German churches, from the thirteenth to the fourteenth century.” With respect to ornamental carving, a prevalence will be observed of leaves, variously composed and in garlands, above any geometrical form. Such are fre- quently very finely finished, and offer very bold profiles. The small canopies over the statues are shaped like little towers, which admitted of greater embellishment in the pro- gress of the art.” The German antiquaries and artists have published, or are engaged in several magnificent works, of the greatest expense and curiosity. Moller has published Monumens de V Architecture Alle- mande, with descriptions in German, 15 livraisons, folio, with numerous etched plates, (nine plates elephant size,) illustra- tive of the Cathedral of Cologne in detail. Flans and Elevations of the Church of St. Elizabeth^ at Marburg, folio. Large ditto of the Cathedral of Oppenheim. Boisserie'^s Cathedral of Cologne, and the Architecture of the Upper Rhine, a magnificent work, with a volume of plates, elephant folio. [L] pagel02. — ‘‘TheAbbey of Altenburg, at a little distance from Cologne, now a manufactory, had a church of the same admirable style, and which still exists : this is said to have been built by the same person who was the architect of Cologne ; and as it was finished, we are enabled, from the exquisite lightness and grace of its interior, to form some conception of the splendid and majestic vision which would have been em- bodied by the completion of the original plan of Cologne.” — Essay, Wheley, p. 67. Many, and those among the finest specimens, it is much to be deplored, both in France and Germany, have been converted to profane purposes. Some of the most highly-finished churches in Rouen are now work- shops and messageries. A GLOSSARY OF THE FRENCH TERMS OF ARCHITECTURE USED EY THE MASTER-MASONS OF THAT NATION, AND BY THE AUTHORS ON THAT SUBJECT. Croiste — croisees fenkres^ the transept of a church — the large windows of a church. Roses placees a ses deux extremites^ the circular or mari- gold windows, generally three, in a church ; one at the west end, and one at either end of the transept. JuM^ a lofty gallery or pulpit at the entrance of the choir, from whence the precentor regulated the choir at high mass. La nef, navis ecclesias, the mid-space of a church, from the west end to the transept, or to the choir. L’^axe de la ?ief, the central line of the roof of the nave. Les maitresses voutes de feglise^ qui comprennent la nef^ la croisee^ et la clioeur^ the principal roofs, those of the nave, the transept, and the choir. La mute, a roof formed by stones which support each other — in Gothick architecture, by ribs of stone, springing from a centre. Le rez de chaussee^ the ground or basement, as high as the water-table. Des piliers qui sorit accompagnes de culs de lampe^ et les petits dais destines d recevoir des statues^ a kind of pen- dentives which are placed below the intersections of Gothick roofs : — canopies and pediments of niches which contain statues. Faisceanx de colonnes, the small pillars round the central one ; reeded pillars ; clustered pillars. Portails, the great entrance of churches, occupying much of the facade. An ornamented porch. Tenans en fer, a piece of iron bound round a square, up- right beam, and fastened by a loop> 122 NOTES AND EXTRACTS. Les arcs-boutants et contreforts^ upright or flying but- tresses ; abutments to support the clere-story. Les pyramides et V amortissement ^ finials which rise from a square or polygonal turret. Les croteres de la balustrade, small pillars or pediments for statues placed on the summit. Les frontons, the highest triangular part of the facade, including the nave. Les mineaux des fenetres, the mullions and transomes of a window. Les montures des piedroits, the mouldings or grooves of the jambs or head of a doorcase or window, into which are inserted canopies and figures of small size, and which follow the course of the arch. Les murs contrebutes, the walls of a church abutted by flying arches between the windows. Les piliers bout ants des quatre angles de la croisee qui resolvent d la fois la retombce de trois arcs-boutants, plain buttresses which are the basis of flying arches. Galeries hordees de ballustrades a jour, galleries on the roof, guarded by ballustrades of open work. Un luxe d’artetes rosaces et des culs de lamps ou pendentifs, toujours croissans jusques a la renaissance, the richness and variety of the bosses, roses, and pendants in the roofs, which were still increased till the revival of the Roman architecture. Grosses poutres avec figures d V extremite, large beams with little figures at their extremities, carved out of timber. Bas-cotes, lower side-aisles. Escaliers tournant en vis, noel or winding staircases. Vis is the small circular pillar which ascends from the bottom to the top, the steps like a screw. Les retombees reposent, &c. that part of an arch which has its bearings without a centre. Arcades sur bassees, low arches which rest upon the ground. Pignons d jour, les tous enrichis de statues, perforated or thorough-light pediments, surmounted by statues. FRENCH TERMS OF ARCHITECTURE. 123 Fenkres prises dans le comble^ construites en ogive, windows resting on the walls and taken out of the roof, finished in a pointed form, with finials, &c. Chardons, the points of iron palisades, wrought like fleurs- de-lis. Montans, the moulding or projecting member which finishes the cornice of a building. Pourtour de la nef, the internal extent of the nave in all its parts. Toit en pavilion, a roof, the timber frame of which' is raised like a tent or a pavilion. Statues adossees d chaque pilier, statues affixed and placed with pedestals and canopies against pillars. Bas-reliefs gravies en creux, bas reliefs with under-cutting. Pierre de liais, freestone from Caen ; liais. Les boisseries, exquisite carving in alto and bas-relief in wood. Couronnement Gothique d'un port e, the pediment of Goth- ick moulding placed on the face of a wall, above a doorcase. Gargouilles, masquerons a figure chimerique, waterspouts of a capricious form in the parapets of churches. At Rouen were two human figures, called Adam and Eve, with closed mouths, the water passing as in nature. Gargouille means literally an open throat : the figure is generally that of a flying dragon. Clochetons—clochetons djour delicatement travailles, tur- rets thorough-lighted, with open lace- work in stone. Clochard, a campanile or bell-tower, always detached from the main body of a building ; sometimes constructed with timber-frame, covered with lead or slate tiles. Menuiserie, carved in Avood, or moulded with iron or plaster. Un toit point'd. This very sharply-pointed roof was used generally for church-towers : others similar, but of greater span, when applied to the towers of castles or palaces, are called pavilions, either oblong or circular, from their obvious resemblance to a tent. 124 NOTES AND EXTRACTS. Massifs, an upright buttress or pedestal, supporting a statue or figure. Nervures, additional ribs or veins diverging from the top of the vaulting pillar. Conoids, spandril, a pyramid with many sides, with a cur- vilinear slope ; an inverted curvilinear pyramid. The con- cavo-convex vaulting. Voussures, separate hollows of a vaulting. Chrochet. Crocket, a hook, or curled lock, like hair. Pendentives, au milieu duquel est placee une image, pen- dants, having a canopy and figure carved in the sides. Lunette, a vaulted bay window made in the sides or flank of an arched roof, or a cupola, in order to admit light. Louvre, the same, common in halls for the emission of smoke. Fenetres lucarnes, windows projecting from the roof, nearly as high as the ridge, and which rest upon the side walls, and are richly ornamented in front. Grenier ou dormier fenetre. Grenier windows are made in the high roof, to light the granary — Dormier, for the dormi- tory. The above are peculiar to the large mansions erected about the reign of Francis the First. Perpendre, a large stone balanced by equalling the thick- ness of a wall. Quarelles, the square space included within the arcade or division. Hovels avec gabletz, niches composed of canopies and pediments. L'ceil des aisles, the large circular windows in the nave and transept, filled with rich stained glass, set in mosaic patterns without figures. La retour d^equerre, right angle. Une galerie inttrieure prise dans epaisseur de murs deface, an interior wall, taken out of the thickness of the wall, from the face of it. Chambranle, an ornamented groove made in the splay of a door-case. Le fond de Papside, the end of the absis and choir. This FRENCH TERMS OF ARCHITECTURE. 125 kind of termination prevailed in the thirteenth century : it has a Roman origin, and has been copied in all Norman buildings. Contre-retahles en menuiserie^ carved wainscot behind the altar— reredoss, usually of rich cabinet-work in wood, but in other instances of bas-relief in stone. Petit s dais travailles d jour ^ a small canopy over a niche wrought in open work. Les contours de la voussure^ des arceaux, the outline of the vault or retiring surface of a doorcase. Le trumeau de la porte, a pillar placed from the base to the centre of a large door-case, sometimes sculptured with a niche containing the figure of a Madona. Cadre ogive, a frame in the shape of a pointed arch. The term ogive has been applied by French writers to describe the pointed in distinction to the semicircular arch. Les arcs rampants, flying arches which spring from but- tresses to support a wall. La charpente de grand comble, the timber-frame of the chief roof. Doubles bas-coth formant des larges peristyles, side aisles divided by a peristyle, as at Notre Dame, which makes them appear to be double. Grosses colonnes isolees et engages dans les murs, great pillars insulated, or which are detached from the walls. Travee, the space between two beams, or between one and the wall. Amortissement : it includes all the ornaments or statues placed upon the summit of a church. Fastigium. Arcs ogives et les nervures croissees diagonalment, pointed arches with ribs, which cross each other diagonally. “ Lon- gitudinal and transverse bands were first used in roofs. The rib ran along the top of the vault.” Evidees djour, wrought or voided open work ; perforated parapets. Chapelle de Vierge situe au chevet de Veglise, the chapel of the Virgin, always placed beyond the choir. 1^6 NOTES AND EXTRACTS. Comhle en charpente en la forme de pavilion^ a roof, the timber-frame of which forms a pavilion. Une porche en saillie^ a porch which projects far beyond a building. Xc linteau du chamhranle de la porte, the lintel, or piece of wood or stone placed to support the masonry above the door- way. Sculptures et cTentrelacs^ carvings and scrolls interlaced over grooves and mouldings. Ohelisques d jour^ finials perforated or thorough-lighted with carved work. Naissances de voutes ou arrachemens en pierre^ the part above the impost, from which the arch springs to the centre : — servent d contrebuter la poussee des voutes^ to abut against the splaying or lateral pressure of the wall. Lefastige du toil du chccur^ the ridge of the roof of the choir. Trumeau qui separe la porte en deux^ the upright which divides the space of the great doorway. Grands arcs en pierre^ en plein ceinture^ principal arches of stone, with circular heads. Cadre ogive, grand cadran de la porte, the great pointed moulding which encloses the door-case. Traves de la nef, cross-beams. Lie maitre autel, the high altar placed in the chevet of the choir. Les voutes qui par leurs divisions en angles, rentrans et saillants, decorees de figures et de rinceaux d?ornem,ents, vaults with intersections of salient and retiring angles, deco- rated with carvings. Ceps de vignes decoupes d jour qui suivent les contours des arcs ogives ainsi que des entrelacs et des rinceaux, branches of vines which follow the outline of the pointed arches, as well as scrolls and other foliage with stems. Tympan au-dessus de la porte, the space under the arch, above the doorway. FRENCH TERMS OF ARCHITECTURE. 127 Uavant corps de la porte^ the projected building of the porch. Piliers ornes sur chaque face de colonnes engages^ pillars ornamented on each face of the principal columns. Grosses tourells surmontees de cones^ large turrets sur- mounted with spires. Branches d'^ogives dans les voutes^ nouvelles arcades en ogives^ sections of vaults made by ribs, in the form of pointed arches. Ressaut, a projecting moulding or fillet in the splay of a Gothick arch. Fueilleur, the groove into which doors or windows are shut. Arcs douhleuxj a double arcade on either side the nave, exactly formed, one above the other, as at Notre Dame at Paris. Surmontees de clochetons et de pyramides^ small towers with low spires. Rond-point du chocur^ chevet^ the eastern termination of the choir, round or polygonal. Grand comhle de Veglise est convert en ardoises^ blue slate, applied as the covering of roofs instead of lead. La toiture de la croisee^ the roofing of the transept. Escaliers en lunafon, en vis, a winding staircase ; a noel, as in belfries ; beffroi. Arc ogive ornee d'^un decoupure a jour, a salient angle forming two faces, which passes under a vault from two oppo- site angles ; a cross-springer ; or merely a ribbed arch pointed, with open work enclosed within it. Bextrados de la voute, external facings of the ribs of a vault. Cartouches, a tablet of stone of a capricious form, with carvings or inscriptions. Facade surmontee d'^un pignon, principal front surmounted by a triangular face, nearest the roof, and highly orna- mented. Ees trefles decoupes d jour, trefoils wrought in open work, and frequently other leaves. 128 NOTES AND EXTRACTS. Contreforts mrmonth de clochetons et de pyramidesy flying buttresses surmounted at the base with turrets and finials. Extrados orne desjolies decoupures, external facing of the arch, ornamented with open work. Coiironne ducal travaillee d jouVy ducal crown, or balus- trade of a tower, composed of open work, as those at Rouen. Beffroiy helfreduSy borrowed from the English term belfry. Nervures croiss^es, cross-springers or ribs supporting vaults. Centre de rond-pointy the centre of the chevet or termina- tion of the choir. Bas c6th, side aisles under the triforium or gallery. Dans ocuvrey withinside the building. Pendentifs ou encorbellemensy pendants or corbel-stones, so placed as to project one over the other. Fortes pratiquees sur des profonds voussures ogives, doors in the thickness or substance of a pointed arched door-case or vault. Deux j ambages de la porte, the two jambs or sides of the above-mentioned. En arriere corps, part of a building placed behind another. CharpentCy the roof of timber-frame. DISCOURSE III. FLORID GOTHICK. 1400—1520. Church architecture in England, when it had reached the zenith of excellence, very soon passed beyond it. Simplicity, with its harmo- nious effect, was now superseded by an accu- mulation of minute ornament, which invention and skill were employed to supply, and caprice frequently usurped the place of beautiful con- struction. This has been designated the Flo- rid, with as clear a definition as by any other subsequently made. I have already noticed, that in the course of the twelfth and thirteenth centuries such alter- ations of the Saxon and Anglo-Norman styles, by which it had been reconciled to the Goth- ick model, were frequently made by those eccle- siastics whose opulence and taste led them to practise or patronize the science of architec- ture. We have abundant memoirs of bishops and abbots who cultivated with assiduity and success the elements of geometry and the prin- 130 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. ciples of decoration, when to be applied to struc- tures of which they had furnished the plans, or at least had suggested the, main design.^ The allowed utility of certain discriminative terms has led to many, which have been offer- ed, but with doubtful acceptation. By some authors, too, many divisions have been specified which have incumbered the purpose of dis- tinctness. “ Where, as in not unfrequent in- stances, a style of general analogy has been mixed with one that is antecedent to it ; or where one manner of construction or ornament has, as it were, slid into another, to mark or fix the precise gradation or transition has often proved a perplexing rather than a satisfactory task. In fact, a single church should not abso- lutely decide the chronology ; but the age would be more truly inferred from many churches, resembling each other.” The earlier has been designated as the “ Plantagenet,” and the later as the Tudor ” architecture, as being appli- cable respectively to those reigns. Of the Anglo-Norman and Early English or Lancet-arch style, I have already treated. The next in succession has been denominated, from the admission of more ornament, the Decora- tive,” or Florid,” which has been defined to differ from the Early English principally upon that account. From a characteristic, to which * See Note [A] page 163. FLORID GOTHICK. ISl there scarcely occurs an exception, the suc- ceeding style has been termed the Perpendi- cular,” as having all its lines and forms drawn upwards or enhanced from either the circular or horizontal and it differs mainly in having certain perpendicular members, mullions, pan- nels, &c. which, in the last mentioned, are only so in part. The fifteenth century, beginning with the reign of the fourth, and extending nearly to the close of that of the seventh Henry (1400— 1509), will be found to include the total pro- gress of that particular manner of building, called, for the sake of distinction, the “ Florid Gothick.” It has been lately advanced, if not proved, that we borrowed much from the lower style of German Gothick, and more particularly from that which was then prevalent in Bur- gundy. In the subsequent age, even that style was abandoned for the inventions of Holbein, and John of Padua, in England, imperfectly adopted from those of Brunelleschi and Palla- dio, the great reformers of architecture in Italy. * See Rickman's useful and very judicious Attempt to discriminate the styles of English Architecture^ 8vo. Cottingham, in his Introduction to his Account of King Henry the Seventh's Chapel at Westminster^ divides the subject of Gothick architecture into three grand periods. His defini- tions are clearly and distinctly given, and they present a view of the transitions which succeeded each other, and their dates, with a sound knowledge of his profession. K 52 132 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. The leading peculiarity of this later manner of building is chiefly to be perceived in the vaultings of roofs connected with windows, and the construction and ornaments of cloisters and towers.^ In the roofs, f the intricacy of figures de- scribed by the intersecting of cross-springers, or diagonal ribs, and the exact adaptation of the complex groins of the vault to the heads of the windows, which are more pointed than in the preceding age, together with the scarcely credible height and thinness of the side walls, fill the eye of the astonished spectator with an instantaneous alarm for his own safety. Jam lapsura cadenti Imminet assimilis. iEN. 1. vi. 503. * Comparative mensuration. length. breadth. King’s College Chapel . 340 78 feet. Windsor . . . 218 65 Henry Vllth’s . . 120 64 For the complete external renovation of this last-mentioned structure, the sum of 42,028/. was defrayed by Parliament between the years 1807 and 1822. The whole was most ably and satisfactorily executed by the late T. Gayfere, the master-mason, who has published an ample account both of the elevation and interior, in imperial folio, comprising a complete series of architectural delineations. -f- Hearne informs us, that Adam de Sodbury, abbot of Glastonbury in 1330, after having vaulted the roof of the nave with stone, “ adorned it with beautiful paintings.” The same was done as late as 1500, at Winchester and Chiches- ter, by the bishops Fox and Sherborne, and had, indeed, an ancient origin. FLORID GOTIIICK. 183 A fertile source of decoration, peculiar to the Florid Gothick, is pierced pannelling, richly traced with graceful foliage, and indiscrimi- nately introduced into every part of the origi- nal design. Although it exhibits the virtues and power of the chisel, and the patient skill of the artist, it unquestionably diffuses a gau- diness over the whole, which greatly tends to diminish the - imposing, yet sober effect, which was peculiar to the Gothick in its meridian splendour. After having varied and exhausted the forms of leaves, knots, and bosses with rosettes, or pendentives surrounded with pannels or small niches containing statues,^ the artists frequent- ly introduced images of angels with musical instruments in full choir, over the high altar.-f Tracery, particularly when spread over roofs, was expanded into a beautiful system of har- monious intricacy. Yet a recurrence of these minute parts fatigues the eye, and prevents a comprehension of the whole design at a first view. A true knowledge of construction is the basis of architectural fame ; and superfluity betrays ^ Where the tall shafts that mount in massy pride, Their mingling branches shoot from side to side ; Where elfin sculptors with fantastic clue O’er the long roof their wild embroidery drew. T. Warton. f In the choir at Gloucester. See Appendix, p. 183. 1S4 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. no less a deficiency in real science, than the obvious weakness of constituent parts, propor- tionably to each other. The four-centred arch is the distinguishing feature of the Florid Gothick, for there is scarcely a building of that period in which it does not predominate, and which has not a groined roof with a ridged band. These edifices are magnificent as a whole, and are extremely delicate in detail, and, consequently, are more frequently admired as the perfection of the Gothick style by the generality of observers. In the windows we remark an expanse be- yond all proportion when singly placed ; or otherwise, that they are crowded into a very inadequate space. Circular windows were in usage with the Saxons. The architrave of that at Barfreston is filled with chimmras, masks, and grotesque figures ; and the divisions are made by pillars, the capitals of which are form- ed by human heads. But the Catherine-wheel window was certainly borrowed in the four- teenth century, from our neighbours on the Continent, but distantly imitated. Its more usual and ancient English name is the Mari- gold. In most of the great east and west windows of this age, a circle or rosette, beau- tifully variegated, is introduced into the up- per compartment. Few cathedrals in France are without them. They are rarely seen in FLORID GOTHICK. 135 England, in a detached form, but only occa- sionally introduced, as at Canterbury, York, Chichester, Lichfield, Westminster, Lincoln. The perforated parapet and pierced battle- ment were first introduced towards the close of the same century, and subsequently gained both variety of forms and greater lightness, by being made open to the air. The elevation is infinitely improved by them. The chief pinnacles of the Beauchamp cha- pel at Warwick have fiat terminations : upon these, large crests, usually beasts, carved in stone, and holding vanes or banners of metal, were originally placed. The same, likewise, were at first on Windsor chapel. These orna- ments have been removed from both. About this period it became more usual to place carved escocheons of armorial bearings, held against the breast of half the human figure winged as angels, and affixed as corbels, under the springing of an open arch or groining. I omit, in this part of the general disquisi- tion, to describe many important accessories to large ecclesiastical buildings, which, in later centuries, were most remarkable for dimensions and beauty. Of such, I have given a critical examination in the general appendix of illus- trations. Cloisters, which were originally, with few exceptions, unornamented enclosures for the 136 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. purposes of exercise or religious offices, were then found to admit of the full embellishment of the shrines or chapels existing in other parts of the church. This new application of the ornamental particles was assisted in a very striking degree by perspective, and the almbst infinite reduplication of a small vault, spring- ing from four semicircular groins at the angles, which rest upon pilasters. For this kind of fretted roof upon a diminutive scale, the term “ fan-work ” has been used — an idea suggested perhaps by a certain resemblance to the shape of an old-fashioned feather fan, as spreading from the base. In beauty and variety of carvings, no clois- ters in England exceeded that attached to St. Stephen’s chapel, Westminster, when in its perfect state, and that which is still so at Glou- cester. In general, from the opportunities which occurred to me of making the observa- tion, this kind of building on the Continent is extremely inferior. Almost every convent has its cloisters ; and those annexed to the great churches are probably the best ; but they are chiefly plain unornamented enclosures, for the purposes of exercise and devotion. The most extensive I saw, those at Pisa, while the con- tiguous buildings are in a style of the highest Lombard-Gothick, are in a great measure void of architectural embellishment ; which defi- FLORID GOTHICK. 137 ciency is supplied by the works of Cimabue, or of Giotto and his scholars. Less frequently, indeed, the walls are covered with fresco paint- ings, of which the more celebrated instances are, that at Florence, in the monastery of the Annunciation, where is the Madonna del Sacco, by Andrea del Sarto ; and that of the Carthu- sians at Paris, where Le Sueur has so admirably described the life and death of St. Bruno.^ In the fifteenth century, the windows of cloisters in England and France were generally filled with scriptural stories, in series, in stained glass, and the walls sometimes painted in fresco. The Dance of Macabre (Holbein’s Dance of Death) was painted on the walls of the cloisters of the Innocents at Paris, and in those of Old St. Paul’s cathedral, London, which were double, one placed above the other. j A In the first aera of Norman architecture, towers of very large dimensions and great height were placed either in the centre or at the west end of the cathedral and conventual churches. Many of these, which now lose the appearance of their real height from their ex- treme solidity, as at Winchester, St. Alban’s, and Tewkesbury, were, as before remarked, finished by tall spires of wood covered with * These are now in the Louvre gallery, having been trans- ferred from pannel to canvass with admirable intelligence and skill. 138 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. lead. Old St. Paul’s, Lincoln, Tewkesbury, and Malmsbury, had, each of them, a leaden spire of amazing sublimity ; and in monkish annals are found accounts of many others, which have been destroyed by tempests. Salis- bury, as it was almost the earliest, was the most successful attempt to construct them with stone. The towers,* which are known to have been erected in the fifteenth century, (with the single exception of that at Lincoln,) espe- cially towards the close of it, have certainly gained little in point of aerial elevation, but are much more beautifully constructed ; as they are usually panneled with arcades and half-mullions, like those which compose a win- dow, from the base to the summit. Nothing can exceed the boldness of the parapets and pinnacles, which consist of open embattled work in numerous instances ; the most remarkable of which are seen in the western counties of England, f It is a singular fact, that during the com- motions between the houses of York and Lan- caster, and their adherents, so prejudicial to the progress of the arts of civilization, archi- tecture in England flourished in a great de- gree. The superior ecclesiastics were con- fined to their cloisters, as few of them had * See Note [B] page 163. •|* See Note [C] page 164. FLOllII) GOTHICK. 139 taken an active part in the dispute ; and some of the fairest structures which remain/* arose in consequence of wealth accumulated by in- stigating the noble and affluent to contribute to the general emulation of splendid churches, built under their own inspection. One of the most beautiful sepulchral chapels is that erect- ed by the executors of Richard Beauchamp, earl of Warwick, in the reign of Henry VI. which adjoins the parish-church at Warwick : lately restored without taste. The choir at Gloucester, which has no equal, was completed during that turbulent period, by abbot Sebroke, with the arcade which sup- ports the tower. The meek Henry VI. better suited by his education and habits to have been a priest than a potentate, encouraged this prevailing- taste by his own example. King’s College chapel at Cambridge was begun only under his * A cavil has been raised against my former assertion, in the Observations on Architecture^ that the reign of Henry VI. was particularly rharked by the actual erection of some most beautiful ecclesiastical buildings,” — the usual consequence of half information and flippancy. .What will the author say of the nave of Canterbury, Bishop Beckington’s works in the cathedral of Wells, Prior Silkstede’s at Winchester, the Divinity School and All Souls'* College at Oxford, Redcliffe church, Bristol, and the singularly fine towers of Gloucester, Thornbury, Taunton, and St. Stephen’s, Bristol ; — - not to quote others in the north of England ? 140 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. auspices and at his expense, and although he was prevented from carrying on his munificent intentions by his personal distresses and vio- lent death, when these celebrated walls had arisen scarcely twenty feet from their founda- tion, it is evident that the original plan, given under the direction of Nicholas Cloos (after- wards Bishop of Ely), was partially adhered to by Edward IV., Richard III., and by Henry VII., whose will was performed by his executors, in the first part of the reign of his son. King’s College chapel was the wonder of its own, as it has been of every succeeding age. A minute detail of its history, if collected from genuine documents, will tend to throw a light on the state of architecture, as the grandest example, now perfect, of the Florid Gothick,” and on the manner in which so vast a work was conducted to its gradual completion. Hitherto, we have had more general praise of its beauty and excellence than satisfactory accounts of its origin and progress, even in those disastrous times. One of the first acts of the ill-fated Henry VI., after he had taken the government into his own hands, was the foundation of two magnificent colleges at Cambridge and Eton. His chief counsellor, with whom these plans BLORID GOTHICK. 141 were consulted, was William of Waynflete, and who lived to be himself the founder of Mag- dalene College, Oxford. In the twenty-second and following year of his reign, and the same of his age, the king charged his duchy of Lancaster with a pay- ment of 2000/. a-year, towards the erection of his two colleges at Cambridge and Eton ; and he confirmed this donation in his will, (dated March 24, 1447,) to be continued for twenty years. ^ Eton was designed “ to be replenished with goodly windowes and vaultes, laying apart su- perfluities of too great curious workes of entaile and busy mouldinge.” Little attention was paid to this simple injunction by the architects of Henry VII. The monarchs of the house of York appear to have patronised the great work at Cambridge, in which but a slow progress had been previously made. Yet the sums given by them, were either so sparingly or irregularly paid, that the roof, external orna- ments, turrets, pinnacles, vaulting, the small oratories and glazing, remained to be finished by Henry VII., and this celebrated structure was completed by his executors, soon after his decease. See Henry the Sixth'^s will, first printed in Eoyal and Noble Wills, 4to. p. 191. 142 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. A more commanding elevation than that of this Chapel will not be found in any other part of the English dominions. Being a mass, the height of which is sufficient to relieve its great length, it instantly communicates an idea of Gothick grandeur, almost without parallel. The chief cause of our admiration upon the first entrance into this chapel, is the unity of design : from which it appears to be smaller than in reality, or that upon frequent examina- tion it would do, a circumstance invariably happening to those who visit St. Peter’s. The grand whole instantly fills the eye without any abatement or interruption. When we find leisure for the detail, we may admire the in- finite parts which compose the roof, and the exquisitely finished arms and cognizances of the house of Lancaster ; and regret that being so large, they , should be stuck against the finely-wrought pilasters like monumental ta- blets in a parish church. The stained glass heightens the effect of the stonework, and gives it a tint which can never be produced by any wash of lime, with whatever substance it may be compounded, when the light passes through diminutive squares of raw white glass. King Henry VI., as it is evident from the injunction he makes, in the instance of both his colleges, against superfluous masonry, never intended a roof so splendidly elaborate as that FLORID GOTHICK. 143 designed and perfected under the auspices of his successors. His objection was not to the difficulty or impracticability of the work, for several of great, though not of equal extent, had been erected prior to and during his reign, but to the enormous expense it would require. Considering therefore the roof of King’s College chapel as the utmost effort of con- structive skill, and the paragon of architectural beauty, it may not be irrelevant to recapitulate briefly the works of that nature of sufficient celebrity which had been finished in England.^ The more ancient roofs in those cathedrals where the Norman style prevails, were com- posed of wood in rafters only : but in the progress of architecture, those were concealed by pannels, and painted in a kind of mosaic of several colours. f The surface was even made fiat by these means, as in the transept of Peterborough. The naves, both of that cathe- dral and of Ely, afford instances of the ancient timber roof. Of the vaulting with stone the more fre- quent examples are in the reign of Henry III. It was formed by groined arches, springing from corbels in the side walls, between the win- dows, and, when first invented, was composed of plain ribs of stone, called cross springers, with * See Note [D] page 164. -j- See Note [E] page 165. 144 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. a key-stone in the centre of them, and the in- terstices were filled up with some lighter mate- rials. There was always a space of several feet intervening between the vaulting and the roof. As the principle of their construction became more scientifically understood and practised, about the reign of Edward III., by the more frequent and complicated intersection of the ribs, more ornament was introduced, and de- licately carved orbs and rosettes were applied, where not necessary to any architectural pur- pose. The arch of the vault was pointed, and that highly embellished part of it did not, at first, extend many feet on either side the com- mon centre. This circumstance is remarkable in the choir at Lincoln, Our Lady’s chapel at Ely, and many others erected during the fourteenth century. In the choir at Gloucester this elaborate work is spread over the whole roof, in an equal pro- fusion. To reach a higher degree of excel- lence, probably because a greater difficulty, the architects of the latter aera invented an arch, from four centres, flattened, and with groins hemispherically wrought. That peculiar spe- cies of architecture and carving called fan- work (from its resemblance to a feather fan), which, on account of its extreme cost and de- licacy, had been confined hitherto to cloisters and sepulchral chapels, was now applied to FLORID GOTHICK. 145 whole roofs ; and with an equal defiance of cost and labour, made to supersede all the excel- lence of construction and finishing, that had previously been attainable. It is an allowable conjecture, that this new method was either known to few of the master-masons, or was too expensive for frequent adoption, upon a large scale. Certain it is, that the vaults of Windsor, the choir of Winton, King’s College, and Henry the Seventh’s chapels were commenced and completed within twenty years ; and that no farther attempts of consequence were subse- quently made. The tradition, that Sir Christopher Wren declared that the construction of King’s Col- lege chapel was beyond his comprehension, but that if any person would describe to him where the first stone should be placed, he would then be enabled to effect it,” is not altogether deserving of credit. Mr. Walpole took it from the notes of G. Vertue, who might have been told it, among other wonders, by the verger who showed the chapel. The point of difficulty will be solved, in a great measure, if, instead of contemplating the roof, as a whole or entire work, we con- sider the space only which is contained v/ithin four buttresses, as independent and complete in itself ; and the connexion between each 146 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. compartment concealed, for the purpose of producing a very surprising effect of elon- gation. One proof that the vault consists of many such individual parts, is the agree- ment with master masons for each “ severey,” or partition, to be engaged for as a distinct undertaking, and to be paid for in propor- tion. Allowing this fact, the length ceases to be wonderful, excepting on account of the labour and expense.* The hemispherical carved courses of the groins, as I have been assured by a very able master-mason, might have been worked on the ground, and with the key-stones, though of a ton weight each, raised to that height, by means of an ancient instrument now called a Lewis, of the powers of which a curious account appears in the Archseologia.f My informant has fre- quently elevated stones of nearly twice that weight, by the same means, in the magnificent restorations made in Arundel Castle, by the late Duke of Norfolk. The idea that the carving was excavated from a solid arch, as the easier mode, is not worth attention ; nor would it have been very practicable. Where ancient art her daedal fancies played In the quaint mazes of the crisped roof. T. Warton. * See Note [F] page 165. f Vol. X. page 223. FLORID GOTHICK. 147 The high honour of being the designer of this superb fabric has been, perhaps, too has- tily attributed to a Fleming, named Cloos, or to his son Nicholas, as the sole architect. The last mentioned having died in 1453, it is not possible that he had any share in the amended plan which was adopted by Henry the Seventh. Great as the merit is, which is due to the unknown designer, the execution deserves a still higher degree of praise : and the names of John Woolrich, Henry Semark, and John Wasted, may be handed down to posterity as the most skilful master-masons of their age and nation. The remark may probably have more no- velty than justness, but I am of opinion, that the admiration which the inspection of the vault of King’s College chapel universally ex- cites, is directed to an inadequate object, if it be other than of the complex beauty and the labour which the formation of such a roof must have required and exhausted. A tra- veller who views the pyramids, knowing pre- viously that their construction was practicable, will rather wonder at an expense in which the powers of calculation would be lost. The skreen which divides the choir from the antechapel is of rich sculpture in wood, and was probably the work of some of those foreign artists, who received so great encouragement L 2 148 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. from Henry VIII. Holbein carved a whole- length small figure of him in wood ; and I have seen another in alto relievo, of the same material. This delicate art was introduced into England by Pietro Toriggiano and his followers, and a school was established here, which existed, till Grinling Gibbons eclipsed all former fame. A leading peculiarity in the French and German cathedrals is, that the nave and choir are almost always surrounded by separate ora- tories or small chapels. This mode of con- structing the larger churches occurred but seldom in those of our own country, in the earlier periods. But in the prevalence of the Florid style, an imitation of that distribution of the ground plan was adopted, and more conspicuous instances are not found, than in the twelve oratories or small chapels of King’s College, and the eight which surround Henry the Seventh’s, Westminster Abbey. Humphrey Duke of Gloucester was the muni- ficent patron of learning and learned men. He began the Divinity School at Oxford, and the Public Library above it, in 14^7 : the fretted and pendentive roof was completed in 1480. It is of a flat arch, and is much too low for its length. Bosses of the groined roof are wrought into filligrain work, extending over the inter- sections, which are visible through it. FLORID GOTIIICK. 149 When Edward IV. had gained peaceable possession of the crown, he rebuilt the royal chapel at Windsor, probably from a design of Beauchamp Bishop of Sarum, whom he ap- pointed surveyor of his works. But the glory of this style and age was the sepulchral chapel erected by Henry VII. at Westminster. The exterior of the choir at Winchester was the ad- mired work of his minister. Bishop Fox.* Al- cocke. Bishop of Ely, where he had built an elegant chapel, and had given proof of his skill in architecture in several colleges at Cambridge, was appointed surveyor of the works by that monarch, and associated with Sir Reginald Bray. These eminent men were equally versed in the theory and practice of architecture, which their joint performance, the conventual church of Malverne in Worcestershire, sulR- ciently evinces. In the far-famed edifice at Westminster, the expiring Gothick seems to have been exhaust- ed by every effort. The pendentive roof, never before attempted on so large a scale, is indeed * The exquisite little sepulchral chapel, built by that sove- reign on the bridge of Wakefield in Yorkshire to the memory of his father, who fell in that disastrous battle, well deserves particular notice for its facade of singular richness and beauty. The chapel of Charles de Bourbon Archbishop of Lyons, erected in that cathedral in 1478, is the most beau- tiful and the latest work of that kind in France. 150 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. a prodigy of art ; yet, upon inspecting it, we are surprised rather than gratified. That “ma- gic hardiness,”* of which Mr. Walpole speaks as characteristic of the last style of Gothick, has in this instance gained its utmost bounds. There is an infinity of roses, knots of flowers, bosses, and pendents, with diminutive armorial cognizances, clustered without propriety upon every single member of architecture, and we are at length fatigued by the very repetition which was intended to delight us. In this point of view, this chapel of Henry the Seventh much exceeds King’s College, which had not been completed when this was begun. It affords by far the most exuberant specimen of the pendentive roof, with pannels diverging in rays, varied into many graceful figures. There are eight clere-story windows above the aisles, which, as at King’s College and Wind- sor, are low, and depressed by the flying but- tresses. The side walls are exuberantly cover- ed with sunk pannels with feathered mould- ings. In a profusion of niches are statues, angels with escocheons, and the royal heraldic devices, Tudor-roses, and fleurs-de-lis, under crowns. * The term hardiesse ” and ‘‘ arditezza,” so frequently adopted by French and Italian architects when describing the extreme loftiness of Gothick structures, is so translated by Walpole in his Anecdotes of Paintings vol. i. p. 202. last edit. FLORID GOTHICK. 151 This last manner has often deviated into absolute confusion, by which taste and selec- tion are equally precluded ; whence results a littleness, whilst the eye is diverted from any particular object of repose. Whilst so much admiration is excited by vaults wrought in stone, it will not be withheld from many still remaining, which are composed entirely of timber-frame. They occur, indeed, most frequently in the great halls of castles and palaces. Those at Westminster, Christ- Church, Oxford, and Hampton Court, are scarce- ly inferior in beauty and constructive skill to the stone vaults already mentioned. Pendents, or pendentives, were first executed in timber- frame before they were attempted in stone, as in Crosby Hall. The choir of the cathedral of St. David’s is a most curious example. The fashion of timber-frame roofs originated about the reign of Edward III., as applied to great halls. They are common about 1400, in churches in which the stone vaulting, prior to that date, appears to have been more common. The first Norman castles had arches of stone in the interior of their keeps and halls, as had all those built by Edward I. in North Wales. Remarks so slight as the foregoing, have oc- curred incidentally in the course of the present investigation, with respect to the component parts of Gothick buildings. 152 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Of the ecclesiastical architecture in Scotland, the venerable remains of which will amply gratify antiquarian research, even the following cursory notice must not be omitted. David I. king of Scotland, was the founder of the mag- nificent abbeys of Melrose and Kelso, in the twelfth century. Their style accords in gene- ral with that prevalent in England at the same period. In the same reign, both Dryburgh and Jedburgh were built. These are all of them in Roxburghshire, a border county, and were built in emulation of Tynemouth Abbey and the cathedral of Lindisfarne in Northum- berland. Other interesting remains are seen at Linclouden College, at Dumblaine, Aberdeen, Elgin, and Glasgow. But the just boast of Scotland are the cha- pels of Roslin '^ and Holyrood. For richness, quantity, and variety of ornamental carvings, both withinside and without, the first-mention- ed cannot be exceeded. Of arches, there are no less than thirteen different forms. The whole plan is absolutely without a parallel, and conformable with no other specimen of the fif- teenth century, in which it was erected by Sir William St. Clair. Holyrood chapel is anterior, having been finished by King James, second of that name, in 1440. It is a beautiful specimen, and has a remarkable peculiarity in the forms. ^ Pyrittons Architectural Antiquities^ vol. iii. p. 47, 4to. FLORID GOTHICK. 153 Flying buttresses, more rich in ornament than any in England, are applied in either instance. Contemporary with these specimens of “ Flo- rid Gothick ” is the abbey church at Bath, par- taking in a very small degree of that descrip- tion of ornament.^ It w^as the last building of equal magnitude, entirely Gothick, and re- mains in the same form as when finished in 1532. Oliver King, Bishop of Bath and Wells, who died thirty years before that time, may be considered as the founder, and as having fur- nished the plan. In an age when ecclesiastical fabrics of the first degree were constructed with a vast pro- fusion of wealth and labour, we are the more pleased to contemplate this work of a prelate who preferred the admirable simplicity of the earlier school of Gothick, to the overcharged decoration which other architects of his own time were so ambitious to display. As far as the knowledge of the powers of construction, the Gothick architects maintain a superiority over the moderns. The most able geometrician of that day, the great Sir Christopher Wren, is reported to have con- fessed, (but upon uncertain authority,) from frequent surveys of the roof of King’s College * The two latest specimens of unbastardised Gothick are said to be, Archbishop Warham’s tomb at Canterbury, 1522 ; and Bishop Langland’s chapel in Lincoln Cathedral, 1547. 154 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. chapel, that it exceeded his utmost efforts in construction ; and upon inspecting the churches of Salisbury and Westminster pre- viously to repairs, he declared that the archi- tects of a darker age were equally versed in those principles. M. Suffliot, the most scientific architect France ever produced, and an inde- fatigable investigator of the fine cathedrals which abound in that country, was clearly of this opinion. From such researches he col- lected many useful hints for his exquisite cupola of St. Genevieve at Paris. Had caprice alone directed these architects, they would not in so many instances have me- rited this praise, namely, that the boldness and lightness of their works have been always ac- companied by a correspondent solidity, the ef- fect of scientific construction, which their per- fect duration amply proves.* We must in candour acknowledge that these efforts of skill defy any imitation by the mo- derns with success, excepting in very rare instances.! The plans are irretrievably lost, for I cannot allow that they never existed, as some have asserted. In France, and more especially in Germany and the Low Countries, there were accurate details of ecclesiastical architecture in MSS. collected from conventual archives, which ^ See Note [G] page 165. *|* See Note [H] page 166. FLORID GOTHICK 155 have been either printed by their antiquaries, or were carefully preserved, before the Revolu- tion. In England, at the suppression of mo- nasteries, their MSS. were destroyed, with a very limited exception only; and it is a fair conjecture, that many were written on subjects of geometry, mechanics, and architecture, elu- cidated by drawings.^ When the zealous but tasteless reformers of the Romish church seized upon all MSS. in the conventual libraries, they generally destroyed them without selection. But illuminated books rarely escaped destruc- tion ; and as those which treated on architec- ture, or any of the other sciences, were usually so elucidated, they were involved in one com- mon annihilation : we cannot, therefore, won- der that such most interesting documents will be now sought after without a probability of success. The stupendous examples of the prac- tice of these sciences will surely vindicate the ancient artists of this kingdom from that par- tial acquaintance with the theory,^ which has been imputed to them. It will be surprising to a casual observer, that a church of similar style and equal di- mensions should be found in the opposite ex- tremities of England, and so analogous in its whole plan, as to appear to be a repetition or copy. The provincial architects can hardly * See Note [1] page 167. 156 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. be supposed to have followed a divulged sys- tem, when the intercourse with each other, or with any school, was almost impracticable. The fact is, that the master-masons were chief- ly foreigners, incorporated by royal authority. When the foundation of an abbey was medi- tated, these artisans removed themselves in great numbers to any spot in any part of the kingdom. In the earlier ages, at least, they are not to be considered as the inventors, but as the executers of the plans which were proposed to them by ecclesiastics, the only men of science at that time. The free-masons were blessed by the Pope, and were first encou- raged in England by Henry III. where they were constantly employed till the close of Gothick architecture. When the rebuilding of their cathedrals, either totally or in part, had been determined upon by the great ecclesiastics of the thirteenth century, they had become conversant previous- ly with the powers, and had designed the forms, of the new style. The artificers had become masters of its geometrical principles, were asso- ciated in a fraternity under the denomination of free-masons, and removed themselves from one English province to another, w^herever these new churches were to be built. Their constitution and internal government were strictly regular ; and from the peculiar privi- FLORID GOTHICK. 157 leges which they obtained upon their first in- stitution, they were enabled to conceal their art and modes of practice from the rest of the world. We may thus account for the general coincidence and character maintained through- out each aera of the Pointed style. It has been remarked by a French critic in Gothick architecture, that to compose a church where every perfection of which that style is capable should be combined, he would select the portal and western front of Rheims, the nave of Amiens, the choir of Beauvais, and one of the spires of Chartres."^ Upon a similar idea, in England, I would propose the elevated site of Durham or Lin- coln ; the western facade of Lincoln, Peter- borough, York, or Wells ; the octagon louvre or presbytery of Ely ; Our Lady’s chapel of Ely, Gloucester, or Peterborough ; the nave and transept of York and Westminster; the towers of Lincoln, York, Canterbury, or Glou- cester ; cloisters of Norwich and Gloucester. Yet this opinion will apply strictly to the ex- cellence of these several parts, exclusively con- sidered, and not to any definite idea that their union would exhibit a perfect model of com- position. A positive preference or decision in favour of any single specimen which I have adduced. ^ See Note [K] page 167. 158 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. I am unable to make ; each of them being so decidedly in the manner and aera to which they belong, and possessing an excellence peculiar to itself. Our reformers demolished nearly as many fine specimens of Gothick as they left entire. We have ample proof in monastic ruins, as well as in those churches which were spared and applied as cathedrals, or given to parishes, that the greater abbeys were possessed of conse- crated buildings no less magnificent than those of the episcopal sees, which comparative state- ments may place in a clearer point of view. A perfect analysis would be made with diffi- culty, and exceptions should be very numerous, to invalidate a rule which generally prevails. It is yet an obvious inquiry, whether the usage of particular styles may be invariably confined to distinct aeras ; and whether in every instance they mark the date with absolute precision ? It has occurred to me, that, whilst in cathe- dral and large conventual churches a new style succeeded, in similar buildings, with so general an imitation as to be certainly appropriated to aeras ; in parochial churches, such a gradation was not always attended to. There abound documents to prove the true date of the erec- tion of parish churches to be at least a century after the architecture of it had fallen into dis- use. The provincial-masons were content to FLORID GOTHICK. 159 copy only what existed in their neighbour- hood, or which lay within their knowledge and acquirement. Whether the foregoing observations be sa- tisfactory, or otherwise, certain it is, that the Gothick churches, whatever be the peculiar manner of their aera, present their beauties to every eye. We cannot contemplate them with- out discovering a majestic air well worthy of their destination, with a knowledge of what is profound in the science and practice of build- ing, and a boldness of construction, of which classic antiquity furnishes no examples. The Romans gave to their lafge vaults six or eight feet of thickness ; a Gothic vault, of similar dimensions, would not have one. There is a heaviness to be perceived in all our modern vaults, whilst those of our cathedrals have an air which strikes the most unpractised eye. This lightness is produced by there being no intermediate and projecting body between the pillars and the vault, by which the connexion is cut off, as by the entablature in the Grecian architecture. The Gothick vault appears to commence at the base of the pillars which sup- port it, especially when the pillars are clustered in a sheaf, which, being carried up perpen- dicularly to the height, bending forward to form the arcades, even to their centres, ascends to the roof itself ; and stone there seems to 160 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. possess a flexibility equal to the most ductile metals. In the fine churches of Peterborough and Ely, this harmonious effect does not exist, as it is broken by raftered or flat painted roofs, of gaudy colours. To the credit of the present age, the Gothick style has been much more accurately under- stood than it was in the last. Bentham, and Essex of Cambridge, were the first who exhi- bited any thing like precision or true taste in the restorations which they superintended or made. The numerous publications of the Society of Antiquaries have laid open the sources of in- formation on that subject, and proposed ge- nuine models for the direction of those archi- tects who are not misled by capricious attempts at novelty or improvement. The cathedral at Lichfield was the first specimen of restoration by the late James Wyat, who, by incorporating Our Lady’s chapel with the choir, has extended it to a disproportionate length, by which means the “ artificial infinite,” which is considered by Burke as a source of the “ sublime,” wanting both gradation and variety, is, in a great de- gree, lost in the same extent of plain surface. At Salisbury, although he has merited the praise of Mr. Gilpin,^ for the propriety and * Western Tour. Dissertation on the modern Style of al- tering ancient Cathedral Sy hy Milner ^ 4to. 179B. FLORID GOTIIICK. 161 simplicity of his alterations, he has done the same. He has likewise rebuilt the nave of Hereford cathedral, since its complete dila- pidation. The restorations of York minster were made by Carr and Halfpenny ; and since the conflagration of the choir (the work of an insane fanatic in 1828), it has been renewed in- ternally, upon the exact model of the original choir, superintended by R. Smirke. Those who contend so much for the pic- turesque, seem willing to sacrifice the charac- teristic of a great church, which was not ori- ginally planned as one vast room, but to con- sist of dependent and subordinate parts, con- ducting us from one to the other, in succession. Nothing can exceed the neatness with whicli St. George’s chapel has been repaired by the munificence of King George III. Originally one of the most beautiful structures of the aera to which it belongs, it has gained every advan- tage that taste, aided by expense, could give it. To Sir Reginald Bray, already mentioned, the nave may owe its original design, although he died before its completion in 1508.^ The roof is perhaps too much expanded for the height, and its proportion to the imposts, which are small and light ; but the aisles are exqui- site - — they have all the magic perspective of the cloisters at Gloucester, even improved by * See Note [L] page 1G8. M 162 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. loftiness. A good effect is given to the elevation by the transept, with its hexagonal termination, equally dividing it in the centre. Contemporary with Sir Reginald Bray, and enjoying the same favour under Henry VII. lived Richard Fox, Bishop of Winton, who, adding to a fund established by Cardinal Beau- fort, determined to give a new exterior struc- ture to the choir of Winchester cathedral. It is one of the most elaborate and beautiful in England, particularly in the flying buttresses and the sculpture, which, from the nature of the stone, is in fine preservation. The lover of ecclesiastical Gothick, during the middle centuries after the Conquest, will dwell with admiration and delight on the re- collection of the stupendous elevation and in- terior of York, Lincoln, and Canterbury, in their several parts. In the seemingly magical construction of the louvre at Ely, and the im- posing richness of the western front of Peter- borough, he will contemplate the concentrated efforts of that style. Yet, taking the abstract idea, as of a general effect, produced by the Florid style of architecture, he will consider Windsor as the “ beauty of holiness and of sublimity, with the exception only of King’s College chapel, in Cambridge, (which is not strictly analogous,) will seek no more admira- ble specimen than the choir of Gloucester. NOTES AND EXTRACTS ILLUSTRATIVE OF THE THIRD DISCOURSE. [A] page 130. Like every other human art, which on - attaining the summit of perfection tends gradually towards its decline, so did Gothick architecture now begin to retro- grade from the purity, the elegance, and grandeur, which dis- tinguished it during the whole period of the second style. “ Towards the end of the fourteenth century, innumerable innovations were made, both with regard to form and decora- tion, which broke the rectitude of its lines, and interfered with the harmony of the general design. In the fifteenth, it more perceptibly degenerated into fantastic refinement and false taste, by departing from the nobleness of elevation (the arches, which would be equilateral, gradually assumed an ob- tuse form, until they almost lost their pointed character) ; and by acquiring, towards the end of the period, a superabundant mass of unmeaning ornament, which totally corrupted the style, and brought it into disrepute.” [B] page 138.—The height of most cathedrals is equal to the breadth of the body and side-aisles. Spires and towers are usually as high as the nave is long ; or perhaps more accurately, the transept. The cross or transept extended half the length of the whole fabric; and the aisles just half the breadth and height of the nave added together. — - See Pref. to Willis's Mitred Abbeys, p. 8. It is a distribution of parts which will hold generally — that the width of the nave is that of the aisles, measured in the plan to the extremity of the buttresses externally ; and that the breadth and height of the whole building are equal. The internal height of the nave doubles that of the aisles.- M 2 164 NOTES AND EXTRACTS [C] page 138. — Prominent examples in the western coun- ties are, the tower of Gloucester cathedral; St. Stephen’s, Bristol ; Thornbury, Gloucestershire ; Taunton, Huish, and St. Mary Wells, Somersetshire. In Lincolnshire, and the north of England, very lofty spires rise from towers of great height. Of the last mentioned, there are, indeed, numerous examples, with which every lover of this style is conversant, and con- templates them with admiration. Molem propinquam nubibus arduis.” — Hor. Od. The pinnacles and open balustrade of the towers exhibit an infinite variety. At Doncaster, Yorkshire, like feathers or fleurs-de-lis. The pinnacles of the tower of Wrexham are octagons, — and that of Gresford, both in Flintshire, shows a singular application of statues, externally placed, as standing upon an open parapet. At St. Stephen’s, Bristol, and other towers in the vicinity, a wing of open latticed-work is pro- truded from each angle. [D] page 143. — It may introduce a curious comparison of the actual expenditure of money in the fifteenth century and that in the nineteenth, in the erection of great buildings of the ecclesiastical character, by adducing the following exam- ples, as far as they may extend. But the excessive advance in the price of both materials and labour, must be taken into the account. Beauchamp dtapel^ Warwick, computus for seventeen years, from 1443, 1806/. Ss. 8d. Kmgs College chapel, Cambridge, from 1441 to 1515, 22,469/. 2s. 7d. finished in 1516. Windsor chapel, from 1478 to 1482, 6572/. ; but much more was afterwards added to this sum. Roof, 1506 to 1508, 700/. Henry the Seventh's chapel, Westminster, according to an account mentioned, but not specified, by Holinshed, 14,000/. in all. Indenture between the executors of King Henry VII. and J. Wasted and Henry Semark, dated 1513, roof to TO THE TniRD DISCOURSE. 165 be made according to a plot thereof, made and signed/’ 1200/. in these times nearer 12,000/. [EJ page 143.— The mode of painting the original timber- frame-roofs is first authenticated by Gervasius, in his descrip- tion of the second cathedral of Canterbury, 1175. “ Coelum inferius egregie depictum,” and coelum egregia pictura de- coratum.” [F] page 146. — Among the very curious MSS. bequeathed to the British Museum by the late Mr. Kerrich, librarian of Cambridge, are the papers of T. Essex, architect, who was distinguished for his knowledge and practice of Gothick ar- chitecture, particularly at Ely. He made a most minute and practical survey of King’s College chapel, and had collected many original documents, with a view to publish an authentic history and a scientific investigation of the principles upon which it was constructed. He printed in 1756, a Proposal to give fifteen plates^ explaining the various designs and pro- portion of parts, with a pla7i of the College, as designed hy the Founder, and observations on the original Contract sF The architectural student will regret that his intention failed of due encouragement. It appears from a contract, made in 1512, that the masons were summoned by T. Larke, Archdeacon of Norwich, the Comptroller, and that the following items occur. Memo- rand. For the great stone roof, 1200/. ; for three towers, 100/. each ; for the roofs of the two porches, 50/. each ; for sixty- eight images, 72/. ; pro imagine Regis stands ad magnam portam, 1/. 65. 8d. The roof was constructed with much timber frame, none of which is seen from below.” A bell tower was intended, but not built. See a plan of it, upon two large leaves, in the Cotton MSS. Brit. Mus. Engraved in Lysons’ Magna Britannia. [G] page 154. — “ The Gothick architects varied the pro- portions of their columns from four to one hundred and twenty 166 NOTES AND EXTRACTS diameters, and contrasted the ornaments and the parts with equal licence ; and though a column so slender, employed to support a vaulted roof of stone, may offend the eye of a per- son who suspects it to be inadequate to its purpose, therefore associates ideas of weakness and danger with it ; yet to those who know it to be sufficient it will appear extremely light and beautiful, as is proved by the columns in the cathedral of Salisbury, which are of this proportion, and which have been admired for centuries. The contrivers of this refined and fantastic Gothick seem to have aimed at producing grandeur and solemnity, together with lightness of effect ; and incom- patible as these qualities may seem by attending to effect only, and considering the means of producing it as wholly subordinate and in their own power, they succeeded to a de- gree which the Grecian architects, who worked by rule, never approached .” — Knighfs Inquiry, p. 172. [H] page 154. — The rawness of new stone is totally unfa- vourable to Gothick buildings of the ecclesiastical kind. So long accustomed to contemplate churches when of harmoniz- ing tints, ‘‘ in their old russet coats The same they wore some hundred years ago,” Headley. we annex an idea of inferior dimensions and unappropriate trimness to edifices of a most ancient semblance indeed, but only a few years old. This observation may apply to nume- rous modern imitations of the Gothick style, designed and executed by the village mason at the command of the church- warden. The great architects have generally failed. Palladio gave plans, neither Grecian nor Gothick, for the front of the church of St. Petronius at Bologna, a very ancient Lombard struc- ture. Inigo Jones placed a Corinthian portico before Old St. Paul’s : he built the chapel at Lincoln’s Inn, and called it Gothick. Sir Christopher Wren’s towers at Westminster, and Christ Church, Oxford, are not happy productions. The TO THE THIRD DISCOURSE. 167 chief deficiency in modern imitative Gothick is in point of scale, and is imposed upon our contemporary architects by the circumstances of the age. In our criticism upon these modern edifices, it may be just to remember, that churches were not then built by parliamentary grants, but that from the superstition or piety of individuals, the necessary funds issued from a more prolific source ; and that many who could not give money, contributed large portions of gratuitous labour. Yet, in not a few of the churches lately erected by Act of Parliament upon a Gothick model, we are too often compelled to see ‘‘ Gothick in masquerade.” [I] page 155. — “ There is a basso-relievo in the cathedral at Worcester, by which is represented an architect presenting his plan, marked on a tablet, to the superior of a monastery. It is of high antiquity, and affords a certain proof that eccle- siastical buildings were not erected without plans, elevations, and what are called working drawings.” — Carter’ s Architecture of England, p. 54. [Kj page 157. — Architecture is said to have been intro- duced into France by Charlemagne in the ninth century. A school of architecture was then established in France ; and it is asserted that they were not indebted to foreigners for the magnificent works which abound in that country. Rumalde, the architect of Louis le Debonnaire, the son and successor of Charlemagne, built the cathedral of Rheims in 875. Ason built that of Seez in Normandy in 1050. Hilduard, a Bene- dictine monk, in 1170, planned the church of St. Peter at Chartres. Hugh Libergier, who died in 1263, was the archi- tect of the celebrated church of St. Nicaise at Rheims. His contemporary, Stephen de Lusarche, began the cathedral of Amiens, which was completed by Robert de Lusarche in 1222. The Abbot Suggerius had previously finished the church of St. Denis in 1140, which was considered as a model of per- fection. The Notre Dame at Paris was built in the reign of Robert the Pious, but probably not the edifice now seen. 1G8 NOTES AND EXTRACTS The churches of Verdun, Laon, Lizieux, and St. Remi at Rheims, are all of the thirteenth century. The architect Montreau attended Louis IX. into the Holy Land ; and upon his return to France designed several churches, in which he introduced the ornaments and the style of those he had seen at Jerusalem. The Sainte Chapelle at Paris, and the Abbey of Poissey, are monuments of his skill. Associated with him was Joscelin de Courvault. At Rouen are two superb speci- mens of Gothick architecture, which have been noticed more at large in a former Discourse. — Dargenville^ Vies des Archit. Le Noir, Musee des Mon. Fran^. It is creditable to the architects of our nation, that several of the finest cathedrals in France were built by the English, during their possession of the northern provinces. In the Netherlands are some fine churches. Antwerp is 500 feet long by 330, and the spires 360 feet high. Malines has a very regular and beautiful tower, built in 1452. It is 348 feet high without the spire, which would have been one-third higher. Ypres, regular, and more in the English style, with a tower and transept resembling York or Lincoln. The abbey church at St. Omers, called St. Bertin, is of vast dimensions and fine architecture. At Ghent the tower is light and ele- gant, particularly in its upper tier. The western front of the cathedral at Brussels nearly resembles that of Wells, but is inferior in point of ornament. I have not learned the name of any celebrated Flemish architect. A professor of Gothick architecture flourished in France as late as the commence- ment of the sixteenth century. Jean Texier began, in 1506, one of the spires of the cathedral at Chartres 378 feet high, which he completed in 1514. In England, the architects, generally, had relinquished spires, and were at that period engaged in the beautiful towers of Gloucester and Canter- bury. Lincoln and York had preceded them. [L] page 161. — ‘‘John Hylmer and William Vertue, free- masons, undertook the vault of the roof of the choir for 700/. TO THE THIRD DISCOURSE. 169 in 1506, and to complete it before Christmas 1508.” Ash- mole’s Hist. Garter^ p. 136. The executors of King Henry the Seventh contracted with John Wastell and Henry Semark, for 1200/. to complete the roof of King’s College chapel, in Cambridge. MS. Indent. These contracts were drawn up with great strictness, and considerable penalties were annexed to the breach of them. In the Duke of York’s agreement for the building of the chapel at Fotheringay, Horwood, the free- mason, stipulates, “ to yeild up hys body to prison at my lord’s wyll, and all hys moveable goods,” in case of non-per- formance, and that he shall neyther sett mor nor fewer free- masons, roghsetters ne leys thereupon, but such as shall be ordeigned and that the Duke shall find all materials, ‘‘ ropes, bolts, scaffolds, gynnes, &c. and all other werke that longyth to such a body, nave, isles, &c.” Dugdale. ARCHITECTURAL TERMS AS OCCURRING IN ANCIENT DOCUMENTS^ AND USED BY THE MASTER-MASONS IN THEIR CONTRACTS WITH THE SUPERVISORS OF GREAT BUILDINGS, WITH EXPLANA- TORY OBSERVATIONS. This is a Glossary of selected terms only, such as can be proved by the authority of genuine documents to have been the language of the early architects, from the thirteenth to the fifteenth century. In a MS. published by Hearne, it is called “ the universal language of masonnes.” I omit many which have been investigated and published, reserving the liberty of offering such objections as may occur to certain definitions, by proposing others which appear to be more consonant. The present series will consist of terms found in docu- mentary evidence, and which are confirmed, as to their impli- cation, as occurring in contemporary poems. Those which are more modern will form no part of this inquiry. From Chaucer. Chaucer, and others of our early poets, are extremely mi- nute as to their architectural descriptions, and apply the terms, usual in their own age, to edifices of poetical imagery. But he seems to have been well aware of this difficulty. ‘‘ 1ft fit ^ct]^e, almo!^t a iuerht, tearmeies alslo Shrine-works are thus described in his “ First Boke of Fame.” ** Ifn t]^fr hm‘c mo (©f goltJ iltantimg; fn jgontlrte i^tagejS ; In mo rfcf)c tabernacle^g ; ^itU luftl) pierre ( 'precious stones) moe pfitnacUiEi, moe curio ujJ pourtrautureei ^nti quent mamtere figured,” cS.c. TERMS OF GOTHICK ARCHITECTURE. 171 Castles. ** of j^tone of ( agate or carnelian ) 33ot]^c cajEitle antJ tofom, cfee j^alle antJ ebno boioere, ( chamber) Wtti^out piertisl or joining^; 53ut manj) )Subt(U rompa^£lmg^, babcune^ anb ptnnadej^, ^ftnagerirj; anb tabernaclr^g, ^nb guomt manere figurr;£{.’' ( grotesque carvings.) ** 0f pate£l ftour{jl]^{nge£(, of compaaig ne of brrbmgrsJ, iSe ]^ob) t]^e ]^acbmg m masionru^f ; rorbrlUig anb imagtrk'g.” Third Book of Fame. Which includes the several members of ornamental masonry, and formed the perfection of decorated Gothick, both as to design and workmanship. “ ^nb of a ^Suit b)cre all touresi, ^ubtilln rarbcit, after floureeJ, mann a ismall turrett The Dreme. L IDG ATE, in his account of Troy, is not less minutely descriptive. ** (iBberp totoere bretereb ( embattled ) loa^ ^o elene (J^f ci^o^e jgtone, tl)at luere far ai^unbre ; Clje tuorbmen Ijabe fell anb interne bielagee^ #f riche entaple ( carvings ) TOroughf otit of intone, anb neber like to fail, ^nb on eacl) turrett tuere raisleb up figured CO ooo !— I lO I-t (D G<( O) CM "cS O 00 C3D 01 P5 ' tr- ee CO ^O OJ Ol CO ^ -g CC Ph cd p a ° « "S .ts Q €\ ■B oS .S s-t i - •"1 t' i cc ^ is % .S 3 c3 oj *X3 fl o o I w .p O) > ’■a p. ^ QJ o -p q=l CD p ^ CO C3 Qi ?H H CO ^ ^ o C o in 03 <1-3 Ph O) m P ,p f-t cd ’S cu U ■*-> o 0) 1-^ hP pq O) (—1 H •4-j P .s s G p =« pT2 p o Eh o d 3 «+H I 0 > p- o rP G d (D D 4 -> «2 O p ^ P t 3 CO -M bo P CCS T 3 :h O O D CCS P P I I U •'-> ^ u X B ^ § o c o rP Ui , d ^ D U D G 3 o D D P D ’ d o CCS P § .§ -d 3 o T 3 cS M ^3 c3 o D O ^ g_j • ^ P “ ■n CCS Pi p ^ P ^ I ^ I « P I - d PI o 0 ^ o PI o np P d o > d P eS rP <«>-> D 1 PI O }-i P o $-1 O P' bo P P I — I D P ro CC D D 'S.S O D CD ^ S-i P CCS 03 5-1 .s ^ bJO B T ^ O bJO D P 3 PI ^ *1 1 cated open arches, which have a very beautiful effect. The aisles and nave are of equal height— only forty- three feet. CANTERBURY-— CATHEDRAL CHURCH. — From Wild’s History. 220 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES CARLISLE— CATHEDRAL CHURCH— From Nicolson’s History. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. OJ V • 'S'® 1-^ a S6 o TO o o 'a >. o 'V B ;h G O CS CJ g ° c3 S3 ^ (D ^ X c3 o» '5 H I ^ C/J O O) H c« •+0 g - '3 0) CO ^ ^ r 'ct' ^ r-' s I ^ ^ 2 -o e ^ 5 h O S2: tJ O'! cS 221 CHESTER— CONVENTUAL CHURCH OF THE BENEDICTINES. 222 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES t3 o QO 0) d: O 3 •W5 o 'S fH *Q 1-H H w .s 1 ^ . CO ^00 • o» 1/5 • • o '6 • • t/j 'd oj 0( dO O rd .fS d •d d3 K * .§ 1 • • • d. o 1'^ G « * 1 • • • 2 % ^ o d • 2^' CD . . rH H ® 2; •'.Jh w • 3 . c/5 d3 a w • • d • • 1 P ' O d3 O • m • +3 3 * OJ O Dd rd rQ dd O £ 'd C+H o d 'd o c3 ^d-nd w So "3 d d § 1 s 1 • pc? m 1 75 CD o o CD O) GO CO 00 O cc3 01 Q r-* a ^0) *o a a (D o a 0» Cl. Oi c« S cj C 03 a > c3 o c3 P- S-i OJ > (D S s So CO CD 53 CD parts of the church. The chapter-house was built by Ranulf Earl of Chester ; and many of his descendants are interred there. It is a specimen of the architecture of his day. The refectory of the abbey still remains — 98 feet by 34. The whole roof is of timber-frame. There is a north transept only, of large dimensions. — Total dimen- sions 348-180 . — Illustration of Chester Cathedral^ hy C. Wild^ fol. 1813. CHICHESTER — CATHEDRAL CHURCH. — From Dallaway’s History of Western Sussex. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES 223 Tower and Spire. At the west end 95 Bell Tower 107 Spire added to the tower 271 high. Chapter- house. Cloisters. L. B. H. W. 84 14 S. 198 10 E. 122 10 Our Lady’s Chapel. « gj * rH « Gi . t- Transept. L. B. H. North South with the window zc. Aisles. L. B. H. j Included 1 - 91 - There are four aisles, two on either side the nave : the outer were added. It is the only instance in England iments of the choir, 6 Choir. 1 L. B. H. Church 100 64 61 d embellisl Nave. L. B. H. First 105 95 61 Repairs an Founders. Bishops. Ralph, 2 . Siffrede, 2 . . ) Abbot of Glastonbury j Ralph de Warham . Gilbert de St. Leofard John de Langton Robert Sherbourn . Dates. 1094 1125 1217 1282 1329 1520 a. t/2 c rj CD S ^ OJ ^ 8 § ‘M ^ 2 a 3 .^5 <4h O a c3 a %■> o :z; o» c/2 o» Sh cj c cs 5 is eg c/2 G cc S o» -G c/2 0 ) o G eg eg fcX) eg «2 G ^ a ci^ .a oj rG3 G o :h *0 .a la o G ^cn 'g d> *a &- Qj ;h B a o cS G .a 02 ^ 'M a 02 I o 8 s .a -a s o ^ o 02 rG d) 't-) - a -4.J 05 eg t! I, i “ I o o « «2 02 o I G G CD 02 a 'i4H O »— I 8 ^ ^ § CL ^ 30 *^ .2 :s ^ o G crC 02 _ G 02 G «2 rD *E: G^ ^ ^ OJ rr-l 02 02 S §1 G oi rG Xi ^ Ti 5)0 C) 5 ^ cs _C/2 "Ig C/2 -H .S cS H ji fee's S3 ,a> cs ^ f- 'V ^ m IS ■<1^ j § p o CO «3 « i oi oj CO 3 +J -4^ -4J . Oi W 'o . « t- . o OJ CO GO O CO o) CO CO O --H 40 O O GO 03 ct) OJ CO G4 CO i. o o ^ j ^ .^2 ^ ^ m fl P- >-d g ^ ^ S ^ I a o $-1 «3 CO 3 iJ 3> pO § -s m d o o o Eh O) 3 c« ?> o to ^ fcl «c <^-l O M tJ d c rp o I ^ 0) pO O) ?o 04 Sl o ^ ^ O M o T3 QJ X OJ G C C3 ^ ^ ns S n-4 2 Ho ^ ^ gt bjo C3 (—1 _G .5 ■ 5^ C3 ^ § 0) pO c H ^ (i 04 T5 CO OJ s- D fciC « Jjangley finished the galilee in 1430, which had been originally constructed before the great western entrance in 1180, by Bishop Hugh Pudsey, (at an expense of 500Z.) in which he was buried. Its removal was in- tended under the direcUon of the late James Wyat, who was employed by the Dean and Chapter to reform (more suo) and beautify their cathedral. The galilee, however, eventually escaped demolition. The re-modelling by Wyat took place in 1795, under the patronage of Bishop Barrington, who first' engaged him at Salisbury. EXETER — CATHEDRAL CHURCH. — Account by the Society of Antiquari CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 225 Towers, j M ^ '-' Tj( rH ” S H ^ Chapter. house. B ^ sa* . M 00 : . ^ i4 ^ M , .1 s CG CO .2 « * * '-' 0 6 CO : • • CO t-1 ^ 0? • 00 CO CO o o 0} QO ^ c^i w • ‘ ’ ' S r ^ 5 «3 c5 -1 " 0) .;G 20 1-^ CQ rtO*® ^ ^ "Jjiii q~) K. PhHJ^WH QO CO i- GO O C^ O -H QO --I CO CO CO 7 7 7 7 7 O O CO o o O GO C5 O ■>* Ci --H CO CO G^ OJ ■ZS OJ 'i.j O s rO ^ bJD ^ § H cc 0> OJ 0> - g .S 'S '5 be c3 »' 3J OJ cu OJ cs 4-> CO = C ^ ^ S -M O CO OJ 'T3 173 OiJ T5 c3 G .S ^ ’bJO O ^ eS B ^ ^ ^ ci '3 2 '•^ c_ CO o ^ c I 2 § 2^: I ■+3 ^ .B ^ Jh S ^ o o c O p. Q- .S 0 rG CO T3 *0 73 0 s 0 'G c 0 0 0 oc G r^ -4-> H— > G 0 i-> 0 '3 'I 0 tH • ^ 0 0 G (—1 CO G cu OJ ?H CO CO ‘'fl O CO rt eS 03 ^ ^ H T3 be 3 CO 03 :> Oj CO ° 2 -3 "o •S ^ S > O O' >, o' s be o O CO CO t-'s ^ g ^ S 4.J tr C c3 o r-! *>-1 ^ Pu o d o OJ o ^ 'OJ > rJ2 o \ % o cs H pq pq pJ2 I- CO ^ G O S O ii Eh -5 o ^ ^ d cv J ^ ^ g - H ^ -5 ^ ;3 in '•00 ^ ^ d ^ t o o CO O S o 1 O R f-H C^ s ^ CO CO fO ^ G S H-> be ^G be CO 0 . d G 3 ^ 0 CO [g G oT G 0 » 2 S "I? ^0 s p G ;-( 3 2 P C /-s ^ 'oQ rG ^ O O O <3J OJ S 1=^ 9 h § * CO o G O S s J -a pH b G CO G- g 2 “ ^ .. ^•2-2 §^“as O H-' _CH O -J H«^ G CO bn _Q ^ ^ ^ o 7^ c2 ^ 6 ^ .-H rl G ^ [ 7 ^ P 3 CO G- p be ^ G3 G ^ .S2 G ° 73 G 73 ' ^ - O ^ ^2 !H O S-i ^ -H ^ d 0 C- S J £ 2 ^ S £ 3 s - ^ G cS 03 PM O Q G CO c3 O O Oh O G 03 O M s *7^ be a . • Ph ^ a 2 ® P Oi CD c e s s I O 2 t/j ip.'o o c c« O) C3 P3 m o 5 .. o ^ ^ .^2 o G a y CO o ^ CO CO > g1 ^ o o> TfH ■rr <1 -H O) c^-i o; ^ 50 50 G CC AO O I <2 ® 0» '+J O SK P G P-i Oj 'B p. ^ O G rP 03 GO P. Bei GO '~o • GO s a 1 — i 50 0 c3 no CO GO CO Q 0 0 GO p: 1 lo CO *a CO GO g; p. 0 P- 0 5G GO .-G GJ CO CO g ci a S-i cS s s O H no J- ^ ns c3 ^ CO . ^ CM O rH GO ^ w-I OJ ^ t £p G 0) OJ >,53 d» G CU t> G O o pq cS no o § a - o pq o a; O G G GO CO GO P- O o o o' CO G m a a CO Q 9 Alan de Walsingham was not only the architect of the louvre, but likewise of Bishop Hotham’s presbytery and of Trinity Chapel, which latter is justly considered as one of the most perfect buildings now to be seen of its style and aera. Walsingham laid the first stone in 1321. — Leland. GLOUCESTER— CONVENTUAL CHURCH OF THE BENEDICTINES.— Antiq. Society’s Account. 228 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. iS o to s cd" Ci rH QD O 0) O? CM . CM « 1-T o . ' Cu O ti X .22 1c « g T3 ^ o o o O G ^ t-:s o o .o ^ 4 ^ I h2 • QJ C Jil Qj c ^ o S g . CO l§ .§ = §^1 iS2|S £“ ^ O 0) (i| Ij;, Q ^ 53 «■=«■« S’ Sajogea-s^-g . . *.,• .t.£ ■3 Ph to CO u3 . _ CO I c =-2 OI p «U OJ filial 6“^ cu ^ I— I .2 I ^ G O) o . 0 35 ^ ^ o cc 1 ® ^ Q " " ^11 CO 'G S ^ I 73 , O C3 Dd 03 oT G c 2 G ^ rG ^ ■s i w J O «4H r- ”G o a> -t O *2 > "o G- (D ci Q c« pq 6 ^ ^ g''^ ■T3 55 G rr. ^ 05 G G ooS 52 O O G >. 5sd 05 _S ^ = «»^ |ji 8 lO o 05 T-l O 1-1 21 t- o O r-s O u- OJ O X 05 0} OJ ■Tf< •S i I. i “ S X O S3 'M flj »\ X 05 05 O 53 05 o ^ 2 .§ I 2 15> fri 05 R &J3 •TS 05 o %4 ■<—> m 05 ?2 O) 05 r! .O 05 - O ^ o .(J 05 05 M “ rx: = S ■« "2 Sc i o ^ O § c - == 1:1 aj -S &e o -S =« C 2 G 05 5 - ■' c^ G g o B ;h -- 05 03 9- fejo bJO 05 --O H O) G c3 05 rO = -ii iill =« - .r ^ 5 g 5 =« a "g ^ ^ G ^ ^ ^ a rG 'B B S-rG _g U cH I g ■£ o ^ O ^ X ^ G3 G 3 S •" = .2 j -2 01 G SPA! ^ ^ o X rj .).A (IX 05 05 05 ^ bX) H G3 05 <1^ 'G G 2 C/3 Sh 2 G G ^ ^ 05 HJ ^ fU fG O G 4-< . G ^ G G ^bX) . 'x hG 05 4i! 03 H I I 05 03 a, 03 05 fG X ^ G 3G 05 G GP oO 05 'M 05 0 05 ;-l 0 In 05 Om fG 05 . 5-5 05 05 a 05 G G 03 0 f-i U GP G 0 G 05 Gh 05 0 05 .4H) 03 "G 05 s *0 iB 05 0 .*-> G ’0 PLh 05 o. X > Om "G G • pH 05 4_5 '13 0 X r. 1 0 I— 03 a" " ■g ^ c3 X _ 0 2 "g . c" O ^ G o H a b;§og .3 a (u C 2 -5 -t; = ^ ® T! ° ^ ^ ^ o .s o w c5 ^ ^ 3 3 se 'o '5 05 1 2 o o ^ G o “ c ^ O ^ O ^ ^ X X «' o3 " O O I— ^ I rM CO 05 "03 S.J X 13 G ^§0 o X p- ^ » 05 05 o3 G G 05 G G ^ fG X oj s LICHFIELD-— CATHEDRAL CHURCH.— Illustrations, &c. by C. Wild, fol. 1813. 230 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES C5 u a> . m M 'J-' <30 G pH ‘ CO ffi I «■ 1 . GO G CO l-H ^ . G CO CO j oi o I ^ G 5 o o Ci CO 0^ 2 C 0 r, 4 <»a 3 '-c 3 '— S r •S ^ 4 J r . G> OJ CD g ^ g: cs H i| ““s ■B “ § •s § I G .Z' CCS •- S O c3 OJ 1 :e - _ . . . O) CC ^ 0) H O S A*' ^ CC o 5 ¥3 = G S ^ . . C s; "5. O "2 -a a = . .2.9i>S* = s2'a ■S 3 c " T3 3 “ S _P-i^'Qja!G_Qrr-HP oSaShG*^'^--'® O "g § O P ^ ^ A ^ ^ ^ OS ^ G' ^ f ^ "G ^ I °- O.G gJ.-.G rn •G G OJ nG G G SoAcg- ^ 5 JD§ 2 pG;c^ 2 s-' '“ s.S-S" § ‘^o a ^ o .Go 3 J: 5 G"ir-G'-'G 60 S » s G g: A G G B ^ S ^ G ^ a) " &S "a S G ^ G .2 CD G rr- Ch G ^ c« -M I S-G S C 5 2/3 c^ r 3 a; 1 — I .v DG G ^ .b G cC O Q e 3 ccu+j.,-^ '-’G'_G''"GG’rls-,G = ^ §-"£|Sio§"§ s & i s ^ "1- ^•2 O) CS bo ^ 5^ 3 tcH -g "bb |.g = g^.s arj-- — ' ^ nGGi-G .gsoj'Gh li;s 5 itii-ji|:ii ^ G G K- O .^>W (- G rl fl G J_J - S G S ^ G ^ G S""| .S ... s g .2 1 1 ^ H G ^ ^ G S? ^ _r^ G3 G G 'O ? G w bJO G ^-i c3 ^ G «2 G G .tf S G c+H Go , G w I>^ G •■£ Ig Vo CJ -O G ^ ^ 5-g u « g 2 ^ [g-B - G ^ ’j:3 g Go ^ - 2 f 3 2 ^ s G A g -^2 . Gh ^ G G G O M5 w G O B G G A" § iij ;i|^|!l' 5 i “p-fi s&Vl alf §:| G — iG'O *oCC' 'Gq o t- ^ ^ -s O p O o G G ><) (sQ; rrt P G G CO .- PGeccOoj^G'-o.G Go-- — bb ^ 2 I " V ^ ^ i ?3.S ^J_) ._ G.G *3 - ^ - o ^ 1 ^ 3 ' 5 b ^ I ^ "S ^ G G -P a; ^ J ^ G o A o r-G 1^ G (jj G G G3 dG T3 PPfc» ^ la G a; O, ^ G G O ,G GO kT^ 0= ^ J «J o Grg G t-.CGo G'l g.2 -P .G P CO G G 8s g . • g G •'P ;g S GU SPi_G G-t^.G ^ S A ^ cP LINCOLN — CATHEDRAL CHURCH. — Illustrations, &c, by C. Wild, fob 1819. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. £ S geo S'" 00 o CO C OJ o!> 2 4J ec cc CO OJ rH GO « ^ . O ni bC-(J 0) C3 Oi OJ CJ C 5 +h I O 3^'° ■G a; Ph H P .L. 2 "o GC 2) L. B. H. 140 40 72 Presbytery 106 82 72 2 ‘=5 CO . . > c3 G 00 • • o . . G 01 a> '+H o o O Transept. ^ CM 2 t- “ • CO CO CO CO M . . O CO CM CO 01 " * ' few a "o • • . C/3 cq ^ . . . CJ G . • • A G ^ s ■ G3 G O +2 c« O as o CD a a Cl Oj ,0) AO '+^ 1—1 Cl .s § ® a p S o ■« o H • .S2 A,, o) - ■ •'a S • ^ ^ ^ 3 S ^a OJ O l-§. H-g a 1 • a 1 b- a Cl • CD a * QO a • 1 CO a CO 1— 1 . OJ a o a oi . o a CO CO fl r- ’T' CD .rl a ^ ' I5.at=^ a ^ ^ ^ o £ . r§ -S ^ .2 1- 0) 01 CQ .2 oj a .5 t* C* a ^ a a: an a a P J=J3 a p oi o> a ;:2l> CO O O O O) CD G^ (>J CO ,-( O -H OJ CO aj a a: .2 CD -M h a na a ,fH 01 a OQ &■ •a o C4_ © a © g © a © ■0© a 44» a ^ a C+-I a © 02 a a, a .2 .2 a © 44) a © 2 a © a ^ a o P © a '© a 1 © a a 2 a CO a r-t a a © o 0? .2 a o .1-1 ^ a a, © a 44> ©H © a as »s © 4.4 02 © © .a © a n© ©D 02 P a a © a ^ 2 ca ? uJ 1— I as a h:; s ^ c2 O ^ «+-. o 2 •- a :2 a pq O ^ ^ be asi 2 og a CD a . a a© ^ 0? © O cn © a :S 2 a a ^ © >. as 5«) ^ 01 *s as CO « CO CO © a © be a as © 'a 5b « 2 ^ ^ 2 2 ^ a ^ ^ J %4 ^ © o a! o a © O a a a 01 as a aj a o a a © as a 0 « Cl ..H 01 a © ^ > a © fl .Ss 01 a. ca-i a O ■5 be -73 ^ o 5 o 42 0^ © a © > a ce o be © o S 2 P .is .2 -TS5 ^ -3 ■2 2 -M pH © © N as •+J © o ^ CO ^ 2 .^ '2.1 1— I cfi CO 01 t2 ^ I— t ^ s ■§ a HJ CO a 'a* be CO .N ^ .2 as5 © 2h as H .5 CD c+1 00 © rH ac a c2 a 01 'S ^ C © S :2 © u ^ 01 be ab a is © a ■T© © a a a! a, © OJ ^ -I U-, c © a I t: © J © O 2 . o n© o © O .2 a 01 ^ > © a ^ ©'' -j-a O S 3 40 ^ a w 2 ® a +j h2 ^ a o a P. a be til >> S a a a P a © a a as LONDON— NEW ST. PAUL’S CATHEDRAL CHURCH. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 23 S 03 ^ CO 03 O 1 03 "3 'g a ^ G o G 5r! « G ^ 4> S 'hfl ^ iO ’03 CO hH 03 03 G O G 'G G ' CM G ;*^ <+^ 03 03 Ph G a 40 G CJ lA a 03 G cc O o O 1 ^ 1 >^ • G ^ 03 ^ P G W cj O L. 30 !2; O p W S 03 (/} PI M ' c3 . O ;h G ^ CN G3 V2 03 G3 _G < "o G 4 4 . CD W -5d . 0^ o G Tft . CO G G rH »§g'S.2 G O 03 O 03 P._ > G p^l g§ G ^ • o 2 < a >> 1 G G o !=Mln P (33 G O G . G 40 . hM ® ® 2 2 Ji U ts “ = §- 03 G3 G 03 G G O ^ pS P G g ?■ • fl 2 o 2 2 « 2"^ mg S g.2 73 O G liarle men coal of L ton, O w: iO o 1 0^ U; o r’' ; "S CO 4J iM ' Q f-H rH 2 u o o» 'p < ,1 g-- CO 2 a; oT 3 CO C ^ .2 CO 3 JO ^'B ^ i' « o be O Ci <13 QO ^ .-I G 03 2 2 ? c3 03 i-G <« E2 03 H ® £ 01 . cO c/2 2 (-H 03 C3 G 03 'g Ph ^ O <2 03 *« 03 G. G • " I T 'S S gS I G t- g CO .2 CN -M — G i .2 03 G o 'i 03 73 > 03 03 ^ 'G p 03 3 § O ^ 02 ^ 03 O ’B i 'o i-H G CO 03 0) o « ^ CO CO 03 ^ > .2 .2 Q S g ^ p; .2 i. ^ t CO 2 .V 40 § o t ^ S f. G -5 Pm .V QD *o CO ^73 "h* G O 73 % rH O o 40 03 O CN 0^ o 1 40 o O u o o CO G s G 'p JJl i>r G 1— 1 o r£ 03 1 03 1 Oi 03 G P^ o G3 QD G 03 40 gJ' m 2 G 40 02 ^ .G 03 be G. "G 02 Ti 02 02 ^ o G NORWICH— CATHEDRAL CHURCH,— From Britton’s History. 234 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. o ^ CL ce U O Qi o .H T3 o» Li W % CD o C Li (D W3 o3 Ph 0) ^ a ° i-rt O (D 1 -3 ffl ^ H3 CD ^ rQ .N o *S- <;o . 4 .^ CO be G • s « S c L 0 S .1—1 CD 0 u pi. CA 2 Is ^ lO p- c cc 3 CU b£ >S k, a cfi a * r 3 g ^ j 02^ O O GQ CO O QO iO O -H f-( Oi 0? *0 lO " i S 03 c o » ri C bJO CLi g O oj ja o O) T3 ^ CD 1 ^ p ^ U :3 ^ 2 kH ■« ° c« o .2 ° 2 ^ co" fM bJD 03 .S O X H P- . 2 ^ 3 o P g ® 0. D l3 ^ .S ^ i-Q o %-t a a O .bJD ^ *S k.i -T3 CP rC o c3 2 0 1 'bb c -Ki C« c3 OJ hQ *Cl- cc o p- «+-. O S/J r~I '*-' H a ; r^: C 3 P ! ® .2 "S (>i ^ J e ^ g S ts D O CO ^ I »o B- o3 O P H ^ PETERBOROUGH— CONVENTUAL CHURCH OF THE BENEDICTINES— From Britton. 236 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES O) o o o o <5 Of 'S ^ > a o O) o; Oh ffl OI . O "I" CQ P CO ” -H • S6 0 1 a ^ . I O r-l iO a:s I ^ a ce o o ra .a 03 O l« ■§ <“ ^ a §J5 ir* oi .a a- w J o a o .a ra -a o c- O ^ OJ O O coa«t^ t^oio 00 05 -na^-H OJOJOO CO 2 2'S'S r pD s-> O ^ c3 (>l rS: G G G P , ^ Sh I *G ’S ^ o S'SgS o ^ cc n cS'rt C O 03 G GO ^ ^ ^ S C 5 '• . ■ a O <73 b *G 'T 3 0 ) ^ G aa o fe- O (« Tj b b , o «+H S O c3 O m 0) «3 ^ *rH s ^ cu aj b£' 03 o o ^ ^ ® b ^ s 03 SIS'? g i 5-1 G g <73 be G S ^ ^ ^ B^OO t; ^ S ^ i-b Qj o' 8 bP b o O 03 o r^H . 8 i b O) SH.^1 O) ^ -b ^ o S 2 a'S's G rO 02 c ^ P-i o3 S 1^3 o ^ .-b a §-t 2.S 5+3 b be •<-< •1-1 ^n:3 -H s| b o 'b oj 2 "3 g O > •P-I QJ ^ c3c ^0 5- T3 b 8 be^p ^ a <73 o b G= O) -M . s s G 2 5h <4-1 O) CO U j— ( b .o (U G ^ ^Z'aB o • o be'rt 20 b ^ -t-^ C3 Oj r-H G ^ <— ' G p-ii s ^ Si . >< G G3 i-b 'I-I G b C ,'— ' G G bi b .33 . b - 03 O • Ob G o b oTg oj-.^' — 1 i §^-5 •^GgQXj'’/3 0'TsOb* 20 G ? -^ •'^ '-B ^ E ^ Ve-D 2) ^ bjD^ brS ^ 1-^ ri <8 ^ ^.2,^ S sO HH 5-1 S 'Xi: «2 aa ri 03 ^ G be b ^ . S^S:2 be o^ H o - ?> ^ 03 -O rb o - o ><► O <+P ^ . , 5 h — ^ C 3 o c b ^ b G ^ E2 b G ^ ^ S o sy^ E^ I -+-< •. I> .2 o ^ ^ ^ O O rH t^' b -r JG cb o _ • r— S f7 cj o a b br~'lG'G o G2 'b H o 2 ,^ ROCHESTER— CATHEDRAL CHURCH.— From Hasted’s History. CATHEDRAl. CHURCHES. 237 (n "o ¥ W 5r: 2 43 C cn f-i ''X 1-3 a rC BU O M I pa i . O? t-J W I Oh O cc .1^. .0.0: ^ O W^.o;c/3Ei; ^ ^ O) S c S ® K* OLaqffi^ O ^ i- o CO r-l O) t- O T-I 0^ s • ^ o «+-i o G remarked, that the door-way of the chapter-house at Rochester, is the finest specimen of canopied niches effigies in the architrave to be seen in England. Total dimensions 306-122. SALISBURY— CATHEDRAL CHURCH.— From Britton, &c. 238 CATHEDRAL CPIURCHES Tower. To the parapet of tower 207 feet. Spire 404 high. — Ancient cam- panile or bell-tower taken down under the direction of J. Wyat, architect. Chapter- house. Octangular { i ^ i' ^ B. H feet sq, wide. 0 • • 0 GO • ^ CO -H 1—1 ! w Our Lady’ Chapel. G . 1 . ” CO . • Ci G CO 1 ■£ 1 M G • (^ . j Transt L. B. 230 60 Aisles. Included G . X • 1 "0 -G 0 1 L B. 140 - P G W X • • . CO Pq . . CJ J CM • • IH 5) Founders. Bishops, ird Poore [*t Bingham ft Wikehampton 5 G G Tj rO -0 • GOO ^ r^ r^ to G G c i:- 0 Hf- 0 r- X X CM 01 CM CM 5 ^ d s § § <2 o CO O cS & 4^ .15 .§ 3 ^ tc S G CX, .r, ;-4 O) > G G o G 5^ S ^ ^ ^ a ^ G r-t S G a-^ G .2 o) rrt rs rG ;h ^ G >, •N rO QD rr; •« 01 s D >^ -4J -G a „ o OJ C! G ^ G JR p O) M 4-1 s (» 4J O) - ^ s ^ CO 2^ '3 2 G rG O 0) ~ c ^ o o O) cu 'G ' G . D -1-3 'Sd g a» CO _5^ 03 CO 2 cu . t?- (D 442 O ^ G < ^ SI -G 3 rG 0^0 5^ S G rG G ^ rS ^ g g, pO ^ o s a o' CO 1^ O) o G ® o 'G o> a» ;h gj (X) f-< i> G Q O Ih *2 a,.S2 ^ S 02 rG O o G rG -4-3 P G bo o o o Ph »4 o rG G OO o rj G rG 'g G3 G ;-• G 5s :a C fe o ^ d G CO G rO G G a G G Gi cn o .a G P o a, G a ^ G -S G G rG O O .t? G G G 3 l-H a ^ ^ a: I ^ o ^ o ^ o G ^ fe ^ o 3 a _ p o G rG -J be tj 'g F* rG J3 G rG G w G G rO r 'p! > O G CO rG G . 4 . G o s CO r^ G o OJ a 'e CO G M G o ^ b, o be 5^ -S ^ 'g C G rG C/2 G CO o 2 oO £| O) rG ^■a G. £ CO CO f . ■ ij G ^ ^ O OJ G Gr O) G c rG O (O ' _G G '73 N Gr rO d G-l "GJ O G O 03 a ^Jh G4 O 4J V4 G G4 -G G G ^ G- -G ^ G .2 ^ G, a G3 ^ d G G ^ _ G 2 tJ ® G G o G o - I s s -4 g = 1 1 i * 2 ■■§ « o s 2 .a '* ~ o V G4 G G- rG G r/1 G T3 CO G ^ d G cd 7^ O G be -o g:! G r2 G 03 -g £ ^ G O rG „ rG rr- rG ^ rG <33 r,- '73 7? G *s o a G ^ _d .O be -d • rd O ^ -g g .a ^ G G r, r^ ;r 'rr G '3, G JS G CO G CS £i^(^ ^ CO c ® a a if! ® '< I .-a.s f G G o ^ § oi £ CO -73 a ^ .G O 4_, CO c d CO 7 03 CO G G ^ _ _g H ca k br, 'G3 QD M C3 G 32 - ^ 8 ^ O G 4J - rG G3 p r G P cc ’g 2 a Ph ^ be "g 03 O CO aj G G 01 rG 01 a £ 1 ^ G G O g G t~i rG o be rG P CO G G at +J rG -M d a pH G 03 " d > "G 'G d . G G c £ "S • ^ dLi G d ^ -fj (/:• O WELLS— CATHEDRAL CHURCH.— From Britton, &c. CATHEDRAL, CHURCHES. 239 cc S O 'TS O) CL ij 2 ^5 o £3 ' S ^ B'o

• w CO OD ^2 . t- pq CO CL p c C3 I g’S 0) . • .,.H OB ^ Ch Cap G 0 0)0;:^ u ^ a — cS . . , , , ^ C/2 .3; ^ S o) *-0 K* ffl ^ - s o J_i - lG 3 i-G r-i ^ ■lO CO CO C iO 0 05 CO -lO to 01 CO (At 02 S -M CCS cc nC3 t3 c c3 »T o tc 02 o :o ^ ^ rS 02 a o ^ 02 7-1 S_j 03 c3 OJO ^ .s ^ m O d- o H o ^ ^ 3 c « 02 02 S ^ 'o O G ° T3 __ S ii "« -2 ?-i 3 ^ 02 > «-> a 02 a ^ rS • iH qG 4-» 02 r"* o 12 T5 O 02 C p-i 3 f-i O «4H o 02 ’■a o3 '2 « c .r 5-1 "3? CD 33 02 -i-> c3 02 33 C 02 02 rP 02 > c3 b S 32 cc 02 U 33 02 rB^ a 02 02 rP 02 a 33 02 33 3 a CD 3 .2 02 s- Pl 3 02 02 O .3 33 § CS CJ pu -5 p- p ^ ^ 02 JI3 S 5n. 3 03 33 CC .3 ^ .S P, O s 3 O &i0 'P § ° ^ C/1 GJ '5 'S rr! 3 1 ^ 2 3 = j-i 02 . ■5 ^ o 3 - ^ O C2 P- P- ,P 3o -g 'o JB ^ IS ^ ^ 33 ^ >-5 -3 P. C" O CD P-i 3 lJ gj 03 pU 5-1 03 ,0 »— I ^ 3 ^ 3 &JD - 3 .3 o ;> - 1 cn 3h 3 *73 = I 3 32 CD * r*< 03 pU o3 -t-> c 3 bX) ^ ^ S 33 - 3. {2. 3 02 (r> K ^ 03 ^ 5^ O r,3 ^ I 02 'T3 0) -rH -5 bC 3 3 02 02 32 02 c3 O == 3 S S 2 S. 8 :s CO oS 13 L-2. p. 3 Tc (D CD 3 c\ CD 1A CD 0 y CD • r-^ • rH CA} 3 03 •N 3 CO 02 02 y *0 p. 3 PP .2 OD 3 CO .3 !-h -C y -*-> CD • rH .2 *y CD 'f WESTMINSTER— CONVENTUAL CHURCH.— From Neale and Brayley’s Account. 240 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES ^ O 0( o cn 25 o ^ o ^ C ^ to 01 S -+J s a aj s ^.2 ■5 m 04 o ^ 00 c« I— < CO ^ fcJj b£ .2 .5 [5 isi > s ^ 01 CO 0) 'y oi T3 CO ’2 .2 01 , G 01 .w • ^ -M ' «^-l o oT G o bJO 01 CO p^ p *co G G o Oi O -M '73 bo G ^G 01 *2 c^ rP O G o ‘5 ’o «+-i ep; o 01 G 01 o-' bJO •2 c G *2 u G o >-» 01 PI5 73 • rH "IS 01 ' 01 -OtS o G • *' ; G ^ 01 "o —I G G o o 0 01 G 0 01 &. O/) ^ ® -G P i.Ci O P 'SI i~i '1' o S— I C; S Oi OI 53 I P i . CO t- S'S, G ^ 0) . Pp -P 'w OJ rS 'O 5 ^ pO <>0 03 CO '-' 03 cq p CU o P S -r; « p • pu 3 o 33 g a.2 g .§ r5'T= M O _g ft, c o o C3 ^O C3 O 1-1 CO CO CO >3 D ’~C >- (3 a J c ^ CC C *'fl cj u . o 2 .2 g, ^ CS c 0> pd <:d) OD r— ( 1 io lo m G O C -o c3 ^-> O pd ■d 0) i-> o • ^ G ^ G ■d 33 s ^ G G O as O) &-I CD bJO G O S-i d eS o> Pq (U 33 0; G >3 O fS o 3S 3. T3 G G nd G p! G H as B S-i o ‘rB g as p33 o p3^ c/l s S 03 t/1 -2 ■"d OJ •S ’c3 -»~J 03 '5 '5 'll 03 ” _, 03 G cs 03 G o o +-* 03 ^ Ti ^ G 03 ’G •p p> s 1.G <13 p:3 03 03 ^ G 03 03 o- d 03 o s CS ^ d- pd 5:^ d ^ Qj O 03 03 bJD nd G 03 bJC G R WINDSOR — COLLEGIATE CHURCH. — From Lysons’s Berkshire. 24£ CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. uo « 'to o h5 t- w i LO m 0? o 1^ n; o ^ ^ CO I-H ^ o O O . 1 -H C 5 O be C! a ^ MW G> 3 ^ ^ ’hi) ^ 'S ? fl ^ C rrt o 0 >73 (D -c ic H 'g 1 •N onl ^ o 'S -§ CO ^ G G 03 k!' 03 s ^ G .5 cy G (n o *P- CO 5 1 bJO ^ ^ *G O) ^ §- S 8 «4H O 03 «2 OJ ^ cu i £ S-^ s . O 0 r> * “ « 1 N C 3 !3 bJO '•" § % G ^ bJO S CG ^ rd Tj O o> G CC O) 'B.M Seventh’s Chapel, have three chief divisions, and occupy the whole space of the nave. Total dimensions 210-100. WORCESTER-CATHEDRAL CHURCH. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. X 3 ^ O a ^ O a) bCc a X « a ^ CiO <5 ffi ^ • . Oi 0) M ^ C<3 • P W tp . « > d > . X 03 p, tp • • CM . . C pH OJ ^ XuOi W oq 2^ Cw c a; ffi X OJ tJ< o r-H 0} O) t- X CM W CO CO X V. « O) o; 03 i *+J ifi o fl pQ o fH .o ^ 'S •£ a 1 s CD ^ a ^ H ^ . ^ o oS ^ tI5 3 pQ X c3 03 •S 'So 'C o X X G .2 ’S 3 U b CD ;> 03 X o ’•£ pi2 g S ~ O CD c2 '. CM j— < rH I X o ••^ t-H X G O o § i2 S ^ G CD G Ph ‘ o Eh K. >-. G u c3 O o'O p- Co X Ki 2 £ X Pu .^2 c_. C/3 ^43 R Q YORK— CATHEDRAL CHURCH. 244 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES M2 05 ^ p2 • _ 0 bo cn G a> 'G sJ 0 es M2 G 05 05 OJ ^ G ^ OJ ^ H i4 1 1 "li Oh^ G pLi , }s.^ G CO oj oi P- CO oc c3 0 pS n G s-> « *0 CJ t-4 0 tp. Jl w 1 s o3 xn G 0 0 5 hi ^ "aJ ffi 0 • 0 G « * M i = G ■>0 'O CO CO CL o> B 0 I—* CC G « 1 cc 0) H p5 O) O'? Xfl K . * 1 Xfl B < 0 Oi . pH w . . 0 • pH '0 pCj «■ . CO 0 . . • 0 hI AO pH G C5 CU CO I ^ M . 0 • 0 . p3 *0 1 05 CC ^ £ SH SH -G • • 05 t/5 1/) _r s-» P. G 05 s g 0 G 0 < >^.s P G 5 1 G G ^ pG De Melton V. Zouch. . I'horesby . Bermingliai surer, com pi facade. 05 ^ r— 0 pH C' 0 C4 05 PT* CO C 0 c3 CO CO CO SH Q p-( pH rH PH pH S 3 O OO ^ CO ^ CO CO ^ T3 c3 as ®3 «+-i O) ^ rS3 -3 '5 no S 3 ^ G G cv O ^ ^ O s P-H QJ G ° a ^ -t-> !> G O O O ^*'1 ^ s p.- O p£2 *3 pG G O O) ^1 K*% ^ (D rr^ 2 ^ G CU U 2 ;-> O) , bJD M O . r3-^ 0) O) za (V pG 3 o pG G O) O o pG cn G CU CJ G o ^ , n G G pO 3 ■p- » Q ?0 -<3 So pG CU > G C G G ^ idO o pH 0 ^ ’o pG C pH G 05 « .2 G 'TS G M2 >73 G Gh G H.J G G 0_ pv 05 H.J M2 h G G G C3 G Sh 05 ^ CU s-> X 05 05 ^ 05 pH G 3 •rH s-» G Si- OJ ^ CU <3 pG ^ H « . CU G -s p- o o t- CO p3ii u o feet from the floor ; the choir with the terminating chapel is exactly co-extensive with the nave, 222 feet. 1 he rose window (the finest in England) is 22 feet 6 inches in diameter. — WilcTs Perspective Views of York Cathedral, fol. 1809. The spire of Strasburgh is exactly twice as high as the highest pinnacle of the towers of the facade of York. — See MolleVs print. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 245 CORRESPONDENT DIMENSIONS OF THE SEVERAL COMPONENT PARTS OF CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. TOTAL LENGTH. Chichester . 410 feet, Norwich . 411 Worcester . 410 Durham 420 Gloucester . 420 HEIGHT OF NAVES. STYLE. Salisbury . 84 Pointed arch. Lincoln . 83 Pointed arch. Canterbury 80 Pure Gothick. Peterborough 78 Norman. Winton 78 Pure Gothick. Durham 71 Norman. Ely . . . 70 Norman. Exeter . 69 Pointed arch. Gloucester 67 Norman. Wells . 67 Pointed arch. BREADTH OF NAVES AND AISLES. Norwich 71, Bristol 73, Chester 73, Ely 73, Canterbury 74, Exeter 74, Sarum 76, Peterborough 78, Worcester 78, Durham 80, Lincoln 83, Gloucester 84, Winchester 85. 246 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. A SCALE OF CATHEDRALS, &c. I Naves and Aisles. L. n. H. Spires and ToAvers. London (ancient) . 335 91 102 London 534 St. Paul’s (modern) 200 107 88 St. Paul’s cupola 356 Ely . . . 327 73 70 Salisbury 387 York . 264 109 99 Norwich 317 Lincoln — 83 83 Ely 270 Winchester . 247 86 78 Lincoln, west 270 Salisbury 246 76 84 Chichester 267 Peterborough 231 78 78 Lichfield 258 W. 183 Norwich 230 71 — Peterborough 186 Canterbury . 214 74 80 Rochester 156 Lichfield 213 67 — Oxford . 184 Worcester 212 78 — Chichester 205 91 61 TOWERS. Wells . 191 67 67 Lincoln 260 Gloucester 174 84 67 Canterbury . 235 Exeter . 173 74 69 York . 234 Rochester 150 65 Gloucester 225 Hereford 144 68 68 Durham 214 Bath 136 72 78 Ely 210 Westminster 130 96 101 Worcester 196 Bristol . 100 75 73 Ely louvre 170 Oxford . 74 54 41 Bath 162 Chester — 73 73 Wells . 160 Carlisle — 71 71 Peterborough louvre 150 Exeter . 130 Chester 127 Bristol . 127 This parallel will afford us, at one view, authentic information concerning the proportion of one constituent part to another of every cathedral in England, which is worthy the notice of an architect. Such a coincidence of dimensions as that which is CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 247 found in many of them, can scarcely be supposed to be the effect of chance, especially where the buildings are contemporary, and of an exactly correspondent style. May we not fairly conjecture, in these several instances, that they have been designed by the same architect ? To avoid repetition, I refer my intelligent reader to the tables, where he will find the equality of proportions to be confined to each sera and style of ecclesiastical architecture, in a remark- able degree. The constant rivalry which subsisted between the magnificent prelates, was excited upon the erection of any part of a cathedral of superior beauty, and imitated in those of the same kind which were then undertaken; and the architect, who had once displayed great talents, was invited to repeat the more perfect performance, upon which he had rested his professional fame. It is a distribution of parts which will hold almost gene- rally, that the width of the nave is that of both the aisles, measured in the plan to the extremity of the buttresses externally, and that the breadth and height of the whole building are equal. In the more ancient churches, the aisles are usually of the width of the space between the dividing arches. 248 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES A SCALE OF THE CATHEDRALS IN ENGLAND, COMPARING THE DIMENSIONS OF THEIR SEVERAL INTERNAL PARTS. Total j Internal Length, j Transept. Internal Breadth. Choir. L. B. H. London . . 631 London . . 297 London . . 163 91 88 Old St. Paul's 300 Old St. Paul’s 248 Old St. Paul’s 165 42 88 Winchester . 545 Lincoln . . 227 Norwich . . 165 — — Ely ... . 517 York . . . 222 Rochester 156 — — Canterbury . 514 Salisbury . . 210 Westminster 152 — 101 Y ork . . . 498 Peterborough 203 Canterbury . 150 74 80 Lincoln . . 498 Norwich . . 191 Gloucester 140 — 86 Westminster . 489 Westminster 189 Salisbury . . 140 — 84 Peterborough 480 Winchester . 186 Carlisle . . 137 71 — Salisbury . . 452 Ely ... . 178 Winchester . 138 — 78 Durham . . 420 Durham . . 176 Peterborough 138 — 78 Gloucester 420 Canterbury . 154 York . . . 131 — 99 Chichester 401 Gloucester 144 Exeter . . . 131 — 69 Norwich . . 411 Hereford . . 140 Worcester 126 — 74 Lichfield . . 411 Jixeter . . . 140 ! Durham . . 117 33 71 W orcester 410 Wells . . . 135 Lichfield . . 110 — 67 Exeter . . . 390 Chichester 131 Wells . . . 106 — 67 Wells . . . I 371 ! Worcester 130 Flereford . . 105 — 64 Hereford, anc. 370 Bristol . . . 128 Ely ... . 101 73 70 Chester . . 348 * Bath . . . 126 Bristol . . . 100 — — Rochester 306 Rochester . . 122 Chichester 100 — — Carlisle . . 213 Oxford . . . 102 Oxford . . . 80 — 374 Bath . . . 210 Lichfield . . 88 Bristol . . . m| Oxford . . 154 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 249 CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE OF CATHEDRAL CHURCHES IN ENGLAND. ANGLO-NORMAN. Before 1170 , during the reigns of King Henry 1. and Stephen. Oxford : nave and choir. Rochester : western front and nave. Gloucester : nave, north aisle, and the chapels round the choir, with the whole original substruction. Exeter : transept towers. Winton : central tower and transept. Chi- chester : nave. Ely: north transept. Peterborough : choir. Lincoln : older part of the western front and central tower. Durham : the entire church, excepting the additional transept to the east. Worcester : many arches. Norwich : nave and tower. SEMI OR MIXED NORMAN. From 1170 to 1220 . Henry II. Richard I. and John. Ely : western towers and nave. Bristol : elder Lady cha- pel and chapter-house. Canterbury : choir, and the round tower called Bechet’s crown. Norwich : nave and choir finished. Hereford : transept, tower, and choir. Wells : nave and choir begun. Chester : chapter-house. Chichester : pres- bytery. Peterborough : transept. LANCET ARCH GOTHICK. From 1220 to 1300 . Henry III. Edward I. Oxford : chapter-house. Lincoln : nave and arches beyond the transept. York : north and south transept. Durham : additional transept. Wells : tower and whole western front. Carlisle : choir. Ely : presbytery. Worcester : transept and choir. Salisbury: uniformly. Roc/icsfer ; choir and transept. 250 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. TRANSITION STYLE, OR PURE GOTHICK. From 1300 to 1400. Edward I. II. III. Richard II. Exeter : nave and choir. Lichfield : uniformly. Lincoln : additions to the central tower. Worcester : nave. York : nave, with the choir and the western front. Canterbury : transept. Gloucester : transept. Norwich : spire and tower. Sarum : spire and additions. Gloucester : cloisters begun. Bristol : nave and choir. Chichester : spire and choir. Ely : Our Lady’s chapel, and the central louvre. Hereford : chap- ter-house and cloisters (now destroyed). DECORATED GOTHICK. From 1400 to 1460. Henry IV. V. VI. Gloucester : choir. Canterbury : nave. Wells : Bishop Beckington’s additions. Lincoln : from the upper transept to the great east window. TUDOR STYLE, OR FLORID GOTHICK. From 1460 to the close. Edward IV. to Henry VIII. Gloucester: Our Lady’s chapel. Oxford: roof of the choir. Alcocke’s chapel at FAy. Exterior of the choir at Winchester. Our Lady’s chapel, Peterborough. North Porch, Hereford. It is well worthy of observation, that though the ground ])lans of sacred edifices are, generally speaking, similar and systematic, yet in no single instance which occurs to my memory do we find an exact and unvaried copy of any build- ing which preceded it, in every part of the structure. A striking analogy or resemblance may occur, but that rarely. In Greece, all the temples were constructed after a few great models, and were discriminated only by their relative CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 251 dimensions : they are, upon that account, less impressive on the imagination than the infinite variety which, in a Gothick edifice, is constantly presenting itself to our view. Gothick buildings should be referred to their places in the order of art, instead of a succession of extracts relative to particular churches. Architectural chronology is not to be determined by any single church ; but rather the age is to be inferred from many which are similar. When the Puritans seized upon the cathedral churches, every particle of orna- ment accessible to the hand of violence suffered a destructive injury. The iconoclastic bishops, after the Reformation, had nearly removed many beautiful but superstitious objects ; and the ignorance of true style, with the prevalence of false taste, increased instead of mending these defects, by injudi- cious repairs. But during the late reign, the justly-celebrated architect James Wyat contributed principally to the introduction of more correct principles of repairing the decayed structure of several cathedrals ; yet he was unmindful of true restitution, indulging, in some instances, a love of mere picturesque effect, foreign to the original character of the church, in the disposition of its internal parts. RESTORED CHURCHES. Durham, Salisbury, Lichfield, New College Chapel, Oxford, ^ James Wyat. PARTIAL, RESTORATIONS. Winchester. Peterborough. Ely. Canterbury Chichester. Worcester. Gloucester. Choir of York, (burned down in 1829 .)— R. Smirke, 252 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. WESTERN AND EASTERN FACADES OF CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Rochester Lincoln . Peterborough Gloucester Ely Salisbury Peterborough Wells . Lichfield . York Exeter Bath As the most ancient specimen. The original part. The timber-frame roof of the nave. The arcade of the nave. Two parts of three finished. Simple pointed, style Gothick. The whole western facade. Most rich in niches and statues. Of a similar character. Most beautiful in point of proportion and finishing. Remarkable for uniformity and sculp- ture. The same in the latest style and sera. Lincoln . York Salisbury Beverley Minuter Gloucester, Norwich, Winchester, } EASTERN. The finest in England. Similar, with a certain inferiority. Of smaller dimensions, but perfect in its own style. In the style of York, and scarcely inferior. Above the roofs of the choirs and the chapels of Our Lady, upon the an- cient choirs, as a superstructure. PECULIARITIES OR SINGLE INSTANCES IN THE INTERNAL OR EXTERNAL ARCHITECTURE. 1 Bath 2 Bristol 3 I Canterbury The extreme height of the clere-story above the arcade. Had no nave in the original structure. The present choir is the Lady Cha- pel. It is supported internally in the aisles by the construction of their roofs, which are of equal height with the nave. The grand portal is under the south tower of the fagade. The octangu- lar chapel at the east end, called Becket’s Crown. The marble co- lumns of the choir, with their roma- nesque capitals, are tlie earliest spe- cimen now to be seen in F]ng1and. 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 253 Chester . Chichester Durham . Ely Exeter Lichfield . f London, St. 1 I PauFs J Norwich . Peterborough . Rochester Salisbury Winchester Y ork A north transept of the largest di- mensions. Double aisles to the nave. Our Lady’s Chapel, placed at the east end as a second transept. The Galilee chapel placed before, and distinct from the facade. A single western tower connected with the nave ; an octangular tower ; and Our Lady’s chapel, detached from the choir. A portico called a Galilee in a perfect state. The skreen before the western front, and the towers at either end of the transept. The ramifications in the heads of the nave windows are all of them dissimilar. Completed according to the original plan. Three spires of stone. The cupola and hemispherical porti- coes attached to the transept. Roof of the nave and east end. The triple arcade before the west end, eighty-two feet high : double tow- ers with spires attached to the west end. The choir longer than the nave. Complete uniformity of style, and the height of the central spire. A dou- ble elliptic inverted arch under the tower, as at Wells. The longest nave. Double aisles to the transept. The largest window, of seven divisions of lancet arches. The square lou- vre. No cloister. Lincoln and York are remarkable for the variety and ex- quisite finishing of all the sculptured ornaments, as attached to the columns, and the tabernacle- work of the choirs and skreens. The space of the arcade of the upper transept of Lincoln is filled up about the middle with a row of niches and canopies, as if resting upon a beam of stone, but in reality supported by the side walls. 254 CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. CATHEDRALS, OF WHICH THE SUPERSTRUCTURES OF THE LATER GOTHICK STYLE HAVE BEEN INTRODUCED UPON THE EARLY NORMAN. 1 Gloucester 9 Oxford . 3 Norwich . 4 Winchester ThomasBoy field, abbot, finished be- fore 1381 the complete vaulting of the nave, which, with the upper tier, had been begun in 1461. The choir, with its lofty roof, was intro- duced within the old Norman walls by the same abbot. By Cardinal Wolsey, or John King, the first bishop. By Bishop James Gold well. By Bishop Richard Fox. ABBEY CHURCHES. Malmsbury Tewkesbury Clere-story of the nave. John de Tyntern abbot, 1340. The choir. NAVES OF CATHEDRALS IN THE TRANSITION OR GOTHICK STYLES. Before the year 1400. — Salisbury; Exeter ; Worcester ; Winchester; York; Lichfield; Lincoln; Wells; Chester; Westminster. After 1400. — Canterbury. CHOIRS. Before 1400. — Sarum ; Wells ; Lincoln ; York ; Lich- field ; Ely, with the louvre and octagon ; Exeter ; Glouces- ter begun; Worcester; additions to Norwich. After 1400. — Windsor; Henry the Seventh’s chapel, Westminster; King’s College chapel; Winchester and Ox- ford raised upon the ancient walls. CATHEDRAL CHURCHES. 255 CHAPTER-HOUSES. LONGITUDINAL. LENGTH. BREADTH. HEIGHT. Bristol ft. in. 46 ft. in. 26 ft. in. Gloucester 72 33 — — Peterborough 84 33 — — Chester 50 30 — Vestibule 35 — 35. Oxford 54 6 23 9 35 — Durham 75 35 — Circular end taken Exeter 55 32 50 down 1785. OCTAGON— -DECAGON — POLYGONAL. Y ork . 57 57 66 7 Octagon, without a Lincoln 60 60 42 central column. Octagon. Worcester 57 57 — Circular decagon. Lichfield 42 27 23 Square within circu- Salisbury 58 58 62 lar terminations. Octagon. W estminster . 60 60 — Octagon. Wells . 53 53 — Octagon. Hereford 40 40 -- Decagon. Taken down. 256 CONVENTUAL ARCHITECTURE. Both as to the churches and the habitable parts of a large monastery, Conventual architecture is of sufficient importance to merit a distinct investigation ; I shall therefore select two instances, from which their whole plan may be deduced, be- cause these accounts authenticate sumptuous buildings in the state in which they were found immediately before their final dissolution, when they were very generally consigned to a total ruin. The number, large dimensions, and designation of the chief apartments, did not vary greatly in most monas- teries of the higher order. Glastonbury and Reading are examples. The whole site of Glastonbury, within the walls, was sixty acres. Dimensions of the church : — nave, f. 228 long ; choir, 159 — 79 ; transept, f. 220 ; chapel of St. Joseph, f. 117 ; total length, f. 594. Chapter-house, f. 90. Breadth of the tower, f. 45. Quadrangle, f. 491 — 224. There were twelve apartments belonging to the abbot, including state chambers, abbot’s hall, and private chapel. His great chamber was f. Ill — 51 ; and his stables always contained forty-four horses, &c. The abbey kitchen f. 40 square.* Sir H. Englefield *f* gives the following measurements of Reading Abbey : — the nave, f. 215 long ; choir, f. 98—34 ; transept, f.l96 — 56 ; aisles, f. 19 wide; cloister, f. 1 48 square; chapter-house, f. 78-42 ; abbot’s refectory, f. 72-38. Extreme length of the church, exclusively of the transept, f.420 by 92. The ground-plan of the habitable portion of conventual buildings was usually, though not without exception, qua- drangular; and in the later ages partook of improvements ^n domestic architecture, as in the colleges built by Wyke- ham and Waynflete, and many of the episcopal residences. As several of these abbeys had buildings recently erected at * Hearn es Hrmin^ford., Appendix, + ytrchceologia, vol. vi. p. 63, CONVENTUAL CHURCHES. 257 the dissolution of monasteries, the grantees of their sites, in many instances, retained, and made them their own habi- tations. In the two instances I have cited, the Visitors re- commended that they should be kept in the King’s hands, as palaces, and their dilapidation was respited till the subse- quent reigns. Of the halls and other large apartments of which they were composed, the laborious destruction, and the immediate sale and dispersion of their materials, have scarcely left us any remains : even of the cathedrals to which monasteries were annexed, and the conventual churches, now become cathedrals, the surrounding buildings have been in a great measure removed. Those at Durham and Peterbo- rough, and the conventual halls of Worcester and Chester, must be excepted. The hall of the former measures one hundred feet by forty ; and at Peterborough the abbot had a hall, the dimensions of which were ninety-six feet by thirty- six, and his great chamber, ninety-nine by thirty. How great must have been the profusion of examples of architec- ture, in the richest variety, during the zenith of the Roman Catholic religion, when the cathedrals, or parts of them, which we now admire as almost solitary instances, could be compared with numerous conventual structures without infe- riority, and which imitated or rivalled them in dimensions or grandeur. Such was the visible employment of their great wealth, which modern calculators condemn, as having been injuriously misapplied. Yet the ingenious man was patron- ised, and the artisan was fed. The liberality of founders and benefactors was without bounds. It is recorded, that the abbey of Vale-Royal in Cheshire had cost King Edward I., before its completion, no less a sum than 3200/. sterling ; a sum scarcely credible if estimated in modern money ; but the extreme difficulty of conveying the materials from Wales caused this expense. Our authority is that of an historic monk of Abingdon, in the Cotton MSS. Even the churches of the Mendicant Friars were singularly rich in every species of embellishment ; as they were selected S 258 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. in preference, for their sepulture by noble and opulent per- sons. Of these, the most eminent was the church of the Franciscans, near Newgate, London, (the site of Christ’s Hospital,) the length of which was f. 300, width f. 89, and height f. 64. Margaret, second queen of Edward I., built the choir at the expense of 2000/., besides other very large contributions to the fabric. In the satirical poem called P/erce VlowmarCs Crede^ is a lively description of one of these magnificent convents of the ‘‘ mendicants,” frequently quoted. Several of the conventual kitchens were of a peculiar and excellent construction, the roofs being groined with stone, and having an octangular opening to the middle of the roof, which sprang from the angles, rising like a louvre. Those at Glastonbury and Durham still remain, and are equally perfect and curious. The former is forty feet in diameter, and the latter, thirty-six. The castellated, or at least embattled, country-houses, both of bishops and abbots, for retirement, and the reduction of their large retinue, during summer residence, resembled col- leges, upon a smaller scale. They were very frequent, and several were attached to one monastery. According to the subsequent division of style in which parish churches and their parts have been designed and exe- cuted, individual instances are found in every county in England, and many of them are equal to those which I have adduced. This list is intended merely to communicate a general idea and classification. To the credit of the laborious piety of our ancestors it is worthy of remark, that in certain counties where the materials of architecture least abound, the beauty of parish churches is the more frequent and conspi- cuous ; and w^hilst the monastic institution is so generally scandalised on account of the unprofitable expenditure of enormous wealth, it is a known fact, that the chief number of handsome churches have been built from their funds, either totally or by munificent benefaction. They have the merit likewise of the architectural plan, as suggested by the more scientific of the fraternity. CONVENTUAL CHURCHES. 259 ABBEYS FOUNDED BY THE SAXONS. The rule of St, Benedict obtained, almost universally, under the dynasty of the Saxon kings. To each of these monas- teries, without doubt, large buildings of a requisite kind were annexed ; but it would be difficult to decide upon the genuine- ness of any remains. The crypts, as being the least subject to demolition from fire or rebuilding, have the best claim. The ambition of the Norman prelates to reconstruct their cathedrals upon much more expensive plans, superseded those of true Saxon architecture. All the subjoined, which were founded previously to the Conquest, were Benedictines. Abingdon. Rochester Cathedral. St. Germain'’s Cathedral, Westminster (1049), Edw. Cornwall. Barking nunnery. Colchester. Gloucester. Tewkesbury. Winchcombe. Rumsey nunnery. St. Alban’s. Confessor. Peterborough. St. Frideswide, Oxford. Glastonbury. Bury St. Edmund's. Malmsbury. Evesham. Pershore. Besides these, several of inferior consequence may be found in the different counties, which are traditionally of Saxon origin, but it is not probable that their structures had any degree of splendour. CONVENTUAL CHURCHES MADE EPISCOPAL OR PAROCHIAL. CATHEDRALS. Peterborough, Bristol, Gloucester, Westminster, now Collegiate only. Entire. PAROCHIAL. St. Alban’s, Waltham, Malmsbury, Shrewsbury, Thorney and Croyland, Tewkesbury, Pershore; Christ-Church, Hants; Winbourn, Dorset. s 2 260 ARCTllTECTUllE IN ENGLAND. Of these, some are nearly entire, and others have escaped only the almost total dilapidation. At this time in ruins. — Glastonbury, unquestionably the most magnificent; St. Mary’s, York, a most beautiful structure. The following are known only by their sites, and by ANCIENT DELINEATIONS OR DESCRIPTIONS: — St. Augustine’s, Can- terbury ; St. Edmundsbury ; St. John of Jerusalem, London ; St. Benet’s, Hulme ; St. John’s, Colchester ; Evesham, Abing- don, Reading, Cirencester, Winchcombe, Hayles, Bardsey, Hyde, Tavistock, Reading ; Hulme, Yorkshire. Of these, the greater number enjoyed the privilege of the mitre, and are selected as having been, when entire, the most remarkable for architecture and extent. Other, and not greatly inferior, instances may be found in several counties of England. CONTEMPORARY ARCHITECTURE OF CONVENTUAL CHURCHES IN ENGLAND, NOW APPLIED AS CATHEDRALS OR PARISH CHURCHES, OF WHICH THERE ARE REMAINS OR AUTHENTIC ACCOUNTS. SAXON. A. D. 800 to 870 and 1000. Waltham Abbey ^ Essex. Transept arches of Southioell, Notts. The nave of the abbey church of St.Albaris^ Herts. St. Augustine, Canterbury, west front. St. Frideswide's, Oxford, nave. Remains of the west front and porch of Alalmsbury. Tower of Caystor Church, Norfolk. ANGLO-NORMAN. Before 1100 to 1150. The destroyed abbeys of Abingdon,^ Reading,^ and Ciren- cester.^ Mailing, Kent. ^ Tewkesbury,^ nave, aisles, tran- ^ The churches marked * are now used as parochial. a Is described by Leland to have resembled the cathedral of Wells. The choir was of the early Norman. T. de Salford and R. de Ilarnme, abbots. CONVENTUAL ClIUllCHES. 261 sept, and west front. ^Malmshury^^ nave and west front. Buildwas^ Salop. St. Boto/ph, Colchester. Bolton.,^ York- shire. Winhorn Minster, Dorset." Castle Acre, Norfolk. Hagmon, Salop. Bedfordshire. Cross, Hants. * Romsep, Hants. Furness,'^ Lancashire — the more ancient parts. Lindisfarne, Northumberland. Bpland, Yorkshire. Fanercost, Cumberland. * Sherhourn, Dorset. Soiithivell, Nottinghamshire. Kir lest a 1 1, ^Yorkshire, nave. Christ-Church, Hants, the more ancient part. SEMI OR MIXED NORMAN. From 1150 /o 1220. Fanthony,^ Monmouth. Fountaiiis,^ Yorkshire, nave and west front. Glastonbury, nave, and the chapel of St. Joseph. Selby, Yorkshire, west front. * St. AlbarCs,"^ Herts, many 1426 — 1435, built the nave; which, with the western front and towers, was finished by their successor, W. de Ashenden. The church was dedicated by T. a Becket, 1164, and was constructed upon the plan of Durham. Total dimensions, f. 420- — 196; nave, f. 215; choir, f. 98 — 34; transept, f. 196 — 56 ; eastern or Lady’s chapel, f.l02 — 55. ^ According to the measurement made by W. Wyreester in 1440, the total length was f. 280; nave, f. 92 broad with the aisles; choir, f. 132 — 66 ; cloister, f. 104 square ; chapter-house, f. 42 — 30. ^ f. 324 — 136 ; nave and aisles, f. 70 ; west front, f. 100. ® f. 100 by 60, tower and choir destroyed. ^ Total length, f. 261. ? f. 180 by 60. h Ruins of the transept and east end, with a few arches of the west; chap- ter-house, single shaft in the centre, built in 1200 ; choir in 1460. i f. 224— 118; transept built by Henry de Laci and Alexander, abbots, from 1147 — 1182. The tower built in the reign of Henry VHI. by W. Mar- shal and John Ripley, the last abbots. ^ 'l otal length, f. 212. Transept, f. 100. ^ f. 351 — 65, nave and aisles; transept, f. 186. In 1204, John de Ebor, abbot, began the fabric. John Pherd, afterward bishop of Ely, and John de Cancia (who died 1245, 29 Hen. III.) finished the whole structure. The chapter-house was f. 84 by 42. Refectory, f. 108 by 45. The tower stood at the north end of the transept, and is f. 166 in height. f. 267 — 100; nave and aisles, f. 50. West end built 1180; nave and transept, 1090 ; choir, 1390. f. 550 — 217 ; f. 65 high ; nave and aisle, f. 72. 262 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. parts. Wenlock, Salop, choir. Cartmell^ Lancashire. Yur- ness° the more modern parts. Bylandj west end, with the wheel window, and the south transept . p Bolton^ Yorkshire, in parts. Brinkhourn, Northumberland, in part. St. Ed- muridshury^ Suffolk, in part. St. John's church, Chester. LANCET ARCH GOTHICK. From 1220 to 1300. Lanercost, Cumberland. Rivaulx, Yorkshire. Westmin- ster abbey. Fountains, choir and east end. Tint erne, ^ Mon- mouthshire. Netley,"^ Hants. Whitby,^ Yorkshire. Valle Crucis, Denbighshire. Ripori minster, Yorkshire. Beverley minster,* Yorkshire, south transept. Milton dhhey,'' Dorset. * St. Alban's,^ part of the nave. Tinemouth, Northumber- land. Brinkbourn, Northumberland. Vale Royal, Cheshire. Eastern fa 9 ade of Howden, Yorkshire. PURE GOTHICK. From 1300 to 1400. W estern fagade of Howden, 1320. Alerton College,^ Ox- ford, chapel. Gisborne priory, Yorkshire. ISiew College,^ Oxford, chapel. St. Stephen'' s chapel,^ Westminster. Kirk- stall,^ Yorkshire, additions to the pediments of the choir and “ Built 1188, semi-Norman, as Selby and Fountains. ° f. 287 — 130. P Nave roof, f. 38; transept, f. 73 ; choir, f. 50; nave and aisles, f. 68 wide. Total length, f. 323. 1 f. 225 — 150; nave and aisles, f. 40 in breadth, thirteen arches on the south side, with an intercolumniation of fifteen feet. Begun in 1239. ^ f. 200 — 160; breadth of the nave and choir with aisles, f. 60. Begun in 1239, by the same architect. s The choir, north aisle, centre tower, and north transept, remain. The nave was blown down in 1702. ‘ f. 333 by 165 ; nave and aisles, f. 63 wide ; western towers, f. 198 high. u Built by Walter Archer, prior, 1320 — 1330 ; f. 132 — 107; f.55 high; tower, f. 101 high, resembling Merton College, Oxon. X The church is f. 550 long by 72 : and 65 high ; transept, f. 217. y Built by W. Rede, bishop of Chichester, and T. Ilodeborne, warden. z Finished 1379. Built by Edward III. By W. Marshall, abbot. CONVENTUAL CHURCHES. 268 north transept. SL Mary'^s^ in York. Kirkham, Yorksliire. Selby Yorkshire, choir. PURE GOTHICK DECORATED. From 1400 to 1460. Tewkesbury^ Gloucestershire, choir. ^ St. Mary'^s chapel, Fly cathedral. Facade of Croyland^ Lincolnshire. Bever- ley minster,® Yorkshire. Magdalene College^ Oxford^ cha- pel. Eton College chapel,^ Bucks. Chapel on the Bridge, § Wakefield^ Yorkshire. Beauchamp chapel,'* Warwick. FLORID GOTHICK AND TUDOR STYLE. From 1460 to 1540. St. George''s chapel,' Windsor. King'^s College chapel,'' Cambridge. King Henry the Sevenths chapel,' Westminster. Great Malvern, tower and choir,' Worcestershire. Roof of Christ-Church choir, Oxford.^^ Campanile and gateway of Evesham abbey, Worcestershire. In 1390. ^ Built by the Despencers, earls of Gloucester, during the thirteenth century. ® f. 333 by 165; nave and aisles, f. 63; western towers, f. 198 high. They were the model of those added by Sir Christopher Wren to Westmin- ster Abbey. f Begun and finished by Henry VII. s Built by Edward IV. in memory of his father, Edward Duke of York, Built by the executors of R. Beauchamp, Earl of Warwick. » Begun by Edward IV. and finished by Henry VII. and VIII., under the superintendence of Sir Reginald Bray and Cardinal Wolsey. ^ Founded by Henry VI. upon the plan of Nicholas Cloos, but not com- pleted till the reign of Henry VIII. ^ Built by Sir R. Bray. Added by R. King, Bishop of Oxford. 264 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. COMPARATIVE DIMENSIONS OF CONVENTUAL CHURCHES, MANY OF WHICH ARE IN RUINS. St. Alban^s Glastonbury . St.Edmuncrs Bury Reading . Tewkesbury . Fountains Beverley Selby Kirkstall Lanthony . Tintern . L. B. H. ft. ft. ft. 550 217 65 420 220 — 506 240 — 420 196 — 300 120 — 351 186 — 323 165 — 267 100 — 224 118 - — 210 100 — 225 40 nave. We must not confine the progress and perfection of our early architecture to such specimens as are presented to our view in perfect cathedrals. Some of the grandest of them were conventual, and several were connected with a monastic establishment whose funds were dedicated to architecture. This view of such ruins, and authentic documents concerning them, in wdiich the original measurements are given, would afibrd convincing proof that many destroyed conventual churches were not inferior to the existing cathedrals.* VAULTED ROOFS IN THE FOURTEENTH, FIFTEENTH, AND SIXTEENTH CENTURIES. A.D. Feet. Choir of Lincoln Cathedral . . . 1306 . . . 200 — 40 Our Lady’s Chapel, Ely .... 1349 • • • 100 — 46 Choir of Gloucester Cathedral . . 1360 . . . 140 — 34 Do. of York 1373 . . . 135—45 Chapel at Windsor Castle . . . 1508 . . . 260 — 65 Do. Henry VIE, Westminster . 1508 . . . 99— 65 Do. King’s College, Cambridge 1516 . . . 291 — 45^ Choir of Winton Cathedral . . 1525 . . . 138 — 86 Do. of Christ-Church, Oxford . 1535 ... 80 -20 See new edition of Dugdale’s Monasticon. PAROCHIAL CHURCHES. SAXON. Tickencote^ Lincolnshire ; Steivkeley^ Bucks ; Barfreatou^ Kent, — as the most decisive instances. Many Saxon door- cases and heads of arches have been preserved and inserted, when other parts of the churches have been rebuilt, and fonts, for their sanctity and curious carvings and bas-reliefs. ANGLO-NORMAN. Melton, Suffolk. Sotterton and Sleaford,^ Lincolnshire. Christ-church,^ Hampshire. Sherbourn minster, Dorset. Winchehea, Sussex. Steynmg and Neiv Shoreham, Sussex. Chancel of St. Peter's, Oxford. EarVs Bar tori tower, Nor- thamptonshire. West Walton tower, Norfolk. Bifley, Ox- fordshire. Castle Rising, Norfolk. St. Margarefs porch, York, St. Peter s church, Northarrqrton. There are several round or polygonal bell-towers both in Suffolk and Norfolk. SEMI OR MIXED NORMAN WITH THE LANCET STYLE. Winbourn minster, Dorset. Ramsey, Hants. Dorchester,^ Oxfordshire. St. Mary Otter y,^ Devon. Howden, York- shire. Doncaster, ditto, Lynn, Norfolk. Stowe, Great Grimsby, and Sleaford, Lincolnshire. St. George’’s, Stam- ford. Choir of St. Mary's, Warwick. St. Mary Overy, Southwark, choir. Beverley, Yorkshire. PURE GOTHICK, OR TRANSITION STYLE. Grantham.,^ Lincolnshire. Attelborough, Norfolk. High- am Ferrars, Northamptonshire. St. Michael,^ Coventry. ‘ The western front of Sleaford is one of the largest and most ornamented of parochial churches in England which has not originally been conventual. 2 f. 302— 106. 3 f. 251— 100. Two towers, one attached to each semi-transept, as at Exeter cathedral. 5 f. 183 — 87. Tower, f. 180 high. ® The church of St. Michael, Coventry, f. 293 — 197 ; tower and spire, f. 272 high. They were twenty-two years in building, and cost 2100/.; 1372 to 1393. — Diigdale. ^66 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Truro, Cornwall. Witney, Oxfordshire. Stratford-upon- Avon^ Warwickshire. St. Peter Mancroft, Norwich. Bos- ton,'^ Lincolnshire. St. Marp, Edmund'^s- Bury, Suffolk. Maid- stone, Kent. Ludlow, Salop. PURE GOTHICK. St. Mary Overy, Southivark. Thaxted^ and Saffron Walden, Essex. Lowth and Stamford, Lincolnshire. Camp- den, Gloucestershire. St. Mary, Redcliff;^ and the tower of St. Stephen, Bristol. Taunton and Churton Mendip, Somersetshire. Lavenham, Suffolk. Manchester College. St. Mary's, Oxford. Whittlesea, Cambridgeshire. Wake- field, Yorkshire. Doncaster, Yorkshire. Nevjark-upon-Trent. Heckington, Lincolnshire. Mould, Gresford, and Wrexham, in Flintshire. Melton Mowbray, Leicestershire. Octangular towers, St. Margaret's, Norwich, and All-Saints, York. FLORID GOTHICK. This style is principally to be referred to oratories, porches, and chapels annexed, or to sepulchral sacella, with their tombs included, in parochial churches. There is perhaps no parish church which exhibits a complete specimen of it in all its parts. The pulpit and skreen at Dartmouth, Devon, are a superior specimen. Every observer knows, that it was a common practice in the thirteenth century, and perhaps earlier, to place pointed arches upon round Norman pillars, and to rebuild the zig- zag mouldings in that form, especially in parish churches, where a saving of expense was necessary. It will not be easy, from that circumstance, always to discriminate the true aera and style of any parish church where it occurs. One fact is evident, that the building has been re-constructed, at least in several constituent divisions of it. 7 The church at Boston, Lincolnshire, f. 280 — 99 ; f. 86 high, with its very remarkable lanthorn tower, rising f. 262 from the ground, was begun in 1309, and was in progress of building during the whole reign of Edward IIL The expense was chiefly defrayed by the foreign merchants oftlie Steelyard. "" f. 195—79. Spire, f. 273. f. 220—110. DISCOURSE V. MILITARY ARCHITECTURE OF THE FIRST AND MIDDLE CENTURIES AFTER THE NORMAN CONQUEST; WITH AN EXAMINATION OF CASTLES IN ENGLAND, AND THEIR SEVERAL COMPONENT PARTS. To enumerate or describe fortifications and castles, such as are still seen in every nation of Europe and Asia, would require a great length of research : it is sufficient to observe, that in the lower empire of Rome and Greece, no city was undefended by castellated walls, and a castle or citadel, the architecture of which was successively renewed according to the general plan practised during the Gothick ages.^ Referring generally to the very able investi- gations made by General Roy and Mr. King, concerning the military erections of the Ro- mans, and in what degree the camps and forts * The walls of Constantinople extend for more than three miles on the western side — are triple and embattled. Its hun- dred towers, diminishing in perspective, offer a stupendous scene. No single castle in England presents a continued front of more than three hundred yards."’ — Archccolog.\iA. xiv. See Note [A] page 317. 268 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. of the Romans may be distinctly considered,^ what is the description of the Anglo-Saxon tower, or the larger castle, built by Alfred, this review does not respect an earlier period than that of the Norman conquest. As military structures were necessary in all ages and na- tions, it is certain that the Romans built many in every province they conquered, which we can hardly suppose to have been either de- stroyed or dilapidated by time, when they quit- ted Britain ; and their Saxon successors pro- bably availed themselves of all the fortifications they found, f The application of Roman bricks and tiles, used as the materials of the walls in castles of their foundation, is remarkable at Colchester, and is likewise seen at Arundel, where, withinside, are placed rows of herring- bone masonry. Chaucer describes the composi- tion of the fluid-mortar by which the grouting was made.:]: The Normans, who brought with them the feodal system in its greatest extent, knew that a castle must be attached to every lordship, and they either assimilated what they found of Saxon work, or constructed castles on new sites, according to their own peculiar plans of * See Note [B] page 317. f Launceston, liestorniel, and Tintagel castles, in Cornwall, are said to have been erected by the aboriginal inhabitants. I Sec Note [C] page 319- MILITARY. 269 building. They imported stone from Caen, but only for the casing of the walls, and the carved jambs of the doors and windows. The walls themselves, frequently from ten to fifteen feet thick, consisted of an indissoluble grouting, made with fluid mortar, mixed with pebbles, or small flints, or sea-shells. Forty-nine castles are enumerated in Domes- day Book, that of Arundel only as existing in the reign of Edward the Confessor. Eight of these were built by William the Conqueror, ten by the greater barons, and one by a tenant of Earl Roger Mont-Gomeri. There are eleven, the builders of which are not particularised.^ The leading discrimination of a Norman for- tress is a lofty mound of earth, thrown up in the centre of the other works, and caused by the forming a very deep ditch, moat, or fosse, from the upper ballium or summit of which rose either a square tower of several stories and great height, or a circular one much lower, and of equal diameter, approached by steep un- guarded steps on the outside. Other compo- nent parts were, the gateway, and the barbican or watch-tower, both of which communicated with the keep by sally ports. During the lapse of centuries, from the ear- liest date of their foundation to their final * Introduction to Domesday Book^ lately published by Parliament. 270 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND, decay or destruction, various styles of military . architecture, by which the several parts of a castle were rebuilt or added, will afford a de- cided proof of the aera to which they belong : for it is certain, that deviations from the first building, by a new construction and forms of gateways, towers, and embattlements, may still be discovered, in castles of the larger extent, which have passed through many owners in succession. This discrimination is no less strongly marked, than in the several distinct aeras of Church-architecture ; and that to be as decidedly referred to its own proper period. The prototypes of most of our English cas- tles of primeval construction may be found in Normandy, in such parts of them as remain perfect, or nearly so.^ Yet it is certain that the sites of numerous castles are now but gr^en mounds or battered ruins ; “ and the place that once knew them, knows them no more.” There are many too which exhibit vast fragments, and which have not been destroyed by time alone, from the mere adhesion of parts which pressure has rendered as indissoluble as the stone itself. After having premised thus much, I would propose the subjoined classification. 1. Saxon, or of Roman foundation. 2. Anglo-Norman, from 1070 to 1170 . * See Note [D] page 320. MILITARY. 271 S, Norman, from 1170 to 1270. 4. Style of the. Crusaders, introduced by Edward I. in 1272. 5. Style of Windsor, by Edward III. 1350 —1400. 6. Style of the Fifteenth century, 1400 —1480. 7. Castles in the reigns of the Tudors. The purpose intended by this classification of castle architecture is, to convey a general view of its varieties, which were introduced in the course of successive centuries, by adducing such specimens only as remain to be inspected. Wherever dates of sufficient authority can be given, they are added in a note. Ocular de- monstration will afford the most satisfactory proof of any hypothesis ; it may therefore be superfluous to mention, by way of confirmation, the style of many castles of which there are accounts in Leland’s Itinerary, and by other antiquaries, though they are now totally dila- pidated by the injuries of war and time ; pur- posely dismantled upon the suppression of feo- dal tenures, or by command of Cromwell, to pay his army by the sale of the materials. Ground-plans of several castles have been pub- lished by Grose. In the subjoined list,^ I have mentioned those with which the antiquary is * No. 1. Richborough, Kent ; Castleton, Derbyshire ; Porchester, Hants ; Pevensey, Sussex ; Castor, Norfolk ; 272 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. best acquainted ; for with instances of nearly equal curiosity or consequence, we are embar- rassed only by a facility of choice. This ar- rangement is governed by the aera when any memorable change in the coristruction or more habitable parts took place, and when one con- siderable castle gave the new mode of building to several others. Such a progress made from Burgh, Suffolk ; Chesterford, Essex ; Corffh, Dorset ; Exe- ter castle gateway ; Dover, Kent ; Beeston, Cheshire. No. 2. Launceston, Cornwall ; Arundel, Sussex ; Wind- sor, Berks, rebuilt ; Tower of London ; the square keeps of Hedingham, Essex ; Caer-Philly, Glamorgan ; Carisbroke, Isle of Wight ; Porchester, Hants, 1160 ; Guildford, Surrey ; Bamborough, Northumberland ; Kenilworth, Warwickshire; Richmond, Y orkshire ; Cardiff, Glamorgan ; Canterbury, Kent ; Oxford, 1071; Newcastle, Northumberland, 1120; Gisbo- rough, Yorkshire, 1120 ; Castle Rising, Norfolk, 11 . . ; Mid- dleham, Yorkshire; Cockermouth, Cumberland; Durham, 1153 ; Lincoln, 1086 ; Berkeley, Gloucestershire, 1153 ; Lan- caster; Orford, Suffolk, 1120, polygon. No. 3. Ludlow, Salop, 1220; Kenilworth, Warwickshire, enlarged 1220; W^arkworth, Northumberland, square, with the angles canted off ; Denbigh ; Beeston, Cheshire ; Har- warden, Pembrokeshire. No. 4. Carnarvon, 1280; Conway, 1283; Harlech, 1290; Beaumaris, 1295 — North Wales. Arundel, outward gate- way and barbican tower ; Pembroke, gatev/ay and lofty cir- cular tower ; Leeds, Kent, 1300 ; Chepstow, Monmouthshire. No. 5. Windsor gateway and towers, 1340; Warwick gateway, a polygonal, and octangular towers ; Cardiff, Gla- morganshire, octangular tower ; Amberley, Sussex, gateway and round towers, 1390; Lumley, Durham, perfect, built by Sir Robert Lumley, 1320 — 1360, where the walls of the towers incline from the base to the battlement, for greater MILITARY. 27 S rude strength to interior accommodation of plan, and even ornamental construction, be- came universal during the fourteenth and the century succeeding it, when spacious halls, bowers or parlours for the ladies, alures or broad pavement upon the walls, small herbaries or enclosed gardens, oratories with an oriel window, or larger chapels, and numerous small strength ; Brauncespeth ditto, four large square towers with deep machicolations, 1398; Alnwick restored, Northumber- land, 13 . . ; Raby, Durham, perfect, built by John de Ne- ville, 1378 : Leland calls it ‘‘ the largest castle of logginges.” Naworth, Cumberland, perfect ; Saltwood, Kent, 1380, gate- way with circular towers ; John of Gaunt’s hall and build- ings, Kenilworth, 1382 ; Goodrich, Herefordshire, gateway and hall ; Maxtoke, Warwickshire ; Bodyam, Sussex, (gate- way and towers,) which is unique from its uniformity, upon the exact model of castles in Gascony. No. 6. Sudley, Gloucestershire; Wingfield Manor, Derby- shire, brick ; Tattersal, Lincoln, ditto, 1440 ; Herstmonceaux, Sussex ; Hilton, Durham, gateway with numerous carved escocheons ; Hampton-Court, Herefordshire, 1400 ; Whit- ton, Durham, 1410. No. 7. Thornbury, Gloucestershire, 1511 ; Framlingham, Suffolk, 1500; Raglan, Monmouth, 1520; Bury Pomeroy, Devon, south front ; Lulworth, Dorset, 15 . . ; Earl of Leices- ter’s addition to Kenilworth, 1575. Castles in a habitable state, oi^ restored : — Windsor; Arun- del, Sussex ; Warwick; Alnwick, Northumberland ; Powys, Flintshire ; Lumley, Durham ; Belvoir, Rutland ; Berkeley, Gloucestershire; Raby, Durham; Naworth, Cumberland; Bamborough, Durham ; Maxtoke, Warwick ; Shirbourne, Oxfordshire; Leeds, Kent; Skipton, Yorkshire; Appleby, Westmoreland; Stafford; Broughton, Oxfordshire. T 274 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. apartments for the reception of the lord and his numerous menials, were found in almost every castle of the higher and more opulent nobility. 1070 TO 1170. An architect of the greatest celebrity in the reigns immediately succeeding the Conquest, was Gundulphus, bishop of Rochester,^ who seems to have considered the lofty artificial mound, originally of Danish usage, as unne- cessary .j- His central towers are so lofty as to contain four several floors : the basement was the dungeon, without light, and the portal, or grand entrance, many feet above the ground. But his great merit consisted in various archi- tectural contrivances, by which cautions, as much security during a siege was given to his keeps by stratagem, as by real strength. Holin- shed records a memorable circumstance of Rochester castle, when besieged for sixty days by W. de Albini, Earl of Arundel, in the reign of King John.J * He died in 1108; but having completed the Tower of London and the castle of Rochester, he may be considered as having invented and left models of that kind of castle archi- tecture. See Note [E] page 320. The terms gros-mont^ hoa-mont, and heau-mont, occur frequently in ancient descriptions, to denote the mounds of earth thrown up for the erection of keeps. X Holinshed^ vol. iii. p. 183, says^ that “ after all the limmes MILITARY. 275 In the construction of a castle, no ordinary skill was required. We may suppose a Nor- man castle, fully garrisoned, to resemble a mo- dern man-of-war, in the arrangement of the different parts, the complete occupation of space, and the perfect command of every divi- sion of it, from the subordination of its crowd- ed inhabitants. The subsistence and comfort of those who were enclosed within it, were not less to be provided for by the architect than mere defence, or the devices by which the assailants might be misled or defeated. Most of the keeps, of which an account is now offer- ed, had four distinct stories, and the walls were not unfrequently from twelve to twenty feet thick, and the floors were massy planks, which w^ere grooved into each other to prevent assaults from above. There were four turrets at the angles, many feet higher than the para- pet, which was divided into broad battlements. One of the turrets had a considerable elevation above the others, and such were seen in the two square keeps built by Robert Consul of • Gloucester, in the reign of Henry I. — ^one at Bristol, and the other at Cardiff.^ In the thickness of the walls were placed winding of the castle had been thrown down, they kept the master tower till half thereof was overthrown ; and after kept the other half, till, through famine, they were constreined to yeild.’' ^ See Note [F] page 321. 276 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. staircases, the well for water, the vast oven, enclosed galleries and chimneys, with an aper- ture open to the sky, and communicating with the dungeon, in which prisoners were confined, and to whom it gave all the light and air they could receive. There was likewise a kind of flue for conveying sound to every part, not more than eight inches in diameter. Wells of great depth, even of several hundred feet, were so constructed as to communicate with each separate floor, and with the platform on the roof of the keep. At Conisburgh, a very ancient instance, it was placed in the centre of the circle. The passage, or narrow gallery within the substance of the walls, did not run horizontally, but rose unequally; and without were steep steps, leading to a false portal. This military stratagem appears in Rochester castle. The walls of the first-men- tioned are nearly half as thick as its diameter within, which is twenty-one feet ; and as they ascend towards the top, a few places are hol- lowed out and converted into closets with loop-holes. The state apartment occupied the whole third story, and the staircases leading to it were made much more commodiously than the others, some of which were even large enough to admit military engines. Adjoining to the great chamber was an oratory.^ ^ These oratories were lighted by a larger window, em- MILITARY. Tn From the earliest period of the Norman aera, the power of the Church was predominant. It had pervaded even the walls of castles, which, by its influence, were not solely dedicated to war, or purposes of defence or destruction. Included within the thickest walls, or more frequently forming a room of a tower of entrance, always attached to the gateway of a keep, was a small chapel or oratory. At Arundel, such a one occupied the highest story. They were usually dedicated either to St. George or St. Martin, the two military saints. In the Tower of London there is a chapel, fifty feet by forty, with aisles, divided by an arcade. That at Ludlow is circular, and has many Norman mouldings. At Brougham, Westmoreland, is one very remarkable for a curiously groined roof. At Caernarvon, a very beautiful one is undestroyed. In process of time, chapels within castles were so construct- ed as to admit of ten or twelve priests, who became collegiate. Memorable instances are, St. George’s at Windsor, and those destroyed or suppressed at Wallingford, Berks ; Arun- del, Sussex ; and Tickhill, Yorkshire. These bowed withinside, and called an “ oriel/’ Lydgate^ describe, ing a lady, says ; Ifit \)tx ornall tl;erc s;l)e ClosiutJ tuetl vo|)all gla^. 278 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. were founded sometimes in the lifetime of the great barons, but more often by their last wills and testaments, in articulo mortis^ In Rochester castle, the chief room was thirty-two feet high, including the whole space within the walls. Moveable suits of arras were suspended from the circular arch which sup- ported the roof, to make separate apartments, and attached against the walls as furniture, which were sometimes painted in fresco, as in the castle of Guildford. In the ground-floor there was no light ; loop-holes, only, were al- lowed in the second ; but in the third were three large round-arched windows, placed high, so as not to be looked through, and so defended by an internal arcade, that no missile weapon could enter, or fall with effect. Each floor had its communication with the well. The chimneys were very capacious, and projected considerably into the rooms, resting upon small pillars ; and the sinks were so contrived, in an oblique direction, that no weapon could be sent up them. Gundulph is said to have introduced the architectural ornaments of the Norman style into castles, both withinside and without. In the Norman keeps of Berkeley and Pontefract, the walls were constructed with semi-round towers only. MILITARY. 279 The use of battlements, loop-holes, and open galleries or macchicolations, was certainly known to the Romans. Troes contra, defendere saxis Perque cavas densi tela intorquere fenestras. ^N. 1. ix, 533. The basement or ground-story was divided into dungeons to confine prisoners, who, in those barbarous times, were deprived of light and air. But they were universally applied to hold the instruments and engines of war and those used in the early Norman reigns, appear to have been all of them adopted from the Romans. CatapultcB^ or Mangonels to cast large stones to a distance. BalistcB, slings, (sprin- gals^) to throw smaller stones or arrows against the besiegers. Tribuli, the same, but so con- trived as to have a triple delivery of any mis- sile.f Arcubalistce^ cross-bows of steel, which were wound up with a windlass. Multones (moutons)^ battering-rams, used only by be- siegers. Barfreyii (skajfauts%)^ wooden towers, * In Grose, upon Ancient Armour^"* will be found a larger list of these inventions, many of which, from their names, appear to have originated in France. I have selected those which were most in usage. “f* Interea grosses Petraria mittit ab intus, Assidue, lapides Mangonellusque minores. W. Brito, quoted hy Du Cange. X Uratitle none a^i^aut, gtnne, gonne or ^feaffaut. Chaucer, Rom. of the Rose. 280 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. with scaling-ladders, used to bring the be- siegers on a level with the garrison on the walls and embrasures ; introduced and much used by King Stephen in his wars.'^ Among other preparations of military en- gines to be taken into Palestine by Richard I. in his crusade, was a high tower of timber- frame, to be erected there. In the romance of “ Coeur de Lion,” it is thus described as made after a model in stone : — ^ cartel, unUerigtontr, Ci^at bag matJe of timbere yn ((BnglontJe ; gfx gtagtg j)inat(0 of touullcg, Wid anti floungfjetl ioit]^ gotle feernelUg. These required almost all the space of the basement ; but there were round openings, like wells, in the thickness of the walls, through which the engines might be lifted with cords or chains to the roof and macchicolation. A stone thrown by a mangonel of sixteen inches diameter, and weighing 200lb. has been found in the foss of Kenilworth Castle. These obser- vations will be found to include nearly the whole scheme of ancient military tactics. * At the siege of Arundel Castle by King Stephen.— History of Western Sussex. MILITARY. 281 SCALE AND DIMENSIONS OF THE PRINCIPAL KEEPS ERECTED DURING THE NORMAN ^RA. INTERNAL SQUARE OR OBLONG. Names. Dimensions. Division of rooms. Dates and Founders. Tower of Lon- L. B. H. 116 96 — By semi-circular William Conqueror. don Porchester . . 115 65 _ arches Four floors. Canterbury . . 88 80 30* Two walls continued Rochester . . 75 72 104 from the base to the top. By semi-circular Gundulph, bishop. Dover . . . Colchester . . — — 92 140 102 — arches Three large rooms Norwich . . . no 92 70 upon every floor. Roger Bigod. Ludlow . . . — — no Four stories Roger de Laci. Hedingham . . 62 55 100 Three tiers above Guildford . . Oxford . . . 42 47 — the basement. Robert D’Oiley. Bamborough . 1070. Richmond . . • Vault supported by 1100. Newcastle-upon- 82 62 54 a single octangular pillar By internal arches Robt.Curthoise, 1080 Tyne Corfe .... 72 60 80 ROUND and door-cases in the Norman style OR POLYGONAL Arundel . . . 69 37 — Roof open in the Roger MontGomeri, Conisburgh 23 diameter centre ; straight buttresses Three floors; two of 1070. W. de Warren, 1070. York .... 64 45 — t them state apart- ments Four segments of William Conqueror, T unbridge . . Berkeley . . 1 . o . • circles Circular, flanked by 1068. Robert Fitz-Hard- Lincoln . . . four small towers ing, 1120. William Con. 1086. Orford . . . « • • Polygon, flanked by Windsor . . . 90 85 — three square towers Rebuilt by Edw.Hl. Durham . . . 63 61 — . Heightened in 1830. Dilapidated. t Largest diameter. 282 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. The component parts of a complete castle in the first Norman centuries, may be stated to consist of — The barbican. Outward vallum, or rampart. Outward ballium, or ditch. Middle vallum. Inner ballium. Mount and keep, and a square tower built before the entrance, containing secret passages, and other stratagems, sally ports, &c. Upper ballium surrounding it. Upper and lower wards.^ The ditch, moat, foss, vallum, a hollow space on the outside of the walls or ramparts. Ballium is the space between the outer and middle ditches. Round the upper ballium were walls which circumscribed the keep. These were commonly flanked with towers, and had a parapet embattled or crenellated. There were flights of steps for mounting it, placed at convenient distances ; and the para- pet often had the merlons pierced with long chinks, ending in round holes or oeillets.f The keeps were ascended by an unguarded flight of steps, from which the besiegers might be precipitated ; and though their general plan was nearly the same, yet the military * ^rcJuzolog. vol. xii. p. 196. t Grose and Archaolog. vol. iv. p. 390, and vol. vi. p. 253. MILITARY. 283 contrivances were effected in a very different manner.^ That most ancient fortress of Falaise (tradi- tionally the birth-place of William the Con- queror) appears to have furnished the model of most of the strong holds in England. It is still a most noble ruin. • The square form of keeps, the more usual with us, is of rare occur- rence on the opposite coast; but the append- ages and outworks are of very great extent. Very deep macchicolations, after the return from the first crusade, more frequently finish- ed their round or polygonal towers, than bat- tlements or parapets. A large portal and windows, with sculptures, similar to those used in ecclesiastical buildings, appear in most of them. Castle Rising, Norfolk, and Norwich, and particularly Newcastle-upon-Tyne, abound in admirable specimens of Norman arcades and mouldings ; but particularly one in the castle of Durham, exactly resembling those in the ca- thedral, and as richly designed ; and the castle of Newcastle-upon-Tyne is even more remark- able for the number of internal arches and door-cases, which are decorated with Norman carved work. In the circular, oval, or polygonal keeps, which usually occupied the whole area of the Khtg. £84 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. mount on which they stood, a richly-carved door- case is to be discovered. Such are still remain- ing at Arundel and Berkeley. The remaining circular tower, flanked by four small ones, at Houdon, near Falaise, is the exact prototype of the latter. The great tower of entrance was built at the foot of the artificial mount, from which was a subterraneous sally-port with stone stairs leading to the keep. It contained the port- cullis and drawbridge affixed to the archway, and several spacious chambers. lii point both of the formation of the mount and keep, and their connexion with the entrance-tower, the remains of Tunbridge, and the more perfect state of Arundel Castle, exhibit a singular re- semblance.^ The walls were protected by very substantial ribs or buttresses, and the round keeps had a central space left open to admit the light and air. At Arundel, the corbel- stones which supported the beams of timber, * The gateway of Tunbridge Castle is of the same form and asra. The base of the mound covers an acre of ground. (See the elevation and plan in Carter's Ancient Architecture in FtUgland^ pi. Ixi. a work to which the candid will allow a considerable degree of merit.) The fosse at Arundel is 110 feet deep on one side, and 80 on the other. Leland observes a peculiarity of Berkeley, sed non stat in mole egestae terrae.” The excavations under the keep of Reigate Castle, now de- stroyed, made in the sand-rock, are most extensive. There was formerly a very large crypt, surrounded by stone benches. The keep of Pembroke Castle, with walls fourteen feet MILITARY. 285 and which converged to an open centre, where was a subterraneous room, are still easily to be marked out. The life of a chieftain during the first Nor- man reigns, appears to have been passed in building castles and defending them, when not actively employed in destroying those of others. Although constructed, as if to last for ages, the long reign of Henry III. spent in a ceaseless contest between that king and his revolting barons, affords numerous in- stances of fortresses which were scarcely finish- ed, before the outworks, at least, w^ere levelled with the ground. The keep more frequently escaped utter ruin, after a long and obstinate siege. This demolition was effected by means of vast military engines, such as catapiiltce, ( esprmgals ) and battering-rams, the use of which had been retained, and applied accord- ing to the Roman system of war. These ob- thick, has a circular form likewise, and a singularly curious arched roof, composed externally of stone. The diameter is 25 feet, and the height 75. It is probably of a later date, by a century, than the two before mentioned. “ A tower in Pontefract Castle had a singularly narrow and irregularly winding staircase going down from the upper floor to a sally- port constructed within a solid wall, under the mount."’ ‘‘ The old rounders of imperishable stone and cement, which last even hardens by time, contain in themselves no more principle of decay, than the rock on which they stand.” — Whitakei'''s Skipton. 286 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. servations likewise belong to the barons’ wars in the reign of the second Edward. We can- not indeed fairly account for the total subver- sion of so many castles as the chroniclers have asserted, but by concluding, that after a castle was taken, the whole soldiery engaged as vic- tors did not leave it until the entire demoli- tion was completed , — ‘‘funditus demoliendumJ' ^ In process of time, several improvements, in respect both of military strength and commo- dious habitation, were adopted, even in these Norman fortresses. The second ballium was protected by smaller towers, and those of the barbican and gate of entrance admitted of spa- cious rooms. In these the feodal baron resided with his family, who were driven to inhabit the keep merely as a place of refuge during a siege. Such castles were frequent in every county in England, as early as the reigns of Henry II. and his sons, and continued till the close of that of Henry III. But the plan which allowed of enlarged di- mensions, and greater regularity and beauty in the architecture of the towers, owes its intro- * Lydgate very forcibly describes such total ruin — Walls; an'tJ tohjrc;^ anU tre;gtt!S mbattailrlf, for ioar ^^tronglp apparatlleU, 33e fi'rsiu tJoion brte, t^at noticing be 33ut all togebpr tj^e peart]^ plein 23elob) laitt. Story of Thebes^ Part iii. MILITARY. 287 duct ion into England to King Edward I. We may, indeed, consider his reign as the epoch of the grand style of accommodation and mag- nificence in castle architecture. When en- gaged in the crusade, he surveyed with satis- faction the superior form and strength of the castles in the Levant and the Holy Land.^ Every city he saw surrounded by lofty embat- tled walls, thickly studded with well-shaped towers, and crested with banging galleries and macchicolations, which served the double pur- pose of military defence and great external beauty. f Of the five castles which he built in Wales, Caernarvon, Conway, Harlech, and Beau- maris, retain the vestiges of former magnifi- cence ; but Aberystwith has scarcely a ruin which remains at this time. The castle of Caernarvon consists of two dis- tinct parts, one of which was military, and adapted to receive a garrison, and the other was a palace. Of this celebrated castle, the ground-plan is oblong, unequally divided into an upper and lower ward. None of the towers * The Norman eroisaders, during the winter, fortified, in the manner of their country, every post they had gained. Our Richard I. built the walls of Acre, Porphyra, Joppa, and Askalon. Fuller's Holy War^ lib. iii. chap. 2. from WiU Jielmus Tyrensis. -j- See an account of the walls of Constantinople, Archccolog. vol. xiv. 231. Procopius^ De Edificiis Justiniani, mentions 500 “ (ppspiuF or embattled towers ; an evident amplification. 288 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. are circular, or with macchicolations, but have five, six, or eight angles. The largest, called from some tradition “ the Eagle tower,” has three tall angular turrets rising from it, whilst all the others have but one of the same descrip- tion. The inclosing walls are seven feet thick, with alures and parapets pierced frequently with oeillet holes. A great singularity is ob- servable in the extreme height both of the great entrance gate and that which is called the Queen’s. Leland observes of the portcul- lises at Pembroke, that they were composed ex solido ferro. In confirmation of the opinion, that the Royal founder adopted the form of such gates of entrance, those similar are almost universal in the castles, mosques, and palaces of the Saracens, and which he had so frequently seen during the Crusades. The tower of en- trance from the town of Caernarvon is still per- fect, and is the most handsome structure of that age in the kingdom.^ It is at least one hundred feet high ; and the gateway, of very remarkable * Lydgate, in his Troi/ Boke, describes the fortification of his own times : — h)ert on ijagljt Cluo aihit^, all of marble gren, filageeolleb loitljout for ;^aulte^ anU e^i^a^. Magecolles, or machecoulis, were the openings under the parapet of the gate, or other towers of salient angles. Some of these, of singular curiosity, are at Lumley and Raglan MILITARY. 289 depth, is formed by a succession of ribbed arches, sharply pointed. The grooves for three portcullises may be discovered, and above them are circular perforations, through which missile weapons and molten lead might be discharged upon the assailants. In the lower, or palatial division of the castle, stand a large polygonal tower of four stories, which was appropriated to Queen Eleanor, and in which her ill-fated son was born ; and another to the king, of a circular shape externally, but square towards the court. The apartments in the last-men- tioned are larger, and lighted by windows with square heads, and intersected with carved mul- lions. There is singular contrivance in the battlements, each of which had an excavation for the archers to stand in, pointing their arrows through the slits ; and a curious strata- gem, the carved figures of soldiers with hel- mets, apparently looking over the parapet. This device is repeated at Chepstow. It has been happily conjectured, that the castles of Caernarvon and Conway were intend- ed for different purposes ; the one, as a capital castles, two instances as early, and as late, as they were made in England. Of the first-mentioned, the buttresses are sloped from the base, and the turrets are finished by macchicolated galleries. Hanging watch-turrets, large enough only to con- tain one man, are suspended, as if by geometry, from an angu- lar point of the macchicolation. U 290 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. fortress to overawe North Wales ; the other, as a pleasant residence, — so far as residence could be pleasant where precaution, such as its plan and locality indicate, was required for personal safety. All the ornamental architec- ture, in both, has rather the character of the conventual or ecclesiastic, than the military — in the pointed arches and the shape of the windows ; a circumstance perhaps rather of necessity than choice, from the short time for the construction, and the difficulty of procur- ing workmen versed in any other style. At Conway,” observes an anonymous author, ^^what is called the Queen’s Oriel is remarkable for the fancy, luxuriance, and elegance of the work- manship. Nor is the contrivance of the little terraced garden below, considering the history of the times, a matter of small curiosity, where, though all the surrounding country were hos- tile, fresh air might be safely enjoyed ; and the commanding view of the singularly beautiful landscape around, from both that little herbary or garden, and the bay window or oriel, is so managed as to leave no doubt of its purpose.”^ Conway has no resemblance to Caernarvon. It is built much more exactly upon the model of the fortresses erected during the last Greek emperors, or those of the Gothick chieftains in * Principles of Design in Architecture^ 8vo. 1809. See Note [G] page 322. MILITARY. 291 the north of Italy. Here all the towers, with their turrets, are round, with a single slender one rising from each of them, and the macchi- eolations, which are not seen at Caernarvon, are introduced ; and the hall, capable of containing numerous guests, appears, as a first instance, to have been within castle-walls. The roof was vaulted upon ribbed arches of stone. A pecu- liarity in the construction of the towers, all of which are either circular or polygonal, is, that that those containing the royal apartments are finished by small round turrets, rising many feet above that upon which they are placed, as a proud distinction. Almost all the castles built in order to defend the marches of Wales and Scotland, more numerous than in other parts of England, were founded in his reign. After the subjugation of Wales, and the par- tition of it into great lordships, among the fol- lowers of the victorious Edward, for their secu- rity and the preservation of their power, many castles were erected upon the general plan of those he had built, but varying in dimensions and situation. Caer-Philly, in Glamorganshire, was the strong hold of the De Spencers in the reign of the second Edward, and so much increased by them, that its vallations and remains are much more extensive than any now discoverable. The hall was an immense room compared with ^92 ARCHITECTURE IN ENCxLAND. that at Conway.^ There was another at Chep~ stow. Castles had then become habitable, and in these apartments, having more and better accommodation, if not magnificent. The splen- did reign of Edward III. was an aera still more favourable to these improvements. Many of his barons, who had acquired wealth by the ransom of prisoners taken in the fields of Poitiers and Cressy, were proud to apply it to the decoration and enlargement of their castles ; and the example the king had shown at Windsor, excited in them a rivalry of imi- tation. The original destination of protection and defence was never wholly sacrificed to con- venience, but was consulted by many cautions of a warlike nature. Various improvements extended themselves from this reign to the close of the contention between the houses of York and Lancaster. Within that period we may date the erection or renovation of the grandest castellated struc- tures of which this kingdom could once boast : and whose venerable ruins are the most cha- racteristic features of the English landscape. About this time, turrets, and hanging galleries, over the salient angles and the gateways, very various in their design, were added to the ruder architecture of impregnable strength; and, par- * The hall was f 129 by 31, and only f. 22 high. See the plan in Pennants Tour. MILITARY. 29S ticularly in the Welsh counties, conical but- tresses were applied to round towers, reaching to more than half their height, and spreading at the base like a modern bastion. By these additions the ruins are rendered extremely picturesque. Of the fortress built by William Rede, bishop of Chichester, at Amberley, Sussex, about 1370, its ground-plan describes nearly a parallelo- gram, having four large towers at the angles, which do not project externally, but are, as it were, dovetailed into the side-walls. He was one of the most able geometricians of his age, and applied his skill to this structure. The lofty perforated parapet or arcade of Swansea castle is of this aera. Through these arches the water ran from the roof. Henry Gower, bishop of St. David’s in 1335, improved upon this plan in his magnificent castellated palace which he erected there, and in another at Llanphey Court. So beautiful an effect was not repeated, and we have no other instance in Wales.^ As the circuit of many castles, with their out- works, frequently encompassed several acres of ground, the base court was proportionably spacious, and the halls and other large state * The followino- dimensions show the extent of this curious o and singular edifice : — area of the great court, f. 120 square ; king's hall, f. 88 — SO; bishop's hall, 58 — 33.- — Wi/)tdlta/us Tour. £94 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. chambers had the advantage of windows, of less magnitude, but similar form to those in churches. Other apartments and offices were almost unavoidably incommodious, as defence was the leading idea ; symmetry therefore is very seldom seen in the smaller rooms, which were often without fire-places ; and the oeil- let-holes and narrow windows served only to make darkness visible. If the chief apartments in a castle of im- proved construction be here more minutely in- vestigated, it may be considered as a digression necessary to their better classification. I have observed, that the inner court only was so occupied. Halls. — William Rufus constructed a hall in his palace at Westminster, which preceded all others both in point of antiquity and of dimensions. Hugh Lupus built one at Ches- ter Robert Consul one in Bristol castle ; and others were erected by his father, Henry I., at ^ The hall at Chester, called Lupus’ Hall, was 99 feet long, by 45 feet wide : taken down in 1790. Of that aera and equal dimensions was that in the castle of Bristol, built by Robert Consul (temp. Henry I.), and taken down in 1643. W. Wyrcestre,inl480, gives the measurement 108 feet by 50, divided by upright beams of timber. Aubrey ( MSS. Ash- mol. Mus. Oxford) says, that in the hall of Henry the First’s palace of Woodstock, there were two rows of pillars support- ing circular arches with Norman zig-zag mouldings, divid- ing as n{)w commonly seen in churches. MILITARY. 295 Woodstock, and Beaumont in Oxford. These were probably of rude construction, and were divided into two aisles by stone arches or up- right beams of timber.* Others were contem- porary, of which similar accounts are known to the investigating antiquary. In the next century, castles began to be constantly inhabited ; and the necessary resort to them of equals and feodal dependants, at solemn feasts and customary entertainments, required a large space, and soon admitted of internal architecture and characteristic orna- ment, more especially at the upper end, where were the dais” and the high table.f Edward I. erected a hall in his castle at Conway, in which are certain peculiarities.:]: From that period, no principal residence of the * The halls of some of the earlier castles had arches of stone crossing them at every bay, with a timber-frame roof resting upon them, and seen betwixt them. Such were at Conway, Goodrich, and Mayfield, Sussex. ■f* The haut-pas, or dais, was a part of the floor elevated above it, and approached by three steps at least. I This hall is 129 feet by 31, and 22 feet high. It is not oblong, but is built to follow the curvature of the rock. Halls, in these and similar instances, were so spacious, as to admit of a knight’s riding up to the high table ; as the cham- pion of England was used to do at the coronation. The hall of Raby is sufficient for that purpose, f. 90 — 36 ; 34 high. Ifn at tlje fjalle 'Hqvz al igutfijaxlfe Cf)ere came a fenigi^t upon a sitetre, ^ntJ up i)t vitJetl) to tje l)igf)e borKe. Chauce 296 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. nobility or feudal lords was without one ; and though the general plan was correspondent with each other, they varied both in minuter parts, and in the degree of magnificent con- struction. Edward III. gave a grand example at Wind- sor, which was followed with emulation during his own and the succeeding reign. The limits of this slight treatise will not allow of an ex- tended enumeration. The following, however, must not be passed over. Westminster was rebuilt by Richard II., and Eltham, Kent; Kenilworth, by John of Gaunt ; and Darting- ton, Devon, by Holland Duke of Exeter, all of them most remarkable. Crosby Hall, London, was finished by the Duke of Gloucester, after- wards Richard III. Of each of these, accounts have been published, which are scientific and satisfactory.^ There was a general plan, as to the internal arrangement of these halls. J he high table was elevated upon a platform above the level of the floor, and was reserved for the lord and his family, with the superior guests. Around the walls were separate tables and benches, for the officers of the household and dependants: In the centre was the great fire-place, open on all sides, placed immediately beneath a turret in the roof, called a louvre, for the purpose * See Note [H] page 323 . MILITARY. 297 of conveying away the smoke : this was the most ancient, but a very imperfect expedient. We find from Leland, that chimney-places in- cluded within the walls were in Bolton Castle ; but there are other, and perhaps earlier, proofs of this alteration, at Conway and Kenilworth. The expansive roofs were made of timber- frame of oak or chesnut. Whether of the in- digenous material oak or chesnut, or of the latter imported from Portugal and Castile, is a question which has been discussed, but not determined, by antiquaries. It was firmly compacted together with considerable geome- trical skill, and admitting many of the orna- mental forms, in carved wood, which abounded in the age in which they were erected. Large corbels of stone and projecting trusses issued from the side walls, and were disposed in the bays (likewise called severeys) between each window. Upon the ends of these v/ere carved demi-angels, each holding a large esco- cheon to their breasts. The vast superincum- bent frame-work was thus supported, and was composed of open lattices, which gave much lightness by perforation, and were finished with pendants. Near to the high table was a projecting or bay window, fully glazed, and frequently with armorial stained glass, in which was placed the standing cupboard, to contain the splendid display of plain and parcel-gilt 298 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. plate. The rere-doss was a frame with tapes- try,^ sometimes canopied, fixed behind the seat of the sovereign or the great chieftain, when he dined in public. Around the walls was wainscot of panneled oak, or strained suits of tapestry. I speak of the fourteenth century, the aera of their introduction. Privy Chambers, Parlours, and Bowers. — Castles, at least as early as the reign of Edward I., were not constructed merely for garrisons. At Conway there were several smaller apartments which admitted of accom- modation and ornament from the introduction of carving, fresco painting, or tapestry. The two first mentioned arts were applied with a profusion and excellence in the royal palace at Westminster, of which sufficient evidence has been preserved. Of the dimensions of these castles, and the infinity of small rooms in which they abound- ed, the number of retainers who were resident, and necessary to the state of a nobleman, will give a positive proof, exclusively of occasional garrisons in time of war.f * fnto A ijalle of noble apparatlc TOitlj arrael i^preab. Chaucer. See Note [I] page 324. *[• See the ancient Household Books of the nobility, parti- cularly that of the Earls of Northumberland, lately repub- lished, 1828. MILITARY. 299 Adjoining to, or nearly connected with the hall, was a spacious room, usually having a bay window, which looked into the quadrangle or court. Here the lord received his family or special guests before dinner, and retired into it when that ceremony was finished. It was adorned with the richest tapestry, and cushions of embroidery by the ladies themselves, and was distinguished as the presence or privy chamber.” For the females of the family there was another similar apartment, in which they passed their time, and which was dedicated to their occupations and amusements, known as my lady’s bower, or parlour,” where they received visiters. Kitchens. — A great kitchen was an indis- pensable appendage, and was generally con- structed with considerable skill. The shape was square or octangular. At Raby, for in- stance, it was of the former description, and the roof most elaborately groined, with an oc- tangular aperture in the centre to convey away the steam and smoke. The fire-places in them and other apartments projected into the room, and were supported by small pillars, as in the keep of Conisburgh, and several others ; and the chimneys, externally, were single and lofty, as those built in Berkeley Castle in the reign of Edward III. : afterwards they were enclosed in turrets. The windows of the hall were long soo ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. and narrow, of two lights only, and a single mullion ; and a larger one over the high table at the end, looking to the court-yard.^ Bay windows were never placed in the outward wall, and seldom others, excepting those of the narrowest shape. But as the architects were most conversant with church building, we may observe a certain similarity of form in those parts of a castle where it could occur. We will now examine the plan and consti- tuent parts of the exterior of enlarged and habitable castles. In the course of these in- vestigations, some readers may be inclined to know, by the most certain evidence we can acquire, what was the real state of the principal castles which were, in the far greater propor- tion, adjacent to the Marches of Wales and Scotland, in the time of their perfect repair and habitation, and what was more worthy of remark in many of them. In the reign of Henry VIII. (1534), that intelligent and industrious antiquary, John Leland, was commissioned to collect, by an actual survey, certain information concerning them, in every county in the kingdom. No man * In these windows were emblazoned the armorial ensigns of the lord and his connexions, in stained glass. Leland has noticed that those at Sudley Castle, Gloucestershire, were composed of “ berals.” Chaucer, in several passages, has the terms “ burrell and crystal,’" meaning only very thick, but dia- ydianous, glass in knobs, and probably not stained with colour. MILITARY. 301 was more competent to such a task ; and great- ly we must regret that his notes, taken in this Itinerary, are the only remains of his labours, which were finally interrupted by sickness and death ; and what remains to us is still iiiiper- feet, although Hearne, who published them, has done as much to connect and restore them as could have been done. At all events, Le- land has enabled us to see what has, in so many instances, vanished from the earth, with his eyes^ and realise many ideas of their former extent and magnificence, which we may have pictured in our day-dreams, whilst we were inspecting their ruins. With him, “ we may walk about their bulwarks, and tell the towers thereof.”^' This consideration will create an interest in many towards the extracts which I purpose to make in the Appendix, principally relating to peculiar rather than to general construction* When the lover of our old national architec- ture visits the remains thus presented to him, he will enlarge his view by previous knowledge of its history, and be furnished with a clue to his investigations of the once enormous struc- ture, which has passed away for ages. For Leland himself enumerates many castles, of which he remarks “ that they be now dene downe.” See Note [K] page 324. 302 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. An account of all the majestic mansions in which our ancient nobility resided, now totally rased and dilapidated by war and time, and of others whose fate and grandeur we learn only from historians, will not be expect- ed in a slight essay. But for excellence or peculiarity of architecture the following may be selected.* Windsor was left a complete castle by Edward III. Spofford, Raby, Ke- nilworth, Ludlow, Alnwick, Arundel, Lumley, and Goodrich, had each of them halls of good proportions, like those in the greater abbeys. Those of Raby and Lumley remain at this day. Warkworth had extraordinary carved devices and escocheons, placed in series on the outside, under the battlements ; while the gateways of Raby, Lancaster, and Warwick, were remarkable, when many now dilapidated could offer a comparison. The external appli- cation of escocheons with armorial ensigns, was most frequent in the northern counties. No- thing can exceed the lightness and elegance of the polygonal tower, which stands singly, at ^ Amid the ruins of castles, we are frequently shown one called the ‘‘ Maiden Tower,’’ as in Lord Surrey’s sonnet at Windsor : — ‘‘ With eyes caste up into the mayden’s tower.” 2\ Warton, in a note on this word, proves that it did not refer to the habitation of the fair sex, or to the towers never having been taken, but simply a corruption of the old French “ magne,” great. — Hist, of Foetry^ vol. iii. p. 15. MILITARY. 303 Warwick, finished with macchicolations and projecting brackets. The effect of these polygonal, lofty, and richly-macchicolated towers, is most interest- ing in the perspective view ; and of this we have still an opportunity of judging at War- wick and Cardiff. They are very beautiful. The ground-plots of castles were arranged chiefly according to their sites. When placed on a rock above a river, with the foundation rifted and appearing as a continuation of the natural fastness, an idea is communicated of impregnable massiveness, which is pecu- liarly striking at Durham, Warwick, Conway, and Chepstow. The ancient castle of Leeds, in Kent, was placed on an island in the middle of a lake ; and that likewise of Bodyam, Sussex. No castle which recurs to my memory is of so regular a construction, and so strictly cor- respondent in its plan, as that of Bodyam, last mentioned, so much so as to be nearly unique. It rose from its foundation in 1397 — 1400 ; square, with four circular towers at the angles, a stately gateway between two others, deeply macchicolated, and two more, all corresponding in their location. There are no carved de- vices, but escocheons of arms and crests over each gate.^ * A graphic and historical sketch of Bodyam Castle, in Sussex, by W. Cotton^ Esrj. M.A. 8vo. 1830. 304 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Baronial fortresses, which had not such ad- vantages of situation, were usually oblong squares, with lofty towers at each angle, con- nected by embattled walls or curtains, pierced only by oeillet-holes. They had open galleries, or corridors, and bay-windows, opening to the court-yard, from which the ladies could view the military processions, and award the prize to the successful knight at jousts and tourneys. The castle of Newark, Notts, has several small rooms or closets, projecting externally, like bay windows, at a great height from the ground. At Caernarvon, in a niche over the doorway, Edward I. is represented as standing, and about to draw his sword ; and at Pembroke is the Earl, in a sitting posture. In several of the northern castles we have a display of large escocheons, with armorial ensigns, affixed to the building. The drawbridge over the first vallum, or ditch, was never omitted ; and when the castle was built on the banks of a river, a long arched bridge added to its security. Usually at one of the angles arose a tower, (as Leland terms it, of “ lodginges,”) sometimes to the height of even five stories, with single apartments, always occupied by the lord or his family. At Wresil Castle, Yorkshire, the Earl of Northumberland had converted one of these MILITARY. 305 rooms into a library, which he called Para- dise.” There was a mode of building a certain part of a castle for greater security, called a Bas- tille.” This was effected by raising the con- necting walls almost to the height of two or three of the towers, and strongly embattling them. The origin of it was the great fortress at Paris, known emphatically as ^ The Bastille,’^ which had two courts and towers of uniform height. Its destruction in 1793 will be re- membered. There was an instance in the de- stroyed castle at Bristol,f but another does not occur to my recollection. * This was the largest and most complete. In the two courts there were eight towers, which, with the walls, were of uniform construction. It was founded by Charles V. King of France, in 1370, and finished in 1382. The term bastille” is used adjectively in the Roman de la Rose. un tjcrgter grant tt le , (IBnrlo'eS tr’uu i^ault mur, ha^tille . Which Chaucer translates — dTiiU inel about, ft b)a5 battailtb, ^ntr rounb mbtron the Inert ^et dfull man^ a ridj anb fanr turret, ^t ebern eornere of tljii^ Inal, Wa^ £let a toinr full principal. •f In W. Wyreestre’s survey of Bristol Castle, about the year 1480, Item, a bastyle lyethe southward beyond the water-gate ; containeth in length 60 yardes.” Itin. IF. IF. p. 260. X 306 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Barbican towers were of early introduc- tion. They were always erected on the first ballium, sometimes on a mount, and serving the purposes of a watch-tower, to keep a con- stant guard. Scotland, on the borders, had a peculiarity in the castles. Almost every chieftain’s manor- house was built around one large and lofty tower, which was called a “ peel and as they were generally deeply bracketed, there was a superstructure of wood under a conical or pa- vilion roof^ Several apartments were thus * This plan of superstructure was introduced from France, where, in the thirteenth century, the larger castle towers were finished by high conical or pavilion roofs. See ancient illuminations in Froissart, MSS. Harl. fob No. 4350, in the British Museum. Such were known as “ bartizans,” from the old French; but the wooden erections on them were called hreteskes,'''' from the Italian bretesche.'^’' Lydgate says, in his account of Troy : — Cbme toiurc hrettjcUJ dmc (©f djcs'c' ^tom, tljat tutre not far ai^unUre, which seemeth to apply to battlements only. ‘‘ The King (Edward III.) went to Striveling, where, on a plott of grounde, where the destroied castell had stood, he built another fortresse called a Peele.” — Holinshed. Le- land likewise has adopted the term : “ the house called Clifton, like a ‘ pile or castellet;’” by which term he means a single tower. A Peel is described as such, elevated on a mound of earth, and surrounded by a high fence of sharpened stakes. MILITARY. 307 made, in which, in time of danger, the females of the family dwelt, or retired to them for pro- tection. We will now turn back to consider and in- vestigate how far the opinion which might have been suggested by former discussions be cor- rect. The royal palaces of Westminster and others were not, strictly speaking, castles. Al- though they were not actual fortifications in each instance, Windsor was decidedly so, and the Tower of London. As late as the reign of Edward IV. before a new manor-place was built, a permission from the crown of a partial fortification, at least, called a “ licentia crenellandi,” was pro- cured.^ This appeared principally in the great gate of entrance, which had at this pe- riod an embattlement of larger dimensions than before, upon a very deep and overhanging bracket, by which an open gallery was formed. This licence was more frequently demanded for the small castles, or peel-houses, in those counties which border on the northern marches. ^ Sir W. Hastings, of Ashby-de-la-Zouch, had “ licentiam murillandi, tourellandi, kernellandi, embattellandi, et mac- chicolandi,” and the following more minute statement in- cludes a full description of castle walls. Patent to W. Earl of Southampton, to build Cowdray : — “ cum petris calce et zabulo, muris et turribus includere, batillare vel turrellare, kernellare, et macchicolare.”'’ X 308 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. The great variety of materials of which cas- tles were composed, depended upon the soil and the nature of the country where they stood. Walls of the thickness of twenty feet were faced only with hewn stone ; the inter- mediate part was composed of pebble, rubble stone, or flint, imbedded in an indissoluble mass of fluid mortar, which acquired, by time and pressure, such an induration, as scarcely to be separated by any possible means. Upon the sea-coast, squared flints were last of all used for the outward walls ; but in counties which produced the better kinds of stone, the neatest and most regular masonry was not spared. Stone was procured from Caen. Castellated structures of brick became more frequent in England, when habitable houses, upon the largest scale, were erected ; some- times entire, and at others, mixed with stone, in the more decorated parts. Michael de la Pole, Earl of Suffolk, in the reign of Richard II. erected a magnificent house in the town of Kingston-upon-Hull, and surrounded the burgh with walls and towers of the same material."^ When the jealous and fierce spirit of the feodal system prevailed in its full force, castles were necessary to repel warlike attacks or pre- datory violence ; and whatever hospitality and courtesy were practised within their walls, they * See Note [L] page 329. MiLITARY. o09 frowned defiance upon all without them, whe- ther uncivilised or hostile. From reflections on the history of the early Norman warriors, we willingly turn to those of the middle centuries, when Chivalry had thrown her rays of refinement over domestic life. Cas- tles then became the schools of the hardier virtues, and manners, which were once distort- ed by emulation and love of power, had acquir- ed from her institutions a mild dignity, which has long since been lost in a higher degree of polish, in the gradual progress of refinement. By far the most important part of a fortress was the great gateway of entrance, and com- bined with it were the chief materials both of architectural beauty and warlike defence. It occupied, with few exceptions, the central part of the skreen wall, which had that aspect from which the castle could be most conveniently approached. The whole exceeded the other parapets in height.^ Two more lofty towers, flanked either side, and the whole had a very deep corbelling, a mode of building brought from the East, where it had its most early use. The Arabs brought it into Europe, in Spain, and it was afterwards adopted by the Lom- bards and Normans. Corbels are stones which are extended at regular distances from the * Among the finest specimens of such gateways now re- maining are those of Caernarvon, Pembroke, Kaby, Windsor, and Warwick. 310 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. main wall, for the purpose of supporting^ a projecting parapet, cornice, or entablature, by means of brackets, which are either simple, or connected with each other by arches. They were most common in the construction of cas- tles, in parapets and galleries so thrown out, where perpendicular holes were pierced in the flooring, which thus enabled the besieged, un- der cover, to throw down missiles, or destruc- tive molten metal, on the heads of the assail- ants. Gothic fancy was employed to add ter- ror to the view, by exhibiting carved giants and monsters, as attached to the walls. John of Gaunt’s entrance gateway at Lancaster f has a lofty pointed arch, defended by overhanging corbels, with pierced apertures. On either side are two light watch-towers, crested with battle- ^ A bay-window, in common acceptation, means simply a projecting window, usually rising from a corbel or bracket, between buttresses, and more frequently at the end of build- ings. t pcrtfeolf^ istrong at tbme gate, inani) a gavgoile, antf manie a Lydgate. Hawes^ in his “ Palace of Pleasure,” (1505,) describes the improved architecture shown in the castles of his own age : — Cl)t fan re totoer igexangletr Uouhtle^^e, ^argopletJ bjitlj grei)l)ouutfe rG s-< G ^ Vi O) o> P5 Ph > ^ 2 ; 0> ^ CG C3 C3 t; o 4-j C as !-^ - O) 1 1 -1530 -1540 0 iO rH 1 1 1 1 0 1 CO 1 ^0 T — 1 1 INI rH 0 1 iO CM 1 iO CO 0 1 0 0 0 0^0 3 —H CM J-H CM CM (M CO CO CM iO iO) 10 >0 iO to io io io 10 io iO >0 ^0 r — 1 >-7 rH rH T— 1 — H T — 1 r— 1 i-H rH rH rH rH G 0 .M r-> 02 03 0 G 0 S G GS S' G 0 0 0 3 § 0) X I ^ G cu ^ "o .J: G «3 ,G 0> bC t: c/2 f/2 G ;h rd ^ •G ot o) ^ O PQ ffi W o ^ G 03 ns .0 O) . . - o ° g G 3 ^ « S;.§^ g-Qf^ «Q ^ g S iPIhP G O ' ^ c>2 G n O G -G Sh C OW G c3 nG >73 ;-i Ph O O ^ 73 t .1 - - ^ O W W C/2 W - «4-l G O G r-H 3 Ti ^PQ ^ 73 HO ^ w «4-, O 5+-I o ^ —I •d G Q^W cc lo G G: Of as V S ^_( f-i 03 o ^ S o g3 O ^ IS o G C/2 - 'hh § ® Gi O) CLG 2 S gQ 03 0 .^ Jai OJ 02 O Eh o ^ 03 o G O 'So G O S-| 'S o> ?7, 03 g: 2 ^ 03 03 , 1 73 G C/2 g3 ^ f-i 5 _, 0 ^ W 1 « a s GP O g: Jb 03 PP 73 Sh HH s_ -2.3 O G2 H P^ cc ci5 iz; <>i G O ^ ^ G G > ffi H HtU o o G G -i) X o G S G 02 K W 01 CO ^ « “ g g 02 fZi o 350 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. I have observed, for the sake of more accu- rate definition, that the Tudor architecture ex- hibited three distinct styles of ornamental arrangement in the several aeras of Henry VII, his magnificent son, Edward VI, and Queen Elizabeth ; and of these some explanation will not be deemed irrelevant in the course of this inquiry. A parallel may be drawn between the styles of domestic buildings during the reigns of the two contemporary monarchs, Henry VIII. and Francis I. of France,* analogous as to a general description, but by no means strictly accordant in every point. As far as the distribution of the apartments, they were not dissimilar. In the exterior of the French Chateaux, a perpetual repetition was presented of towers and turrets, consisting of heavy parts, not con- nected by any regular design, detached from each other by fortified walls, and crowned by immense roofs, either obtusely conical, or spread out at length, as if under a pavilion, which contained several distinct floors, occupying at least one-third part of the total elevation. The grand roof was still higher in the general proportion, as the ridge was finished by an open * Francis I. rebuilt the old palace of the Louvre, from the design of Pierre Lescot, finished in 1540, which differed widely from it. — Legrand, Dhcription de Paris et de ses Edifices^ 8vo. 1808. THE TUDOR STYLE. 351 balustrade of carved work, extending for the whole length, which was considered as a dis- tinguishing mark of seignory. Windows of a peculiar construction (called grenier and dor- mier"^) rose immediately from the external wall, and were continued almost to the summit, which were rendered very ornamental. The windows themselves were of an oblong form, with transoms, and the surfaces of the super- structure partook of all the carved varieties of the front. They terminated in pediments be- tween two lofty finials. Of this manner, there are, among others, two prominent examples, which have been accurately engraved f — the Chateau de Melan, and that of Josselin, both of them in Britany. Holbein J was established in England under the royal patronage, and had gained sufficient influence for a partial introduction of the mix- ed style — Gothick^ with a certain adoption of Roman architecture, as it began to revive in * By these, light was communicated to the granaries and dormitories, which occupied the roof. These could not be reconciled to any plan of Grecian or Roman architecture. Such was the first Louvre, when Pierre Lescot built the present grand court, upon his own model. f By Vaucelles. When the Italian members of ornament took place of those peculiar to the latest Gothick, upon their introduction, partially only, as in the reign of Henry VIII, they were noticed by Hall, in his Chronicle, as “ anticke worke of Homayne fgures."" 352 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Italy. The grand portal of Wilton house, (now removed into the park,) and that already mentioned at Whitehall palace, gave an un- questionable proof of his skill in ornamental design, as it was first applied, in his time, to decorate buildings of a superior order. The first transition from what may be termed “ the expiring Gothick” in its last modification, took place in the short reign of Edward VI, and, under the direction of an architect known by the name of John of Padua, obtained in a few very memorable instances. Of this eminent person the real history is obscure ; but it is certain that he enjoyed the patronage of the Protector Somerset, and others of the Court, and that several very sumptuous edifices were constructed by him."^ From his designs were erected the palaces of Somerset House, in the Strand, and Sion House, Middlesex, with Long- leat, for Sir John Thynne, in Wiltshire. The palace called Somerset House was a proof of the ambitious magnificence of the Protector-Duke, from which he was led to the block when the walls only were finished. To found this immense pile, he destroyed the cloister of St. Paul’s cathedral, and the palaces of the bishops of Worcester, » Lichfield, and LlandafF, and in order to apply their materials to that purpose. It was built, but not com- * See Note [G] page 388. THE TUDOR STYLE. 353 pletely, soon after the year 1549 ; and, with the addition made by Inigo Jones for the recep- tion of Queen Henrietta, was entirely taken down, and the site is now occupied by a cele- brated modern edifice. The honour of having introduced the Roman architecture into England, in any large building, must be attributed to John of Padua, but with- out doubt, with all the deficiency of a first introduction, which was subsequently perfected by the superior genius of Inigo Jones. The left bank of the Thames had a splendid display of palaces, which were situate between the Temple and Westminster, in magnificent succession, and had an immediate communi- cation with the river.^ Sion House, upon the site of the nunnery, had been finished in its ground-plan only, when its founder was beheaded. Longleat was nearly completed, and remains one of the grandest structures of the kind in England. Mr. Wilkins, the Cambridge architect, has attributed the design of the two beautiful gate- ways in Caius College to John of Padua: but ^ These were, Essex House, Arundel House, Durham, Salisbury, and Worcester Houses, Somerset House, above- mentioned, Northampton, now Northumberland House, and York House, now Whitehall, the original proprietorship of which may be traced by the names of the modern streets built upon their sites. Hollar has drawn or engraved most of them, as they stood in his day. 2 A 354 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. his pretensions are disputed by another foreign- er, Theodore Haave of Cleves, whose portrait is preserved in the library, painted by himself. The gateway called the “ Porta Honoris,”^ nearly resembles, in its columns and orna- ments, the tombs of the nobility erected in that age, with various members of Roman archi- tecture upon a small scale. It was intended to exhibit the new manner, and excited great admiration. Besides these, the great additions made to Sudley Castle, Gloucestershire, by the Lord- Admiral Seymour, and Callage, Cambridge- shire, by Edward Lord North, were remark- able, as having been built in the reign of Ed- ward VI, but which are both now dismantled and destroyed. It is essential to the design of my inquiry, to notice the former existence of those grand edifices, which no longer remain to us, no less than such as are, generally speaking, still per- fect, or have been retained in part. Even these mansions are falling away apace. In every quarter of a century a class inust disap- pear, by the joint operation of repair and de- cay. Most of their remains have been remov- ed to raise or to be incorporated with other buildings. ^ Engraved and described in the third volume of the Vetusta Wlonitmenla. THE TUDOR STYLE. 355 We now reach the third and last aera of the Tudor Gothick, with its specific varieties, as peculiar to the reign of Queen Elizabeth, with which this investigation will terminate. Domestic architecture had now assumed a more scientific character. No building of con- sequence was undertaken without a plan pre- viously regulated.^ Early in the reign of this queen, we had the treatises of Lomazzo and Philibert de Lorme translated into English, and the new system was sedulously adopted by the best architects of our own nation, when they were employed to construct palaces for the nobility.')' Any attempt to authenticate the works of several principal architects, at the close of the fifteenth and the commencement of the six- teenth century, would be attended with partial success; several, who were sufficiently merito- rious, are recorded, but without a specification of their individual works. Yet the names of the following professors of architecture, whose works, many dilapidated and some destroy- ed, have been, in rare instances, indubitably ascertained, have been rescued from the obli- vion which conceals those of the immediately preceding and darker age. The more eminent * See Note [H] page 388. *t* Du Cerceau, Des plus excellens batimens de France, 1607, folio, with minute engravings of thirty houses, built in the sixteenth century. ^ A 2 356 AllCIIlTECTUllE IN ENGLAND. of these will appear in the following series, which is chronologically arranged, as nearly as possible. I. Robert Adams, Surveyor of the Works to Queen Elizabeth.* II. John Shute. I cannot authenticate any of his buildings, but he is known to have writ- ten on the subject, and has styled himself “ paynter and architecte.”'}' III. Bernard Adams. IV. Laurence Bradshaw. V. John Thorp was the most celebrated architect of his day, and was consequently selected to design and build the magnificent palace of the Lord Treasurer, at Burleigh in Lincolnshire, and another for the Lord Buck- hurst, at Buckhurst, Sussex, now taken down. A very curious MS. book of his designs, and which had belonged to him, is still existing, and preserved in the best private library of architecture in England. J This affords evi- dence that there were few celebrated houses then erecting, in which Thorp was not engaged. VI. Gerard Christmas was associated with Bernard Jansen in building Northampton, afterwards called Suffolk, and now Northum- berland House, not strictl)" within the reign of ^ Buried in the old church of Greenwich. Inscription : — “ 11. A. operationum regiaruni supervisori, architecturae peri- tissiino. Ob. 1595.'* t See Note [1] page 399 1 See Note [K] p. 390. THE TUDOR STYLE. 357 Elizabeth, in which both of them had gained some professional fame. Christmas inserted his cypher in the street front, C. M. ( Christmas mdificavit.) VII. Bernard Jansen. He was the archi- tect who probably designed, and was the first employed by T. Howard, Earl of Suffolk, and Lord High Treasurer, in the very large and sumptuous mansion called Audley Inn, Essex. VIII. Moses Glover was associated with Gerard Christmas and the last-mentioned, in completing Northumberland House, and pro- bably Sion House, Middlesex, for Henry Earl of Northumberland, who had expended 9000 /. in that great work. IX. Robert Smithson, and his son, Hunt- ingdon Smithson,^ were engaged in that most beautiful structure, Wollaton House in Notting- hamshire, and likewise at Bolsover, Derbyshire. Thorp was at least consulted, as there are designs for Wollaton among his MSS. above noticed. X. Thomas Holte. Hearne discovered that he was a native of York. He designed and built the Public Schools and the college qua- drangles of Merton and Wadham in Oxford. He first introduced columns of the five clas- * His epitaph is in Wollaton Church. He is saici to have died in 1614, aged 79, and is styled “ Architcctor or Sur- veyor unto the most worthy house of Wollaton, with divers others of great account."” — Epitaph in Bolsover Church : ‘‘ Huntingdon Smithson, Architect, Ob. 164 OA 358 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. si cal orders, and applied them, in a series from the base to the summit, in the west side of the tower of the Schools. This idea was evidently borrowed from Philibert de Lorme, in the Chateau d’Anet, near Paris, destroyed at the revolution. It was at best but a conceit, and from being incongruous with other parts, did not occur often in this country. Excepting from the preservation of Thorp’s MS. which specifies so many buildings in which himself had been concerned, we must rest con- tent with the proof of a single edifice having been designed or finished by several of the architects here enumerated, of whom informa- tion has been incidentally collected. It must be observed, too, that the same individual archi- tects lived and flourished in the next century. Many of their grandest works were not com- pleted before the middle of the reign of James the First ; so that the last Tudor style may be said to have been practised to the days of Inigo Jones, in whose early works it may be traced. This fashion of building enormous houses was extended to that period, and even to that of the Civil War. Audley Inn, Hatfield, Charl- ton, Wilts, and particularly Wollaton, are those in which the best architecture of that age may be seen. Others of the nobility, deserting their baronial residences, indulged themselves in a rivalship in point of extent and grandeur of THE TUDOR STYLE. 359 their country-houses, which was of course fol- lowed by opulent merchants, the founders of new families. Sir Baptist Hicks, the king’s mercer, (afterwards ennobled,) built Campden House, Gloucestershire, which was scarcely in- ferior to Hatfield, which was afterwards burned down. There is scarcely a county in England which cannot boast of having once contained similar edifices ; a very few are still inhabited ; others may be traced by their ruins, or remem« bered by the oldest villagers, who can confirm the tradition and the sites, at least, *of others are pointed out by descriptions, as having existed within the memory of man. A new aera of domestic architecture now presents itself to us, not indeed absolutely dis- similar to that immediately preceding, but in a short process of time introducing new designs and ornamental features : it has therefore gain- ed, from modern definition, to' be termed the Tudor style. This, as it prevailed for more than a hundred and twenty years, including the Elizabethan peculiarities, will require his- torical investigation, with comparative criti- cism. Pursuing that investigation from the middle of the fifteenth to the close of the six- teenth century, those extensive, and otherwise remarkable structures, only require notice as they were the work either of the sovereigns * See Note [L] page 391- 360 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. themselves, or, in certain instances, of the most wealthy nobility. This new manner obtained, at first, a gra- dual preference only, and was intermixed ; but it afterwards became complete, and was charac- teristic of itself There was a transition from rude and massive strength to light and compa- rative convenience. I must recapitulate, in order to afford my readers a nearer view of that kind of domestic architecture, when, by its introduction, that which is strictly military was superseded, by offering a chronological classification of the several reigns in which there is a certain evi- dence that these mansions were erected.^ ^ Capital Mansions begun or built in the reign of Henr y VIII. Cothele, Cornwall 1500. Perfect. Place-house in Fowey, ditto . 1510. Considerable remains. Hengrave, Suffolk 1534. In perfect repair. Barsham Hall, Norfolk . 1515. In ruins. West Stow Hall, ditto . 1510. Reduced. Gifford’s Hall, ditto 1500. Perfect. Harlaxton, Lincolnshire 15—. Perfect. Penshurst, Kent . 1520. Perfect. Oxburgh, Norfolk Perfect. Mount Edgecumbe, Cornwall — Perfect. Belvoir Castle, rebuilt . 1525. Perfect. Westwood, Worcestershire Westonhanger, Kent. Perfect. Sutton, Surrey Perfect. West Wickham, Kent . 1510. Repaired. This list, if all now dilapidated or entirely taken down were enumerated, might be extended to several pages. THE TUDOR STYLE. 361 During the reign of Henry VIII, and in those which immediately followed it, the cour- tiers and opulent gentlemen vied with each other in the vast expenditure which they em- ployed in erecting most spacious houses, in the several provinces which they inhabited. And when any memorable change took place in the construction or architectural ornament of any considerable mansion-house, it was readily imi- tated or adopted by others. All novelties in domestic architecture, as in personal fashions, emanated from the court, especially if the sove- reign happened to be popular, and were pro- gressively disseminated through the higher or more opulent ranks. And hence originated much of the extraneous and puerile ornament,^ which was particularly displayed in large chim- neypieces, so frequent in mansion-houses of con- sequence. Leaving the historical inquiry into the subject, as far as I have endeavoured to render it more accurately known, — the several * The shell-roofed niche, grotesque pilasters, with caryati- des, &c. columns having t he lower part covered with carved foliage, and the upper parts fluted, with a jumbled mixture of cherubim, birds, and lions^ heads, armorial bearings, and mythological hieroglyphics, composed the designs of various objects of composition and false decoration, which prevailed during the long reign of Elizabeth, and continued in the early part of that of her successor.” — Britton's Arch. Antiq, vol. ii. 101. Collectively speaking, there was an intricacy of design which appeared to defy explanation. 362 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. component parts and discriminating features peculiar to the mansions which were the last erected after the Tudor manner, with more fre- quent use of the members borrow^ed from France and Italy, require a distinct examination. With respect to the last aera, which bears an analogy only, not an exact resemblance, to the two which preceded it, a more minute description may not be irrelevant. Next to the ^ hall, ^ the apartment of the greatest importance was the long gallery, which was the frequent resort of the inmates, as an ambulatory, so necessary in this climate ; and for social intercourse, which admitted the ladies, f It was sometimes lined with wain- scot of oak pannel, wrought within the squares or stiles," with carved tablets, resembling a scroll, and well known as most common in the time of Henry VIII. The cornices were rudely cast, in plaster, to represent armorial cogni- zances, with festoons or vignettes of fruit and flowers. Beside these, were numerous escoch- eons affixed, which the pride of ancestry de- lighted, everywhere, to contemplate. * See Note [M] page 392. In the more ancient castles there were no galleries, but the alures,” or walks upon the walls within the battlements, which were frequented by the ladies for air and exercise. About the Tudor age, when castellated houses were common, long galleries were first introduced, and the halls reserved for feasting or assembling at meals. THE TUDOR STYLE. 363 In the windows at either end of these long rooms, occupying generally the extent of one side of the quadrangle, and next under the roof, a display was made of arms and quarter- ings collectively, in blazonry of the richest colours, in brilliant glass. The galleries of this later date exceeded, in fact, many that had been previously built, espe- cially in point of length.^ Those of Audley Inn and Hatfield were the most remarkable. Such portraits as were the works of superior artists were most highly valued, and deposited as furniture of the large dining-rooms, more often than in galleries. The painters of emi- nence, in that age, were rare, and their price proportionate. Among other embellishments of the great chamber of state,” was a most sumptuous chimney-piece composed of alabas- ter or marble, richly carved and gilt. It was usually of very large dimensions, widely spread, and reaching ftom the floor to the ceiling. There were sometimes statues placed within columns and niches, which represented some the cardinal virtues, or grotesque termini^ in the Roman manner, then lately introduced into this country. The whole was painted with gaudy colours ; and the armorial bearings of the family, in one large escocheon, or the quarterings dispersed into many others, were See Note [N | page 392. 364 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. an indispensable decoration. In certain in- stances, the chimney-piece was of carved free- stone, left plain. The almost perfect resem- blance of these to the superb monuments, which, in that age, were dedicated to the me- mory of the dead, leave no doubt that the original idea had the same analogy. Of this opinion one most splendid instance will suffice — that of the mausoleum of Robert Dudley Earl of Leicester, in the Beauchamp chapel, Warwick, and the chimney-piece preserved in the gatehouse of Kenilworth Castle. I have already adverted to the wide cornices usually inclosing the frieze, which encompassed the room, and sometimes no small part of the ceiling. They were cumbrously wrought in plaster-work, and exhibited very grotesque forms and figures, which afterwards, under the influence of Inigo Jones, yielded to an im- proved style of ornament.^ A peculiarity in the wainscoting was, that the pannels were carved in the form of scrolls, (a name given to distinguish that kind,) and sometimes enriched with raised letters, composing cyphers, mottoes, or sentences. Where the walls were white- limed only, poesies and moral proverbs were inscribed upon fantastic labels, rudely painted. Externally considered, the fabric, both from its great extent and height, was very command- * See Note [O] page 393. THE TUDOR STYLE. 365 ing. Each floor or stage included lofty apart- ments. Very capricious shapes were adopted, chiefly of the new model, borrowed from the French or Italian school, and applied as para- pets above the upper cornice. In some in- stances, which shall be noticed in the Appen- dix, the interstices of the balustrade were filled up by many large capital letters, carved in stone, allusive to the founder’s or the archi- tect’s name, and date of the building.* The chimneys were likewise disposed in some- what of a more classical taste, with members and ornaments, in the Roman manner, grouped several together, with a rich entablature, as at Burleigh.f Porticoes, or rather inclosed porches, and open corridors, were introduced into the fronts, either separately or conjoined, particularly at Audley Inn, Burleigh, and Charlton, Wilts. Both the arches and piers admitted a considerable degree of ornament, not inferior in point of pro- fuse decoration to other prominent members of the whole structure. After the French and Italian fashion, architecture became allied to ^ See Note [P] page 393. “t Not only Queen Elizabeth’s celebrated minister, Lord Burleigh, expended his great wealth upon this, but likewise Theobald’s, and Cecil-house, London. His son Lord Salis- bury, at Hatfield, whose elder brother, Thomas Earl of Exe- ter, built Wimbledon and enlarged Cecil House, Strand. All these were large and sumptuous mansions. 366 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. gardening, in the immediate environs of great houses. The walls were extensive, and formed of hewn stone, and the flights of steps often repeated and finished by balustrades. In the perspective view, where the ground rose with sudden elevation, they appeared to have formed a constituen t and important part of the general plan, and to have greatly added to a magnifi- cent effect.^ Wimbledon, when in its perfect state, presented a superior example. Of those I have mentioned in the course of this inquiry, in not a few instances the sub- stance of these fabrics has passed away, but their very shadows are acceptable to posterity.” The graphic art, even in its early imperfect state, has been employed to transmit to us the image of the vast structures which were the ambition of the Tudor age, so that they may be clearly revived in our imagination, and more forcibly when we visit their sites. In modern views but a limited satisfaction is given to the investigating antiquary, for landscape usurps the scene, and truth of delineation is made subor- dinate to the picturesque idea. Candour must allow, that the restorations applied to these ancient houses, when rendered subservient to modern accommodation, adopt a very equi- vocal character with reference to any system of architecture. See Note [Q] page 393. THE TUDOR STYLE. 367 Within the last very few years, three artists of singularly distinguished merit have been withdrawn from us, from whose delineations the architectural antiquary has derived a satis- faction, as great as could have been communi- cated by exquisite art and consummate feeling of the subjects which they have elucidated.^ In the present age, although fertile in genius of the most promising cultivation, we may hope that equal taste and ability may supply their loss ; but those who can appreciate such merit, will indulge no sanguine expectation of imme- diate success in the same degree. But this obser- vation refers only to the graphic representation of the different styles of Gothic architecture. What may be specifically termed Municipal Architecture, is the original formation of cities during the particular periods which have been already noticed in due course. A singu- lar uniformity and correspondence pervaded all the ancient English cities. On the continent, more especially in those of France, Germany, and the Low Countries, the general plan will * The works of Wild, Pugin, and Hunt, will be long held in high estimation. They are now terminated. The first men- tioned, whose perseverance I have often witnessed as his attached friend, has acquired his meed of fame by ceaseless exertion to acquire fidelity of representation, and by much too great a sacrifice — the loss of sight. The others have sunk into their graves in the middle period of life. See Note [R] page 394. S68 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. be found scarcely to have varied from our own; and, as if by convention, they were the same everywhere. During the middle centuries, almost all the cities and great towns offered nearly a similar appearance to the exterior view. Encompassed with lofty turreted walls, having large gateways and narrow streets, spa- cious houses of carved frame woodwork, many small and one or two large and magnificent churches, and townhouses — these will complete the description of the greater part of our old towns ; and yet in local features, each may be proved to have borne a character distinctly from each other. It is from this consideration, that such remarkable objects being pointed out by in- telligent topographers, will increase the interest we take concerning any one of them in parti- cular. With very few exceptions, they are laid out in four chief quadrivial streets, at right angles, which led to the four gates ; and in the centre of the intersection stood a market, or high cross, of lofty and elaborate masonry, with the statues of such kings as had been their patrons. Very remarkable ones were then seen at Coventry, Winchester, and Bristol. The quarters were subdivided into close streets, lanes, angiports communicating with the pos- tern-gates ; and all of them very narrow and incommodious. But not till the beginning of tlie last century THE TUDOR STYEE. 369 had any of these yielded to modern improve- ment. Nothing is now known of the former sites, excepting from old plans and charts, and topographical investigations. This kind of civil architecture may be consi- dered in the present age rather as presenting objects picturesque and curious in themselves, than of study and imitation ; and may be class- ed rather with those which belong to the Eli- zabethan aera, than that of the earlier Tudors, though doubtless there were many which were contemporary with them. I speak of the last style of them, for we know" that a similar con- struction in large towns prevailed as early as the days of Edward III, but with much less ornament externally. This particular mode of building was like- wise frequent in those counties where timber was more abundant than stone. Wealthy burgesses affected an ornamental display in their houses, especially as to expen- sive carvings, which is evident from what little is still spared to us by subsequent improvement and innovation. Enough is yet left to delight every true admirer of the picturesque. On the continent, with certain variation from the Eng- lish mode, the same manner of building per- vades most of their large towns, and in a much better state of preservation than with us, espe- cially in those of Germany, the Netherlands, 370 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGEAND. and France, where timber enters largely into the construction of the outer walls. By these are formed the striking street scenery of Ant- werp, Brussels, Louvaine, Nurembourg, IJlm, and Rouen, not to multiply instances. In England, at Chester, Shrewsbury, and Coven- try, and within a few years past, at Bristol,^ they prevailed universally. Specimens in England exhibit frequently uni- form and consistent embellishment, which was not void of elegance and elaborate finishing.^ This manner was certainly much better suited to the painter’s eye than to comfortable habita- tion, for the houses were lofty enough to admit of many stories and subdivisions, and being gene- rally placed in narrow streets, were full of low and gloomy apartments, overhanging each other, notwithstanding that they had fronts nearly composed of glass, with the projecting windows and the interstices filled for nearly the whole space. Admirable contrivances were used in framing the roof, and the gables and barge boards exhibited singularly beautiful specimens of the art of carpentry. More particularly in imitation of vegetable or other forms, hitherto almost confined to stone, great skill, and some- times even taste were manifested, in exuberance of fancy and good execution. Such occurred * See Note [S] page 395. f Fugiri's Ornamental Gables^ 4to. 1831. THE TUDOR STYEE. o7 1 more frequently in manor-houses in the coun- ties of Chester, Salop, and Stafford. I must now hasten to finish my observations. A farther recapitulation is unnecessary to the plan of these Discourses, and would inevitably be tedious. Extending the inquiry, in a limited degree, beyond the term prescribed by my original in- tention, the superb structures which arose dur- ing the reign of James I. or were completed in it, assumed a distinctive character from the Tudor style, in a degree of discrimination far beyond what has been generally considered. J. Thorp I have already quoted as the most celebrated architect, concerning whom we have equal evidence, and, more than all, his imita- tions of De Lorme and the French school, which he had introduced with so great success, became the prevailing genius of our national architecture, where means of practising it were afforded. By these the last efforts of the Tudor man- ner were superseded, and no very sumptuous building, which was then being erected, either in the elevation or distribution of apartments, partook largely in designs which had so re- cently preceded it. The distinction is decided. Inigo Jones, in the early career of his archi- tectural fame, and before he had seen and so happily studied the works of Palladio in Italy, 2 B 2 372 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. adopted the best examples of the domestic architecture then prevalent in this country. Many are the mansions which in this and in the latter periods of his life have been attri- buted to him without proof of any kind. Wal- pole has noticed several ; some with certainty, others in doubt ; but he observes “ that Jones seems to have enticed the age, by degrees, into good taste.” His works were, with great pro- bability, not frequent, but upon the largest scale of magnificence, and he is justly denomi- nated the father of classical architecture in England.”* The castles of the middle ages, and the vast mansions peculiar to the Tudor reigns, have been alike involved in one common ruin ; and in the present day there are solitary remains only in any degree of their former perfection. Yet there are enough to supply the inquiring Inigo Jones was born in 1572, and died in 1652, at the age of seventy-nine years. His first public work, as known, was when he was thirty-three years old. He resided in Italy for several 3 ^ears before 1606. In his second visit to Rome, in 1612, he does not appear to have remained there more than two years. He purchased when there, the edition of Palla- dio’s architecture, published in 1613, the margins of which he filled with notes and sketches. This invaluable book was bequeathed to Worcester College, Oxford, by the well-known amateur, Dr. G. Clarke. See Walpole's Anecdotes^ vol. ii. pp. 330 to 355, last edition. In the Duke of Devonshire’s collection are other MSS. which were procured by Lord Burlington. THE TUDOR STYLE. 873 antiquary with definite ideas respecting their original history, plan, and specific design. The leading causes of their destruction are supplied by history in the earlier periods ; nor are many others which present themselves upon due inquiry, difficult to be accounted for, inde- pendently of the ravages of war or gradual decay. No period was more fatal to the fortresses of that time, than the spoliation during the civil war in the reign of Charles I, if, indeed, the general demolition of them, by the orders of Cromwell, when Protector, be excepted. Most of the battles had been decided in the field. When his predatory army had gained either a castle or fortified mansion-house, after a siege and celebrated defence, it was usual with them to burn it down in revenge, or to dismantle it totally, and sell the lead and tim- ber as plunder for the soldiers. It is memo- rable that such castles and large country houses, which had resisted him most, were doomed by Cromwell to be laid level with the ground. After the restoration, the introduction of the French fashion in architecture prevailed, to the destruction of many a magnificent Tudor man- sion, or of such parts as then remained. The Dutch taste, under William III, completed the same effect. 374 ARCHITECTURE IN ENGLAND. Subsequently many an ancient patrimonial house has suffered a gradual, but certain decay, or, at least, been Left untended to a dull repose.” More than twenty years ago, I published “ Observations on English Architecture,” but upon due consideration, instead of a second edition, I determined upon offering a series of Discourses, chronologically placed, in which I should attempt a condensation of critical opi- nions and historical facts, either original, or acquired from other authors, during the inter- val of that publication. I trust that no negligence of investigation will be apparent, nor conspicuous error be fre- quently discovered. Many instances in proof of any style or peculiarity of architecture, which may seem to those who have pursued the same path with equal interest, to bear a stronger relation, may either be unknown to me, or con- sidered as of inferior importance. The progress of literary curiosity has been directed, of late years, to the acquirement of * Resemblances of a great number of these seats of the gentry in the several English counties, were engraved with a certain degree of truth and effect by Burghers and Kip, By the latter, Britannia Illustrata^ 80 plates, fob 1714 ; Atkyns’ History of Gloucestershire,, fob 1711 ; PloCs Staffordshire,, and many single plates ; so that though substance be sunk in oblivion, the shadow still presents itself to us. THE TUDOR ST TEE. 375 more systematic knowledge concerning our na- tional architecture in the past centuries. This has been effectually promoted by works of acknowledged merit, and the skill of the gra- phic artist has been employed with deserved success, both in point of number and accuracy. New facilities have been by these means opened to the student, and not without in- creased gratification to the amateur. To en- large the sphere of useful information has been the main object of this treatise. It may not be a merely fanciful analogy, if the Grecian and Gothick styles were allowed to admit of a comparison ; as the Doric with the Norman, the Ionic or Corinthian with the pure and decorated Gothick, and the Compo- site with the Florid and subsequent varieties introduced in the Tudor age. Resemblance is out of the question ; but the collation of them, as far as their succeeding each other in a like gradation, is, at least, a singular coincidence in the history of art. 376 ANNOTATIONS ON TUDOR ARCHITECTURE, lULUSTRATIVE OF THE SIXTH DISCOURSE. [A] page 336. — See a very curious and accurate plan of all the buildings of which the ancient palace of Westminster was composed, from actual plans which were continued dur- ing fifty years, by the late W. Capon, ( Monumenta Vetusta^ vol. V.) with notes and remarks. [B] page 336. — The hall of the palace at Westminster was certainly rebuilt by Richard II. on the foundations of that of William Rufus, and perhaps of a still earlier ; for a great hall was the necessary appendage of an ancient palace. It was completed in 1397. The construction of the roof, by which its extraordinary force and pressure on the side-walls is effec- tually lessened and counteracted, is admirable, and proves that the architect possessed a very superior mind. The roof, of chesnut timber, exhibits both beauty and skill in scientific carpentry. Eltham Hall was erected earlier in his reign, about 1385. It still remains, as a barn, and has a peculiarity, that the windows are placed in couples. The hall in Kenilworth Castle has only one side remaining. It was finished in 1397, two years before the death of John of Gaunt, who had been long engaged in enlarging that castle. — Dugdale's Warwickshire. Dartington, much inferior to the others. See Ly sons'* Magna Britannia^ Devonshire. Built by J. Holland, Duke of Exeter, about the same period. There is an indisputable evidence concerning an architect of celebrity in the reign of Richard II. Rot. Bat. 17 Ric. II. 1391. Pro Nicolao Walton, Magistro Carpentario et Depo- TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 377 si tore operum Regis, quoad artem Carpeiitarii, quamdiu se bene gesserit, pensionem,’’ &cc. — Rymer's Fadera, Dimensions. — l. b. h. Westminster . . . 228 66 — Eltham . ‘ . . 100 30 55 Dartington . . . 70 40 44 Kenilworth, very spacious, but the exact measure- ment unknown. John of Gaunt obtained a warrant from Richard II. in 1392, directed to Robert de Skillington, Master-mason and supervisor of his buildings at Kenilworth, to impress twenty masons, carpenters, &c. — Dugdale ut sup, Henry VII. is styled by Harrison, (in his Description of England, p. 330,) the onlie phoenix of his time for fine and curious masonrie and by Leland (Cygn. Cantat. in notulis) “ unicum in architecture hujus saeculi lumen.” Holinshed remarks, that his buildings were “ most goodlie, and after the newest caste, all of plea- sure.” To the palace of Eltham he made very considerable additions. The large sums which he applied for these pur- poses prove that his sepulchral chapel at Westminster was not the only object of his expenditure. He paid for the repair of the very ancient palace of Woodstock 894/. in the year 1494, and sumptuously enlarged the castle of Ludlow, for the residence and court of his son. Prince Arthur. Speed (Hist, of Britaine, p. 995.) observes concerning Henry VII. — Of his buildinge was Richmond palace, and that most beautiful peice, the chappell at Westminster; which formes of most curious and exquisite buildinge, he and Bishope Fox first, as is reported, learned in France, and brought with them into England.” Gothick architecture, of the new style, was effectually ad- vanced by that monarch, who, from the enormous wealth that he had amassed, left the ecclesiastical buildings to be completed by his executors. In the early part of his son’s reign, the chapels of King’s College, and of Westminster and Windsor, were entirely finished. 378 ANNOTATIONS ON Hector Asheley, a famous master-mason, was retained in the service of both monarchs. He is very frequently men- tioned in the Privy Purse Expenses of both those monarchs. Sir Richard Lea is noticed as a favourite architect of Henry VIII. and it is therefore conjectured that he was em- ployed about his palaces ; but from all remaining evidence it appears that he, with greater probability, excelled as an engineer as military architect. He was certainly so employed by his royal master, as Jerome da Trevigi had previously been. Walpole specifies no work which he completed as a civil architect . — Anecdotes of Paintings last edit. vol. i. p. 219. note. [C] page 339 . — The survey taken by order of Parliament in 1649, affords a very minute description of Richmond Pa- lace as it then stood, with satisfactory information as to plan and distribution of the chief apartments in such buildings, and elucidates our present investigation. “ The great hall was a hundred feet in length, and forty in breadth ; it is de- scribed as having a skreen at the lower end, over which, says the Survey, is ‘ a fayr footpace in the higher end thereof ; the pavement is square tile ; and it is very well lighted and seeled. At the north end is a turret or clock-case covered with lead, which is a special ornament to the building.’ The privy lodgings are described as a free-stone building, three stories high, with fourteen turrets covered with lead, ‘ a very graceful ornament to the whole house, and perspicuous to the country round about.’ An octagon building is mentioned, called the ‘ canted ( angular ) . tower,’ with a staircase of a hundred and twenty-four steps. The chapel was ninety-six feet long, and forty broad, with ‘ cathedral seats and pews.’ Adjoining the privy garden was an open gallery, two hundred feet long, over which was a close gallery of the same length.” ~ hysons'' Environs, vol. i. p. 441. Floors of coloured brick, glazed, or sometimes enamelled with figures and armorial bearings, were invented and used as early as the reign of Edward III, and were common for two centuries after. TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 379 Ci)e floiT autJ beuci) toaig P^bptJ fain anb TOitf) £Jtom'^ i^quan, of tnanie bibevsl ^eloe ^0 tool ppneb, tjat for to j^aw tl)e ^otf)e ^l ^cmeb om, tl)at none ti^e otl)er bnetoe. Chaucer. [D] page 341. — Farther observations on the palaces and buildings erected in the reign of Henry VIII. : New Hall was begun before 1524. It had two large quadrangles, a hall 96 feet by 50, and 40 feet high. There was a particularly magnificent gateway, with the royal arms, and this description : — l^enncu^ rex octabxii^, rex mcljitu^ armig, liflagnammuiS iStruxit l)oc opuiS egregium. Nonsuch. Left incomplete by Henry VIII. and finislied by Henry FitzAlan Earl of Arundel. There were two quad- rangles, two very sumptuous gateways, and two octangular towers, five stories high, at the east and west corners. From a print by Hoefnagle, in Queen Elizabeth’s time, it appears that the walls were covered by bas-reliefs in plaster, and that there were statues so composed, the earliest introduction of them as ornaments into England. In the Parliamentary Survey in the Augmentation Office, the materials of the house were valued at 7020/. Camden says, “ It is built with so much splendour and elegance, that it stands a monu- ment of art, and you would think the whole science of archi- tecture exhausted in this building. It has such a profusion of animated statues and finished pieces of art, rivalling the monuments of ancient Rome itself, that it justly has and maintained its name from thence.” Haec, quia non habent similem, laudare Britanni Saepe solent, nullique parem cognomine dicunt. Leland. See Hentzners Travels, edit. Walpole, and Lysons' Envi- rons, vol. i. p. 1 51. Charles IL gave this palace to the Duchess of Cleveland, who pulled it down, and dispersed the materials. 380 ANNOTATIONS ON York Place, Whitehall, was originally the palace of the Archbishops of York, and was called by Wolsey York Place. It was exchanged by him with the King for Hamp- ton Court, in 1526. Hunsdon. Originally built by Sir W. Oldhall, in the reign of Edward IV. upon a large scale. Refitted for the royal children. Remains, but much reduced. Le Champ de Drap d'Or, Holinshed, who gives a minute description of the architectural preparations of this splendid interview, says that it was a palace, ‘‘ the which was a qua- drant, and everie quadrant of the same palace was three hun- dred and t wen tie-eight foot long of assise, which was in compasse thirteen hundred and twelve foot about. This palace was set on stages by great cunning and sumptuous work.” The description of the interior is too curious to be omitted. “ The chambres were covered with cloth of silke, of the most fair and quicke invention that before time was seene. For the grownde was white, engrailed and battened with riche clothes of silkes, knit and fret with cuts and braids and sundrie new casts, that the same clothes of silke shewed like bullions of fine burnished gold ; and the roses in lozenges that in the same roofe were in kindlie course, furnished so to man’s sight, that no living creature might but joy in the be- holding thereof. Beside rich and marvellous clothe of arras, wrought of golde and silke, compassed of manie auncient story es.”^ At Greenwich, in the tilt-yard, Henry VIII. erected a large temporary palace, with halls and galleries, for the re- ception of the French Ambassador (see Holinshed)', and in the Cotton MSS. Brit. Mus. is a plan of a very magnificent gallery which he designed to build, not improbably that above mentioned. For the Commissioners for the French match. Queen Elizabeth caused another to be erected within * Holinshed^s Chron. vol. iii. p. 647, copied from Hall, p. 605. In the royal collection at Windsor Castle, is a most curious and well painted pic- ture of this gorgeous building, of which there is an engraving and account by Sir Joseph Ayloffe in tlie Archccologia. TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 381 the palace at Westminster, by Thomas Grave, Surveyor of the Works. — Holinshed. Raglan was built by William Herbert, Lord of Chepstow and Earl of Huntingdon. It descended to Sir Charles So- merset, created Earl of Worcester, who made great additions in the reigns of Henry VI I. and VIII, which were continued to the reign of Charles I. by the celebrated loyalist, the Mar- quess of Worcester. It was quadrangular, with a large hall, and similar apartments. The Marquess maintained it against a memorable siege. See Rus'ins work as above. Kenninghall^ Framlingham Castle, and Mount Surrey, said to have been built upon an Italian, but, more probably, upon a French plan, were all of them the work of Thomas Howard third Duke of Norfolk, Lord Treasurer, and his more cele- brated son. Kenninghall “ was a most noble structure, built in the form of an H, as a conceit denoting the name of the founder. It had two most spacious and stately fronts towards the east and west, seated upon rising ground in the centre of a large park. It was entirely taken down in 1650, and the materials sold. In the neighbouring village, many of the ornamental moulded bricks are seen inserted into w^alls.’’ — BlomeJield’'s No? folk. Framlingham. The castle was accommodated to all the purposes of a splendid dwelling-house. It was remarkable for moulded brick chimneys, more numerous and equally orna- mented with those at East Barsham and Thornbury. Mount Surrey. A country-house of an elegant design, built by H. Earl of Surrey, upon the site of St. Leonard’s Priory (in 1542), near Norwich. It was pillaged and de- molished in Kett’s insurrection, 1540. Cowdray. William Fitz-William Earl of Southampton, and Lord High Admiral, founded this noble mansion, and left it incomplete, in 1543 ; and it was not entirely finished before the visit of Queen Elizabeth to Anthony Browme, second Viscount Montagu, in 1501. In magnitude, and the ornamental architecture peculiar to that age, Cowdray was 382 ANNOTATION^ ON not inferior to the many noblemen’s residences, then about to be erected in England, which, as it has been observed, “ were the works of tranquil times, at liberty to sacrifice strength to convenience, and security to sunshine.” The house with its appendages, covered the space of an acre. The area of the quadrangle was 107 by 122 feet, which was opened by a lofty central gateway, finished by four light turrets, &c. Archi- tecture of characteristic solidity and plainness prevailed ex- ternally, whilst the space, proportion, and great number of the apartments, and their singularly curious embellishments and furniture, gave to Cowdray a preference above most of the provincial palaces erected by the courtiers of Henry VIII. and his immediate successors. This venerable pile had been preserved both in its form and furniture during two centu- ries by its noble owners ; and the most genuine and valuable series of early portraits, which had afforded a peculiar gratifi- cation to the virtuoso and antiquary, were, by the conflagra- tion of a few hours on September 21th, 1793, reduced to a ruin and ashes. — Dallaway's W. Sussex, vol. i. p. 246, in which are views of Cowdray in its original and present state. Thornhury. Leland describes Thornbury much at large, Itin. vol. vii. fol. 75. Upon the site of an ancient castle, built by the Audleys and Staffords, the most unfortunate of that ill-starred race, Edward tlie last Duke of Buckingham, soon after his possession of it, designed to erect a castellated palace, of peculiar sumptuosity and architectural beauty. Those in the survey taken in 1582, which are styled the New Buildings, were begun in 1511, as we learn from the in- scription upon labels upon the great unfinished gateway. An octangular corner tower, flanking the southern front, is still perfect, but open to the air. The western unfinished front extends 207 feet, containing parts, to the first story, of four large and two small towers. A more complete example of the plan and arrangement incidental to the first style of the Tudor architecture is not noiv to be seen ; particularly in the bay windows of the great apartments, and the chimneys of TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 383 moulded brick, excepting which last mentioned, the whole is of free- stone. It is graphically described in sons'' Glou- cestershire Etchings, Britiori's Architect. Ant. and with more accuracy and science by A. Pugin, Examples of Gothic Architecture, 1832, 4to. Grimsthorpe was more remarkable for extent than for architecture. The g;reat hall was ornamented with the first Gobelin tapestry brought into England, by Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk, and was part of the dower of his wife the Queen Dowager of France. About that time the east, west, and north fronts were erected, which have embattled turrets at the angles. The south front was rebuilt from a plan of Sir John Vanbrugh for the first Duke of Ancaster. Hampton Court, after it had been chiefly built by Car- dinal Wolsey, and enlarged with the hall and other apart- ments by Henry VI II. consisted of no less than five spacious quadrangles. These were reduced to three ; and upon the site of those taken down, was erected the “ Fountain Court,*” by King William III, in which are the state apartments. Sir Christopher Wren was the architect. The garden front has an air of grandeur from its great length and height, which loses much of its effect, from the perpetual perforation of windows. Horseheath. This mansion was taken down in 1665, by William Lord Allington, when a most splendid mansion was built, at the expense of 70,000/., likewise taken down in 1777, and sold for its materials. Toddington. The largest private house in England was built here by Paulinus le Peyvre, who was steward of the household to Henry III, at an enormous cost in that day, which is described by M. Paris. Sir Thomas Cheyney and his successors built another before 1580, where Queen Eliza- beth was received, now dilapidated. It occupied four sides of a quadrangle, with a turret at each corner. North and south fronts 210 feet in lenoth. Taken down in 1745. O The Vine. Rebuilt and modernised. 384 ANNOTATIONS ON Wansted. Originally erected by R. Lord Rich, and great- ly enlarged by R. Dudley Earl of Leicester. Rebuilt by Lord Tylney. Sold for materials^ 1826. Cheynies. Part standing, but dilapidated. Hill Hall. Begun in 1548 ; since completed ; and altered by subsequent possessors. Hever Castle exhibits interesting and venerable remains. The quadrangle and hall are perfect, and are in the early Tudor style of building. Basing House. The siege and blockade of this grand mansion, the outworks of which extended over fourteen acres, was one of the most eventful facts which occurred durino: the civil war. The ruins are particularly interesting to the anti- quarian visitant. The plan nearly resembled that of Raglan, with which it was contemporary, and its fate similar. Watton Wood Hall (Herts). The original manor-house was erected by Sir Philip Boteler. It was a noble quadran- gular building of brick, with a gateway flanked by two round towers, and a gallery of remarkable length. Burned down in 1772. Bayer Marney. Built by Sir Henry Marney. The gate- way and front are much neglected, but not in ruins. These castellated mansions were usually constructed with chequer- ed compartments of flint, or with lines, diagonally placed, of dark-coloured glazed bricks. The mullions of the windows are columns, with capitals imperfectly copied from the Corin- thian. Haddori Hall, Derbyshire. Founded by Sir R. Vernon 1452, and completed by Sir John Manners, in the high Elizabethan style. “ The gallery is 110 feet long and seventeen wide, occu- pying the south side of the principal court. The wainscoting is enriched with Corinthian pilasters, supporting arches, be- tween which are shields of the arms and quarterings of Ver- non and Manners. The frieze is ornamented with boars’ heads (the crest of Vernon), roses, and thistles, in plaster. The great bedchamber, fitted up at the same time, has a deep TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 385 cornice, with boars’ heads and peacocks, with a rude bas- relief of Orpheus charming the beasts, over the fire-place.” — Ly sons' Magna Britannia^ Derbyshire. Many of the rooms are lined with ancient arras, of most grotesque figures, or simple forest work, which represented trees bearing labels and mottoes. This oldest kind of tapestry was called ‘‘ Verdoys,” from the prevalence of green colour, and when they admitted subjects, they were representations of forest sports. (©n t]^t oltf pourtrai'ture lialukesS, auU Hntt i^arte' tJire al full oi Chaucer's Dreme. This kind of tapestry was called “ Parke work” — -figures and landscape, and was of woollen only. In the progress of luxury — in Cardinal Wolsey’s sumptuous apartments, the gorgeous materials were of cloth of gold and silver. See various inventories. [E] page 346. — -A bay, in architectural acceptation, is a quadrangular space, over which a pair of diagonal ribs extend, which rest upon four angles. The same term is also used for the horizontal space comprised between two principal beams. A bay-window, in common acceptation, means simply a projecting window between two buttresses, and which is frequently placed at the end of a building. The use to which bay-windows were applied in great halls, during the fifteenth and the next century, appears from a MS. in the College of Arms^ relating to a feast given in the hall of Richmond palace. Against that his Grace had supped, the hall was addressed and goodlie beseene, and a rich cupboard set thereupon in a bay-window of nine or ten stages and haunces of hight, furnissed and fullfilled with golde, sylver, and parcele gilt.” Bay-windows were generally composed of five parts of an octagon ; but of a half circle between two angles, at Thornbury and Windsor. Chaucer, in his descriptive poem of the ‘‘ Assemblie of 386 ANNOTATIONS ON Ladies/’ gives us an idea, not generally received, of the accommodation and comfort in the domestic architecture of his own age. c^ambtrig anb parler^g oi a i^orte, /m succession ) OTitb ban gooblfc man be t]^oug]^t; far traun^ing antr otjeriniige ’bi^porte. “^Tj^e gallerieiS rigljt inel ntnraugf)!, C]^at bjel 1[ tnot, if j^e tuere tl^iber braugf)t, tobe gaob ]^ebe tfjerof, in eberp tni^e ^e bjoulb it tl^inbe a berp parabi^e. Chaucer. [F] page 348. — Of the introduction of the manufacture of tapestry in this kingdom, we have satisfactory evidence. It was certainly previous to the year 1344, when there was a writ issued (17 Edw. Tertii, m. 41) — “ De inquirendo de mystera Tapiciorum London.” Henry VIII. gave a patent to John Mustian to be his arras-maker ; and in the same reign, a private gentleman, named Sheldon, established at Barcheston, in Warwickshire, a manufactory in which some small pieces were made, consisting of maps of counties, some of which are still preserved. — Walpole's Anecdotes, vol. ii. p. 49- edit. Dallaway. In the same work is a full account of the manufactory at Mortlake, of Sir F. Crane, conducted by F. Cleyne, in the reigns and under the especial patronage of Kings James and Charles I. But there are documents to prove that needle-work, and even tapestry, was practised by the females of almost every nobleman’s house, and likewise in those of the next lower rank, as the household books and wills afford sufficient instances.— Vetusta, Nicolas. — Ellis's Orig. Letters, vol. ii. p. 15 n. Upon the Conti- nent, it is well known that both Raffaelle and Giulio Romano were most extensively engaged in painting cartoons, to be wrought in tapestry ; and that the princes of Europe w^ere most ambitious of such splendid decoration of their state apartments, and were magnificent in their remuneration of these artists. The enumeration of the tapestries procured by Francis I. for his palaces, by Felibien, (tom. ii. p. 190. TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 387 12mo. 1725,) would exceed belief, both with respect to quan- tity and value, were not that author of good authority. To give some idea of the quantity, he says, that the story of Psyche, by Raffaelle, consisted of twenty-six pieces and one hundred and six yards. A volume would not suffice to collect all the details concerning tapestry of equal excellence, in the palaces of different princes and high ecclesiastics. The first Gobelin tapestry was brought into England by Charles Brandon Duke of Suffolk, to ornament the noble mansion which he built at Grimsthorp in Lincolnshire. It was a part of the dower of his royal bride, Mary Queen of France, the younger sister of Henry VIII. This splendid appendage soon excited a similar taste in that sovereign and his favourite. Cardinal Wolsey. Our admiration is excited both in point of quantity and fine quality. Their several palaces, according to the accurate inventories preserved in the British Museum, were furnished in a profusion scarcely credible, both as to the number and the cost of the pieces, in multifarious subjects, wrought with silk and threads of gold and silver. In the fabrication of such gorgeous pieces, the most costly materials were used, as from the wardrobe ac- counts both of the King and the Cardinal is sufficiently appa- rent. MSS. Harl. Brit. Mus. No. 14d9, Survey of the Ward- robe,^ 54^1. — In the palace of Hampton Court, probably placed there by Wolsey, were eighty-three complete suits. Inven- tory of Cardinal Wolsey'^s Household Stuff at York Place and Hampton Court, MSS. Harl. No. 599- — Lord Orford says, that at the sale of the effects of Charles I. the suites above-mentioned were purchased for Oliver Cromwell. “ One set of hangings relating to the story of Abraham, in eight parts, at Hampton Court, was valued in the inventory at 8260/c ; and another in ten parts, the history of Julius CcEsar was appraised at 5019/-” The velvet bedchamber at Cowdray, fitted up for the reception of Queen Elizabeth in '1591, and in which she lay during the week she spent there, was hung with tapestry taken from some of Raffaelle's cartoons. De- stroyed by fire. 388 ANNOTATIONS ON It is curious to reflect, that of works, the component parts and workmanship of which were so extremely sumptuous, any complete vestige will be now found to be preserved in detached parts or fragments only, in the houses of the nobi- lity, either on account of the decay of the material, or the entire change of fashion. [G] page 352 . — He was architect toHenry VIII. at the end of his reign, when his palaces were finished, so that he could not have been extensively employed. In Rj/me7‘'‘s Fodder a, t. xv. p. 34, there is a grant of a pension to John of Padua for his services and inventions in architecture and music, dated 1544 ; and Mr. Walpole says, ( Anecdotes of Painting, vol. i. p. 216,) that he was styled in another document ‘‘ Devizor of his Majesty’s Buildings.” What his real name was, — how edu- cated, — and what were his works previously to his arrival in England, no research has hitherto discovered, with any satis- faction. That he was continued in his appointments during the next reign, is certain. The pension was two shillings a-day, which, now so small, was, when granted, by no means an inconsiderable sum, and, besides other emoluments, was given merely to retain him in the court as a servant of the king. [H] page 355. — The earliest publication in England relat- ing to practical architecture, appears to have been ‘‘ The first and chiefe grounds of Architecture used in all the ancient and famous monyments, with a farther and more ample dis- course uppon the same than has hitherto been set forthe by any other. By John Shute, paynter and architecte. Printed by John Marshe. fob 1563.” Walpole mentions this w^ork (last edition), and adds that the author was sent in 1550 to study in Italy, by John Dudley Duke of Northumberland, with the intention, probably, of employing him, on his return, upon some magnificent palace. In the Cabala is a letter from Lord Burleigh, then en- gaged in erecting the sumptuous palace called by his name. TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 389 to his agent at Paris. The book I most desired is made by the same author, and is entitled, ‘ Novels institutions per bien baster et a petits frais, par Philibert de Lorme,’' Paris, 1576.” A proof that the great statesman was studying the subject. In the Dietarie of Healthy by Andrew Borde, printed in 1542, are rules for planning and building a noble- man’s house, which he supposes to be quadrangular. Of Roman architecture, the earliest treatise which appear- ed in England, is “ A tracte containinge the artes of curious paintinge, carvinge, and buildinge, written first in Italian, by John Paul Lomatius, painter of Milan, and Englished by Richard Haddock, Student of Physic, of Newe College, Oxford, fol. 1598.” We have a sufficient proof that several English students in architecture of this period visited Italy for acquirement of knowledge and practice in the new system, and that they had become sufficiently versed in the Italian language to publish translations from it : Shute, as above mentioned, and Robert Adams, Ubaldine’s account of the defeat of the Spanish Armada, from Italian into Latin, 4to. 1589 and Hay dock" s translation of Lomazzo. In the next reign (1611) we have ‘‘ The first book of Architecture made by Sebastian Serly (Serlio), entreating of geometrie, &c. by Robert Peake ; translated out of Italian into Dutch, and out of Dutch into English.” It is a small folio, black letter, with wood-cuts. But a singular curiosity has been brought to light, which was lately in the custody of Mr. Colnaghi, sen. (Printseller.) It is a series of views and perspectives of the City of London, its ancient buildings, with St. Paul’s Cathedral, the Tower, &c. upon the north-west shore, for a considerable extent. Others are taken from the roof of the Mint (formerly Suffolk House) in Southwark, overlooking that side of the river. Of the royal palaces at Westminster, St. James, Plaisance at Greenwich, Hampton Court, and Oatlands ; there are distinct elevations and parts, in many delineations of each. It is of the largest imperial folio size, several of the views being so long as to require to be folded. They were certainly taken 390 ANNOTATIONS ON from the spots mentioned, which are represented with scru- pulous accuracy, and give a true idea of London in 1558. The artist’s name affixed is Antonio Van Wynergard, and the drawings are tricked with a pen, heightened with blue. [IJ page 356. — John Shiite did not confine his transla- tions to architectural subjects. In 1562 he published “ Two very notable Commentaries, the one of the original of the Turkes, and the other of the warres of George Scanderbeg, translated from the Italian. 8vo. b. 1.” [K] page 356. — The folio MS. of plans and architectural delineations, were the private memoranda of John Thorpe. How they came into the possession of the late Earl of War- wick is not known. At the sale of his brother the Hon. Charles Greville, they were purchased by Sir John Soane, by whose liberality an unrestrained permission of inspection was given to the present author, of which he availed him- self in his edition of Walpole's Anecdotes, to which the reader is referred. Vol. i. supplement, p. 329. There are forty-one plans and elevations, some of them with names specified in ink, and others of the same hand in pencil ; but sufficient to ascertain almost all. Those most known or worthy remark are enumerated, including those which he built entirely, added to, or altered. Buckhurst ; Copthall, Essex ; Burleigh ; Holland House ; Wimbledon ; Two Courts at Audley End ; Ampthill ; and Holdenby.* TUDOR ARCTIITECTURE. 391 [L] page 359. PALATIAL HOUSES OF THE NOBILITY, IN THE REIGNS OF ELIZABETH AND JAMES. Names. Date. County. Founder. | Architect. Pres. State. | 1 Burleigh 1577 North- W. Lord Bur- J. Thorp Perfect. 2 Kenilworth 1575 amp. lUar- leigh R. Earl of Lei- Ruins. 3 Hunsdon wick cester H. Ld. Hunsdon Taken 4 Stoke Pogeis 1580 Earl of Hun- i down. Do. 5 Gorhambury 1565 Herts tingdon Sir N. Bacon Do. 6 Buckhurst 1560 Sussex Lord Treasurer Do. 7 Knowle 1579 Kent Buckhurst The same. Perfect. 8 Basing-house 1560 Plants Marq. of Win- — Destroyed, j 9 Catledge 1560 Cam- chester Lord North —— Taken 10 Wanstead 1576 bridg. Essex Earl of Leicester down. Do. 11 12 Wimbledon Penshurst 1588 1570 Surrey Kent Sir T. Cecil. Sir H. Sydney Perfect. 13 Hatfield 1611 Herts R. Earl of Salis- — Do. 14 Westwood 1590 Wor- bury Sir J. Packing- Do. 15 Hardvvick 1597 cest. Derby ton Countess of Ruins. IG Audley Inn 1610 Essex Derby Earl of Suffolk _ Partly 17 Holdenby 1580 North- Sir Christopher _ perfect. Destroyed. 18 Osterley* 1577 amp. Middx. Hatton Sir T. Gresham — Rebuilt. It may be worth inquiry at how remote a period mansions, which were not military, but simply for domestic residence, were common in England. The most ancient and singular instance of a magnificent private house, was that (previously * A curious anecdote relating to Osterley is given by Fuller, in his Worthies of Middlesex. Queen Elizabeth, when visiting Osterley, ob- served to that magnificent merchant, that the court had better been divided by a wall. He collected so many artificers, that before the Queen had arisen the next morning, a wall was actually erected.” These mansions are not enumerated exclusively, but as supplying general information. 392 ANNOTATIONS ON mentioned) built by Pauline le Peyvre, a favourite of Henry the Third, at Toddington, in Bedfordshire, the very site of which cannot now be ascertained. Matthew Paris describes it minutely, p. 821. Adeo, palatio, capella, thalamis et aliis domibus lapideis et plumbo co-opertis, pomeriis et vivariis communicavit, ut intuentibus admirationem parturient. Operarii namque pluribus annis edificiorum suorum, qualibet septimana, centum solidos, et plures X marcas recipisse asseruntur.” This was a very rare and magnificent specimen of domestic architecture, when cas- tles were so frequent and necessary. — At Little Billing, Northamptonshire, and Appleton, Berkshire, are large houses nearly as ancient. [M] page 362.— DIMENSIONS OF HALLS OF THE TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. Richmond Palace, . . . L. 100 B. 40 H. — feet. New Hall, Essex, .... 96 50 40 Christ Church, Oxford, . . 114 40 50 Hampton Court Palace, 108 40 45 Trinity College, Cambridge, 100 40 50 Longleat, Wilts, .... 62 30 34 Sion House, Middlesex, . . 66 31 34 [N] page 363— DIMENSION OF GALLERIES. L. B. H. Richmond Palace . . f. 200 above an open gallery of the same length. Haddon Hall, Derbyshire, 110 17 17 feet. Harlaxton, Lincolnshire, 100 14 11 Hardwick, Derbyshire, 170 26 — Theobalds, 123 21 Longleat, 160 — — Parham, Sussex, . . . 158 — — Audley Inn, .... 226 34 22 Hatfield, ..... 162 19 16 TUDOR ARCHITECTURE. 898 Numerous instances both of halls and galleries might be adduced, but these are sufficient to prove their magnitude in the lower age. [O] page 364. — See Walpole's Anecdotes^ vol. ii. p. 4, last edition. [P] page 365. — These inscriptions are composed of letters enclosed within the balustrade, as if within lines, so large as to be visible from the ground, being thorough-lighted. 1. At Wollaton Hall. ‘‘ En has Francisci Willough- BtET gedes rar^ arte extructas, Willoughbaeis relictas — incho- atse 1580— 1588.” 2. At Castle Ashby. “ Nisi Dominus aedificaverit domum in vanum laboraverunt qui aedificant earn.” 3. At Hardwick Hall, Derby, the letters E. S. for Eliza- beth Countess of Shrewsbury. 4. The letters H. N. were originally in the balustrade of what is now called Northumberland House, when first built by Henry Howard Earl of Northampton. Both these last- mentioned were frequently repeated. [Q] page 366. — Of the imposing grandeur of an approach produced by terraces connected by broad or double flights of steps, with balustrades, we have no finer example than Sir Edward Cecil’s palace at Wimbledon, in Surrey, when it was entire, as appears from a rare print by Winstanley, which has been copied in Lysons'' Environs^ vol. i. p. 524. A few extracts from the Parliamentary Survey, in 1649, may communicate some idea of its great extent. “ The scite of this manor-house being placed on the side slipp of a rising grownde, renders it to stand of that height, that betwixt the basis of the brick wall of the lower court and the hall-door of the sayd manor-house, there are five several ascents consisting of threescore and ten stepps, which are distinguished in a very graceful manner. The platforms were composed of Flanders brick, and the stepps of freestone 2 c 5 394 ANNOTATIONS ON very well wrought. On the ground floor was a room called the stone gallery, 108 foot long, pillared and arched with gray marble.’’ The hall was curiously fitted up. “ The ceiling was of fret or parge-work, in the very middle whereof was fixed one well-wrought landskip, and round the same, in con- venient distances, seven other pictures in frames as ornaments to the whole roome ; the floor was of black and white marble.” [R] page 367. — It is no more than justice to particularise their several publications, and to recommend them to every true lover of the Gothick style. None will more satisfactorily promote an acquaintance with subjects of which we should be unwilling to be ignorant, but unable, from circumstances, personally to inspect. Twelve Perspective Views of the Cathedral of Canterbury^ by Charles Wild^ fob 1807 : the same, of For/c, 1809 : of Lichfield^ 1813 : and of Chester^ 1813. These are etchings, shaded and coloured. In folio, of a larger size, and with highly-finished en- gravings, Illustrations of the Cathedral Church of Pincoln^ 1819 : the same of Worcester^ 1823. Specimens of Gothick^ (edited by E. I. Willson,) hy Augus- tus Pugin, Architect, 4to. Examples of Gothick Architecture, selected from various Gothick edifices in England. Pugin and Le Keux'^s Specimens of the Architectural Anti- quities of ISormandy , 4to. 1828. Pugin'^s Gothick Ornaments, from various buildings in England & France, drawn on stone by J.D. Harding, 1831, 4to. Pugin’’s Ornamental Gables, selected from ancient Exam- ples in England, 4to. 1831. Gothick Examples, a second Series, 1831, 4to. Two Parts only published at his death, 1832. (Castles only.) Exemplars of Tudor Architecture, with illustrative details from Ancient Edifices, by T. F. Hunt, Architect, 4to. 1830. Twelve Etched Outlines from Architectural Sketches made in Belgium, Germany, and France, by CharlesWild,smAo\.\^32. TUDOR ARCHITECTURE 395 [S] page 370. — Etchings of superior merit and picturesque effect have been published of the old houses in Chester, by Cuitt, and of those in Bristol, by Skelton. The latter were taken from drawings by O’Neal, a very clever deceased artist, who was patronised during several years’ residence in Bristol, by G. W. Braikenridge, Esq. my highly-esteemed friend. He is well known for his singular liberality to artists, and has collected graphic illustrations of his native city, to the amount of fifteen hundred separate drawings. He has thus preserved the memory of numerous Elizabethan houses, and other more ancient buildings, the very site of which would now be sought for in vain. So numerous, and in many instances so excellent, are the engraved specimens now before the public, not only of the elementary parts or members of Gothick architecture, but of elevations, perspective interiors and sections, that I have declined to insert any embellishment whatsoever. Many of those published are referred to in the course of these inquiries. My sole view has been to compile a treatise, in which use- fulness to the student or amateur, and acquirement by a moderate expense, should be the characteristics. %