wki 4':>^^^/'||^j|f||||f^ 
 
 i i H ^ ; ^■«r'f! K^?{! ;' 
 
 lA [?ipiiiiiiil»ii^^ 
 
 5 I •V‘iVr;:V'7:)':W^ 
 
 lilWliiiiili-: 
 
 if ii . 
 
 ■li i 
 
 
 
 jsf 1 
 
 •:iV >'-' ;v‘H-'ji>- ■•'’■■■■■'■> i’*: 
 :y;K-r;:;'/^:-,i;i>i', 
 
 . ;S 1 j s 1 1 : •■( :)i -.v ; i 'I ; i:'< ■'. : ■ n . 
 
 
 
 i:/|.llii#tSigi2||i|l^^ 
 
 1 1 1 Ipifilif liip f ®i I 
 J i. 1 
 
 ;'i .LCviv^fliS .5^ ■■•i 
 
 4 1 i 'Pipif ftii; #■ S® 
 
 1 1 1 ' .s> ■■ ■; ^ -. 'V s -s j / ''%_ K' V, 
 
 i lllllSiliili: •i® 41 #:il 
 
 ; V !; ■• : 5 : ( L- 0 7 4 r;> V; : ';;rTrp 
 
 ;!.;:4:;;i-\v,-J:::; >! 
 
 4 j J l8l®lil8lllt®Silitliil^ 
 
 ■'■f ]■ ' 
 
 f , :apai9f » aiiis^ 
 
 •X I ’ J ‘» > > } 5 * » , ' ,1, ' r 
 
 § |■.„i!4v4^v'•.‘.®4^■;®;;;;!’i:rIi'^ 
 
 I ‘ ' I if PI® 
 
 ■I I U»xt|9awa» 5U aas»»;?ls;a;' ;ass;j^^ 
 i 1 laAaiisissaaiiesi^^ 
 
 
 
Digitized by the Internet Archive 
 in 2016 
 
 https://archive.org/details/essayonorigindev00free_0 
 
AN ESSAY 
 
 ON THE 
 
 ORIGIN AND DEVELOPMENT 
 
 OF 
 
 WINDOW TRACERY 
 
 IN ENGLAND; 
 
 WITH NEARLY FOUR HUNDRED ILLUSTRATIONS. 
 
 EDWARD A. FREEMAN, M.A., 
 
 LATE FELLOW OF TRINITY COLLEGE, OXFORD ; 
 AUTHOR OP THE “ HISTORY OF ARCHITECTURE,” 
 
 “architecture or llandaff cathedral,” &c. 
 
 OXFORD AND LONDON, 
 JOHN HENRY PARKER. 
 
 M DCCCLI. 
 
OXFOED i 
 
 FEINTED BY I. SHEIMPTON- 
 
TO 
 
 ALEXANDEE JAMES BEEESFOED HOPE, 
 D.C.L., M.P., &c., &c., 
 
 THIS ESSAY IS DEDICATED 
 
 AS THE FINAL RESULT 
 
 OP MANY FRIENDLY CONTROVERSIES 
 
 IN PRINT, WRITING, AND CONVERSATION. 
 

PREFACE. 
 
 The present volume consists of an improved and ex- 
 tended form of several papers on the subject of Tracery 
 read before the Oxford Architectural Society at intervals 
 during the years 184G and 1848. Each of the three first 
 Chapters represents a paper. Of these the second and third 
 are essentially the same as when communicated to the 
 Society, allowing for a searching revision, and for the in- 
 sertion of passages omitted in reading for want of time. 
 But the first Chapter has been completely re-written, and 
 the fourth is an entirely new addition. 
 
 I have thought it advisable to give these particulars, as 
 the dates will sufficiently obviate any suspicion of rivalry 
 with the excellent work by Mr. Sharpe on a nearly similar 
 subject. The latter had not assumed its present form till 
 the whole of my three first parts were all but ready for the 
 press, and the earlier numbers certainly gave no promise 
 that a complete work on Tracery was designed by the 
 accomplished author. Yet had it been otherwise, I cannot 
 but think that the field of architectural literature might 
 easily contain both. Indeed, if I may venture so to speak, 
 it seems to me that both are necessary to a complete work- 
 ing out of our very extensive subject. Mr. Sharpe and 
 myself have, from obvious circumstances, regarded it from 
 such very different points that each has a wide field 
 entirely to himself ; it is but seldom that we come across 
 
VI 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 one another’s path, and I do not remember any important 
 differenee of opinion when we do. Each has followed out 
 the line to which his own studies and turn of mind 
 naturally directed him, and to which therefore he was 
 most likely to do justice ; but on my part at least, most 
 certainly, without at all undervaluing that to which he 
 was less attracted. Mr. Sharpe, at once a Cambridge 
 man and a professional architect, is naturally far more 
 at home than I can pretend to be in principles of 
 mechanism and construction ; while my own studies 
 have led me to pay a more diligent attention to the 
 sesthetical part of the subject, to the artistic principles 
 of composition, and the classification and nomenclature 
 of the various forms which tracery has assumed. In 
 his own department, Mr. Sharpe has proved himself a 
 worthy companion of Professor Willis ; his views of the 
 origin of tracery are so sound and clear, and at the same 
 time so elaborately drawn out, that, had they appeared 
 earlier, I should probably have entirely eliminated my 
 own remarks on the same branch of the same subject, 
 so exceedingly meagre must they appear beside them. 
 On the other hand, Mr. Sharpe attempts hardly any 
 classification of the minuter varieties of tracery ; and 
 his scheme involved but a very slight notice of the 
 Plowing style, and none at all of the Flamboyant and 
 Perpendicular. 
 
 In these parts of my sidrject I feel that I have all the 
 advantages and all the disadvantages of one entering on an 
 entirely new path. I have found numerous valuable hints 
 in the works of Rickman, Brandon, Paley and others, and 
 oecasional definitions and designations of particular classes, 
 some of which I have adopted in my own work. But I 
 have never yet found any systematic arrangement and 
 nomenclature of the numerous divisions and subdivisions 
 
of Gothic tracery to supply the want of such an one 
 first led me to the present undertaking. As a first 
 attempt then, it is doubtless very imperfect ; in numerous 
 cases I would most willingly exchange my designations for 
 better ones, did such occur to me ; but I may be allowed 
 to say, “ dimidium facti, qui coepit, habet.” It is some- 
 thing to have made some classification and nomenclature, 
 however imperfect, if it be only as a groundwork for others 
 indefinitely to improve upon. And I may add that no one 
 who has not made the experiment can have any conception 
 of the intense labour and strain upon the mind involved in 
 thus working all but entirely alone. From those who may 
 have gone through the like in any kindred pursuit I should 
 expect to find almost unlimited allowance for individual 
 errors and imperfections, provided only the general ground- 
 work is esteemed sound and legitimate. 
 
 In my main classification I have assumed the same four 
 divisions of Gothic Architecture, Lancet, Geometrical, 
 Flowing, and Perpendicular, which I took as the ground- 
 work of the Gothic portion of my Flistory of Architecture. 
 And I am well pleased to see this view gradually gaining 
 adherents among those who are most competent to pro- 
 nounce upon such a subject. First and foremost I may 
 reckon Mr. Sharpe himself’’. The same view has been 
 more recently maintained by Mr. Poole, in a paper read 
 before the Northampton Architectural Society, and which 
 w'ell deserves some more permanent abiding-place than the 
 columns of a provincial journal. From this last paper it 
 also appears that Mr. Poole himself is the author of the 
 
 « Professor Willis’ nomenclature of Geometrical being equally Curvilinear, 
 some forms of tracery is chielly con- the division is thus rendered unnecessa- 
 structive, being based on the mouldings ; rily illogical ; I have therefore retained 
 it is therefore a cross-division to mine. the old and expressive term “ Flowing.” 
 Mr. Sharpe’s division coincides with I regret having to differ from Mr. Sharpe 
 mine as far as it goes. But I cannot on this point, as he has done me the 
 admire his name of “ Curvilinear” to honour to approve my nomenclature of 
 denote the later Decorated style; the several of the minor subdivisions. 
 
vm 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 excellent review of Mr. Sharpe’s work in the Archaeological 
 Journal. I might almost call the appearance of that arti- 
 cle, when compared with former ones on similar subjects, 
 an sera in architectural literature. It is something much 
 more than the mere change from an erroneous to a correct 
 opinion on a particular point ; it is a deliberate recog- 
 nition, on the part of the most powerful body of archi- 
 tectural students, of those deeper and more extended 
 views of the subject, which their organ at one time cer- 
 tainly ignored and even opposed. Had such a change 
 taken place two years sooner, much of the preface to my 
 History of Architecture would have been unsaid ; the 
 remarks, which then were just, woidd have been altogether 
 uncalled for b 
 
 I need hardly say that the present work is, in the 
 strictest sense, purely architectural. The general view of 
 the art and its revolutions can never be accurately grasped 
 without reference to general history, ecclesiastical and 
 political ; but it is altogether unnecessary and unadvisable 
 to introduce any thing like controversial matter into a 
 
 ® To turn to another point, I am indeed 
 glad to have the support of another able 
 article in the same periodical, proceeding 
 too from no less a pen than that of 
 Dr. Whewell, for a view of mine in 
 which I difter from Mr. Ruskin, and 
 from the author of an able review of 
 Mr. Sliarpe’s work and my own in the 
 Gentleman’s Magazine for November, 
 1850. “ The precision and order,” say.s 
 
 the Reviewer, “ of geometrical tracery 
 gave way to curvilinear forms and com- 
 binations, in which the tracery-bars were 
 made to ramify and undulate with a 
 hitherto unknown flexibilil)'. W'’e are 
 willing to regard this change, with 
 Mr. Ruskin, as the first fatal blow to 
 Gothic art ; the stone tracery-bars now 
 were taught to appear as possessed of 
 a ductility altogether foreign to their 
 nature: ‘ this was a change which sacri-' 
 ficed a great principle of truth ; and 
 sacrificed the expression of the qualities 
 
 of the material ; and however delightful 
 its results in their first developments, it 
 was ultimately ruinous.’ ” On the other- 
 hand Dr. Whewell remarks, “ that tra- 
 cery necessarily implies that the atten- 
 tion is fixed upon the tracery -bars as the 
 positive elements of the structure; and 
 that when the window space is either so 
 constructed or so seen that the blank 
 spaces (trefoils, quatrefoils, &c.) strike 
 the eye, the intermediate bars being 
 blotted into unorganized spaces of vari- 
 able breadth, (as the cu.sps project and 
 retire) produces the effect of genuine 
 tracery no longer. This holds whether 
 the quatrefoils, &c., be seen from wuthin, 
 as lights in a dark space, or from without, 
 as dark figures in a light space. Much 
 of the filling of Italian windows appears 
 to be of this spurious kind of tracery.” 
 Archaeological Journal, September, 1850. 
 p. 221. 
 
r RE FACE. 
 
 IX 
 
 merely teclmical investigation into a portion of its details. 
 I believe the disputes between the spiritual and temporal 
 powers, and the enthusiasm of the crusades, to have had no 
 small influence on the general development of Romanesque 
 and Gothic Architecture ; but here we have simply to do 
 with their mere details and technicalities. I have not, and 
 never had, the slightest belief in the system of architectural 
 symbolism put forth by many writers for whom I have a 
 high respect ; I really cannot rate the intellect of the 
 great mediasval architects so low as to suppose them 
 capable of descending to the wearisome, and indeed often 
 well nigh profane allegorizing, which by some writers is 
 not only attributed to them as a matter of fact, but is even 
 held to be in some mysterious manner connected with our 
 perceptions of beauty. There being therefore no tempta- 
 tion to do otherwise, I flatter myself that nothing will be 
 found in this volume which any reader, of whatever opinions, 
 can consider unconnected with the subject. 
 
 As to the illustrations, I assume that their simple 
 character can stand in need of no apology. Of course a 
 smaller number of highly finished engravings would have 
 made a much prettier book, but the utility of the volume 
 would have been diminished in proportion to the increase 
 of its beauty. It is clear that, with my treatment of the 
 snbject, the first point nns to have the greatest possible 
 number of examples. I have for the most part*" — indeed 
 1 have hardly ever purposely done otherwise — confined 
 them to examples not previously engraved ; being content 
 to refer to engravings in other works whenever they suited 
 my purpose. They have all been engraved from drawings 
 of my own made from original sketches. The greater pro- 
 
 >1 One can liardly use milder 1 in- « The exceptions would prehahly he 
 guasie when one reads of “ vul.ie” found chiefly in Cathedrals and other 
 and “ pede” windows. imponant churches. 
 
 b 
 
X 
 
 PREFACE. 
 
 portion of these are my own, but many have been com- 
 municated by friends. I have to thank Mr. George Gilbert 
 Scott — and I have great satisfaction in coupling so eminent 
 a name with my work — for a large collection of drawings 
 of German Geometrical windows, several of Avhich have 
 been introduced^. To the Rev. J. E. Millard, M.A., Head 
 Master of Magdalen Colleo;e School, I am also indebted 
 for numerous valuable examples, chiefly from the East of 
 England, a district with which I have hardly any personal 
 acquaintance. And obligations, greater in amount, though 
 not in degree, are due to the Committee of the Oxford 
 Architectural Society for their liberality in placing at my 
 disposal the whole of their extensive collection of drawings, 
 including the valuable accumulations of Mr. Rickman. 
 Eroni this latter source many of my best examples are 
 derived, as well as several from drawings in the same 
 collection by the Rev. William Grey, ]\I. A., of Magdalen 
 Hall. I must Anally not omit to thank my friend and 
 coadjutor in so many undertakings, the Rev. G. W. Cox, 
 for much assistance rendered at different stages of my 
 labours. 
 
 With regard to those illustrations for which I am most 
 directly responsible, I would beg for the candid indulgence 
 of other observers for any minute defects which may be 
 found in th.em. It is no easy matter to make a large 
 collection of windows without some inaccuracies. I am 
 only endeavouring to shelter myself under their example, 
 
 ' Had my view extended directly to 
 foreign tracery — which, had I had the 
 means so to exten 1 it, it doubtless would 
 — Mr. Scott’s kindness would have been 
 still more serviceable. But as, unlike 
 the general features of a style, techni- 
 calities of this kind can on y be learned 
 by personal inspection or by collections 
 of drawings of vast extent, I determined 
 to confine my primary subject to England 
 and Wales — the latter a more important 
 
 adjunct than might be imagined — intro- 
 ducing foreign, and even Scottish, ex- 
 amples merely by way of occasional 
 illustrations or contrast. My references 
 to the Island of Jersey may seem an 
 exception ; but I was anxious to insert 
 all the examples I could of Flamboyant 
 tracery, of whicli that island contains 
 some important varieties, and I must 
 also confess some partiality for the only 
 transmarine country I have as yet visited. 
 
TREFACE. 
 
 XI 
 
 when I say that I have often fonnd errors and discrepancies 
 in the drawings even of Mr. Rickman and Mr. Sharpe. 
 Many of my own drawings were necessarily taken from 
 hasty sketches made long ago, some before I liad learned 
 accurately to observe the subordination of mouldings ; of 
 course I might have seen fewer buildings and drawn them 
 more elaborately, but I think such a process would have 
 greatly diminished my amount of real information. But if 
 I have, as doubtless I have, here and there given a piercing 
 a wrong proportion, or drawn a trefoil instead of a cinque- 
 foil, the accuracy of a particular example is of comparatively 
 little consecpience, so long as I have really arranged and 
 illustrated the several classes into which the varying forms 
 of tracery resolve themselves. 
 
 The want of an Index having been justly objected in 
 several quarters to my History of Architecture, I have 
 endeavoured to avoid any blame on that score on the 
 present occasion. 
 
 Oahlands, Dursley, 
 
 Novemher Wth, 1850 . 
 
CONTENTS. 
 
 Chapter I. Of Geometrical Tracery. page 
 
 § 1. Introduction ....... 1 
 
 2. Of tlie Origin of Tracery .... 5 
 
 3. Of Early Geometrical Tracery . . . . 10 
 
 4. Of Foil Tracery ...... 33 
 
 5. Of Ai’ch Tracery ...... 40 
 
 6. Of Combination in Geometrical Windows . . 49 
 
 A. Combination of Geometrical and Foil Tracery 50 
 
 a. Intermixtiure ...... ib. 
 
 b. Geometrical Skeletons with Foil Patterns 51 
 
 B. Combination of Arch Tracery with Geometrical 
 
 and Foil . . . . . . 52 
 
 a. Intermixtm’e of Geometrical and Arch 
 
 Tracery ...... 53 
 
 b. Arch Skeletons with Geometrical Patterns ib. 
 
 c. Arch and Foil Tracery .... 55 
 
 a. Mullions not Intersecting . . ib. 
 
 iS. Mullions Intersecting ... 56 
 
 y. Corruptions of Arch and Foil Tracery 58 
 
 d. Anomalous Arch Tracery . . . 61 
 
 e. Subarcuation ..... 62 
 
 f. Subarcuated Foil Windows . . . 69 
 
 g. Imperfect Spherical Triangles . . 70 
 
 C. Centre-pieces of Wheel Tracery, etc. . . 72 
 
 a. In Geometrical Figm-es . . . ib. 
 
 b. Wheel Tracery without a central Geome- 
 
 trical Figure . . . . . 75 
 
 c. Divergent Vesicai in Head . . . 76 
 
 d. Foil Wheel Tracery . . . . 78 
 
 e. Divergent Compositions . . . ib. 
 
XIV 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 D. Introduction of Straight Lines . . . 79 
 
 a. Spiked P'oliation . . . . . ib. 
 
 b. Straight Lines in Arch Tracery . . 81 
 
 c. Anomalous Instances of Straight Lines . 82 
 
 Conclusion . . . . . . . 83 
 
 Chapter II. Of Flowing Tracery. 
 
 § 1. Definition of Flowing Tracery .... 85 
 
 2. Subdivisions of Flowing Traceiy . . . 88 
 
 3. Of Reticulated Tracery ..... 89 
 
 4. Of Ogee Tracery . . . • . . 97 
 
 5. Of Flowing Wheel Tracery .... 104 
 
 a. Of Divergent Tracery . . . .106 
 
 b. Of Horizontal Convergent Tracery . . 108 
 
 c. Of Reversed Convergent Tracery . . 110 
 
 6. Of Combination in Flowing Windows . . ib. 
 
 a. Combination of Reticulated and Ogee 
 
 Tracery . . . . . .Ill 
 
 b. Combination of Reticulated and Divergent 
 
 Tracmy . . . . . .112 
 
 c. Combination of Reticulated and Convergent 113 
 
 d. Combination of Divergent and Convergent ib , 
 
 e. Combination of Retie ala ted, Divergent, and 
 
 Convergent . . . . .115 
 
 7. Of the Transition from Geometrical to Flowing 
 
 Tracery . . . . . .116 
 
 8. Combinations of Geometrical and Flowing Tracery 125 
 
 a. Geometrical Skeletons containing Floiving 
 
 Patterns . . . . . ib. 
 
 b. Arch Skeletons containing Flowing Patterns 127 
 
 c. Flowing Skeletons containing Geometrical 
 
 &c. Patterns . . . . .128 
 
 d. CJommingling of Geometrical and Floiving 
 
 Patterns . . . . . .129 
 
 9. Of Subarcuated Flowing Windows . . . 132 
 
 a. Combination of Geometrical and Flowing 
 
 Tracery in Subarcuated Windows . 133 
 
 b. Subarcuated Windows with Geometrical 
 
 centre-jiieces . . . . . ib. 
 
 c. Subarcuated Window's with \\Tieel centre- 
 
 pieces . . . . . .135 
 
CONTENTS. XV 
 
 PAGE 
 
 d. Subarcuated Windows wdth Flowing centre- 
 
 2 ^ieces . . . . . .137 
 
 a. Witli a Complementary light . . ib. 
 
 jS. With a Central Midlion . . . 142 
 
 e. Quasi-Subarcuated Windows . . . 143 
 
 10. Of Subordination in Flowing Windows . . 146 
 
 Chapter III. Of Complete Coxtinuous Tracery, Flam- 
 boyant AND Perpendicular. 
 
 § 1. Of Flamboyant Tracery and its Origin . . 155 
 
 Definition of Flamboyant Tracery . . 156 
 
 Derivation of Flamboyant Tracery from Reti- 
 culated . . . . . .159 
 
 Combination of Flamboyant and other forms 164 
 
 2. Of Perpendicular Tracery .... 166 
 
 3. Of the Varieties of Perpendicular Tracery . 173 
 
 4. Of Snpennnllioned Tracery . . . . 177 
 
 Snpermnllioned Windows with open Transoms 178 
 
 Sujjermullioued Windows Transomcd . . 179 
 
 Subarcuated Supermullioned Windows . . 180 
 
 a. VTth a Complementary Light . . 181 
 
 b. Without a Complementary Light . 185 
 
 5. Of Alternate Tracery . . . . .186 
 
 Subarcuated Alternate Windows . . .190 
 
 Combinations of Alternate and Supermullioned 
 
 Tracery . . . . . .191 
 
 6. Of Panelled Tracery . . . . .194 
 
 7. Of the Derivation of Perpendicular Tracery from 
 
 Flowing . . . . . .199 
 
 Development of Reticulated Tracery into Per- 
 pendicular ..... 200 
 
 Development of Ogee Tracery into Perpen- 
 dicular ...... 204 
 
 Origin of Supermullioned Tracery . . 206 
 
 8. Of the Combination of Perpendicular and Earlier 
 
 Forms . . . . . .210 
 
 Combination of Perpendicular with Geome- 
 trical and Flowing Tracery . . 215 
 
 Combinations of Perpendicular and Arch 
 
 Tracery . . . . . .224 
 
XVI 
 
 CONTENTS. 
 
 PAGE 
 
 a. Excessive Subarcuation . . . 225 
 
 b. Excessive Groujnng . . . 229 
 
 Chapter IV. Misceltaneohs Windoavs. 
 
 § 1. Of Circular WindoAA^s . . . . .232 
 
 a. Circular WiiidoAvs Avitli Geometrical Tracery 234 
 
 b. Circidar WindoAvs Avitb Wheel Tracery . 235 
 
 c. Circidar WiiidoAvs Avitb EloAving Tracery . 236 
 
 2. Of Triangular WiudoAV'S ..... 238 
 
 3. Of Square WindoAvs ..... 241 
 
 4. Of Elat-IIeaded Windows ..... 243 
 
 a. Origin of Square-headed WindoAvs . . 244 
 
 b. Of Square-headed WindoAvs Avdth Tracery 247 
 
 c. Of Square-headed AViiidoAvs Avith Spandrils 251 
 
 d. Of Segmental-IIeaded Windows . . 253 
 
 5. Of Belfry WindoAVS and Sjrire-Lights . . 256 
 
 Additions and Corrections. 
 
 To Chapter I. . . . . . . 261 
 
 To Chapter II.. . . . . . 274 
 
 To Chapter III. ...... 280 
 

 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 OP GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 § 1. Introduction. 
 
 Among all the beautiful aucl majestic features which are 
 so conspicuous in the architecture of the middle ages, a 
 rank inferior to none must be assigned to the varied and 
 graceful forms of its window-tracery. The window itself, 
 in the prominent position which it holds in the most per- 
 fect forms of Gothic art, is a feature peculiar to that style 
 of architecture. In the Grecian, and even the Italian, 
 style, the window can hardly be looked upon as anything 
 but an intruder; a necessary evil, which, on account of 
 physical requirements, cannot be dispensed with, but which 
 it is extremely difficult to bring into harmony with the rest 
 of the building. Even in the best Italian Churches, for in 
 secular erections the fault is hardly so conspicuous, the 
 windows are for the most part little better than eyesores. 
 In Romanesque architecture the windows enter far more 
 into the general composition of the building, and are often 
 highly ornamental features ; but they are still compara- 
 tively small and unimportant, and are perhaps the last 
 thing taken into account in judging of the merit of a de- 
 sign. It was reserved for the Gothic architect to assign to 
 a portion of his building so physically indispensable, its 
 
 B 
 
2 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TKACERY. 
 
 fitting and natural place as the most iinpoitant and cha- 
 racteristic feature of the exterior. Instead of the few and 
 small openings pierced through the massy walls of a Ro- 
 manesque Church, we now see the wide and soaring win- 
 dow, spreading the airy net-work of tracery from buttress 
 to buttress ; no part of the structure enters more tho- 
 roughly into the general design, none has more eompletely 
 imbibed the spirit of the style. The large traceried win- 
 dow is essentially and distinctively Gothic ; and there is 
 no greater triinn})h of that glorious style than the complete 
 ascendancy thus gained over a feature which had been the 
 least satisfactory point of all that preceded it. What had 
 hitherto been little more than an unmanageable necessity, 
 now becomes an harmonious part of the design, and one 
 pre-eminently admitting tlie highest degree of sinqilicity 
 and grace, of variety and richness, allowed by the most 
 perfect form of art w'hich the wmrld has seen. 
 
 Trom this it follow's, almost as a necessary consequence, 
 that the traces of each successive change to wdiich Gothic 
 art submitted should be found deeply impressed upon this 
 chosen ofispring of the style. And an examination of ex- 
 isting specimens will shew that it was in the tracery of 
 windows that the principles of each successive form of 
 Gothic architecture developed themselves more fully and 
 clearly, and especially much earlier, than in any other part 
 of the building. The wundow is a more strict unity, its 
 tracery has greater physical independence than any other 
 part, and its whole nature gives freer scope for the exercise 
 of a luxuriant imagination than vault or columu or door- 
 way. Every one must have observed that it is to the 
 wdndows that the novice in architecture mainly looks in 
 his endeavour to grapple with the outw'ard distinctions of 
 successive styles ; and it is to the wdndows that the more 
 advanced observer chiefly appeals as the exponents of their 
 
INTRODUCTION. 
 
 3 
 
 animating principles. The truth is that, while other por- 
 tions — mouldings above all — are witnesses of equal cer- 
 tainty, none deliver their testimony in so full and per- 
 spicuous a form. 
 
 But while the main principle of each variety of Gothic 
 architecture is thus clearly set forth in those forms of win- 
 dow-tracery whicli form their best landmarks, no inquiry 
 can well be one of greater difficulty than to unravel the 
 different shapes which that tracery actually assumed. The 
 princi];)le embodied in each great form of tracery was in- 
 deed one, but well nigh countless were the simultaneous 
 methods in which the fruitful genius of the ancient mason 
 endeavoured to express it. Innumerable types both of Geo- 
 metrical and Continuous tracery may be readily discerned, 
 completely distinct from each other in idea, which ne- 
 vertheless we shall find perpetually intermingled in the 
 existing examples, as indeed can hardly fail to be the case 
 with forms which are in contemporary use. Certain prin- 
 ciples of formation, distinct, although often kindred, are 
 seen plainly at work in the composition of tracery ; in idea 
 they can be readily distinguished ; but in any individual 
 instance it is at least as usual to find a mixture of two or 
 three of their number, as a design carried out solely in 
 accordance with one. Hence to draw up a system of 
 classes, in other words to recognize the distinctive prin- 
 ciple of each, is comparatively easy ; while to arrange the 
 actual examples under the classes so formed is a far more 
 difficult matter. And this is the case both with Geometrical 
 and Flowing windows, but more especially with the latter ; 
 for the free and varied character of their tracery naturally 
 allowed of more exuberance both in the invention and 
 combination of forms, than the rigid mathematical outlines 
 of their predecessors. 
 
 Combination of principles in tracery may be effected in 
 
4 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERS. 
 
 two ways. The first is by mere commingling, when one 
 part of a window is designed on one principle, and another 
 on another. In this process there is always great danger 
 of producing mere confusion ; either the two modes of for- 
 mation may not be in themselves cajiable of harmonious 
 connexion ; or when there is no such antecedent impedi- 
 ment, the skill of the designer may be insufficient to fuse 
 them well together, and the result may be a mere physical 
 juxta- position of incongruous elements. This is indeed 
 very frequently the case, and comparatively few windows 
 of any remarkable size or beauty are to be referred to this 
 class. 
 
 The other chief mode of effecting combination is by 
 tracing out a large skeleton of one form, and filling up the 
 figures thus produced with smaller patterns of the same, 
 or more usually of another or several others. To this 
 source we owe a very large proportion of the most splendid 
 windows of all dates. In these cases it is very usual to 
 mark the different patterns by si'hordination in the mould- 
 ings ; that is, the mullions and tracery-bars describing the 
 primary pattern are'^ of greater size and projection than the 
 secondary range, or are marked by the addition of some'’ 
 particular moulding to their surface. This principle of sub- 
 ordination may be carried out to any extent, producing 
 primary, secondary, tertiary tracery-bars, with the patterns 
 described by each order receding from the plane of that 
 before it. 
 
 But even when we have done our best to trace out all 
 these varieties and combinations of varieties, our work is 
 still but partially accomplished. Besides actual transitions 
 from one form to another, which are found both in suc- 
 
 ^ “ A plane, parallel with the wall of Character, p. 10. 
 the building, and touching the surface of *’ See Willis, Architecture of the 
 some of the mullions, arches, etc., would Middle Ages, p. 53. 
 not touch others.” Petit’s Architectural 
 
OF THE ORIGIN OF TRACERY. 
 
 5 
 
 cessive and contemporary styles, we shall in the course of 
 our inquiries meet with several windows which it is a hope- 
 less attempt to bring within the definition of any class ; 
 and still more whose general effect and spirit show them 
 to have really a greater affinity to some other class than to 
 that under which they must formally be reduced. These 
 anomalies have been, when of sufficient importance, care- 
 fully noted, and for the most part reckoned with the va- 
 riety to which they seemed to bear the greatest general 
 resemblance. 
 
 § 2. Of the Origin of Tracery. 
 
 The origin of tracery in windows is naturally to be 
 sought for among the forms which preceded its intro- 
 duction, from which we shall find it to have been deve- 
 loped in an easy and natural manner. When the single 
 lancet-windows of the Early English style begin to be 
 grouped together into compositions of two, three, or more, 
 under a single arch, a great step has been taken towards 
 the formation of the genuine traceried window ; each light 
 loses to a great extent its separate existence ; “ it forms 
 part of a composition, and can no more be considered 
 without reference to others in the same front or compart- 
 ment, than if it were one of the lights of a large mullioued 
 window®.” Of this stage of art by far the noblest production 
 is that admirable model of grace, the eastern triplet of our 
 Early English Churches ; its different varieties are but so 
 many forms of beauty, but its acme was certainly passed 
 before the time when the compound lancet-window began 
 to develop into actual tracery. The finest triplets are un- 
 doubtedly those in which the lights still retain some se- 
 parate character, and where the piece of wall between them 
 has not sunk into a mere mullion. 
 
 ' Petit’s Church Architecture,!. 153. 
 
6 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 It is however the couplet, a figure in itself of far inferior 
 beauty, which contributed much more than the triplet, or 
 indeed than any other of its kindred compositions, to the 
 development of tracery. When a triplet is placed under a 
 comprizing arch, or occupies a bay of vaulting, the greater 
 elevation ordinarily given to the central light gives a unity 
 and pyramidal tendency to the whole composition, and suf- 
 ficiently fills up the space allotted to it. There was there- 
 fore no occasion to look out for external means to fill it up; 
 and as tracery is but the result of such experiments, we 
 shall find that but a small number of windows are directly 
 traceable to the triplet, although ideas derived from it ex- 
 ercise eonsiderable influence upon many. But in a couplet 
 the case is altoa-ether different. Two lancet windows side 
 
 o 
 
 by side are perfectly equal, they balance one another ; they 
 have no pyramidal tendency, and cannot fill up the pyra- 
 midal space under a high gable or a sharp-pointed arch. 
 Hence even in whole fronts which are lighted by two 
 lancets even at a considerable distance, we often find a 
 circle or some similar window above them, which is 
 far more than a mere gable light, and is evidently 
 to be taken in connexion with the lancets, the whole 
 forming a composition of extreme elegance. Such east 
 ends occur at St. Mary-le-Wigford, Lincoln, Stubbington, 
 Hunts, and Pattingham*^, Staffordshire. But much more 
 does this necessitv occur when the two lights are brought 
 into close juxta-position, especially when coupled under 
 an arch®; then a void space is left between the arch and 
 the heads of the lights which absolutely cries for some- 
 thing to fill it up. A means of so doing is soon found by 
 the insertion of some small figure in the head, a circle 
 
 d Figiiied in Petit’s Architectural this distinction, important as it is in it- 
 Character. self, is of no consequence. See Glos- 
 
 ® This arch is often a mere label ; but sary, i. 406. note u. 
 for the purposes of the present inquiry 
 
OF THE ORIGIN OF TRACERY. 
 
 7 
 
 (fig. 1) plain or foliated, a trefoil, quatrefoil or such like 
 ornament, or the figure called vesica piscis^ Sometimes 
 also we find a mere opening® with its sides corresponding 
 with the lines above and below, which is extremely un- 
 sightly. In the belfry-windows of St. Giles, Oxford'’, oc- 
 curs a form of which I am not prepared with another ex- 
 ample, and of which I cannot find any trace in subsequent 
 forms, namely, a smaller lancet light occupying the head of 
 the arch. So strong indeed was the tendency to place pierc- 
 ings of these different kinds in connexion with the couplet, 
 that we even find them when there is no containing arch' at 
 all; or as at St. Mary’s, Haverfordwest^ (2), merely a label 
 following the whole design. This arrangement, which is 
 far less elegant, can only be considered as a false develop- 
 ment, whether we consider it as a clumsy imitation of win- 
 dows comprized under an arch, or as in any way connected 
 with the fronts above mentioned, of which it might well be 
 an injudicious adaptation'. 
 
 Hitherto the figure in the head has been quite indepen- 
 dent, and is connected with the lights only by composition; 
 in effect it is most intimately united with them, and they 
 must altogether be considered as forming one window ; 
 still their lines are kept distinct ; the figure in the head is 
 cut out of the solid, and there are actual pieces of wall. 
 
 f By the use of this term I do not 
 mean to pledge myself to any symbolical 
 or mystical iiiterpretation. I simply use 
 it as a term now generally understood, 
 and, whatever its origin, less practically 
 cumbrous than “pointed oval.” For 
 the form see the e.xample at Glapthorn, 
 Northants, figured in Brandon’s Analy- 
 sis, and (from the author’s drawing) in 
 Parker’s Introduction, p. 1‘26. 
 e Figured, Bloxam, p. 122. 5th Ed. 
 
 *' Figured in the Glossary, Plate 152. 
 ‘ Glossary, ut supra, note x ; Bran- 
 don’s Analysis, p. 21, and Appendix, 
 fig. 20. 
 
 Externally; within there is an arch. 
 * It appears to be most usual in the 
 
 case of spire-lights, as at Gaddeshy, Lei- 
 cestershire. In such positions the ob- 
 jection does not apply, the connexion 
 produced by the pyramidal head being 
 nearly, often indeed quite, as close as 
 would be effected by a containing arch. 
 In some cases there is no comprizing arch, 
 but the figure in the head is contained 
 under an arch rising from the heads of 
 the lights, as in the interior of the west 
 window at Raunds (figured in the North- 
 amptonshire Churches, p. 59, and in the 
 new edition of Rickman, p. 92) where 
 it is not pierced, and in the four -light 
 composition from Sarum engraved by 
 Mr. Petit in his Architectural Character. 
 
8 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 diminutive though they be, between it and the lights. In 
 the next stage the spandrils between the three component 
 parts of the window are sunk (3) in the stone, but not 
 pierced so as to admit of the insertion of glass ; still the 
 lines of the whole composition are connected, and a great 
 advance has been made towards fusing the component 
 parts into one whole. To make this operation complete, it 
 only remained to pierce these spandiils (4), and we at 
 once have fidl and perfect tracery in its earliest form ; we 
 have now come to the purest and simplest form of the 
 Geometrical window"'. 
 
 It must however be remarked that the process whose 
 stages we have been thus endeavouring to trace out, is by 
 no means confined to windows, but occurs also in other 
 positions, especially in triforia. Indeed up to a certain 
 point the development of tracery in the triforium and in 
 the window is identical, and in England at least the 
 former is the position in which each stage usually makes 
 its first appearance. Thus piercings in the head occur 
 even in pure Norman work, and we find simple Geometrical 
 figures, sometimes forming actual tracery, while the win- 
 dows are still simple lancets. In the Presbytery of Lin- 
 coln we find Geometrical tracery in its full perfection both 
 in the triforium and the windows ; but here the parallel 
 development stops ; this, the very earliest form of complete 
 tracery, is the latest Avhich the triforium admits. From 
 this point, and for this reason perhaps among others, the 
 triforium gradually goes out of use, and when it does re- 
 appear with later forms of tracery, as in the Choir of Ely, 
 the inappropriateness of the whole composition needs 
 hardly to be pointed out. 
 
 The explanation of this is doubtless to be found in the 
 fact that the triforium is essentially a composition of shafts 
 
 ™ See Petit, Architectural Character, p. 10. 
 
PI 1. 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
/ 
 
 
 
OF THE ORIGIN OF TRACERY. 
 
 9 
 
 and arches, designed to be open, the window essentially 
 one of mullions and tracery-bars designed to be filled with 
 glass. The shaft is indeed profusely employed as an orna- 
 ment of traceried windows, but it is a mere ornament at- 
 tached to the mullions, and'' very seldom forms the real 
 separation between the lights, except in belfry-windows, 
 and similar positions where they were not designed for gla- 
 zing. These have far more the character of the triforium 
 than of the traceried window ; they are found divided by a 
 shaft from the earliest days of Romanesque, when the double 
 window was almost entirely excluded from glazed aper- 
 tures ; as being the most usual and the most closely con- 
 nected form of couplet, they, like the triforium, exhibit the 
 earliest approaches to tracery, and afford some of the best 
 studies of its incipient forms. But, like the triforium also, 
 they exhibit but few displays of elaborate tracery; they 
 could not indeed, like that feature, be entirely dispensed 
 with, but they usually present the simplest forms of their 
 respective periods". For it is clear that the rich net-work 
 of tracery is not adapted to open-work^ on a large and 
 bold scale ; a certain degree of simplicity and severity, and 
 a certain reproduction of the constructive features of the 
 building, seems desirable. There can be little doubt that 
 the forms of the triforium and the belfry-window exercised 
 
 " We shall find one or two examples 
 as we go on. In St. Maurice, York, is 
 an extraordinary example'(figured in the 
 Archaeological Proceedings for 1846, 
 Churches of York, p. 24) late Roman- 
 esque, two round-headed lights grouped 
 under a round arch, with a small circle 
 pierced in the head. 
 
 “ These remarks might with equal 
 truth be extended to double doorways, 
 at least as they appear in England. 
 They are chiefly found in the days of 
 Geometrical tracery, of the different 
 forms and stages of which they often af- 
 ford good examples. Later than this 
 they hardly appear, as the later styles 
 
 presented no appropriate architectural 
 means of filling up the head. I am 
 only aware of one example, the Flowing 
 tracery most inappropriately inserted in 
 the head of one of the Early doorways 
 at Ely. Abroad we of course find gor- 
 geous double doorways of late date, but 
 the adornment of their tympana is not 
 attained by means of tracery. 
 
 P An unglazed window of tracery is 
 always an unsightly object; and the 
 Flowing triforium at Ely, and the screen 
 at St. Mary’s, Beverley, are nothing more. 
 The last example I only know by engra- 
 vings. 
 
10 
 
 OP GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 a most important intineiice on the development of tracery, 
 but it was in the way of giving hints to a feature of totally 
 different character. It is to the conversion of the piece of 
 wall between two lights into a mullion that we owe its 
 actual introduction, and all its later forms are peculiar to 
 the composition thus produced. 
 
 § 3. Oe Early Geometrical Tracery"'. 
 
 Having thus arrived at the first fully developed form of 
 tracery, we must go a little farther into detail in order to 
 ascertain its several contemporary varieties, as they branch 
 off even at this early stage into two distinct classes, each 
 of which again admits of further subdivision. The two 
 principal varieties depend upon the relation between the 
 comprizing arch and the lights (5) ; this arch, it is plain, 
 may either be a totally distinct arch, not coinciding with 
 any part of the arches of the lights, or its segments may be 
 simply"’ a prolongation of the outer segments of the con- 
 tained lights (6). The former is at once the most usual 
 and the most graceful, and is the direct source of the finest 
 forms of tracery; the other, though the most simple, and, 
 as events proved, the more lasting, and exercising a most 
 powerful side influence upon tracery of every period, is in 
 itself unquestionably meagre and monotonous, and is only 
 rendered bearable by the addition of foliation or other or- 
 nament. 
 
 These two forms may be thus distinguished ; where the 
 containing arch does not at all coincide with those of the 
 lights, the head is most naturally occupied by a distinct 
 figure, such as occurs in most of the examples already 
 
 <> This seems to be the form called by letter of this definition does not ap- 
 Dean Conybeare ( Arcbasologia Cam- ply; but such examples are rare in this 
 brensis, No. I. New Series, p. 34) Tan- class, and moreover in considering a 
 gential ; a name accurate, but harsh. foil arch, one almost involuntarily sup- 
 
 ■■ When the arch is of the foil shape plies a pointed one of which it might be 
 (as in the Haverfordwest window) the the foliation. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 11 
 
 given ; where it coincides, its natural treatment is that of 
 a mere space. A circle, qnatrefoil, or other figure, may he 
 indeed, and not nnfrequently is, inserted in the head of 
 such a composition (7), but it is clear that no scope is 
 given for the development of such a form into any degree 
 of beauty. The figure always seems to be, not supported 
 by the lights, but unnaturally thrust in between them. It 
 was manifestly a far more easy and appropriate course 
 merely to pierce the quadrangular spandril between the 
 heads of the lights, which at once produces one of the 
 earliest, and at the same time the most meagre of all 
 forms of tracery, the mullion merely branching into the 
 arch ; and we shall hereafter see that this same process 
 of mere piercing produces the simplest form of larger win- 
 dows of this kind. We may therefore fairly conclude that 
 the mere space or spaces in the head, udiether plain or 
 foliated, properly accompany the coinciding arch, and the 
 distinct figure the non-coinciding. 
 
 The former then is Geometrical tracery in the strictest 
 sense. Of this style the animating feature is the circle ® ; 
 it is of circles and arcs of circles that its tracery is almost 
 wholly composed- a straight line is always felt as an in- 
 truder, the foliations themselves are always best and purest 
 when they are most palpably arcs of circles. And Avhen 
 any deviation is made from compositions of mere circles, 
 plain or foliated, it is by the introduction of figures dis- 
 tinctly formed of circular arcs, as the spherical triangle, 
 and others of less frequent occurrence, the vesica and the 
 spherical square. 
 
 It will here be found convenient to make yet a farther 
 
 s “ In every case the circle, whether it have marked the character of the design ; 
 was complete, as in the west window of the foliation was no more than a series of 
 Limburg, and the great eastern one of incomplete circles, introduced, as it were, 
 Lincoln, or appearing only in part, as for the sake of repeating the original 
 one ot the arcs oi a i'oliated figure, seems figure.” Petit’s Cliurch Architecture, i. 
 to liave prevailed over tlie angle, aru'. to 17 , 5 . 
 
12 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 subdivision. The lancet heads may be either simply 
 pointed (with or without foliations) or may be actually of 
 the trefoil form‘ ; similarly the figures in the head may be 
 either the Geometrical ones just mentioned (with or with- 
 out foliation) or may be themselves trefoils, quatrefoils, etc. 
 separately existing. We have here again two contem- 
 porary principles at work, which may be best considered 
 separately. To the form Avhere the tracery consists of 
 circles, triangles, etc. I shall especially reserve the name 
 of Early Geometrical (see above fig. 3 and 4) ; that Avhere 
 it consists of distinct foil figures I shall venture to call 
 Foil" tracery (8)’'. It is clear that the foil arch harmonizes 
 best with the foil figure, and the simple arch with the Geo- 
 metrical figure ; but as in practice they are often inter- 
 changed, and it does not make much difference in the 
 actual tracery, I have thought it an unnecessary cross 
 division rigidly to mark such cases as exceptions or as ex- 
 amples of commingling. 
 
 To proceed with the Early Gecmetrical. I before men- 
 tioned the spandril merely sunk and not pierced as being 
 a sign rather of incipient than of actual tracery ; and in 
 accurately tracing the different stages by which tracery 
 was developed it is certainly to be so considered ; but as it 
 is a feature occasionally recurring at all times, I shall not 
 think it necessary to mark it in every individual instance, 
 unless Avhere it has some marked effect upon the general 
 character of the window. With this proviso, I will pro- 
 
 t Professor Willis calls an arch of this 
 form foiled, an arch with such an one 
 placed behind \t foliated; this is doubtless 
 the best nomenclature, but we habitually 
 speak of an aperture being tryoiled or 
 quatre/oi7ed in a sense which according 
 to this system is inaccurate. I therefore 
 call the two forms trefoil and tref oiled, 
 quatre/o7 and quatre/bi/e^f. The dis- 
 tinction is difficult to catch by the ear, 
 but it seems accurate to say that an arch 
 is trefoiled, by having a trefoil arch placed 
 
 behind it. This is also the nomenclature 
 of Mr. Petit. 
 
 " I find that Messrs. Brandon (Intro- 
 duction, p. 24) call it Foiled tracery. 
 The form I use is in analogy with the 
 remark in the preceding note. 
 
 ^ The difference between the two 
 forms can be nowhere better learned than 
 in Westminster Abbey. The windows 
 of the eastern part are of Early Geome- 
 trical, of the western of Foil tracery, both 
 in their simplest, best, and purest form. 
 
1 1 . 
 
 11 
 
 12 
 

 
 
 
 >} 
 
 c . 
 
 ...iV. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 13 
 
 ccecl to examine the simplest form of Geometrical window, 
 that of two lights with a circle in the head. 
 
 The plainest form of this kind has both the lights and 
 the circle nnfoliated, as in the windows from Glapthorn and 
 Ringstead already mentioned^. When foliation is intro- 
 duced, we have at once the means of ringing as it were 
 almost innumerable changes upon these simple elements. 
 Bnt first of all we must carefully observe the nature of the 
 cusps’’' employed in the circle. There are two kinds of cusps 
 used at this period, one of which is peculiar to early tracery, 
 the other common to this and the later forms. And these 
 two point to two different origins, wdiich may be explained 
 a little more at length. Whatever be the exact origin of 
 foliation, it presents itself to ns in two forms ; in one the 
 foils are simply, according as they are round or pointed, 
 imperfect circles or imperfect vesicse, and the idea of a 
 figure thus foliated is that of one filled with a number of 
 such imperfect circles. The great source of the form is to 
 be found in such compositions as the east window of Lin- 
 coln, which exhibits a circle filled with smaller circles sur- 
 rounding a central one. Next to this in idea comes a 
 two-light window at Oundle (9), in the head of which four 
 mperfect circles join a perfect one in the circle ; we only 
 now want to remove this central circle, and we at once 
 have such a quatrefoil as at Northborough (10). It is 
 clear that the figure at Oundle is an example of subordi- 
 nation in tracery, and this character is preserved in the 
 form of a cusp derived from it, the truncated opc7i sqfflt- 
 cus]). The soffit cusp is thus described by Mr. Paley"*. 
 
 y So at Etton in the same county in 
 the Aisles, figured in Sharpe’s series. 
 The northern part of Northamptonshire 
 abounds in admirable examples of Early 
 Geometrical tracery. 
 
 “ The projecting points are called 
 cusps, the arcs between them are foils." 
 
 Paley’s Gothic Architecture, p. 161. 
 
 a Gothic Architecture, p. 161, where 
 see an illustration of the soffit-cusp. One 
 more to our present purpose is given in 
 the Northamptonshire Churches, p. 57, 
 and in the new edition of Rickman, p. 
 131 . 
 
14 
 
 OF GEOMETEICAL TRACERY. 
 
 “ The earliest cusps spring directly from the soffit, nearly 
 on a plane with the glass, independently of the mouldings 
 of the tracery, and do not rise imperceptibly, as it were, 
 from the sloping sides of the monials, [mullions], only a 
 little below its exterior face or edge. Thus they appear to 
 the eye rather as extraneous additions to, than as integral 
 parts of the monials.” As a secondary order of tracery, 
 the cusping of this kind naturally assumes this position’’, 
 and its peculiar origin as naturally makes the eye"" to be 
 open, and the point to be truncated'^, producing together 
 the definition above given. 
 
 In the other kind of foliation, the idea is not that of a 
 secondary order of tracery composed of circles, but that of 
 a foil figure inscribed within a circle, just as an arch is 
 foliated by inscribing a foil arch within it. Such figures 
 are of course composed of imperfect circles or vesicse no less 
 than the others, but their origin is not strongly marked in 
 the same way, and in foliating a circle they are composed 
 of intersecting curves. Consequently* the cusp is pointed, 
 not truncated ; nor need it be open, and though it may be 
 attached to the soffit, there is no objection to its being fused 
 into the mouldings of the figure. This kind of foliation is 
 used equally with the other in Geometrical tracery, and is 
 that exclusively used in later forms. 
 
 Having thus distinguished the nature of the foliations, 
 
 Not that it was at all peculiar to it : 
 soffit-cusps often and appropriately occur 
 in the heads of arches, the secondary foil 
 arch naturally assuming this position. 
 But the real difference is that in the 
 circle as described in the text there is a 
 strong reason w'hy this form should be 
 adhered to w’hich did not exist in the 
 other case. Consequently while the tra- 
 ceried circle exclusively retained the sof- 
 fit-cusp, in other positions it was used 
 indifferently with the other. The trun- 
 cated cusp is, I believe, peculiar to the 
 position which 1 have been describing ; 
 open cusps are common enough else- 
 
 where, but seem to be borrowed from the 
 former. 
 
 “ The small triangular space, whether 
 pierced or not, which intervenes between 
 a cusp and the curve that circumscribes 
 it.” Brandon’s Analysis, p. 26. note. 
 Professor Willis, p. 45, calls it a “ folia- 
 ting- space.” 
 
 “Another marked peculiarity in early 
 foils is that, in place of being segments 
 of intersecting curves, they are formed 
 from a series of distinct circles which all 
 cut a larger circle marked with them.” 
 lb. p. 21. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 15 
 
 we shall find very great variety in their application. The 
 most usual form has the lights plain and the circle foliated. 
 A trefoiled circle is not uncommon, as in the belfry- 
 windows at Gaddesby and Barrow, Leicestershire, the 
 north transept at Rushden, and the Chancel at Etton, 
 Northants, and above all in the Chancels of Shalflete and 
 Arreton% Isle of Wight, where the truncated open soffit- 
 cusp is used, and connected by a small stone ring, a con- 
 structive vestige of its origin. The trefoil has usually, 
 but not invariably, its apex pointing upwards. The qua- 
 trefoiled circle is however more common ; it may be either 
 placed vertically like a cross, which is far more usual, as at 
 Morton Pinkeney, Glapthorn^ and Warmington®, Northants, 
 and Charlton-on-Otnioor Oxon ; or diagonally in saltire, 
 as in the example from Northborongh given above; at Little 
 Addington', Northants, is a cinque foiled circle With the 
 lights trefoiled and a trefoil in the circle we may refer to 
 the last named church, with a vertical quatrefoil to Croft*, 
 Yorkshire, Ray don*", Suffolk, and the triforium of Lincoln 
 Presbytery” ; the same with a diagonal quatrefoil at Leeds, 
 Kent. The lights trefoiled and the circle cinquefoiled occur 
 at Yalding, Kent, and in the triforium” at Westminster. 
 
 We have already mentioned that this kind of tracery is 
 sometimes found with trefoil lights ; in the Lady Chapel 
 
 « Figured in Sharpe’s Decorated Win- 
 dows. In the Chancel of Blisworth 
 Church, Northants, is a window where 
 the mouldings of the lights and the circle 
 do not unite, so that it can hardly be 
 called actual tracery, in which the circle 
 has a clumsy attempt at a trefoil of this 
 kind, the upper circle being perfect, the 
 two lower with a truncated cusp. This 
 does not shew that tracery in a circle like 
 that at Oundle was an earlier invention 
 than the complete two-light window, 
 as this window is probably a mere bung- 
 ling copy of some more successful one 
 elsewhere ; in the language of Professor 
 Willis, an imitation, not a transition spe- 
 
 cimen. 
 
 ' Figured, Brandon, Introduction, p. 
 
 21 . 
 
 s Do. Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
 Do. Oxford Society’s Guide, p. 12. 
 Glossary, pi. 152. This and Glapthorn 
 are good examples of a very early' stage 
 of the pointed cusp. 
 
 ‘ Northamptonshire Churches, p. 104. 
 Rickman, 142. 
 
 '' Northamptonshire Churches, p. 104. 
 1 Figured, Sharpe. 
 
 See at large, Brandon, Sect. i. pi. 13. 
 " Glossary, pi. 140. 
 
 ” Figured, Rickman, p. 57. 
 
16 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 of Llandaff Cathedral they occur with an unfoliated circle ; 
 the east window of Staunton Church, Derbyshire, is a good 
 example of the diagonal quatrefoil. In Tintern Abbeys is 
 one of more fully developed tracery with the circles sex- 
 foiled. In the south aisle of Woodstock‘S Church are 
 some examples worthy of attentive study ; without, the 
 lights and the circle are quite distinct; within, they are 
 fused together by the mouldings. At Broad Blunsdon 
 (12) in Wilts is a singular example, probably earlier than 
 those just mentioned ; it is hard to say whether the lights 
 are to be called trefoil or trefoiled ; in the head is an un- 
 foliated circle connected with their mouldings, but with 
 the spandrils not pierced ; they are groiqied under a single 
 arch, but without a dripstone. But the most remarkable 
 circumstance about this window, though not strictly be- 
 longing to an inquiry into its tracery, is that in the rim of 
 the circle are three small holes, as if for the purpose of 
 affixing a shutter. 
 
 The three-light window with three circles in the head is 
 a very familiar form and exceedingly graceful. It marks a 
 slightly later stage of development than those which we 
 have been hitherto considering, for, as far as I am aware, 
 it only exists in the form of complete tracery. In its most 
 graceful form it presents three equal lights with two cmcles 
 resting on them, and a third, which is naturally a little 
 smaller, in the head. A slight excess of height or breadth 
 in favour of the central light may be allowed without pre- 
 judice to the general effect; but sometimes, by an idea 
 probably borrowed from the most usual form of the triple 
 lancet, this excess is very considerable, and completely de- 
 stroys the harmonious arrangement of the circles. It ad- 
 mits of all the varieties of foliation which have been al- 
 ready described. Thus windows without a single cusp 
 
 P Paley’s Gothic Architecture, p. 162. Oxford Society’s Guide, p. IL. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 17 
 
 either in the lights or in the head, occur at Cottesbrook, 
 Northants, at Bourneb Lincolnshire, and in the North 
 Transept of Hereford Cathedral under a straight-lined 
 arch. The lights are often plain, even when the circles are 
 foliated, but are more usually trefoiled, and occasionally 
 cinquefoiled. Of varieties in the circles we may men- 
 tion three quatrefoiled, at Oundle®; two quatrefoiled and 
 the upper trefoiled, Southwell, (vestibule to the Chapter 
 House,) St. Giles‘, Oxford, Stanion, Northants, Barkby, 
 Leicestershire — the two latter have diagonal quatrefoils, 
 and in the second and third the apex of the trefoil is re- 
 versed ; three cinquefoiled circles, Dorchester Abbey", east 
 end of north Choir Aisle ; two cinquefoiled and the upper 
 quatrefoiled, Romsey Abbey’', east of Choir, a rich and 
 beautiful example, with the central light rather higher and 
 cinquefoiled ; three circles sexfoiled, lights cinquefoiled, in 
 the Palace at Wells. I will here mention three very re- 
 markable and beautiful windows of this kind under straight- 
 lined arches, as in the example just quoted from Hereford. 
 The east window of Shalflete Church (13) Isle of Wight, 
 has three unfoliated lights, the circles are quatrefoiled, the 
 cusps meeting in a central piece of foliage ; that of Arreton 
 is similar, except that the circles are simply octofoiled. In 
 these two, though the actual opening is straight-sided, the 
 rear-arch and label are of the common form; but in the 
 third, at Wood Newton, Northants, they follow the same 
 triangular shape ; the lights here are trefoiled, the circles 
 sexfoiled. In Peterborough Cathedral (14) is a very sin- 
 gular example, in which the lights are plain, the cu’cles 
 quatrefoiled, each cusp itself assuming the form of a trefoil, 
 like double foliation with the primary cusp omitted. A 
 
 Sharpe’s Windows. rately drawn plain, being trefoiled, though 
 
 * Sharpe’s Windows. mutilated. 
 
 ‘ Bloxam, p. 123. x Petit’s Romsey Ahhey, in the Archse- 
 
 “ Addington’s Dorchester, p. 17. Glos- ological Proceedings for 1845, p. 1. 
 sary, pi. 153. The lights are inaccu- 
 
 D 
 
18 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 window from St. Stephen’s, Canterbury, which I know only 
 from a drawing of Rickman’s, has a trefoil head, and the 
 circles are trefoiled, the foils assuming the ogee shape. 
 
 Of tin •ee-light windows in wdiich the central light is de- 
 cidedly ])redominant, the examples are not so numerous. 
 We find however among them much the same varieties as 
 in the more usual and more graceful form. Thus at Acton 
 llurnelC, Salop, is one of this sort without a single cusp 
 either in the lights or the circles ; and the east window 
 of Cholsey Church \ Berks, has the circles plain, though 
 the lights are trefoiled. On the other hand they occur 
 in the Nave Aisles of Lichfield Cathedral with the lights 
 plain, the circles being trefoiled ; another such at Ded- 
 dington has two qua trefoiled circles, and one sexfoiled 
 above. In St. Mary’s, Stafford, is one wdiose central light 
 has a straight-lined arch ; the circles are trefoiled. When 
 the lights are foliated, there are often more cusps than 
 are otherwise usual in this style, especially in the central 
 light, on account of its greater proportions. Thus in an 
 exceedingly beautiful example (15) at Easton Neston, 
 Northants, the central light is cinquefoiled, the other 
 two being trefoiled ; while in others at Bloxham and 
 Deddington they are cinquefoiled, while the central one 
 is promoted to a septfoil. In all these three the lateral 
 circles have a diagonal quatrefoil, and in the two last 
 that in the head is cinquefoiled. 
 
 Nor are examples wanting in which the lights have 
 trefoil heads. In the Chapel at Temple Balsall, War- 
 wickshire, a building affording an almost endless study 
 of Geometrical tracery, is one of this kind with sexfoiled 
 circles. The central light here rises but very little above 
 the other two; but in one at MeophanC, Kent, it greatly 
 
 y Figured, Rickman, p. 135. “ Do. Rickman, p. 144, and at large, 
 
 ^ Do. Petit, Architectural Character. Brandon’s Analysis, Sect. i. pi. 11. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 19 
 
 exceeds them both in height and breadth. The two lower 
 circles are trefoiled, the upper cincpiefoiled, with excellent 
 examples of the open truncated soffit-ciisp. The east win- 
 dow of St. George’s near Cardiff has a very plain unfoliated 
 central light, the other two being trefoil, the circles are 
 quatrefoiled. 
 
 The four-light windows of this style, fully equal in 
 grace to those of three lights, are of far more value as 
 illustrating the development of the style, and as exhibiting 
 the complete ascendancy which was at a very early period 
 obtained by the principles of composition and subordi- 
 nation. As the two-light window was formed by the 
 gradual approximation of two single lancets and the circle 
 pierced above them, so the complete four-light window 
 consists of a pair of two-light windows placed side by side 
 with a circle in the head of the composition thus produced. 
 Such is doubtless the historical view of the matter ; as an 
 architectural composition we must consider the four-light 
 window as a skeleton of two fenesteUcB^ with a circle in the 
 head (such being the figure described by the primary lines) 
 each fenestella being filled up with a smaller repetition of 
 the whole design. In either case the principle of design 
 is identical in the whole and in the parts. 
 
 It is clear that there were two parallel and inde[)endent 
 developments going on in the case of two- and of four-light 
 windows ; the latter commencing rather later than the 
 other ; at least I am not aware of any four-light com- 
 positions, however little advanced, which do not imply the 
 two-light as their groundwork. But the grouping of four 
 lights certainly began before tracery was fully developed. 
 “ In the transepts of Salisbury Cathedral,” says Mr. Petit®, 
 “ is a composition of four lancet windows, two quatrefoils 
 in sunk circles, and a larger figure with eight cusps also in 
 
 ^ I lie use of this term is borrowed siology. 
 from tl.e Handbook of Ihiiglisii Eccle- ^ Architectural Character, p. 10. 
 
20 
 
 Of GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 a sunk circle All these are mere perforations 
 
 in the wall ; an arch comprizes each of the two 
 
 couplets of lancets, with the circle between them, and 
 another arch'’, springing from the highest points of the 
 former ones contains the larger circle ; there are no 
 subordinate lights formed by the piercing of the spandrils.” 
 In all this we have the very first germ of tracery ; every- 
 thing is quite distinct, the lights are separate lancets, the 
 wall between them has not yet sunk into a mullion, the 
 parts are united only by composition. Still it is clear 
 that the development of the two-light Avindow must have 
 reached a certain stage before such a design would have 
 occurred to the artist ; we here have the two-light composi- 
 tion taken as the groundwork, and those in a much more 
 perfect state as a tAvo-light composition than the Avhole is as 
 one of four lights. The fenestellae, if we may anticipate so 
 far as to call them so, have unity given them by their 
 comprizing arches, while no such® arch gives unity to the 
 Avhole design. The next stage produces such a design as 
 the east \Aundow of Aldwinkle All Saints, Northants^; we 
 have here the same component parts as at Salisbury, but a 
 grand arch comprizes the whole, the divisions between the 
 lancets in the fenestellae may almost be called mullions, 
 and the small spandril between the large circle and the 
 two sub-arches is sunk, though not pierced ; elseAvhere the 
 circles strictly preserve the character of mere perforations 
 in the solid masonry. Next we have the west Avindow of 
 the north aisle at Oundle, Avhere the fenestellae have perfect 
 tracery, Avhile the large spandrils in the head are still 
 merely sunk. 
 
 Of perfect AvindoAvs of this kind one of the most striking 
 
 See above, p. 7, note 1. the view taken by the eye, and can hardly 
 
 ® Most certainly not as regards effect; have been that of the architect. ^ 
 it would however be possible to regard ^ Figured, Brandon’s Analysis, Intro- 
 the whole composition as comprized by duction, p. 22. 
 a trefoil arch subarcnated, but this is not 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 21 
 
 occurs at Acton Burnell^ Salop, where the lights have 
 trefoil heads, and the circles are unfoliated. The superb 
 windows in the Chapter-House at Sarum'’ have the lights 
 plain, the small circles quatrefoiled, the large one octofoiled ; 
 and the same is the design of the east window* at Netley 
 Abbey, an example whose picturesque beauty is generally 
 appreciated in its ruined state, and which is equally 
 valuable for the historian of tracery. The date given by Mr. 
 Sharpe"*, is so early as 1240, a date which would not be 
 astonishing abroad, bnt which certainly is startling for an 
 English window, exhibiting tracery in such a highly 
 developed state, the more so as the rest of the Choir is 
 pure Lancet, while the remainder of the Church exhibits 
 only the merest germs of tracery. The East Avindow of 
 Rudston" in Yorkshire has the same outline with trefoiled 
 lights and a sexfoiled circle, so has one in the North 
 Transept *** at Howden ; though the design of these two 
 is identical, the effect is totally different from the opposite 
 character of their monldings and cnsps. At St. John’s", 
 Winchester, is one with a septfoiled circle and cinquefoiled 
 lights ; the tracery is even more “ thick and wall-like” 
 than at Netley. 
 
 From these examples of two, three, and four lights we 
 may easily deduce the principles of this very beautiful style. 
 
 s Figured, Rickman, 126. 
 
 '' Uo. Petit’s Architectural Charac- 
 ter. 
 
 * Do. Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
 '' “ Tliis window is considered by Mr. 
 Sharpe to be a genuine First- Pointed 
 one. Its composition is certainly Geo- 
 metric Middle-Pointed; but it may be 
 observed that the tracery is remarkably 
 thick and wall-like, and that the monials 
 are constructed in ordinary courses of 
 jointed stone.” Paley’s Gothic Architec- 
 ture, p. 166. Were it not for the tran- 
 sitional character of the western parts, 
 there would he no greater difliculty than 
 that (in a pliilosophical view none at all) 
 
 which accompanies every case of the si- 
 multaneous use of the two styles. As it 
 is, we must either suppose the Nave to 
 be the work of another and less skilful 
 architect, who was unable to grasp with 
 equal boldness the principles of two se- 
 parate styles ; or that this particular 
 window was imitated from some other, 
 probably foreign. Church, without refer- 
 ence to the remainder of the building. 
 
 ‘ Figured iir Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
 Do. 
 
 " Do. Proceedings of the Archicolo- 
 gical Institute for 1845. Notes on the 
 City of Winchester, p. 15. 
 
22 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 as exhibited in its purest form where the circle alone is 
 allowed in the composition of its tracery. And 1 may 
 first remark the very high degree of perfection which the 
 art of designing tracery attained at its first commence- 
 ment. There can, 1 should suppose, be little doubt that 
 this purest and simplest form of Geometrical tracery is 
 infinitely more satisfactory in every point of view either 
 than the contem})orary forms which we shall soon have 
 to describe, or than the later and more elaborate type of 
 the Geometrical window which was produced by its fusion 
 with them. Like the Homeric legend, it derives its 
 beauty from the combination of perfect and artless sim- 
 plicity with the utmost purity and vigour. Its constituent 
 element is the simplest and most perfect of figures ; the 
 circle, in one shape or other, is the one source of all its 
 varieties. It is the very perfection of its own idea, that 
 of the combination into one whole of parts which still 
 retain a most strongly marked separate existence. In no 
 form of tracery do the parts stand out more distinctly ; yet 
 in none is there less that breaks upon the harmony of the 
 whole design. In truth this earliest style of all is a far 
 nearer approach to continuity than that which immediately 
 succeeded it; the windows are far more perfect wholes; 
 and though there are no vertical lines, there is a pyramidal 
 and soaring outline in the general composition of the whole 
 tracery, Avhich is quite lost in the elaborate and ambitious 
 confusion of the later Geometrical. And indeed we shall 
 see that it was actually from this form that the Continuous 
 tracery simply and naturally arose, while the gorgeous pat- 
 terns of the later Geometrical were only unnatural clogs 
 upon its development. 
 
 We have seen that the original and typical form of this 
 style is the window of two lights. From this those of three 
 and four are developments of difterent kinds. The latter 
 
t 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 23 
 
 is a simple repetition of the same form on a different scale, 
 and, as we have seen, is an invention of very little later 
 date than the two-light itself. That of three lights is no 
 such mere repetition ; it is a sort of inference by analogy 
 from the principle of the two-light window ; it conse- 
 quently marks a somewhat later stage of art, and, as far as 
 I am aware, its genuine form does not occur in the same ru- 
 dimental state in which we have seen the window of two and 
 of four lights, but always in that of complete tracery. We 
 may consider it as formed of a pair of two-light windows 
 with the central light in common, and their arches re- 
 moved ; a process which in this particular case could hardly 
 have taken place in reality, though we shall find, as we go 
 on, that similar ones produced many forms of tracery of all 
 dates. 
 
 One natural rule to be inferred from this is that every 
 circle must have two arches (or circles) for its support, and 
 no more ; this follows at once from the origin of the style ; 
 and is absolutely necessary for the preservation of the 
 proper pyramidal outline. Moreover a circle resting on a 
 pointed arch gives no idea of adequate support ; we expect 
 it to be pierced. And if a circle rests on more than two 
 arches, it receives an undue prominence. This rule is more 
 strictly observed in England than abroad. Thus in a three- 
 light window (16) at St. Germain, Pont Audemer, we 
 have only one circle in the head, and the effect produced is 
 rather that of a Subarcuated than of a pure Geometrical 
 window. Comjiositions also occur of a figure resting on a 
 single arch, either as single-light windows or as parts of a 
 larger design. Thus at Graville (17) we have three circles 
 in the head of a two-light window. But even in England 
 we find this most necessary rule occasionally violated ; 
 thus at Temple Balsall (18) is a four-light window with 
 fenestellse on the ordinary plan, and which should have 
 
21 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 had one large circle in the head. Instead of this there 
 are two, to which the proper lines of the tracery afford no 
 sufficient sesthetical, perhaps no sufficient constructive, 
 support ; and a vertical line accordingly divides the win- 
 dow in two in the most awkward manner imaginable. 
 The window is otherwise a rich and fine one ; the circles 
 being filled with smaller ones trefoiled. We shall also 
 find a few examples of this rule being violated in cases 
 where pure Geometrical tracery is intermingled with other 
 forms ; but generally, it is as stringently observed, as 
 is required by its absolute necessity to the obtaining any 
 adequate sesthetical support". 
 
 Another rule of early Geometrical tracery is that in 
 no other is thep equilateral law of Gothic Architecture 
 so prevalent. No window of this kind is really satisfac- 
 tory, unless the arches both of the window itself, and of the 
 lights are of that form ; and it is more stringently neces- 
 sary than in any other style that the commencement of the 
 tracery should exactly coincide with the spring of the arch. 
 If either of these rules is violated, the due proportion of 
 the figures is at once lost. These also are far more strictly 
 observed in English than in foreign tracery. 
 
 I have made these remarks on the style in general at 
 this particular point, because the three- and the four-light 
 window contain its essence, and from them all its principles 
 may be deduced. The examples which we have thus far 
 considered, exhibit every development and variety Avhich 
 the style in its purity can assume ; they supply the typical 
 forms, of AAdiich others are either repetitions or cornqjtions 
 — irapeK^aaei^. 
 
 “ A numerous class of exceptions may the definition of Early Geometrical, 
 
 be alleged in the three-light windows their general effect betrays a really closer 
 with a predominant central light; but affinity with another form, 
 the origin of these will be discussed at a P See this drawn out at length in the 
 future stage, for, though coming under Introduction to Brandon’s Analysis. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 25 
 
 Thus a window of five lights cannot be constructed in 
 this style without at once violating one of its first princi- 
 ples. It might indeed be formed on the principle of the 
 three-light window, but such a monotonous expanse of 
 circles piled up on each other would be hardly endurable. 
 And when it is attempted by subordination, the compo- 
 sition cannot be formed by a repetition of either the two- 
 or the three-light window. The gable window at the 
 east end of Lincoln Cathedral is of this kind ; fenestellse of 
 two lights, with one complementary, supporting the circle. 
 The result is that the circle'* is far too large for the general 
 design, and the complementary light necessarily appears to 
 run into it. There is no appearance of adeipiate support 
 whatever. This circle is foliated with trefoil cusps of so 
 bold a character that they rather resemble the radii of 
 a wheel-window. 
 
 Windows of six lights on the other hand may be easily 
 designed in this style, as the primary lines may describe’' 
 the ordinary two-light pattern, the fenestellse being filled 
 up with the tracery of a window of three lights. The east 
 window of St. Germain at Pont Audemer is a good ex- 
 ample, though perhaps the circle in the head might have 
 been more advantageously filled with smaller ones, as it is 
 rather too large for mere foliation. There are also two 
 notable examples in English parish churches, namely in 
 the west front of Grantham®, and at the east end of 
 Raunds*. Both present the same general design ; but 
 the arch at Grantham, being much more acute", allows the 
 
 *1 The outline of this window is identi- each light filled with one of two lights, 
 cal with that of many of the best examples and the circles, if necessary, with smaller 
 of the later Geometrical, in which this ones, but I am not prepared with an ex- 
 fault is, to say the least, not so striking; ample. 
 
 but in those more elaborate designs the * Figured in Sharpe’s Windows, 
 centre-piece is not of the same conse- ^ Do. do.; also Northamptonshire 
 quence as here. The objection to the Churches, p. 57, and Rickman, p. 135. 
 complementary light seems insuperable. “ The arch at Raunds is sliglitly ob- 
 
 '■ One might also conceive the primary tuse, at Grantham slightly acute; the 
 lines describing a three-light pattern, equilateral arch would have produced a 
 
 E 
 
26 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 centre-piece to assume far greater size and dignity ; it 
 is the crowning point of the window, and is nobly tilled by 
 six smaller circles clustering around a central one. At 
 Raunds the arch of the window is far too obtuse in pro- 
 portion to those of the fenestellse’' ; so that the circle is 
 pressed between them in an awkward manner, and is 
 thereby made of a size too small to admit of the same 
 filling up as at Grantham, and yet so large as to be meagre 
 without it. At jiresent the Grantham window^ has no 
 original foliations in any part ; at Raunds the tracery is 
 plain, but the lights have an open trefoil, which imparts 
 no richness to them, while it gives a meagre appearance 
 to the tracery. This, together with the meagre centre- 
 piece, renders the Raunds window, at present at least, poor 
 and unsatisfactory, while that at Grantham, with all its 
 simplicity, is magnificent in the extreme. A third (19) 
 occurs in the north transept of Hereford Cathedral, in 
 which the fenestellae are under actual subarcuations ; yet 
 there is the open soffit, cusp almost throughout, the greater 
 part of the tracery is cut out of the solid, and the general 
 etfect is by no means that of a subarcuated window. 
 
 I am not aware of the existence of any windows of seven 
 lights which can be considered as pure examples of this 
 style. If there be any, they must be liable to the objec- 
 tions which I have brought against those of five lights. If 
 formed by mere piling of circles they would be still more 
 
 inore satisfactory design than either, for, 
 hypercritical as the remark may seem, 
 I cannot but look upon the Grantham 
 centre-piece as a little too large. 
 
 ^ They differ but little from subarcu- 
 ations. 
 
 y The Grantham window, Mr. Sharpe 
 informs us, has cusps in its tracery, hut 
 cast iron ones of recent insertion, which 
 he has consequently omitted in his en- 
 graving. At Raunds there are now 
 none at all ; hut I have been informed 
 by Mr. G. G. Scott that the tracery 
 
 must have been originally foliated, as 
 he has himself observed the grooves in 
 which the soffit-cusps (which were usu- 
 ally formed out of a distinct piece of 
 stone) were inserted. He is also of 
 opinion that the like was the case at 
 Grantham, observing that the insertion 
 of the modern cusps (the material of 
 which cannot be too much regretted) 
 seems to shew that the restorers found the 
 grooves from which the original cusps 
 had been previously cut. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 27 
 
 monotonous ; if combination be attempted, they might 
 perhaps be a little more satisfactory, as if there were only 
 a single complementary light, it would be almost hidden 
 by the greater importance of the fenestellae. 
 
 When we come again to an even number in the window 
 of eight lights, we have a field once more opened to us for 
 composition and subordination of the grandest kind. We 
 have here the noblest of all Geometrical designs, the east 
 window of Lincoln Cathedral. The front in which it is 
 placed is the glory of the Early Gothic of England, and, 
 with its earlier, but not less sublime, compeer of Ely, 
 might go far to reconcile us to that capital fault of our 
 great Churches, the want of the apsidal termination. The 
 window itself shows how completely subordination is the 
 soul of the style ; the whole is, like the others we have 
 described, only a repetition of its component parts ; its vast 
 size of course allowing subordination to be carried to a 
 greater extent than in any other. This eight-light window 
 consists of two of four lights, each of which again may be 
 resolved into two of two lights ; perfect and beautiful win- 
 dows, both of two and of four lights, might be extracted 
 from it. The centre-piece, the grand crown which they 
 unite to support, resembles that at Grantham with the circles 
 foliated. This whole window is the very model of majestic 
 simplicity ; it may be doubted whether the most gorgeous 
 days of Flowing or Flamboyant tracery ever produced a 
 composition more perfectly satisfactory and harmonious. 
 
 We have thus traced the Early Geometrical tracery 
 through all the forms which it assumes when constructed 
 solely of circles. We have now to consider it as modified 
 by the introduction of other simple — though of course less 
 simple — Geometrical figures, such as the Vesica, the 
 Spherical d'riangle, and the Spherical Square. None of 
 these are so usual or so tyjiical as the Circle ; the latter is 
 
28 
 
 OF OEOMKTKICAIi TllACERY. 
 
 undoubtedly the true and essential mark of the style, and 
 the others must be considered as developments or modifi- 
 cations formed according to its analogies. 
 
 The form in which the Vesica is substituted for the 
 Circle is one of extreme rarity ; but it is a true and 
 distinct variety of the Early Geometrical style, and its 
 importance is not to be measured by the very small 
 number of instances which can be produced of it. It 
 is manifestly an original and independent form, contem- 
 porary with the circle : for we have seen it employed* in 
 the earliest and most rudiniental stage of the development, 
 while the two lights and the vesica in the head remained 
 completely independent. And on the other hand we shall 
 find that no figure, hardly the circle itself, exercised a more 
 powerful influence upon succeeding forms of tracery. But 
 of the form itself in its pure state I am prepared with only 
 two examples : two-light windows of this kind occur in the 
 neighbouring Churches of Asfordby and Melton VIowbray® 
 (19 a) in Leicestershire, which are constructed quite upon the 
 principle of the two-light Avindow with the circle. The for- 
 mer is quite plain ; in the latter the vesica is foliated in the 
 manner evidently most appropriate to it, a long quatrefoil, 
 with the vertical foils pointed and the horizontal ones round. 
 I am not prej)ared with any certain example on a larger 
 scale ; indeed the nature of the figure is such that it Avould 
 seem almost impossible for its pure form to enter to any 
 , considerable extent into the composition of tracery. 
 
 The Spherical Triangle is a figure of far more frequent 
 occurrence, but of less importance in a general view of 
 tracery, as it does not seem to have been an original form, 
 
 * As at Glaptliovn (see above, p. 7, example. As one of ouv two instances 
 note f) and in the Spire- Lights at Gad- in the rudimental form is from the same 
 desby, vicinity, we can hardly fail to regard this 
 
 I must apologize for an accidental as a local peculiarity, 
 irregularity in tlie numbering of this 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 29 
 
 and the traces of its influence on later varieties are but of 
 very trifling extent. It decidedly marks a later stage of 
 development than the circle; the figure itself is less simple ; 
 it is not a natural and original one, but one evolved by a 
 rather complicated geometrical process, and which may, 
 more reasonably perhaps than some others, be supposed to 
 have a symbolical meaning. And in point of fact, though 
 a true variety of simple Geometrical tracery, without the 
 introduction of any^ foreign notion, it is in every sense 
 a later form than the pure circle. It arose later and was 
 retained later. It seldom or never, as far as I am aware, 
 occurs as an independent rudimental figure’^, but almost 
 always in the form of complete tracery ; it is also ac- 
 companied by later details ; all the examples I have 
 seen would in the common classification be ranked as 
 “ Decorated” or “ Middle-Pointed and many belong to 
 an advanced epoch of that style ; the mouldings and 
 foliations characteristic of the earliest complete form of the 
 Circle, have yielded to others of more advanced character 
 in the analogous stage of the Spherical Triangle. 
 
 The two-light window of this kind is by no means 
 unusual, and generally conforms to the same rules as that 
 with the circle in the head. The triangle rises well from the 
 lights below, its lower angles resting upon their apices. The 
 few varieties it presents are chiefly in the foliations. It is 
 clear that as the circle is the main element in its own 
 foliation, the vesica occupies an analogous ])lace in the 
 treatment of the spherical triangle ; it is naturally filled 
 with the pointed trefoil which is composed of three vesicae 
 a pointed foil fitting into each angle of the triangle. 
 
 I mean of course in connexion with See the Geometrical exhibition of 
 
 lancets, so as to form incipient tracery ; one of the ways of constructing this 
 distinct windows of this shape are not figure in Rrandon’s Analysis, Early 
 imcommon. Englisli, § 1. pi. 8. 
 
26 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 centre-piece to assume far greater size and dignity ; it 
 is the crowning point of the window, and is nobly filled by 
 six smaller circles clustering around a central one. At 
 Raunds the arch of the window is far too obtuse in pro- 
 portion to those of the fenestellse’" ; so that the circle is 
 pressed between them in an awkward manner, and is 
 thereby made of a size too smalt to admit of the same 
 filling up as at Grantham, and yet so large as to be meagre 
 without it. At present the Grantham window’' has no 
 original foliations in any part ; at Raunds the tracery is 
 plain, but the lights have an open trefoil, which imparts 
 no richness to them, while it gives a meagre appearance 
 to the tracery. This, together with the meagre centre- 
 piece, renders the Raunds window, at present at least, poor 
 and unsatisfactory, while that at Grantham, with all its 
 simplicity, is magnificent in the extreme. A third (19) 
 occurs in the north transept of Hereford Cathedral, in 
 which the fenestellse are under actual subarcuations ; yet 
 there is the open soffit, cusp almost throughout, the greater 
 part of the tracery is cut out of the solid, and the general 
 effect is by no means that of a subarcuated window. 
 
 I am not aware of the existence of any windows of seven 
 lights which can be considered as pure examples of this 
 style. If there be any, they must be liable to the objec- 
 tions which I have brought against those of five lights. If 
 formed by mere piling of circles they would be still more 
 
 more satisfactory design than either, for, must have been originally foliated, as 
 hypercritical as the remark may seem, he has himself observed the grooves in 
 I cannot but look upon the Grantham which the soffit-cusps (which were usu- 
 centre-piece as a little too large. ally formed out of a distinct piece of 
 
 * They differ but little from subarcu- stone) w'ere inserted. He is also of 
 ations. opinion that the like was the case at 
 
 y The Grantham window, Mr. Sharpe Grantham, observing that the insertion 
 informs us, has cusps in its tracery, but of the modern cusps (the material of 
 cast iron ones of recent insertion, which which cannot be too much regretted) 
 he has consequently omitted in his en- seems to shew that the restorers found the 
 graving. At Raunds there are now grooves from which the original cusps 
 none at all ; but I have been informed had been previously cut. 
 by Mr. G. G. Scott that the tracery 
 
OP EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 27 
 
 monotonous ; if combination be attempted, they might 
 perhaps be a little more satisfactory, as if there were only 
 a single complementary light, it would be almost hidden 
 by the greater importance of the fenestellas. 
 
 When we come again to an even number in the window 
 of eight lights, we have a field once more opened to ns for 
 composition and subordination of the grandest kind. We 
 have here the noblest of all Geometrical designs, the east 
 window of Lincoln Cathedral. The front in which it is 
 placed is the glory of the Early Gothic of England, and, 
 with its earlier, but not less sublime, compeer of Ely, 
 might go far to reconcile us to that capital fault of our 
 great Churches, the want of the apsidal termination. The 
 window itself shows how completely subordination is the 
 soul of the style ; the whole is, like the others we have 
 described, only a repetition of its component parts ; its vast 
 size of course allowino- subordination to be carried to a 
 
 o 
 
 greater extent than in any other. This eight-light window 
 consists of two of four lights, each of which again may be 
 resolved into two of two lights ; perfect and beautiful win- 
 dows, both of two and of four lights, might be extracted 
 from it. The centre-piece, the grand crown which they 
 unite to support, resembles that at Grantham with the circles 
 foliated. This whole window is the very model of majestic 
 simplicity ; it may be doubted whether the most gorgeous 
 days of Flowing or Flamboyant tracery ever produced a 
 composition more perfectly satisfactory and harmonious. 
 
 We have thus traced the Early Geometrical tracery 
 through all the forms which it assumes when constructed 
 solely of circles. We have now to consider it as modified 
 by the introduction of other simple — though of course less 
 simple — Geometrical figures, such as the Vesica, the 
 Spherical Triangle, and the Spherical Square. None of 
 these are so usual or so typical as the Circle ; the latter is 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 29 
 
 and the traces of its influence on later varieties are but of 
 very trifling extent. It decidedly marks a later stage of 
 development than the circle; the figure itself is less simple ; 
 it is not a natural and original one, but one evolved by a 
 rather complicated geometrical process, and which may, 
 more reasonably perhaps than some others, be supposed to 
 have a symbolical meaning. And in point of fact, though 
 a true variety of simple Geometrical tracery, without the 
 introduction of any^ foreign notion, it is in every sense 
 a later form than the pure circle. It arose later and was 
 retained later. It seldom or never, as far as I am aware, 
 occurs as an independent rudimental figure but almost 
 always in the form of complete tracery ; it is also ac- 
 companied by later details ; all the examples I have 
 seen would in the common classification be ranked as 
 “ Decorated” or “ Middle-Pointed and many belong to 
 an advanced epoch of that style ; the mouldings and 
 foliations characteristic of the earliest complete form of the 
 Circle, have yielded to others of more advanced character 
 in the analogous stage of the Spherical Triangle. 
 
 The two-light window of this kind is by no means 
 unusual, and generally conforms to the same rules as that 
 with the circle in the head. The triangle rises well from the 
 lights below, its lower angles resting upon their apices. The 
 few varieties it presents are chiefly in the foliations. It is 
 clear that as the circle is the main element in its own 
 foliation, the vesica occupies an analogous place in the 
 treatment of the spherical triangle ; it is naturally filled 
 with the pointed trefoil which is composed of three vesic0e ®, 
 a pointed foil fitting into each angle of the triangle. 
 
 ^ I mean of course in connexion with * See the Geometrical exhihition of 
 lancets, so as to form incipient tracery ; one of the ways of constructing this 
 distinct windows of this shape are not figure in Brandon’s Analysis, Early 
 uncommon. English, § 1. pi. 8. 
 
30 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 A round foil between each pointed one makes the figure 
 cinqnefoiled, and detracts from the importance of the 
 foliations, though it adds much richness to the effect. The 
 lights may be either trefoiled or cinqnefoiled. Examples 
 with both the lights and the triangle trefoiled occm’ at 
 Denford, Northants (belfry windows), Dorchester Abbey*^ 
 (north aisle), Gaddesby, Leicester (clerestory), (20) Hamp- 
 ton-in-Arden, Warwick, Ratcliffe, Leicester (chancel), Ged- 
 dington, Northants (chancel) ; lights cinqnefoiled and tri- 
 angle trefoiled, Asfordby, Leicester, (transept aisle) ; lights 
 and triangle both cinqnefoiled. Long Compton, Warwick 
 (chancel), Islip, Oxon (south aisle), Eiisham®, Oxon. At 
 Badgeworth^ is an example gorgeously decorated with ball 
 flower. All or nearly all these exhibit complete tracery, 
 though the very small spanch-il intervening between the 
 lights and the triangle is often merely sunk. ILow long this 
 simple form continued is shown by the example at Gedding- 
 ton, which is manifestly contemporary Avith the splendid 
 cast window, of the transition from Geometrical to Flowing 
 tracery, and possibly of a date so late as 1350®. 
 
 An anomalous example occiu’s in the south aisle at 
 Cuddesden in which the triangle, Avhich is not, as usual, 
 equilateral, has two of its sides formed by the arch of the 
 windoAv ; an awkward arrangement of which Ave shall find 
 some foreign examples ; consequently it does not rise from 
 the lights. The triangle is octofoiled, having three round 
 foils betAveen the two lower angles ; the lights are cinque- 
 foiled, and none of the spandrils pierced. 
 
 Three-lioht Avindows of this kind also occur formed 
 
 O 
 
 much upon the same principle as those Avith circles, three 
 spherical triangles occupying the head. There is however 
 
 Figured in Addington’s Dorchester, ^ Do. Brandon’s Analysis, pi. 38. 
 p. 21. s See Neale’s Hierologus, p. 82. 
 
 ® Do. Oxford Society's Guide, p. 140. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 31 
 
 this difficulty, that if the two lower triangles spring from 
 the lights in the same way as the triangle in a two-light 
 window, an awkward spandril is left ; while if the angles 
 of the triangles are thrust beyond the apices of the lights 
 so as to touch the arch, the decorative support is not satis- 
 factory. This is well avoided in a window in the Palace 
 at Wells (21), where the excess is as it were divided 
 between the triangle and the spandril (the former being 
 thrust a very little beyond the lights) so as to be scarcely 
 apparent. A bolder but less successful expedient has been 
 adopted in an example at Quarrington, where a curve is 
 drawn from the impost to the apex of the lower triangle, 
 making a sort of trefoil arch with the lower one. 
 
 All these have the ordinary arrangement of the three 
 triangles, which will be also found in the examples in 
 Rothwell Chiu’ch, Northants. In the south transept at 
 Morton (22) is an instance where the arrangement is 
 strangely distorted; the central light being higher, and its 
 sides continued concentric with the arch of the window; 
 these form one side of each of the two lower triangles, 
 which are thus thrust to one side in a curious manner, 
 while the third retains its usual position altogether uncon- 
 nected with them. At Great Hale'^, Lincolnshire, is a 
 window where, the arch being obtuse, the upper triangle 
 is omitted, and the space in the head quatrefoiled. The 
 east window of the north aisle (23) of All Saints’ Church, 
 Hereford, is a good example of a four-light composition 
 designed wholly on this principle, in a manner exactly 
 similar to the more familiar form with circle, though the 
 foliation of the spandrils is a deviation from the purity of 
 the Geometrical type, and bespeaks the chronologically 
 later date of this variety. The primary pattern, marked 
 in the mouldings, is that of a two-light window, which is 
 
 ’’ Figured in Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
32 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAI, TRACERY. 
 
 again repeated within the arehes, the triangular centre- 
 piece containing three smaller triangles. 
 
 The Spherical Square is the remaining figure of this class, 
 ami, in a pure state at least, the rarest of all. I am only pre- 
 pared with a single example', one of two lights (24) from 
 Middleton Cheney, Northants, in which no other principle 
 of formation is introduced ; this is, at present at all events, 
 unfoliated, and is consequently poor and meagre in the ex- 
 treme. In combination with other forms we shall find it 
 to be one of the most important elements in the elaborate 
 and magnificent windows of Germany, but the good taste 
 of our English artists almost universally rejected it. As 
 the two upper sides of the figure are formed by a portion 
 of the lines of the arcli, the figure fits much more easily 
 into the design ; but it has not the intrinsic beauty of the 
 circle, and this very circumstance tends to deprive it of 
 that distinctness and independence of parts which is so 
 important in tracery of this kind ; just as a spherical 
 triangle is far more pleasing when it stands quite free of 
 the arch. 
 
 But these elementary figures are also, as might naturally 
 have been expected, found intermingled with each other in 
 various combinations, with which however it will not be 
 necessary to occupy our attention so long as with the 
 figures out of which they are composed. Thus a three- 
 light window in Merton College Chapel, of the three 
 figures in the head, the two lower are spherical triangles 
 and the upper a circle. In the aisles of Guisborough 
 Abbey’^ windows of the same formation have tlie two 
 
 * I would not build too much on this its combinations with others in Germany 
 
 illustration, taken from a rough sketch at least if not in England. Some Ger- 
 
 made many years back, and which I have man two- and four-light examples of 
 
 had no opportunity of verifying. But this kind have been communicated to 
 
 at all events, even were it simply an me by Mr. Scott, 
 
 imaginary sketch, it would exhibit a Figured in Sharpe’s Parallels, 
 
 possible and typical form, important in 
 
PI 
 
 
 Cfi. 
 
OF EARLY GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 33 
 
 lower figures spherical squares, but so obtuse as to differ 
 but little from circles, aud the upper a spherical triangle. 
 So also in windows involving subordination, the very 
 fine four-light examples in the vestibule to York Chapter- 
 House', have spherical triangles in the heads of the fenes- 
 tellce, and a circle in that of the whole. A more compli- 
 cated example at Temple Balsall (25) has a spherical tri- 
 angle in the head containing three circles, a small circle 
 occupying the spandril between it and the fenestellse. A 
 five-light window in Exeter Cathedral™ has the reverse 
 arrangement, namely a circle containing three spherical tri- 
 angles. The spaces between them are foliated, an idea 
 plainly inconsistent with the distinctness and severity of 
 pure Geometrical work, and which, though often found in 
 windows of not very advanced date, is a clear sign of 
 development towards later ideas. In this window the 
 upper lines of the triangles in the heads of the fenestellse 
 coincide with their arches. One of the two very singular 
 Decorated windows in the transept at Winchester, that 
 namely in its north wing", is of five lights, with circles in 
 the fenestellse, but instead of a centre-piece has three 
 spherical triangles awkwardly arranged around a vesica. 
 The annexed superb window (26) from Altenberg Abbey 
 is a fine example of the German peculiarities, in the use of 
 the spherical square, the commencement of the tracery be- 
 low the spring of the arch, and the violation of English 
 laws of support, the nature and importance of all which 
 may be made clearer by the contrast. 
 
 § 4. Of Foil Tracery. 
 
 The definition of this form has been already given at the 
 point where the distinction was established between it and 
 
 ' Figured in Rickman, p. 153. ” Figured in Willis’ Architectural 
 
 Do. Britton’s Exeter, pi. 12. History, p. 25. 
 
 F 
 
34 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 the more purely Geometrical. In this we no longer find 
 the circle in its complete form as an element of the com- 
 position, but only so far as it may be considered as existing 
 in its derivative foils. Instead of trefoiled or quatrefoiled 
 figures we now find the tracery composed of distinct tre- 
 foils and qnatrefoils, and the effect is always most pure 
 when the heads of the lights are also of the trefoil form. 
 All this is quite in harmony with the spirit of Geometrical 
 tracery, in which, as we see, the foliation, even when com- 
 bined with other figures, often retains a character of so 
 great distinctness. Perhaps indeed no variety sets this 
 character of distinctness and independence so forcibly 
 liefore our eyes as this, in which we find a marked separate 
 existence bestowed iqion figures which we are elsewhere 
 accustomed to contemplate only as ornamental appendages 
 to others. It may be that this produces the idea of an ex- 
 cessive or unnatural development of the principle of dis- 
 tinctness ; certain it is that the effect of this kind of tracery 
 is by no means so truly satisfactory as that of the pm’e 
 Geometrical ; in a state at once fully developed and un- 
 mixed, it is far less frequent than that style ; its most im- 
 portant applications being in connexion with other forms. 
 
 In this case we may safely begin with the single-light 
 window, as the regular adaptation of the number of arches 
 and figures to each other which is so remarkable in the 
 English examples of the pure Geometrical, is far from being 
 so strictly observed in the present variety. A majority of 
 the examples Avould probably be found to conform to it, 
 but a minority is left far too numerous to be considered as 
 mere exceptions. And looking into the question itself, we 
 shall find no such valid reason for its observance as 
 certainly exists with regard to the other form. While a 
 circle or spherical triangle resting on a single arch is a 
 manifest violation of the first principles of decorative con- 
 
OF FOIL TRACERY. 
 
 35 
 
 stmctioii, the case is quite the reverse vvitli the most usual 
 form whicli the single figure on the single arch assumes, 
 the trefoil arch supporting a trefoil, in which the apex of 
 the former fits excellently into the base of the latter. We 
 find the germ of this form in the splendid eastern triplet® 
 of Wimborne Minster, where a foil figure is pierced in the 
 head of each lancet under the same dripstone. Of this form 
 in its perfect development, Ray don Church'’ in Suffolk pre- 
 sents two beautiful exanqdes ; iii each case a trefoil arch 
 supports a trefoil, in the one example round, in the other 
 jminted ; one similar to the former occurs in the Chancel 
 of St. Fagan’s, near Cardiff. In the tower at Cassington, 
 Oxon (27), is a similar example under a straight-sided arch. 
 
 Still however these exara})les are comparatively rare, 
 though they will be found most important as elements 
 of other varieties. The greater number of windows of 
 Foil tracery are developed by the same process and the 
 same stages as the pure Geometrical from the perforation 
 in the head of a couplet. Of the first stage, where the 
 lights and the figure still remain quite distinct, an excel- 
 lent example, with a sexfoil in the head, occurs at Netley 
 Abbey, and a similar one with a septfoil forms the east 
 window of Stanion Church, Northants. In both these the 
 lights are unfoliated lancets. Another with foliated lancets, 
 and a pointed quatrefoil, occurs in Lindfield ChurclC, 
 Sussex. But an instance more curious and characteristic 
 than any will be found at Chipping Wardon, Northants ; 
 we here have two trefoil lights divided by a shaft with a 
 s'quare abacus — a rare instance of this mode of division in 
 a (/lazed window*' — in the head, under the same label, is a 
 
 ° The exterior is figured in the Glos- windows, see p. 18. 
 sary, pi. 151, the interior in Petit’s Archi- p Figured, Brandon’s Analysis, § 1. 
 tectural Character. I am here speaking pi. 8. 
 
 of each lancet separately; the whole ^ Brandon’s Analysis, § l.pl. 5. E. E. 
 
 ooni]U)sition may have Ijad some iiifiu- ^ See above, p. !). 
 
 ence in the formation of anotlier class of 
 
36 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 round quatrefoil remaining quite distinct. The next stage, 
 with the lights and the figure brought nearer together and 
 the spandrils sunk, is very elegant; it occurs with un- 
 foliated lancets and a round quatrefoil in the inserted 
 window at Iffley, Oxon (28), and in the belfry at Paston", 
 Northants. In the south aisle of Northfleet ChurclP, Kent, 
 are two examples with pointed trefoil lights supporting a 
 quatrefoil, in the one case round, in the other pointed. 
 
 Of two-light examples of fully developed tracery pre- 
 serving the single figure in the head, the window already 
 figured (PI. 2. fig. 8) is an excellent instance of two trefoils 
 supporting a quatrefoil, all the foils being round. The like 
 occurs also at Wellingborough. At Uffington, Lincolnshire, 
 we find a similar example with a trefoil (31), and another in 
 the Chancel of Trumpington, Cambridgeshire, in which the 
 trefoil is of more importance. In the Mayor’s Chapel at 
 Bristol (32) we find two cinquefoil arches supporting a 
 singularly arranged sexfoil, and the Aisle windows of 
 Wimborne Minster exhibit cinquefoil lights with a quatre- 
 foil in the head, of a sort of ill developed Poll tracery, 
 though manifestly of much later date than the majority 
 of those which we are considering. We find the same 
 arrangement with pointed arches at Blymhill, Staffordshire, 
 and also in the beautiful clerestory of Barnwell St. 
 Andrew’s, Northants, where the arches are partly plain 
 
 s The belfry windows and spire lights 
 of this Church present the most inter- 
 esting series imaginable of incipient foil 
 tracery, though several of them exhibit 
 eccentricities out of the line of the ordi- 
 nary development which hinder them 
 from being cited as typical examples. 
 Of the four belfry-windows two of the 
 kind just mentioned, with some variations 
 in the cusps, which in one are trun- 
 cated ; the third has in the head a 
 pointed trefoil sunk, but not pierced, 
 the fourth an awkward variety of the tre- 
 foil not pierced. Of the spire-lights two 
 
 have trefoil lights, and sunk in the head 
 large figures which excellently illustrate 
 the development of pointed foil figures 
 from the combination of vesicae. In one 
 four vesicae actually meet in a point 
 29), in the other (30) they are not 
 quite completed, so as to form a regular 
 quatrefoil. In the other two the lights 
 are unfoliated lancets, having sunk in the 
 head, in one case a ruder form of the 
 same figure, in the other a reversed pointed 
 trefoil, and over it a round quatrefoil. 
 
 ‘ Brandon's Analysis, .§ 1. pi. 1. De- 
 corated. 
 
?].< 
 
 26 
 
OF FOIL TRACER F. 
 
 37 
 
 and partly foliated. In these the foils are pointed, while at 
 Blymhill the lateral ones are round. We may remark the 
 much greater distinctness given by the latter arrangement, 
 and the farther degree of it possessed by the trefoil beyond 
 the quatrefoil. At Barby, Northants, is an anomalous ex- 
 ample of a large trefoil supported by two round arches. 
 It will be observed how all these suggest the spherical 
 triangle, just as those with quatrefoils do the circle. 
 
 Two very singular two-light windows of Foil tracery 
 will be found in Messrs. Brandon’s valuable Analysis, 
 one, from Waltham Abbey“, has trefoil lights supporting 
 an almost indescribable^ foil figure, a kind of irregular 
 sexfoil with a lower pointed foil occupying the space be- 
 tween the lights. 
 
 The same system of composition will be found carried 
 out in large windows of this kind as we have seen in the 
 pure Geometrical, though, from the comparative rarity of 
 examples it will not be in our power to illustrate it at 
 the same length. The east window at Trowse Newton, 
 Norfolk (33), exhibits a Foil window designed precisely 
 after the analogy of the three-light Geometrical windows 
 in which the central light overtops its fellows, it being here 
 cinquefoil, while the lateral ones are trefoil ; the tracery 
 contains three quatrefoils, that over the central light being 
 placed diagonally. Nor is the truer and more genuine form 
 of the three-light Geometrical window without its counter- 
 part; those in the aisles of York Minster are admirable 
 examples, consisting of trefoil arches supporting quatrefoils. 
 
 It is not often that we meet with pure Foil windows of 
 a greater size than three lights. It would be difficult to 
 design larger ones without introducing subordination and 
 inferior arches ; and as these last, to carry out the true 
 
 " § ]. Decorated, pi. 4. wliat analogous foliations occurs in tlie 
 
 * A round window (ibid.) with some- west front of this Chinch. 
 
38 
 
 or GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 spirit of tlie style, must be of the foil form, it would be 
 almost impossible to produce a simple and satisfactory com- 
 position. Yet the difficulty seems very well overcome in 
 a very remarkable four-light window at Cartmel in Lan- 
 cashire^, which does not contain any real subordination or 
 subarcuation, but is still manifestly designed in analogy 
 Avith the ordinary four-light Geometrical window. Each 
 pair of trefoil arches su})ports what must be called an octo- 
 foil, though the subordinate foils are so small that its gene- 
 ral effect is cpiite that of a quatrefoil, and these again sup- 
 port a larger octofoil by way of centre-piece. The window 
 is a remarkable one, and of considerable value in elucidating 
 principles of tracery ; still it cannot be called altogether 
 satisfactory ; we lack the beautiful harmony and subordi- 
 nation of the pure Geometrical, and, owing to the absence 
 of inferior arches, a someAvhat unpleasing space is left 
 between the two lower octofoils. 
 
 We uoAV come to examples in Avhich the Geometrical 
 laws of support are not accurately observed. These are of 
 two classes, according as the lights support a greater or a 
 less amount of tracery than those rules require. In the first 
 case we usually find a single arch supporting a single figure, 
 as in the case of the wdndows of one light already men- 
 tioned. With these we might fairly class the instance 
 from TroAvse Newton, were it not that the idea suggested 
 by that, as by the analogous Geometrical variety, is so 
 decidedly that of a distorted example of the common three- 
 light pattern. Intermediate also are some of the AAundoAvs 
 at Heckington (34), in Avhich the trefoils in the tracery 
 have not their loAA^er cusp, as usual, resting on the apex of 
 the trefoil arch, but the apex, Avhich is ogee shaped, floAvs 
 in between two trefoils, as those of the trefoils themselves do 
 info the upper one. Thus, though there are only the usual 
 
 y Figured in Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
PI. 7 
 
OP FOIL TRACERY. 
 
 39 
 
 number of actual figures, they are not supported in the 
 ordinary way, and there are inchoate figures at the sides, as 
 if the arch cut through an infinite series of trefoils. Less 
 ambiguous instances will also be found. The annexed 
 two-light window (35) from Askley has three quatre- 
 foils in the head ; it will be readily remarked that the foil 
 arch supports the quatrefoil with much less ease than the 
 trefoil, as in the otherwise similar window from Billing- 
 borough, engraved by Mr. Sharpe. In both these the 
 tracery commences below the spring of the arch, the ordi- 
 nary space allotted to it not being sufficient to contain so 
 extended a pattern. In an analogous window of three 
 lights in Lichfield Cathedral, each light (simple-pointed and 
 cinquefoiled) supports a trefoil, these three again two, and 
 these one in the head, the window being very long and 
 acutely pointed. 
 
 Of the other class I am only prepared with two ex- 
 amples, in which a predominant trefoil rests upon three 
 arches, being evidently modelled upon such two-light 
 examples as those at Trumpington and Barby. Of these 
 two, one, at Barkby in Leicestershire, has trefoil lights, 
 in the other, in Peterborough Cathedral (36), they are 
 simple-pointed and unfoliated. 
 
 I am not acquainted with many foreign examples of Foil 
 tracery, and those are chiefly patterns of which I have 
 already given English specimens. I must however add one 
 (37) from Soest in Westphalia, as giving an example of 
 what I have not hitherto observed in English windows of 
 this kind, a distinct subordination of mouldings. Two 
 trefoil lights support one large trefoil including three small 
 ones ; the tracery, as in so many foreign examples, and, as 
 we have above seen, in the most nearly analogous English 
 ones, commences considerably below the spring of the 
 arch. 
 
40 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 We have thus traced out the chief patterns* afforded by 
 the first great division of Early tracery, in which the con- 
 taining arch is wholly independent of those of the lights ; 
 we will now turn to its rival. 
 
 § 5. Of Arch Tracery. 
 
 The general effect of this style, and the principle on 
 which it is constructed, have been already alluded to'^ at that 
 part of our argument when we endeavoured to point out its 
 leading feature of distinction from the pure Geometrical. 
 It is that which is produced when the external side of the 
 arch of each of the external lights coincides with part of the 
 arch of the window. As tracery of this kind, if it deserves 
 the name of tracery, is formed entirely by different arrange- 
 ments and groupings of arches, I have ventured to desig- 
 nate it Arch tracery. 
 
 I have already remarked that to produce the simplest 
 form of tracery of this kind, all that is required is simply 
 to pierce the spandril in the head of a couplet of the pro- 
 portion required, which at once forms a pure’' unfoliated 
 two-light window. It hence follows that there is in strict- 
 ness no such incipient or transitional form of Arch tracery, 
 as we have seen lead the way to the full developments of 
 Geometrical and Foil tracery. The source of this style is 
 to be found merely in the two lights and the containing 
 arch, without that third element which gives the very essence 
 of the other two varieties. We have not here any distinct 
 figure to bring into gradual proximity to the lights below, 
 and to mark by its repeated strivings after a more com- 
 plete union the advances of the style towards the fuller ex- 
 
 ^ There is a -variety of Foil tracery in 
 -which the trefoil lights are very long and 
 acute, which will be considered elsewhere. 
 
 I only allude to it here, lest I should 
 
 seem to have forgotten it. 
 “ See above, p. 10. 
 
 >> See above, fig. 6. 
 
OF ARCH TRACERY. 
 
 « 
 
 41 
 
 pression of its idea. In an ideal view this form of tracery- 
 passes at once from a pure Lancet couplet into a pure 
 traceried window. Any ornament by way of foliation wdiich 
 may be given to the spandril in the head is simply extra- 
 neous decoration added after the complete imfoliated form 
 has been developed ; and is not an element gradually 
 worked into the composition, like the figures of the tAvo 
 preceding varieties. Still we find several examples in which 
 the space in the head is pierced wdth a distinct foil figure 
 not merged into the tracery, which are in practice alto- 
 gether analogous to the genuine transitions of the other 
 styles ; and which it will be most convenient to treat of at 
 this point as transitional forms. Thus at Aston-le-Walls is 
 one in which this space is occupied by a small reversed 
 trefoil; at the west end of the south aisle at Higham 
 Ferrers is a similar couplet pierced with a delicate quatre- 
 foil ; at Thorpe Mandeville are two with a round diagonal 
 quatrefoil, in one of these the lancets have a bold open 
 foliation. At Piddington is another (38) in which we find 
 a reversed trefoil of soflit-cusping, which from its peculiar 
 form may be considered as something intermediate behveen 
 a distinct foil figure and a mere foliated space. It will be 
 observed that all these examples are from Northampton- 
 shire, but I am not prepared to say whether this stage is a 
 local peculiarity or not. 
 
 The complete form of the two-light window of this kind, 
 when the piercing and the lights unite their mouldings so 
 as to form actual tracery, must be familiar to every one both 
 in its plain and its foliated shape. The former, the most 
 common and most meagre of all windows, has been already 
 described'" ; it sometimes occurs with great enrichment of 
 jambs, especially in belfry-windows and spire-lights, as at 
 Kingscliffe and Polebrook, Northants, but no degree of 
 
 See above, Cut 6. ' 
 
 G 
 
42 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 ornament can make it really graceful. Of forms in which 
 foliation is introduced perhaps the most usual presents the 
 head nnfoliated, and the lights furnished with a long and 
 inelegant trefoil. When the head is foliated it is clear that 
 a cpiatrefoil is best adapted for filling up the space ; in this 
 case we find the lights plain, trefoiled, or cinquefoiled in 
 difierent examples. An example at Trumpington has the 
 ogee foil, as well as other larger windows of this class in 
 the same church and at Alarket Harborongh ; the effect is 
 singular, and decidedly richer than usual. But we must 
 remember that windows of this, and of several other kinds 
 of Arch Tracery, were continually used as a kind of sub- 
 stitute during the whole of the Flowing and Perpendicular 
 periods. Still it is manifest that, wdiatever be their date, 
 they must, in point of style, be referred to the present head. 
 At Ravensthorpe, Northants, is a variety of this kind 
 (39) to which a very good effect is given by the use of 
 an oo;ee head. 
 
 Windows of more than two lights are constructed in two 
 quite distinct methods. In the one they seem to be formed 
 upon the analogy of those of two lights ; in the other they 
 are direct products from groupes of lancets of their own 
 number of lights just as the two-light window is from the 
 couplet. This latter class simjdy exhibit a triplet or other 
 combination of lancets, grouped under a single arch, and 
 tracery produced by piercing the spandrils. Hence, as the 
 great majority of lancets are unfoliated, we find this sort 
 of tracery uncusped, even when the style is very much 
 developed. 
 
 It is manifest that a genuine transitional stage is still 
 less to be looked for in this class of windows than in that 
 which Ave have just considered. Still a few examples 
 occur, in which the idea cannot be considered as having 
 attained its full development. A moment’s reflection will 
 
PI is 
 
OF AllCH TRACERY. 
 
 43 
 
 show that a combination of lancets, to be converted into a 
 window of this class, requires somewhat of a change of 
 proportion, as it will be rarely, if ever, found that the con- 
 taining arch of a triplet or quintuplet coincides with that 
 of the external lights, as is required by the very definition 
 of a window of this class. An attempt to form tracery from 
 the ordinary triplet may be found in the windows of the 
 north aisle of Netley Abbey®; a trefoiled triplet here has 
 trefoils pierced in the shoulders, not forming complete 
 tracery. But this seems to have been a mere experiment, 
 and one which could not well have been developed farther; 
 for, though this specimen is elegant enough as a mere case 
 of incipient tracery, it is clear that complete tracery of this 
 sort would be anything but satisfactory. We may see 
 something of the same sort of feeling in a more advanced 
 form in the window from Tewkesbury figured in the 
 Glossary (pi. 15C) ; where however the cuspings are rather 
 to be looked upon as mere foliation of a space, and not as 
 derived from the independent foil figures of the last ex- 
 ample. At Portbury, Somerset, is a large ungainly win- 
 dow of five lights (40) which illustrates the same notion, 
 the side lights being unconnected with the containing 
 arch ; in the Tewkesbury example the natural awkward- 
 ness of the form was somewhat relieved by the cusping ; 
 here the unfinished appearance of the arch, and the sin- 
 gularly ugly shape of the spanclril, remain unmitigated ; 
 the side windows at Berkeley (41) exhibit the same notion 
 with three-lights much better managed. We shall in the 
 course of our investigation meet with one or two other 
 examples which might have been classed here, but which 
 will on the whole find a more appropriate place at a later 
 stage of our argument. 
 
 It was probably the result of these experiments which 
 
 ' Figured, Sharpe, pi. A. 
 
44 
 
 or GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 must have shown the awkwardness of all attempts of this 
 kind which caused them to be generally discontinued, and 
 the lateral lights made to join the containing arch, giving 
 them of course a far more acute form than is usual in an 
 actual triplet. The most typical form is, as was already 
 sta' ed, without foliations in any part such, of three lights, 
 are many of the windows at Finedon and some at St. 
 Albans^; I am not prepared with an example of four lights, 
 but of five they are not uncommon, as the east windows of 
 Irthlingborough®, Northants, Lapley, Staffordshire, and 
 Gaddesby, Leicestershire. With the lights foliated, and 
 the spandrils plain, we have of three lights trefoiled, Pid- 
 dington*’, Oxon, and East Sutton, Kent, and one at Cha- 
 combe, Northants, with a round segmental head ; of three 
 lights, cincpiefoiled, examples occm' at Trumpington ; of 
 four lights trefoiled we have one at Rothersthorpe, North- 
 ants (42) with a semicircular head; while of five lights 
 cinquefoiled, with a very depressed arch, are the east 
 windows of the Choir-aisles at Wimborne Minster. I may 
 mention a window at the west end of the south aisle of 
 Charwelton Church, Northants, as having the centre light 
 trefoiled, and the side lights plain. Some have a foliation 
 both to the lights and to the spandrils above ; as in the 
 south transept at Rushden, Northants ; a very curious ex- 
 ample (43) ocem’s in Rickman’s collection from Staines in 
 Middlesex, to which a singular effect is given by the ogee 
 form of the arch. 
 
 The other mode of forming windows of this kind of more 
 than two lights cannot be derived so immediately from any 
 preexistent form. This is where the mullions simply inter- 
 sect, leaving plain or foliated spaces in the head. This use 
 of intersection may have been suggested by the arcades of 
 
 < Glossary, pi. 156. Rickman, p. 135. 
 
 t Northamptonshire Churches, p. Ill, '' Rickman, p. 145. 
 
or ARCH TRACERY. 
 
 1 
 
 45 
 
 that kind so common at an earlier period ; still this form is 
 a natural development from the two-light window, formed 
 from it in a manner strictly analogous to that which pro- 
 duced the three-light window of the Early Geometrical. It 
 is manifest that a three-light intersecting window contains 
 two of two lights, the centre light being common ; the 
 nature of this kind of tracery making the formation more 
 manifest than in the really parallel case of the Geometrical. 
 This Intersecting Arch tracery is perhaps the very com- 
 monest of any, and has enjoyed the unenviable distinction 
 of being an especial favourite with Churchwardens of the 
 last generation ; many elaborate windows having been 
 destroyed' to make way for this cheap substitute, or so 
 mutilated’' as to be reduced to it. Still it is a genuine 
 ancient form, and one moreover which remained in use 
 during the whole duration of Gothic tracery ; it is only by 
 an inspection of the mouldings and other details that the 
 date of individual examples can be fixed with certainty. 
 Many examples occur which manifestly synchronize with 
 the latest Perpendicular’ windows, and which, except in the 
 lines of the tracery, exhibit all their distinctive features. 
 But as the form is an early one, simply retained in the later 
 style, the question of mere date does not concern our pre- 
 sent inquiry. The really early examples are most commonly 
 unfoliated, as at Northfield”, Worcestershire, Stanford, 
 Northants, and the west window of St. Giles’, Northampton; 
 the late ones have a cusping characteristic of their date; 
 usually cinquefoiled lights and quatrefoiled spaces. Some- 
 times the spaces have merely a trefoiled or cinquefoiled 
 head; as in a square-headed window from Hexham, en- 
 graved by Mr. Bloxain’'. There are however eaily ex- 
 
 ‘ More particularly in Leicester and * See Rickman, p. 200. 
 
 Leicestersliire. Figured, Glossary, pi. 156. 
 
 In the case of Arch and Foil tracery. n P. 167. In the examples, of Per- 
 
46 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 amples with foliations, of which the south side of Dorchester 
 Abbey ChurclD presents a noble range; the north Chancel 
 of St. Sepulchre’s, Northampton, is similar, though on a 
 smaller scale, and here also the windows are, if I mistake 
 not, early. Sometimes the lights are cusped and the spaces 
 left plain, as in windows of three lights at Courteenhall, 
 Northants, and of five at Handsworth, Staffordshire. 
 
 It is not uncommon to find windows of this kind, in 
 which the intersection is not perfect in the head, as in the 
 east window of Blythfield, Staffordshire (44). These serve 
 more strongly to connect the intersecting variety with the 
 two-light window without intersection. 
 
 A curious subject for investigation is afforded by the 
 fact that this kind of tracery is so generally found to be 
 meagre and unsatisfactory, whereas, as being the purest 
 offspring of the pointed arch, we might naturally have 
 looked to it for some of the finest and most characteristic 
 developments of the style. Yet without foliation many of 
 its forms are absolutely unpleasing and even with the aid 
 of that decoration its unmixed varieties produce no shapes 
 of remarkable beauty. This is probably the reason why 
 windows of this kind more frequently than any other seek 
 for enrichment in extraneous decoration, as if mere enrich- 
 ment could supply the inherent want of graceful outlines. 
 Thus we more frequently meet with the baU-flow-er'^ on the 
 
 pendicular date, in the lower of St. Samp- 
 son’s, Cricklade, the spaces are com- 
 pletely foliated with trefoils, which has 
 a strange effect. 
 
 ° See Addington’s Dorchester, p. 27. 
 It will be observed that the foliations of 
 those in the Choir Aisle and those in the 
 Nave Aisle, though both are of Deco- 
 rated date, present an apparently slight, 
 but not unimportant variation. Those 
 in the Choir, which are the earliest, have 
 round foils in the foliated spaces, afford- 
 ing a degree of distinctness to the folia- 
 tions, and slightly approximating the 
 
 design to the Arch and Foil tracery to 
 he hereafter described ; while in the Nave 
 we have the commonest foliation of the 
 spaces with pointed foils. 
 
 P The three-light window without in- 
 tersection is decidedly the most satisfac- 
 tory variety of Arch Tracery ; and this is 
 certainly not improved by foliation. 
 
 We may add the roses at the inter- 
 section at Checkley, mentioned by Mr. 
 Petit, i. 177; where see some good re- 
 marks on this class of windows in ge- 
 neral. 
 
OF ARCH TRACERY. 
 
 47 
 
 mullions ; and such manifestly incongruous decorations as 
 pinnacles" and canopies intermixed with the tracery. It is 
 also remarkable that, while the direction of the mullions is 
 purely and completely Continuous, the general effect of the 
 window is never that of a genuine Continuous window. In 
 no form are the mullions and tracery-bars so completely 
 identical ; the tracery is formed simply by the prolongation 
 of the mullions in the direction which they have already 
 assumed to form the arches of the lights, and no other line 
 whatever is introduced. Yet it is manifest that the general 
 character of an Intersecting window has much more in com- 
 mon with the Geometrical than with any variety of the 
 Continuous style, least of all with its full development in 
 Perpendicular. The reason of this is to be found in the 
 fact that it is not so much the direction of the lines of 
 tracery, as the form of the piercings described by them, 
 which really determines the general character of a window. 
 Hence the importance of foliation®, a variation of which 
 will often give a completely different character to windows 
 whose lines of tracery are identical. Now in an Intersect- 
 ing window, though the tracery lines are Continuous, the 
 piercings in the head are anything but vertical in them- 
 selves, and do not admit of being foliated* in such a man- 
 ner as to give them a vertical direction. The foliation 
 which they naturally require is a complete one, a form of 
 
 '■ As in the east window at Barnack, 
 an example of five lights without inter- 
 section. We may add that of Merton 
 College chapel, a compound window in 
 which this kind of tracery predominates. 
 The famous Jesse window at Dorchester, 
 (Addington, p. 11,) which, when slri])ped 
 of its extraneous enrichments, is a four- 
 light wi])dow with imperfect intersection, 
 may be considered as akin to these, and 
 is surely to be admired rather for bold- 
 ness and originality than for actual 
 beauty. 
 
 * We shall see this exemplified at 
 greater length hereafter. At present I 
 
 will refer only to the manifest difficulty 
 which often exists in determining, without 
 rigid inspection, between Geometrical and 
 Foil Tracery. At a little distance scarcely 
 any difference can be perceived between 
 a Foil window with a quatrefoil in the 
 head, and a Geometrical one with a qua- 
 trefoiled circle, because the glazed pierc- 
 ing is identical in both cases. 
 
 ‘ The instances to the contrary — those 
 mentioned above as having only the head 
 of the piercing cusped — are both un- 
 sightly in themselves, and, after all, do 
 not give any real vertical direction. 
 
48 
 
 or GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 the quatrefoil which is especially horizontal, and causes the 
 eye to rest very much upon itself. If it have any vertical 
 effect, it is only from sharing in a very inferior degree the 
 pyramidal tendency of the pure Geometrical. 
 
 We shall find, as we proceed, that no form is more ex- 
 tensively used in combination with others than this Inter- 
 secting tracery. Though in itself incapable of the highest 
 excellence, a more limited application of its principle, in 
 conjunction with its more successful rivals, seldom fails to 
 add fresh beauty to the Continuous forms ; and we shall 
 soon see that its combinations with those contemporary 
 with, or earlier than, itself, have produced a distinct variety 
 of great excellence. But in no case does any intermixture 
 of this form conduce directly to vertical effect. 
 
 I may conclude this head by alluding to a few windows 
 which do not come strictly within the definition of the 
 style, but which yet approach more nearly to its general 
 character than to that of any other. This is the case with 
 a form of window in which the spandrils of a trefoil- or 
 cinquefoil-headed triplet or quintuplet are pierced, in a 
 manner analogous to the three-light non-intersecting win- 
 dow of this class. A good example with cinquefoil arches 
 occurs at Long Itcliington", Warwick. At Portbury (46) 
 is an extremely unsightly five-light example with trefoil 
 arches. In the annexed specimen from Newent, Glouces- 
 tershire (45) it is, as in some other cases'", difficult to say 
 wLether the arches should be called trefoil or trefoiled ; 
 they are perhaps strictly trefoil heads cut out of the solid. 
 Finally in a three-light window at Lapworth, (47) Warwick- 
 shire, we have this form with the spandrils ingeniously fo- 
 liated in a way analogous to the Tewkesbury example. 
 
 There are also a few examples which, without being in any 
 
 " Paley’s Gothic Architecture, p. 161. 
 
 ^ As in the window at Broad Blunsdon, cut 12. 
 
? 1 . 9 . 
 
 46 
 
 47 
 
OF ARCH TRACERY. 
 
 49 
 
 sense, Arch tracery at all, approach very near to the effect 
 of its Intersecting variety, as having in fact their tracery 
 composed of intersecting straight lines. Thus at Ferry 
 Hinksey, Berks, is a three-light window with a triangular 
 head, the tracery being formed by intersecting straight 
 lines, which produce exactly the same quatrefoiled piercings 
 as where curved lines are employed. The well-known east 
 window of Stanton St. John’s^ Oxon, may be considered 
 as a more elaborate variety of the same type. 
 
 § 6. Of Combination in Geometrical Windows. 
 
 The preceding sections have exhibited the different forms 
 of Geometrical tracery, as they appear when they are found 
 most nearly pure and unmixed. They are, as it were, the 
 elements or component parts out of which the more 
 elaborate and complicated varieties are designed. Having 
 thus endeavoured to disentangle these distinct elements and 
 to elucidate their respective principles as developed in their 
 unmixed state, our present business is to consider them 
 when intermingled and combined with one another. This 
 at once opens to us a very wide field of inquiry, as the 
 majority of the larger and more elaborate specimens of 
 Geometrical tracery belong to the present head, and are 
 formed by the combination of two or more principles of 
 construction. It is manifest that combinations of this kind 
 are, in idea at least, later than the elements out of which 
 they are composed ; and in point of fact the great pro- 
 portion of windows of this class belong to the later days of 
 the style. It is only in a small number of windows, and 
 those for the most part of one class, that we discern those 
 marked peculiarities which so readily distinguish and add 
 so much of beauty to the very earliest eflbrts of the art of 
 tracery. 
 
 J Oxford Society’s Guide, p. 22-'i ; Glossary, pi. 153. 
 
 H 
 
50 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 Combined Geometrical windows readily divide themselves 
 into two great classes ; those namely which belong wholly 
 to our first division, being formed wholly by different com- 
 binations of pure Geometrical and Foil figures ; and those 
 resulting from a greater or less intermixture of the forms 
 of Arch tracery. These two divisions will admit of subdi- 
 vision into several smaller varieties ; and it wiU be necessary 
 to bear in mind the distinction already established between 
 the two great methods of combining different principles of 
 formation, namely by simple intermixture, and by filling 
 up a skeleton of one kind with smaller patterns of another. 
 Besides these two great heads of strictly combined windows, 
 the present section will also be the most convenient, if not 
 the most appropriate, place for considering several anoma- 
 lous classes and single instances of windows, belonging to 
 the Geometrical type, and yet not easily referable to any 
 of its ordinary forms or combinations. 
 
 A. Combmation of Geometrical and Foil Tracery. 
 a. Litermixtiire. 
 
 Of windows formed by combination of Geometrical and 
 Foil patterns, the first class, which exhibits simple inter- 
 mixture, is not an important one. The few examples which 
 have come to my notice either introduce so small a portion 
 of the Foil element as hardly to differ in general character 
 from pure Geometrical windows, or else are but little 
 better than anomalies. Thus a large six-light window 
 in Exeter CathedraF exhibits Geometrical tracery in a late 
 stage, though with but little tangible departure from its 
 genuine forms'^; a quatrefoil in the middle of the centre- 
 
 ^ See above, p. 4. 
 
 “ Figured in Britton’s Exeter. 
 
 Several spaces in this example are 
 
 foliated, a method of treatment decidedly 
 alien to the spirit of Geometrical tracery. 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 51 
 
 piece, and one or two others in other parts of the window 
 may entitle it to come under our present division. Another 
 of four lights from the earlier portion of the same Church, 
 has a purely Geometrical outline, and moreover exhibits 
 that kind of tracery in its best and earliest form with the 
 truncated open soffit-cusp. The centre-piece is foliated 
 with six of the free trefoil arches which we have already® 
 met with in examples at Lincoln and Peterborough, while 
 the spandrils formed by them with the circle are pierced 
 with small trefoils, which alone constitute its claim to be re- 
 garded as a mixed specimen. A three-light window at 
 Barkby, Leicestershire, (48) can be called nothing but an 
 anomaly ; the head is formed by a spherical triangle resting 
 on the lights without any connexion with them, as in some 
 foreign examples. This contains two irregular squares, each 
 foliated with an open diagonal quatrefoil, and a free tre- 
 foil in the head. The appearance is, as might be expected, 
 far more curious than beautiful. 
 
 b. Geometrical Skeletons with Foil Patterns. 
 
 Windows in which a Geometrical skeleton is more or 
 less completely filled up with Foil patterns, form a far 
 more numerous and important class, including not a few of 
 the finest examples of early tracery in England. These 
 occur at a period so early that in a merely archaeological 
 division they have often been called Early English. The 
 well-known east window of Flarapton Poyle^ Oxon, ex- 
 hibits the common type of a three-light Geometrical window 
 with the circles filled in with trefoils. Another at Temple 
 BalsalP has much the same character, with a good deal of 
 diversity in the proportions and details. These are of 
 
 ‘ See above, fig. 14. ® Figured in Sharpe’s Decorated Wiii- 
 
 <> Figured, Oxford Society’s Guide, dows. 
 p. 53. Glossary, pi. 153. 
 
OP GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 course identical in principle with those windows^ of pure 
 Geometrical tracery in which the circles are filled up with 
 smaller ones, and through them are closely connected with 
 the characteristic cusping of that style. In like manner 
 larger windows exhibit precisely the same arrangements 
 and subordinations as pure Geometrical windows ; the 
 circle in the head is usually filled with trefoils, the arrange- 
 ment of which presents many diversities, as large and small 
 ones, or round and pointed ones, alternating. Very pure 
 examples of an outline purely Geometrical filled in with 
 patterns purely Foil, occur in the Clerestory at Guis- 
 borough® (of four lights, the fenestelloe of two trefoil lights 
 supporting a trefoil) and in the Choir Aisles at Exeter*' (of 
 five lights, the fenestellge of two trefoil lights supporting a 
 cpiatrefoil, and the complement trefoil.) The east window 
 of Ripon Cathedral* is chiefly of this kind, although less 
 pure than the examples just quoted j it is of seven lights, 
 the fenestellae purely Geometrical, the single light of the 
 complement belonging to a class to be hereafter consi- 
 dered ; the centre-piece has round trefoils alternating with 
 pointed ones. 
 
 A very remarkable five-light window (49) in Exeter 
 Cathedral may be considered to belong to this class, 
 although differing widely in general effect from those 
 hitherto mentioned. Its tracery is very complicated and 
 not easy to describe ; but it vdll be seen that the principal 
 })attern — the centre-piece — consists of a spherical triangle 
 containinsr another with concave sides. 
 
 O 
 
 A. Oomhination of Arch Tracery witli Geometrical and Foil. 
 
 But in by far the greater proportion of mixed windows 
 we shall find a greater or less infusion of the principles and 
 
 ^ As at Oundle, see above, figs. 9, 18. ^ Figured in Sharpe’s Decorated in- 
 
 s Figured in Shatpe’s Parallels. dows, * Do. 
 
?l. 10. 
 
I 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 53 
 
 forms of Arch tracery. It is indeed from its influence over 
 this class that the chief value of the latter kind consists ; 
 incapable as it is, when alone, of rising above mediocrity, an 
 admixture of it frequently conduces to the production of 
 the highest beauty of the Geometrical style, and in a large 
 number of the most famous and magnificent windows of 
 the latter portion of the period, its influence is extensive, 
 sometimes predominant. We will consider separately its 
 combinations with Geometrical and with Foil tracery, pre- 
 serving, as above, the two kinds of combination distinct. 
 
 a. Intermixture of Geometrical and Arch Tracery. 
 
 Mere intermixture, or rather confusion, of Geometrical 
 and Arch forms, without any principal pattern being traced 
 out, is neither frequent nor elegant ; more so indeed than 
 many other mixtures of the same kind, as nowhere is the 
 break more sudden and the junction less harmonious than 
 when a pattern commenced in one of these ways is con- 
 tinued in another, when the sharp, angular, continuous 
 line of the Arch tracery is stopped by the distinct and 
 swelling figures of the pure Geometrical. This may be seen 
 in a five-light window in Bristol Cathedral (50) ; the idea 
 is that of an imperfect intersection, the head being occupied 
 by a eircle ; but it forms two fenestellee of three lights (one 
 being common) with three circles in the head, which might 
 nominally be referred to the pure Geometrieal class, but 
 the long acute lights of the original intersecting pattern do 
 not at all harmonize with the necessarily small circles which 
 appear to be thrust in instead of their natural completion. 
 
 b. Arch Skeletons ivith Geometrical Patterns. 
 
 Windows in which an outhiie of Arch tracery is filled 
 up with Geometrical patterns constitute a more inq)ortant 
 
54 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 class than the last, but one still not very numerous nor 
 admitting of much beauty. The spaces in the head of an 
 Arch window seem simply spaces for foliation, and do not 
 very well admit of the insertion of any figure ; but as we 
 shall soon see, those of Foil tracery are more manageable 
 and better adapt themselves to the requirements of such a 
 position than the inflexible Geometrical patterns. I am 
 not prepared with any example of this kind in which the 
 original pattern is of more than three lights without inter- 
 section, though it is clear that such an one might easily be 
 designed, and may very possibly exist. With the mullions 
 intersecting, an excellent example occurs in the east window 
 of Meopham Church^, Kent, of three lights, filled with a 
 trefoiled arch supporting a trefoiled circle, by a violation 
 of the common lau's of the English Geometrical ; in the 
 lateral piercings a quatrefoiled circle is inserted, while the 
 head is simply quatrefoiled. A curious instance occm’s in 
 Bristol Cathedral (51) in which the head contains a plain 
 vesica ; we may also remark the singular and unnatural 
 trefoil cusping of the lateral piercings. At Yatton, Somer- 
 set, is a large window of five lights, in which the Geo- 
 metrical element is confined to two awkwardly inserted 
 circles ; the other piercings, except that in the head, have 
 the unpleasant incomplete foliation \ There are also several 
 Avindows, in Avhich a circle is inserted in the head of an 
 imperfect insertion, as in the east window of Pattishall, 
 Northamptonshire, of four lights, and that of Cossiiigton, 
 Leicestershire, of five. 
 
 To the head of Arch skeletons filled in with Geometrical 
 patterns must also be referred the extraordinary window in 
 the north transept at Rushden™, Northamptonshire ; it is of 
 four lights, with intersecting tracery, but the lines being 
 
 Figured in Brandon's Analysis. ™ Figured, Northamptonshire 
 
 • See above, p. 45. Churches, 179. 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 55 
 
 concentric produce the most singular and unsightly appear- 
 ance ; the intersection is not continued into the two ex- 
 ternal lights. The spaces in the head are solid, pierced 
 with circles trefoiled with the open truncated soffit cusp. 
 
 c. Arch and Foil Tracery. 
 
 Far more important than any of these is that widely 
 influential form in which Arch and Foil patterns are com- 
 bined, and for whieh, as the examples are both numerous 
 and important enough to be considered as a distinct class, 
 I would propose the name of Arch and Foil tracery. This 
 is both a very usual, and, as I cannot but think, very 
 elegant, variety in its pure form ; and it will be also found 
 to enter into the composition of a large proportion of the 
 more complicated windows of the style. Nothing is more 
 usual than to find windows of which the whole, or part, 
 consists of an Arch outline more or less completely filled 
 in with Foil patterns. These again naturally subdivide 
 themselves into two classes, according to the two divisions 
 of Arch tracery. 
 
 a. Mullions not intersecting. 
 
 First, where the mullions do not intersect. In this case 
 the Foil element is necessarily confined to treating each 
 light as a single-light window of a Foil tracery, exhibiting 
 generally a trefoil arch supporting a trefoil. This is the 
 most extensive application of the principle, and probably 
 derived its predominance from the very awkward appear- 
 ance (in most cases) of the long, unrelieved lights of the 
 Arch tracery. Something was wanted to fill them up, and 
 no other method at once fills up the required space so 
 exactly, and presents a figure so elegant in itself, and so 
 
56 
 
 or GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 thoroughly imbued with the distinctness of early tracery. 
 But though the present variety exhibits this formation in 
 its utmost, yet from the comparatively uufreqiieut occurrence 
 of the form itself, it naturally does not present so many 
 actual examples as other classes. At Miltou Abbey“, Dorset, 
 is a singularly graceful example of three lights, each filled 
 with a cinquefoil arch supporting a pointed trefoil, the more 
 usual form. The Nave Aisles of Peterborough Cathedral 
 are lighted by large segmental headed windows of five 
 lights, each with a trefoil arch supporting a trefoil ; and in 
 the North Transept of Wimborne Minster (52) is a noble 
 example of the same number of lights, in which cinquefoil 
 arches support cinquefoils, the lower foils being round. 
 
 |8. MuUions Intersecting. 
 
 Secondly, where the mullions intersect in the head ; with 
 which, as identical in general conception, and admitting, 
 which the last class does not, a ceniral space in the head, and 
 thereby a further opportunity for the exemplification of the 
 principle, will be reckoned all examples of two lights. These 
 may be readily divided into two classes. Pirst, where the 
 Foil element is simply confined to treating the lights in the 
 manner just now described, the piercings in the head re- 
 maining foliated as in a common Intersecting window. 
 These of course admit of every variety of which that form 
 is capable. Typical examples of two and three lights are very 
 common ; one of the best is the east window of Staniou 
 Church, Northamptonshire; at Pauterry, Monmouth, we 
 have a quatrefoil over the arch instead of a trefoil (53.) In 
 Exeter Cathedral is a fine example (54) of five lights, with 
 an imperfect intersection. Very curious ones of two lights 
 
 " Figured in Sharpe’s Decorated W’indows. 
 

VI iZ 
 
 5S 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 57 
 
 (55) occur at Byfield and Barnacle, Nortbants, being seg- 
 mental-headed, and seeming to be cut out of an infinite 
 plane of intersection. 
 
 In the second class the Foil element does not confine 
 itself to the lights, but extends itself also to the piercings 
 in the head, which are more or less completely filled in 
 with Foil figures. One of the most perfect and typical ex- 
 amples of this class is the well-known and magnificent 
 east window at Trumpington”, which is composed with a 
 delicacy and skill rarely surpassed ; the intersection being 
 imperfect introduces a large diagonal quatrefoil in the head. 
 And we may especially observe the tact by which the 
 longer piercings have a long trefoil-headed figure intro- 
 duced below the main one, which could not of itself be 
 readily made to fill up the whole space. The trefoil, which 
 is employed in the present case, only occupies the upper 
 part, while the diagonal quatrefoil, which is more com- 
 monly used, leaves a vacant space both above and below. 
 The same arrangement as at Trumpington occurs in the 
 head of a pretty two-light window at Hedenham, Norfolk 
 
 (56) ; but the trefoil-headed figure is more usually absent, as 
 at Leonard Stanley, Gloucestershire, and St. Fagan’s, Gla- 
 morgan, or its place is supplied by a small trefoil, as in 
 one at Tewkesbury. At Rothwell, Northants (57), is 
 a good three-light example, though perhaps the doubly 
 foliated figures in the head do not altogether harmonize 
 with the simpler one below ; others perhaps more pleasing 
 occur at Glapthorn and Deddington. Nor does the great 
 store-house at Exeter fail us in this class any more than in 
 others, but affords a five-light window (58) which, though 
 very inferior to the most perfect specimen at Trumpington, 
 is a more complete and instructive study of the forms of 
 
 “ Figured in Brandon’s Analysis. 
 
 I 
 
58 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 this variety. We may remark the greater distinctness 
 obtained, though I must think at the expense of beauty, 
 by the use of the round trefoil in the lights, and how this 
 distinctness dies off gradually towards the head ; the pierc- 
 ings present three ranges of figures, of which the lowest has 
 a distinct diagonal cpiatrefoil inserted, the middle a space 
 foliated with round foils'^, the upper with pointed, while 
 the single piercing in the head is left altogether iinfoliated. 
 
 It is clear that Arch and Eod tracery, considered as a 
 combination of two forms, belongs to the class in which a 
 skeleton of one class is filled in with patterns of another. 
 I have not made the same formal division as in other 
 cases, because in the only instances of mere intermix- 
 ture with which 1 am acquainted, the Arch portion is 
 itself tilled in with Foil work. One example is in Merton 
 Cha])el (59), the other, far less elegant, is the west window 
 at Panterry, Monmouth ; in both three tall lights, which 
 would be naturally prolonged into intersecting tracery, pro- 
 ceed no farther, and the head is occupied, in the one case 
 Avith trefoils, in the other with quatrefoils. 
 
 7 . Corruptions of Arch and Foil Tracery. 
 
 Closely connected with this Arch and Foil tracery are 
 one or two other forms, all of which do not come precisely 
 under its definition, but may be looked on as its Trape/c- 
 iSdcrei^. The first I shall mention must however, in some 
 of its shapes, be considered as a real, though corrupted, 
 variety. We saw above that in Foil tracery, although the 
 use of the Foil arch, as well as the Foil figure, was the 
 
 *1 I remarked above, when speaking of 
 the intersecting' windows (p. 46, note) at 
 Dorchester, on the approach to distinct- 
 ness produced by the use of tlie round 
 foil ; thus at Bushbury, Stafford, is a win- 
 
 dow whose piercings differ from those at 
 Stanion in this respect ; the effect is that 
 of a type intermediate between the two 
 varieties of Arch and Foil tracery. 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 59 
 
 most typical and appropriate, yet we met with several ex- 
 amples in which the latter was supported by the simple 
 pointed arch. In like manner the simple arch is sometimes 
 employed in the form we are now examining, as in a two- 
 light example (60) at Hunton, Kent. This easily degene- 
 rated into a mere foliated space above the lower arch, a 
 form very usual in complicated windows, as in a handsome 
 one of four lights at Carleton Scroope*', Lincolnshire. It is 
 more rare in windows without intersection, as in a three-light 
 example at Barkby (61). It was now an easy step to make 
 the arch ogee, which is more common, and will be found in 
 examples of all the classes of Arch and Foil tracery already 
 established, both with the midlions not intersecting, as in 
 the west window of Wotton Underedge, Gloucestershire, 
 and intersecting, either with the piercings in the head 
 simply foliated, as in the east window of Badby Chnrch, 
 Northants, or with distinct Foil figures inserted, as in that 
 of St. John’s Chapel, Northampton. A difference of more 
 importance is one analogous to that mentioned above in the 
 case of the simple arch, namely whether the trefoil over the 
 ogee arch is distinct, as in the east window at Great Marlow, 
 Bucks (62), in one of the windows at Chipping Wardon, 
 
 This is not a pure example, having 
 a Geometrical figure in the head ; but I 
 am not prepared with a perfectly un- 
 mi.xed instance exactly illustrating this 
 stage. We often meet with windows in 
 which a single light is treated either 
 in this way, or in the pure Arch and 
 Foil, while the rest of the composition 
 belongs to another class, especially in 
 the case of acute complement.ary lights, 
 for whicli this form afforded an easy 
 mode of relief. This is the case with 
 the five-light windows, otlierwise, ex- 
 cept some foliated spaces, purely Geo- 
 metrical, in York Chapter-House, and 
 the analogous three-light ones in that 
 at Southwell ; as also in the seven- 
 light east window at Guishorough Abbey 
 (figured in Sharpe’s Parallels), a splen- 
 did exani]ih' of a Geometrical skeleton 
 
 filled up with Foil patterns. We also 
 meet with Geometrical skeletons, of 
 which those parts which admit of such a 
 course are filled in with patterns of this 
 kind. Thus a two- light window at North- 
 fleet, Kent (figured in Brandon’s Ana- 
 lysis), has its lights trefoiled with an ogee 
 sub-arch ; the circle in the head con- 
 tains three spherical triangles. The fa- 
 mous west window of Howden is of this 
 class; its primary pattern consists of 
 two arches supporting a spherical square ; 
 the fenestellae of two lights vvith aqua- 
 trefoil in the head; each light filled in 
 with a trefoil on a trefoil arch. The arch 
 of the window is stilted; the decorative 
 impost ranging with the spring of these 
 last arches, the constructive with that 
 of the fenestellae, considerably higher. 
 
GO 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 and in the side windows of the Chancel at Cossington, 
 Leicestershire, (of two lights with ogee foils throughout,) or 
 whether it is reduced to a mere foliated space, the apex of 
 the ogee forming the lower cusp, as in the examples at 
 Badby and Northampton, and one in Bristol Cathedral 
 (63) of singular character in several respects. In the latter 
 case, except when some distinctively Early element is in- 
 troduced, as in the two latter, we might almost regard this 
 form as a transition to the Flowing style. 
 
 It is by no means uncommon to find an Arch skeleton 
 filled up partly with Geometrical and partly with Foil 
 patterns. I am only prepared with one example in which 
 this occurs without intersection, namely a three-light 
 window at Bottisham®, Cambridgeshire, in which the side 
 lights have a trefoil on a trefoiled arch, the central a 
 cinquefoiled spherical triangle on a cinquefoiled arch. In 
 cases of intersection there are a good many examples. 
 In the Chancel at Easton Neston, Northants, is a two- 
 light windoAV, with a pointed arch in the lights support- 
 ing a trefoil, and a quatrefoiled circle in the head. The 
 workmanship is very delicate. The three-light ivindow 
 at llerne‘, Kent, is a most typical example of this class. 
 Of four lights we have the magnificent Avindows“ in 
 the Chapter-Id ouse at Wells, though it may be doubted 
 whether the intersection, AAdiich is moreover imperfect, is 
 a genuine example, as there is a subordination of mould- 
 ings, the central mullion being primary. A similar, but 
 plainer, AvindoAv, occurs at Hoby in Leicestershire (64), 
 Avhich, though mutilated in the head, I have selected for 
 representation, as a very typical instance. The east aauu- 
 doAv at Newnham, Northants, is of five lights, but its 
 Geometrical element is confined to a trefoiled circle in 
 the head of an imperfect intersection. 
 
 Figuied, Brandon's Analysis. ‘ Do. “ Do. Sharpe's AVindows. 
 
PI B 
 
 65 
 
OE COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 61 
 
 d. Anomalous Arch Tracery. 
 
 There is a kind of window not very easy to describe, 
 which may be considered as a variety of Arch tracery, 
 but which seems to find its best place in the present 
 section of anomalies and combinations, especially as its 
 best examples draw much from the two or three classes 
 last described. Whenever they are of more than two 
 lights, the mullions intersect, but the intersection does not 
 extend over the whole window ; it rather resembles a case 
 of imperfect intersection in which a more acute arch has 
 been substituted for the original arch of the window : con- 
 sequently the outermost tracery-bars do not, as in genuine 
 intersecting windows, coincide with the jamb, while the bar 
 next within them on each side is usually^' prolonged into 
 the arch, forming a boundary to the intersecting lines ; a 
 figure or figures independent of them being introduced 
 into the irregular square thus formed in the head, or 
 the space itself simply foliated. Tvvo-light windows have 
 much more the air of pure Geometrical or Foil than Arch 
 tracery, but they are manifestly composed on the same 
 principle as the larger ones, whose character is decidedly 
 intersecting, though it will be seen that they all come 
 strictly under the first great division of Geometrical win- 
 dows, no part of the arches of the lights coinciding with 
 the arch of the window. There is a two-light Avindow of 
 this kind in the north aisle at Cuddesden (65), and a 
 plainer one at Clent, Staffordshire. Of three lights, with 
 the tracery intersecting, and treated as such, is one at 
 Ilsington, Devon (66), in which the quadrangular space is 
 simply quatrefoiled \ at Stafford is one in which the in- 
 
 '■ 'J’his may iu some degree recall the window at Rusliden, mentioned p. 54. 
 
62 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 tersectiiig skeleton is filled in with good Arch and Foil 
 tracery. Sometimes the boundary lines are omitted, as in 
 one of three lights at Portbury, Somerset, in which a 
 quatrefoiled circle occupies the head. A more splendid 
 example of the same arrangement is afforded by the east 
 window of Ely Chapel (67), London, the lower part of 
 whose tracery is one of the finest exhibitions of combined 
 Geometrical and Arch and Foil tracery. These two might 
 have come under the head of combined Geometrical and 
 Arch tracery, but they are decidedly conceived upon the 
 same principle as the other examples just given, which 
 cannot possibly be brought under the definition of that 
 class. And I may mention as another example of the 
 definition and the spirit of a design being quite dis- 
 tinct, the beautiful window at Solihull, figured in the 
 Glossary"", which in strictness must be considered as an 
 example of Foil tracery, and in its genera] effect only a 
 more elaborate version of that just described at Cud- 
 desden. 
 
 e. Subarcuation. 
 
 We now come to windows in which the only vestige 
 of Arch tracery is to be found in their Suharcuations. 
 By this term we understand when the fenestellae of a com- 
 pound window have the outer side of their arches coinciding 
 with the arch of the window, and are consequently thus 
 far constructed on the Arch principle. Though many fine 
 windows occur of this kind, it is hardly possible but to 
 consider the form as a corruption of the pure Geometrical, 
 to which a great number of windows of this kind belong 
 in other respects ; as this shape does not give anything 
 like the same opportunity for exhibiting the several figures 
 
 Plate 153. 
 
OP COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. C3 
 
 ill the beauty of which they are capable. I have already 
 remarked^ that a figure in the head of a two-light window 
 of Arch tracery seems unnaturally placed, not supported, 
 as in the pure Geometrical, but simply thrust in. This 
 applies with more or less force to nearly all snbarcuated iviii- 
 dows with a Geometrical centre-piece, by far the most iin- 
 merous class. Snbarcuated windows fall natinally under 
 two divisions, namely those in which the fenestellm consti- 
 tute the whole window, the lines of subarcuation springing 
 from a central mullion ; and those in which there are one or 
 more complementary lights. This division is nearly coincident 
 with that into windows with an even and an odd number of 
 lights ; the latter must necessarily have a complement, and 
 in the former the arrangement without one, though not 
 absolutely necessary, is far more natural and usual. Now 
 in this case, the figure in the centre-piece is unnaturally 
 squeezed in, and cannot possibly obtain the prominence 
 which naturally belongs to it, and which is afforded by the 
 pure Geometrical compositions ; where there is a comple- 
 ment, more room is given to the centre-piece, but it is 
 only by resting it on the arch of the central light, which, 
 unless the centre-piece be a spherical sphere, gives the 
 unpleasant idea of the point of the arch running into it, 
 being in fact a contradiction of the rule which forbids a 
 Geometrical figure to rest upon a single arch. 
 
 Windows of two lights with such a figure in the head 
 have an equal claim to be classed here, or as examples of 
 Arch tracery filled up with other patterns. Any window 
 of Arch and Toil tracery, with a distinct figure in the head, 
 (as fig. 56, GO), may be considered as an instance. Exam- 
 ples of considerable size, with unfoliated lights and a tre- 
 foiled circle in the head, occur in the Chancel at Stoke Bruern, 
 
 ^ See above, p. 1 1 , 41. 
 
G4 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 Northants, l3iit one can hardly help suspecting'that the lights 
 have been despoiled of a filling up of Arch and Foil or 
 some similar kind. Others with the lights merely trefoiled, 
 occur at Aldwinkle St. Peter’s in the same county. 
 
 Examples of three lights are not uncommon ; the centre- 
 piece is most commonly a circle, either foliated, or filled in 
 with some other pattern. The side-lights or fenestellse, 
 being naturally very long, are usually relieved by the 
 insertion of Arch and Toil or some similar pattern. Good 
 examples of this kind, with the circle in the head foliated, 
 occur at Kingston St. Michael, Wilts, at Cransley^ North- 
 ants, Long Wittenham*', Berks, and Alelton Mowbray ; 
 in the last case the side lights are merely trefoiled. In 
 the aisles at Bridlington’’ are examples of this kind, where 
 the fenestellas have a pointed arch supporting a spherical 
 triangle. A very beautiful example at St. Sampson’s, Crick- 
 lade, has the circle cinquefoiled, the cusps terminating in 
 flowers. At Shiffnal is one, which, at present at least, 
 has no foliation at all in any part. On the other hand in 
 one of those at Dorchester® the eircle has an elegant multi- 
 foil. Of more complicated designs for the centre-piece a 
 very beautiful example occurs in Merton ChapeP, where the 
 circle is filled with three sexfoiled spherical triangles, the 
 spandrils being also sexfoiled. At Charlton Horethorne®, 
 Somerset, is one whose design is nearly identical, but the 
 whole is of far less graceful proportions ; another of much 
 the same kind occurs at Swansea. Most of the fine win- 
 dows in the north aisle at Dorchester are of this kind, 
 in one’ we find a very curious pattern in the circle ; a sex- 
 
 ^ Figured in Brandon’s Analysis, Ap- 
 pendix. 
 
 “ Do. Archffiological Journal, ii. 134. 
 Figured in Sharpe’s Parallels. 
 Addington’s Dorchester, p. 18. 
 
 '' Figured, (the exterior,) Bloxani, p. 
 
 162, and (the interior) more accurately 
 in the Glossary, pi. 154. 
 
 £ Do. Sharpe’s Decorated Windows, 
 f Do. Addington’s Dorchester, p. 21. 
 Rickman, p. 144. 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 foiled circle occupies the centre, and is surrounded by six 
 foliated segments, as if an infinite series of circles had 
 been cut through by the centre-piece. At St. Alban’s is a 
 similar one, only the space within the segments is foliated 
 without any circle. At Shiere, Surrey®, the circle is filled 
 with four quatrefoils placed horizontally ; a diagonal ar- 
 rangement would have been far more graceful. Ear dif- 
 ferent are windows where a spherical square is substituted ; 
 this form exactly fills up the space in the head, even better 
 than uEen the outline is purely Geometrical, and its lower 
 apex coinciding with that of the complementary light makes 
 its sides appear continuations of the alternate ones of the 
 light. There is a good example at Great Marlow (68), 
 and another beautiful window of this sort at Trent, Somer- 
 set. In one at Stoke Albany'', Northants, a centre-piece 
 of this form includes a circle filled with two intersecting 
 triangles. 
 
 Hitherto we have met with none but purely Geometrical 
 elements, except in the almost necessary way of treating 
 the fenestellae. In the east window of Spaldwick Church, 
 Hants (69), we find a Eoil element introduced in a circle 
 filled up with three trefoils in a manner exactly analogous 
 to the spherical triangles at Merton and Swansea ; and at 
 Astel, Oxon (70), is a pure and beautiful instance of a ske- 
 leton filled in consistently with a Foil pattern, the centre- 
 piece consisting of an independent sexfoil. Windows of 
 this kind, but perhaps of less merit, occur at Stafford and 
 Shiffnal', in which a large diagonal quatrefoil forms the 
 centre-piece. The east window of Eastington, Gloucester, 
 has a cinquefoil centre-piece and pointed arches beneath 
 the trefoils in the fenestellse. 
 
 These three-light windows, though not attaining to the 
 
 ^ Do. Brandon’s Analysis, Appendix, 
 
 No. 47. 
 
 K 
 
 '* Figured in Brandon’s Analysis. 
 
 ‘ Do. Petit’s Architectural Character. 
 
66 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 higliest beauty, and open to a manifold objection in the de- 
 corative construction of most of them, are still, when skil- 
 fully managed, elegant and satisfactory. But a four-light 
 window it is almost impossible to design so as to be other- 
 wise than actually unpleasing. The west window of Staf- 
 ford Church (71), is as pure and simple an instance as can 
 be imagined ; it differs in nothing but proportion from 
 the purest Geometrical type, but the change in proportion 
 has at once destroyed all the beauty of that most lovely 
 form. The centre-piece has lost all its importance, and 
 the acute form of the fenestellm does not admit of being 
 filled up by the circles iu their heads. In some instances, 
 the centre-piece still being a circle, the fenestellae are treated 
 in another manner, one something analogous to the way in 
 which a light is filled in in Arch and Foil tracery and its 
 analogous forms ; the two lights are grouped under an 
 arch of the usual proportion, forming a two-light window 
 of Geometrical or Foil tracery, and a trefoil or a spherical 
 triangle is inserted over its apex. Such examples are found 
 in Cartmel-' and Bridlingtoiff Abbey Churches; but the 
 effect is by no means good. The fenestriform triforium 
 of the latter Church exhibits another instance of the shifts 
 which this kind of form involves ; the arch is round, by 
 which means the fenestellae are reduced to the ordinary 
 proportions of a two-light window. In fact, the only at 
 all appropriate way of filling up fenestellae of this kind 
 would be either by treating them as windows of Arch tra- 
 cery, in which case the window would be at once removed 
 
 j Figured in Sharpe’s Windows. such is the case with one of the singular 
 
 Do. Parallels. In this case we can- examples at Oundle. The lower part of 
 not fail to remark the similarity between this (71) forms a perfect and beautiful 
 this arrangement, and that of the three- subarcuated window of three lights, with 
 light window in the same Church al- a graceful centre-piece of pure Geome- 
 ready mentioned. It is curious that a trical tracery; over the apex is a large 
 form very much approaching to that of trefoil, rich with ball-flower, and the 
 these fenestellae should ever have been whole is included under an acute arch, 
 employed as a detached window ; yet 
 
01' COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 67 
 
 from the present class, and become a mere example of im- 
 perfect intersection, as the window already (fig. 64) alluded 
 to at Hoby, Leicestershire, or the east window at Nar- 
 boroiigh in the same county ; or by the employment of a 
 large foil figure in their heads. This is done in two 
 windows from which the Geometrical centre-piece has 
 vanished. In one at Hereford Cathedral (72), the centre- 
 piece has a large cinquefoil of peculiar shape, below which 
 is a trefoil-headed figure after the manner of Trumping- 
 ton. The fenestellae^ have a large trefoil. One in Bristol 
 Cathedral has fenestellae which differ only in being more 
 elaborately foliated, but instead of a centre-piece the space 
 in the head is trefoiled with a double cusping. At Staf- 
 ford is one more like the Hereford example, but here the 
 lights in the fenestellae themselves contain a trefoil on a 
 trefoil arch. 
 
 Examples of five lights occur formed just on the prin- 
 ciple of the similar three and four-light windows ; with a 
 circle in the head, and Geometrical or Foil tracery in the 
 fenestellae. Good examples occur at Bedale', Yorkshire, 
 at Stafford, and the gable window at Guisboroiigh'" ; all 
 these have the lights and ffgures plain or merely foliated, 
 though the Guisboroiigh example has a statue curiously 
 inserted in the centre-piece. The central circle, which 
 had sunk into insignificance in the four-light windows, 
 has regained the same prominence which it possessed in 
 those of three, but with the same difficulty as regards the 
 complementary light. At Stafford and Bedale there is a 
 circle in the head of the fenestellae ; the difficulty attend- 
 ing the use of which is avoided in the last example, at the 
 expense of the whole window, by the employment of a 
 remarkably obtuse arch; at Giiisborough the figure in 
 
 * Figured in Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
 Do. Parallels. 
 
68 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 tliis position is a large trefoil, wliicli suits the form much 
 better. This last is also the case in a fine specimen at 
 Exeter whose centre-piece is a good instance of a circle 
 filled in with trefoils. Others have the fenestellae of 
 Arch tracery". One in the west front of St. Sampson’s, 
 Cricklade (73), has for its centre-piece a circle containing 
 three qnatrefoiled vesicae ; and to this class belongs the 
 superb east window at Great Haseley°; the centre-piece 
 contains three spherical triangles and the fenestellse are 
 filled with the richest Arch and Eoil work. The only 
 instance I am acquainted with in which the centre-piece is 
 other than a circle is the east window of Claverley Church, 
 Salop, which has a spherical square, but, from the obtuse 
 arch of the window and the meagre treatment of the centre- 
 piece, has a heavy and unpleasant appearance. 
 
 I am not prepared with many examples of six lights ; there 
 is one in the south transept at Tintern’’, the fenestellae of 
 two lights are Geometrical ; they are two tall complemen- 
 tary lights and the centre-piece contains four quatrefoils 
 placed diagonally. One might conceive the effect better 
 with a complement of two lights grouped together ; where 
 the fenestellae embrace the whole window, as in one in the 
 Bishop’s Palace at Wells, the insignificance to which the 
 centre-piece is reduced has a bad effect. Of seven lights is 
 a noble example in Samlesbury'i Chapel, Lancashire : the 
 fenestellae are of three lights with a single circle in the 
 head, treated in the same way as the three-light example 
 at PortaudemerG the centre-piece is a circle containing 
 three circles ; the foliation of their spandrils detracts from 
 the pure Geometrical character of the compositiouk 
 
 “ The complementary light precludes p Figured in Sharpe’s Parallels, 
 these from being looked upon as^mere q Figured in the Oxford Society’s 
 imperfect intersections. Sheets. 
 
 o Frontispiece to Weare’s Great Hase- ” See above, fig. 16. 
 ley. ' Among Subarcuated windows we may 
 
ri. i.'> 
 
 76 
 
 75 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 69 
 
 f. Subarcuated Foil Windows. 
 
 From Subarcuated windows we may not unnaturally 
 pass to a class* already alluded to, wliich may be called 
 Subarcuated Foil windows ; a class small in extent, but well 
 worthy the attention of any inquirer into the subject of 
 tracery. They come fully and literally under the definition 
 of Foil tracery, but, as their principle cannot be thoroughly 
 understood until Subarcuation has been thoroughly under- 
 stood, I have thought it better to postpone their examina- 
 tion till the present point. They are an instance of trans- 
 lation, a rendering the forms of one style into the details 
 of another ; they are the expression of the idea of a Subar- 
 cuated window in the language of Foil tracery, by substi- 
 tuting for the simple arch and Geometrical centre-piece a 
 Foil arch and a Foil centre-piece. The latter process we 
 have already met with in genuine Subarcuated windows ; it 
 is the former which gives the present class its distinctive 
 character. The only examples with which I am prepared 
 come from two neighbouring Churches in Staffordshire, 
 Penkridge and Tettenhall. Both these contain two-light 
 examples (75) ; these resemble a two-light window of 
 Arch tracery with a figure in the head ; as it has been 
 above remarked that a Foil figure, and still more a Foil 
 
 also reckon the extraordinary east win- 
 dow at Mildenhall, figured in Paley’s 
 Gothic Architecture, p. 178; of its 
 seven "lights the external pair only sup- 
 port an open band of quatrefoils sur- 
 rounding the genuine window which ap- 
 pears within, in the form of a Subarcu- 
 ated one of five lights. The centre- 
 piece is a vesica octofoiled within a band 
 of foil figures; the fenestell® have in 
 the head an untoward sort of spherical 
 triangle, (two sides being formed by the 
 arches,) octofoiled in a manner equally 
 untoward. Altogether I am acquaint- 
 ed with no example which presents a 
 
 greater variety of unusual forms in a 
 single design. 
 
 There is a five-light window in Exeter 
 Cathedral (74) which seems a combina- 
 tion of subarcuation with that TrapeK^aats 
 of Arch Tracery of which the east win- 
 dow of Ely Chapel is the grand exam- 
 ple. Its general notion is entirely that 
 of the latter, but its lower part consists 
 of two subarcuated designs of three- 
 lights, one light being common to each, 
 according to an arrangement more usual 
 in later styles ; a large quatrefoiled circle 
 crowns the whole. 
 
 See above, p. 40, note a. 
 
70 
 
 01' GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 arch, suggests a Geometrical arch and figure of the same 
 proportion, the long trefoil arches of these designs suggest 
 the long lights of Arch tracery, being, as it Avere, the folia- 
 tion of such with the arches removed ; and the trefoil in 
 the head, representative and suggestive of a circle", shares 
 the fault of such windows as those at Aldwinkle'', in appear- 
 ing to be thrust in between, and not supported by, the 
 arches of the lights. Tettenhall also supplies a three-light 
 example (76), in which long trefoil arches again represent 
 the side lights, and a large trefoil tlie circular centre-piece ; 
 of course the effect of the former is immeasurably inferior 
 to that of the simple arch, but we may observe that the 
 centre-piece is more fortunate than its Geometrical pro- 
 totype, in so far as its lower cusp is well and naturally 
 supported by the apex of the trefoil arch below, just as in 
 a light of Arch and Foil tracery. 
 
 g. Imperfect Spherical Triangles. 
 
 There is a curious hind of window, or rather two or 
 three anomalous classes which have a certain resemblance 
 to one another, the ruling idea of which, so far as they 
 have any, seems to be that of imperfect spherical triangles. 
 In several examples w^e find tracery composed of a series 
 of arches rising from the heads of the lights, and in their 
 turn supporting others ; the Avhole windoAV-head being an 
 expanse of these cut through by the arch at an arbitrary 
 point, and leaving imperfect figures at the sides. When, 
 as in some three-light examples in Lichfield Cathedral, 
 and in the five-light east of Shiffnal'", these arches are 
 merely trefoiled, Ave see but little vestige of the triangle, 
 
 “ The cusps being round ; when they '' See above, p. 64. 
 
 ave pointed, the trefoil suggests a spheri- “ Figured in Petit’s Architectural 
 
 cal triangle. Character. 
 
OP COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 71 
 
 and there is a strong approach to continuity ’‘j but in the 
 Stapleton Chapel at North Moreton, Berks (77), we find 
 windows of pi'etty much the same outline^, the east window 
 of five lights, the rest of three, in which the foliation con- 
 sists of a trefoil, whose lower cusp stands free, evidently 
 suggesting the lower arc of the triangle. Broin this the 
 transition is very easy to a kind of tracery, of which Exeter 
 Cathedral supplies several examples, especially a typical one 
 of five lights"; there is also one of three lights at Corsham, 
 Wilts. Here the different arcs of the triangle are omitted 
 in turn, so that each cusp stands free in turn, the lower 
 arc appearing and disappearing as well as the others. 
 From this we may fairly infer that the North Moreton 
 window is one of the same kind, in which the lower arc 
 only is omitted. 
 
 Tracery of this kind is also used in subordination, as 
 may be seen in two examples from Exeter ; arches 
 rising from the heads of the alternate lights, and in- 
 cluding smaller patterns of the same kind. The large 
 and elaborate five-light example (78) with its filling in 
 of Arch and Foil work is not very successful ; it seems 
 as though it wanted a third arch both in the primary and 
 secondary patterns to complete the pyramidal outline, which 
 would have involved another embracing the whole of the 
 former, and almost necessitated completing the spherical 
 triangle in the upper figure, unless either the secondary 
 lines had been allowed to intersect the primary, or the 
 principle of formation been deserted in the upper part. 
 But even with the present arrangement, the trefoil in the 
 
 At Yardley, Worcestershire, is a tobequitealate.acaseofPerpendicu- 
 window of three lights, wliose sole tracery lar with Foil arches, of which we shall 
 
 consists of two long trefoil arches rising find some instances. 
 
 from the apices of the lights ; being a r E.xcept that a qiiatrefoiled space 
 kind of Foil version of this kind. It is supplants the topmost figure and de- 
 some years since I saw it, and having stroys the pyramidal outline, 
 
 no note of the mouldings, cannot be ^ An illustration will be I'ound in the 
 confident of its date ; it is not unlikely fenestellae of the window, fig. 80 . 
 
72 
 
 OF GEOMETRlCATi TRACERY. 
 
 head hardly seems the best way of occupying that space. 
 The three-light window is far more satisfactory, and it 
 may be remarked that its outline forms the primary 
 pattern of the superb window in the south transept at 
 Hull’^, except that the two lower triangles are perfect. 
 The filling up is of the best Foil tracery, with an ap- 
 proach to Flamboyancy in some of the spandrils. 
 
 I shall conclude the subject of Geometrical tracery with 
 some examples of filling up of centre-pieces in different 
 ways not directly arising from any of the varieties already 
 described, and finally with some windows and classes of 
 windows which appear to be wholly anomalous. 
 
 C. Centre-pieces of Wheel Tracery, 
 a. In Geometrical Figures. 
 
 Of the first class the most important kind are the 
 instances of centre-pieces consisting of circles filled in 
 with tracery more or less closely imitating the spokes of 
 a wheel. These are found in windows of every kind 
 admitting a circular centre-piece, both pure Geometrieal, 
 Subarcuated, etc., and the instances might be fairly classed 
 under those different heads. But I have thought it better 
 to reserve them for this separate cursory notice, because 
 this form of centre-piece is not derived from any of the va- 
 rieties of ordinary tracery ; it is simply a wheel- window 
 transferred whole to the head of an arched one. Now 
 the wheel-window has a quite distinct origin and devel- 
 opment from those of the common form, and will con- 
 sequently meet with a separate consideration. I shall 
 therefore now only briefly refer to a few examples of 
 this kind, without some notice of which my series of 
 Geometrical Avindows would be imperfect. Windows of 
 four lights, of purely Geometrical outline, Avith wheel 
 
 ® Figured in Sharpe’s Windows;. 
 
1 ^' 
 
 
 
PI. 17 
 
 80 
 
O P COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOIVS. 
 
 73 
 
 tracery in the head, occur in Exeter Cathedral, and at 
 Temple Balsall (79). The latter example is one of singu- 
 lar elegance ; the wheel has twelve diverging rays, ending 
 in trefoil arches ; that at Exeter has but six, and is 
 altogether less skilfully managed. The same Cathedral 
 has also in the north transept a superb example of seven 
 lights (80) ; the outline is Geometrical, the fenestellae 
 filled with tracery composed of the imperfect spherical 
 triangles already described ; the wheel has eight rays, 
 which at their termination branch off into similar tracery. 
 ■A fine window in Bayeux CathedraC, of the same num- 
 ber of lights, has the wheel somewhat purer, but the 
 tracery of the fenestellse is very awkward. The like 
 occurs with outlines of other kinds ; thus in the three- 
 light subarcuated east window of Eydon, Northants (81), 
 the centre-piece has four diverging rays in saltire. The 
 superb east window of Merton Chapel is familiar to every 
 one, and, notwithstanding the incongruous introduction 
 of canopies and pinnacles, must be allowed to be one of 
 the finest in England. It is of five lights, subarcuated, 
 with fenestellse of three, of rich intersecting Arch tracery ; 
 the wheel is of an admirable design, and the proportions 
 of the window allow it its full magnitude and importance. 
 Of the same character and number of lights, but far less 
 skilfully designed, is the west window of Tintern Abbey®; 
 here the fenestellse are of four lights, one being common ; 
 the consequence is that the centre-piece, good in itself, is 
 reduced in size, thrust up into the top of the window, and 
 almost studiously shown to be a mere interruption of an 
 intersecting design. The fenestellse have an imperfect in- 
 tersection ; circles containing four quatrefoils occur in their 
 heads, which have nearly as much importance in the ge- 
 neral design as the main centre-piece itself. 
 
 Figured, Rickman, liv. 
 
 I- 
 
 ' Do. Sliarpe’s Parallels. 
 
74 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY, 
 
 A mixture of the wheel notion with the more usual 
 method of filling a circle with foil figures is found in the 
 splendid windows at Leominster‘S, so remarkable for the 
 gorgeous display of ball-flower alike on jambs, muUions, 
 and tracery-bars. In their centre-pieces the actual lines 
 of the wheel occur, but instead of receiving their natural 
 treatment in a foliation at the extremity, the irregular 
 triangles formed by them with the circle, six in number, 
 alternately receive a complete trefoil cusping, and a free 
 quatrefoil. The effect is decidedly that of the other ar- 
 rangement, and perhaps supplies us with the key to the 
 principle on which examples of that kind were usually 
 designed. The circles in the heads of the fenestellse of 
 a subarcuated five-light window at Tishtoft®,* Lincolnshire, 
 exactly resemble those at Leominster : the centre-piece 
 has a curious arrangement of foil figures. We may also 
 remark that some of the instances of very bold foliation, 
 as in the gable window at Lincoln, at least suggest the 
 notion of a centre with diverging rays. 
 
 I am at this point at once able to introduce a greater 
 number of foreign examples than usual, and find it con- 
 sistent with my plan to do so ; as tracery of this sort 
 may be far better studied in German and Flemish windows 
 than in our own. Thus in Utrecht Cathedral (82) we 
 have a very valuable example in which a spherical square 
 is filled with tracery properly adapted only to a circle. 
 This shows at once how completely the two figures answer 
 to one another in German and English tracery, and farther 
 that the circle is the true original figure, the other, one 
 introduced only by analogy and development. Here the 
 upper lines of the square do not coincide with the arch 
 of the window. But more curious than these are a large 
 
 Figured in Sharpe’s Windows, and Rickman, p. HL 
 ® Figured in Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 75 
 
 series of windows at Mindeii, in wliicli the centre-piece 
 consists of an imperfect circle, filled with its proper tra- 
 cery; that is, not a semicircle or other regular segment, 
 but a circle simply interrupted or partially hidden by the 
 Geometrical combinations below, as if they had been added 
 in front of a previously existing circular window. Tlie 
 apex of the lights and the centre of the circle seem gene- 
 rally to be in the line joining the imposts of the window 
 arch ; consequently the tracery commences very far below 
 the spring of the arch ; far lower than we are accustomed 
 to even in those English windows where such an arrange- 
 ment is found at all. 
 
 b. Wheel Tracery loithout a central Geometrical figure. 
 
 From this the transition is easy to examples in which 
 there is no Geometrical centre-piece, but a circle still in 
 idea occupies the head of the window ; that is, it is filled 
 with rays diverging from a centre, and connecting them- 
 selves with the combinations below how they best can. 
 Windows of this kind are not necessarily transitional to 
 the next style, though they often are so, and indeed ex- 
 amples hardly to be distinguished from them often occur, 
 which must be referred, not only in date, but in character, 
 to the Flowing period. They do not necessarily introduce 
 any form alien to the Geometrical style ; still they manifest 
 a desire to forsake its stiff and formal outlines, and to effect, 
 if possible, some closer connexion than it allows, between 
 the upper and lower portions of the composition. The de- 
 gree of success with which this is attempted is very various. 
 In some examples, both German and English, as in the 
 annexed very fine window (83) from Altenberg Abbey, it 
 can hardly be said to be even attempted ; and in others, 
 the intention, though clearly manifested, cannot be called 
 successful. 
 
76 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 By the use of a tall central light in three-light windows, 
 its apex may be made to coincide with the centre, and the 
 desired effect is at once produced. This is done in the rich 
 range in the south aisle of Gloucester CathedraF, in one of 
 the most admirable of the admirable patterns at Merton, 
 and in a window at Claverley, Salop (84). The ogee ter- 
 minations of the divergent figures, though the use of this 
 shape always seems like a deviation from true Geometrical 
 rigidity, do not suffice of themselves to make this a tran- 
 sitional example. Some actual Mowing portions may be 
 found in a singular window at Postwick, Norfolk^, but they 
 are in positions which do not affect the general integrity of 
 the outline, which is a very remarkable one. No window, 
 not actually Continuous, can have its parts more com- 
 pletely fused together, while the rare use of the straight- 
 sided arch in the lights and the cross which forms the most 
 conspicuous feature in the tracery impart to it a more than 
 ultra- Geometrical stiffness. 
 
 c. Divergent Vesicce in Head. 
 
 There is another sort of window closely connected with 
 this, and often hardly to be distinguished from them, which 
 equally involves the notion of a centre, but which never- 
 theless is probably to be assigned to a somewhat different 
 origin. We have already*' met with an arrangement of 
 vesicge diverging from a centre, which runs almost imper- 
 ceptibly into a large and bold kind of foliation. Figures 
 of this sort often form centre-pieces. At Church Bramp- 
 ton, Northants (So), is a two-light window ’with four such 
 forming a cross, totally unconnected Avith the lights, ogee 
 though they be. Three-light windows in Avhich three vesicae 
 
 f Figured in Petit’s Arcliitccturul Cha- ® See below, fig. 96. 
 racter. iiee above, p. 29, note c. 
 
PI. 19. 
 
 88 
 
Or C0MB1^AT10N IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 77 
 
 diverge from a centre coinciding with the apex of the 
 central light occur at ElingS Hampshire, St. Sampson’s, 
 Cricklade, Erisby, Leicestershire, St. Alban’s Abbey, and the 
 Palace at Wells (86). Thus far the vesicae are real vesicae 
 and retain their appropriate complete foliation ; in other 
 instances, especially when they are numerous, their sides 
 become flattened, the foliation confined to the extremity, 
 and it is almost impossible to draw the line between this 
 and the preceding form in such examples as the five di- 
 verging figures at Crickh and the seven at Chipping Norton 
 (87). In these the ogee central light imparts a degree of 
 Plowing character, and they might be called transitional 
 examples. 
 
 Centre-pieces of this kind are also employed in windows 
 of greater pretension, and where the outline does not require 
 any attempt at fusing them with the work below. Thus 
 in some of the four-light windows in Bristol Cathedral we 
 have fenestellse of two lights, and in the head, instead of a 
 circle, four diverging vesicae which might have escaped from 
 one, a good deal like the Brampton example with the lights 
 simple-pointed and divided by a secondary pattern ; notwith- 
 standing the mode in which their own foliation approximates 
 them to the purer wheel tracery, it is impossible not to recog- 
 nize in them the idea of a large quatrefoil, the appropriate 
 crown of the work below. We also find them, — and we shall 
 see this use more extensively in the Flowing windows which 
 are derived, and can hardly be distinguished from them, — in 
 the heads of large windows like that at Ely Chapel. There 
 is one of this kind of five lights at Cheltenham, and a still 
 grander one in the north transept at Stafford (88) of seven, 
 having fenestellse of three and four respectively with a 
 
 ‘ Figured, Rickman, p. 147. intended for the cinquefoil of Astley, the 
 
 j This is a very singular instance of founder of the Church, just as the fleur- 
 tracery having an individual reference ; de-lys is so often found in later Frencli 
 there can be little doubt but that this is tracery. 
 
78 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 common light ; the intersecting portion is filled up with 
 Arch and Poil work, which at Stafford is remarkably good 
 and pure. The four diverging vesicae at Cheltenham re- 
 tain their stiff Geometrical character, while those at Stafford 
 receive somewhat of a Flowing air from their ogee termina- 
 tions ; on the other hand the Cheltenham example is less 
 pure in its lower portion ; having the heads of the fenes- 
 tellae very slightly ogeed. 
 
 d. Foil Wheel tracery. 
 
 It would almost seem as if a Foil variety followed every 
 conceivable form of Geometrical tracery as its inseparable 
 attendant ; none would have seemed less calculated to 
 admit of a translation into Foil language than that which 
 we have just been considering, yet among the immense di- 
 versity of examples at Exeter (89) we find one which can 
 be viewed in no other light. The idea is that of a five- 
 light window of Geometrical outline filled in with Foil 
 patterns, the tracery of the fenestellae being of the latter 
 kind, and the complementary light having a cinquefoil arch. 
 The centre-piece consists of five free quatrefoils diverging 
 from a circle as nearly coinciding with the apex of the 
 central light as the nature of the figimes will allow. 
 
 e. Diveryent Compositions. 
 
 Vestiges of the wheel notion may also be found in a few 
 curious Avindows in Avhich certain whole compositions seem to 
 diverge from a centre, as in the chancel at Claverley, Salop 
 (90) ; in this they are filled up with a sort of Foil tracery, 
 which might have actually sprung from the centre. In the 
 otherwise very similar west AvindoAv at Dunchurch they are 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 79 
 
 absent : the east window of the same church’' resembles 
 this last, save in the shortness of the diverging figures, 
 which have, so to speak, lost their sides, so that the wheel 
 notion has well nigh disappeared. 
 
 D. Introduction of straight lines. 
 
 I have now’", in concluding the subject of Geometrical 
 tracery, to mention a few classes and instances in which 
 straight lines appear unnaturally introduced, sometimes 
 indeed to such an extent as almost to produce an incidental 
 foreshadowing of Perpendicular. Hitherto we have met 
 with them only as radii of circles, or, more rarely, as sides 
 of Geometrical figures : we shall now see them, though 
 they still appear, as they ever must, thrust in contrary to 
 the genius of the design, take their place among the most 
 important lines of the tracery. 
 
 a. Spiked Foliation. 
 
 There is one class of these anomalies which may claim 
 to be treated at some little length, as its full development 
 presents several curious and elaborate windows, the singu- 
 larity of whose character has often been remarked, and whose 
 origin and progress may be easily traced, and is well worthy 
 of notice. I have therefore reserved for notice in this place 
 all the examples, which I might otherwise have arranged 
 under the several heads of Geometrical tracery, of a curious 
 treatment of figures which, for want of a better name, 1 
 may be allowed to call sjiiked foliation. Thus in a three- 
 light window at Winchelsea (91) the tracery consists of 
 three spherical triangles, which at first sight appear to be 
 
 '' Figured in the Glossary. 
 
80 
 
 OP gp:ometrical tracery. 
 
 foliated in a singular manner with very sharp cusps, but 
 still exactly analogous to the ordinary method of cinque- 
 foiling such a space. On examination it will be perceived 
 that the mathematical construction of the form is this ; 
 within the triangle another triangle is inscribed, having its 
 curved sides concave instead of convex, and each side being 
 broken by the addition of a round foil. The like treatment 
 of a triangle will be found in a window at Dorchester*, 
 which is also remarkable for employing a spherical triangle 
 as the centre-piece of a subarcuated window. In another 
 subarcuated window at Billingborough™, Lincolnshire, the 
 centre-piece is a spherical square, which is treated in an 
 exactly similar manner, the foils projecting from the sides 
 of a concave square. 
 
 This method of foliation, for so we must consider it, 
 having once been established, the next stage was to employ 
 the form as a distinct Toil figure. This produces the 
 almost indescribable windows in the transepts at Great 
 Bedwin”, where the side-lights seem a translation into this 
 strange language of single-light fenestellse filled in with 
 Arch and Foil tracery, while the centre-piece is a figure of 
 the same character whose ruling idea seems to be that of a 
 concave spherical square. 
 
 Finally, by prolonging, and, as it were, flattening the 
 spiked ends of the concave figures, we produce the sort of 
 tracery so remarkable in the singular examples at Whitby”, 
 CharthamP, and Woolfield (92) ; in all these straight lines are 
 the most prominent in the tracery, and, being set both hori- 
 zontally and vertically, produce, what may not improbably 
 have been designed, a strong cruciform effect. That these 
 straight lines are really a development of spiked foliation, 
 is very clear at Whitby’, where they still retain very per- 
 
 ' Addington’s Dorchester, p. 21. " Do. 
 
 Sharpe’s Decorated Windows. ’’ Rickman, p. 143, and Petit’s Archi- 
 
 n Do. tectural Character. 
 

PI. 20. 
 
OF COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL M’INDOIVS. 
 
 81 
 
 ceptibly the direction of tlie original concave figures. In 
 the other two examples they are much less conspicuous, 
 but may still be discerned on examination. The Whitby 
 and Chartham examples are the purest, both the fenestellae 
 and the centre-piece containing simply a Toil figure of 
 this kind, while at Woolfield they are inclosed in almost 
 Flowing figures, and the pattern is much disguised by the 
 insertion of trefoils, etc. ; especially in the centre-piece, and 
 in several places it manifests a strong tendency towards a 
 Flowino- character. Still it retains the cruciform idea more 
 
 o 
 
 distinctly in the fenestellae, exhibiting straight lines where 
 the others have curved ones. Both at Woolfield and 
 Chartham'^ are two-light windows of the same kind, which 
 differ but little from the fenestellae of the larger ones. 
 
 b. Straight Lines in Arch Tracery. 
 
 There is another class, not a very important one, in 
 which a straight line is carried into the arch as decidedly, 
 though less conspicuously, as in any Perpendicular win- 
 dow. This is a variety of Arch tracery without intersec- 
 tion, and in general effect hardly differs from the purest 
 examples of that kind. The only change is that in the 
 centre-light, instead of ah arched head, the mullion is car- 
 ried right up, and the space formed by it and the arch of 
 the window foliated, as at Townhope (93), Herefordshire ; 
 or else the mullion is continued alongside of the arch, as 
 in the west front of St. Sampson’s, Crickladeb the east 
 of the aisles at Tintern®, and at Cam, Gloucestershire. 
 Differences in the treatment of the side lights, which at 
 Cricklade are filled in with Geometrical patterns, may be 
 discerned in all these, and at Fleet, Lincoln^ each light is 
 
 4 Brandon’s Analysis. ’ Sharpe’s Parallels. 
 
 '■ Petit’s Architectural Character. ‘ Brandon, Appendix, 31. 
 
 M 
 
82 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 filled with excellent Arch and Foil tracery; the arch in 
 this case is segmental. 
 
 c. Anomalous instances of Straight Lines. 
 
 In these two classes there is at least something sys- 
 tematic in the employment of the straight line ; hut ex- 
 amples occur in which it seems quite arbitrary, and though 
 its introduction is perhaps often owing to constructive rea- 
 sons, still it is clear that a better design would have 
 obviated the necessity of resorting to such shifts. Thus 
 in the east window of Tintern Abbey (of eight lights 
 subarcuated, with a Geometrical outline filled in with Foil 
 patterns), the lower part of the centre-piece is so cut 
 off’ from the rest of the tracery, as to be supported on 
 a vertical tracery-bar rising from the central mullion. 
 This is probably necessary, but no such necessity is 
 found in the far nobler outline of the east Avindow at 
 Lincoln, of which this is a corruption. Temple Ealsall 
 also aftbrds an example of this, as of almost every other 
 feature of the style, good and bad. Here Ave have al- 
 ready seen a Geometrical AvindoAV of four lights, in Avhich 
 instead of a single grand centre-piece, a vertical mul- 
 lion divides the AvindoAv into two parts, and a circle, 
 similarly filled, is thrust in on each side of it". Bristol 
 Cathedral has a five-light Avindow (94), in Avhicli for a 
 centre-piece AA*e find three similar circles kept in between 
 the complementary light and two vertical lines rising in 
 thoroughly Perpendicular fashion from the apices of the 
 fenestellse, Avhose tracery has a Flowing tendency. In 
 the Mayor’s Chapel in the same city (95), is a subar- 
 cuated AvindoAv of three lights, rich Avith ball-flower, Avhich 
 looks as if tAvo vertical lines had been substituted for the 
 
 “ See above, fig. 18. 
 
PL 21. 
 
 CD 
 
 4 ^ 
 
 96 
 
OP COMBINATION IN GEOMETRICAL WINDOWS. 
 
 83 
 
 lower foil of a quatrefoil centre-piece. At Howell'' is an 
 example of spiked-foil figures of a peculiar character in- 
 serted between straight lines in a manner somewhat simi- 
 lar to that in Bristol Cathedral. And the present head 
 of paradoxes and anomalies may be the best place for 
 the (96) window from Postwick, Norfolk, which has been 
 already alluded to"'. 
 
 Coficlusion. 
 
 We have thus gone through the principal forms assumed 
 by the first or Geometrical type of window-traeery. Among 
 all its countless varieties, there is still a great unity of idea ; 
 the purer and more satisfactory the design, the more closely 
 does it set forth the principle of distinctness of parts, of an 
 unity produced by mere design and composition, and not 
 by actual fusion or combination of the parts among them- 
 selves. The mullions still form one design, the tracery in 
 the head another, the purer the style, the more distinct are 
 they ; they might be conceived as existing separately ; we 
 might carry off the centre-piece of many a splendid Geome- 
 trical composition, and set it up by itself as an independent 
 circular or triangidar window. The parts still continue 
 merely to support and be supported, but not to grow out 
 of each other ; they simply touch at various points, and leave 
 many spaces unoccupied; and the purer the style, the more 
 do these unoccupied spaces remain to bear witness to the 
 complete distinctness of the parts between which they lie ; to 
 fuse them together by foliation^ is at once to desert the 
 principle of the style. Among our later examples we have 
 seen many which, though not introducing any perceptibly 
 
 '' Among Rickman’s drawings, but That is by actual foliation of the 
 
 unluckily too slight and imperfect for space, not by insertion of a foil figure in 
 an engraving. a spandril, which is quite in harmony 
 
 " See above, p. 76. with the style, and is often desirable. 
 
84 
 
 OF GEOMETRICAL TRACERY. 
 
 
 contrary element, have forsaken the true ideal of the style ; 
 they have no Flowing lines, it is true, but the hardness and 
 distinctness of the Geometrical is gone ; we have lost the 
 commanding central figure ; a few vestiges only remain in 
 the divergent rays which at best only suggest the idea of a 
 comprising circle, and which are, as far as may be without 
 actual continuation of lines, fused together with the lights 
 below. How early this change was effected is shewn by its 
 occurring in so typical an example of the style as Merton 
 College Chapel. And it is little more than a corruption, it 
 is hardly a legitimate transition ; it introduces no Flowing 
 form, and hardly suggests a Flowing idea. It is clear that 
 the nmllions and tracery cannot be fused into one whole, 
 by Avorking them together around an arbitrarily assumed 
 centre. It must be done by continuing the mullions in the 
 tracery; the first fully developed attempt at which, in the 
 varied and magnificent forms of FloAving tracery, will form 
 the subject of our next Chapter. 
 
CHAPTER II. 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 § 1. Definition of Flowing Tracery. 
 
 Of this style, undoubtedly the most beautiful, con- 
 sidered in itself, of any that has ever been predominant 
 in this country, we shall find the examination, though I 
 am inclined to think less interesting, even more difficult 
 than that of the Geometrical which we have just concluded. 
 Infinite as are the forms assumed by the latter, it is clear 
 that a style formed by the arrangement of pre-existing 
 figures, and those of the hard and definite charaeter in- 
 herent in the simpler Geometrical curves, cannot produce 
 so many varieties as one in which lines are allowed to 
 ramify free and unrestrained according to the taste of the 
 designer. But besides the number of its forms, it is plain 
 that they will admit still more numerous combinations 
 than those of the Geometrical, and that instances of mere 
 intermingling without subordination of patterns, whieh in 
 the Geometrical style are always to be avoided, now become, 
 by reason of the mode in which the design is formed, both 
 more usual and more satisfaetory ; we can hardly hesitate 
 to add, more usual beeause more satisfaetory. Lines may 
 braneh in different directions in different parts of a window 
 without offence, while it is very difficult to pile together 
 
 n 
 
86 
 
 or FLOWING TRA.CERL. 
 
 independent figures formed in different manners witliout 
 more or less displeasing the eye. 
 
 Bnt anterior to the distribution of the great Blowing 
 class into its minor subdivisions, we are met with diffi- 
 culties as to the definition of the style itself. Flowing 
 tracery has a distinct and strongly marked ideal of its 
 own, bnt it is one far less easy to express in words than 
 that either of the preceding Geometrical or the subsequent 
 Perpendicular ; and the difficidty of carrying out its illus- 
 tration in actually existing instances, is greater still. In 
 fact the pure Flowing style, .as clearly distinguished from 
 Geometrical on the one hand and Flamboyant on the other, 
 is, with the exception of the Reticulated variety, of by no 
 means common occurrence. Traces of Geometrical re- 
 mained so long, and the Flamboyant development began 
 so early, that it is not unfrequent to meet with marks of 
 both in the same window ; much in the same way as 
 French Architecture ran immediately from Romanesque 
 to Geometrical, and exhibits features of both svstems of 
 contemporary date. I am inclined to think that pure 
 Flowing ti’acery was never a predominant style ; it was a 
 transient glimpse of beauty, almost too graceful to be en- 
 during. Still it does exist both in idea and in fact; and 
 Ave may therefore endeavour to draw out its definition. 
 In this Ave shall again find the piercings and the foli- 
 ations even better guides than the actual lines of tracery. 
 Instead of independent inserted figures, the tracery is 
 formed of spaces bounded by lines continued from the 
 mullions, not in an actually vertical direction, but rami- 
 fying towards different points. Still these spaces are, in 
 effect at least, to be considered as real figures, though 
 figures formed by the prolongation of the mullions, and 
 completely fused together. FloAving tracery is thus dis- 
 tinguished both from the stiff and independent figures of 
 
DEFINITION OP FLOWING TRACERY. 87 
 
 the Geometrical, and from both forms of the fully developed 
 Continuous, which can hardly be considered to have figures 
 at all in the strictest sense. Flamboyant and Perpendi- 
 cular tracery is a mere prolongation of the mullions, the 
 piercings being nothing more than the long narrow spaces 
 left between them, which are foliated at one end or other- 
 wise so as not to affect the whole piercing. This kind of 
 foliation, early as it was introduced, and, as we shall see, 
 directly developed from Geometrical forms, is always a 
 sign of incipient Flamboyancy. But the pure Flowing- 
 figures are of a somewhat squat form, and while they flow 
 and merge both into each other and into the lights below, 
 seem, no less than the Geometrical ones, to remain sta- 
 tionary, and have not, as the Flamboyant and Perpendicular, 
 a necessary tendency or direction to any point. Hence 
 foliation is absolutely necessary, far more so than in any 
 other style ; and the foliation most in accordance with the 
 principle of the style is one affecting the whole figure. As 
 the circle is the predominating and animating figure of the 
 Geometrical style, so that of the Flowing is the vesica ; the 
 various forms which it assumes without altogether receding 
 from the original type, are in harmony with the free and 
 unconstrained flow of the lines, as opposed to the hard 
 unyielding character of the Geometrical ; the two occupy 
 analogous positions in each. I am on the whole inclined 
 to think, notwithstanding the numerous and splendid in- 
 stances to the contrary, that Flowing tracery is purest and 
 most unmixed where there is no subordination in the 
 mouldings, but where the whole filling up of the window- 
 head is on one plane, and still more when it is of one 
 piece not to be subdivided into smaller patterns. Subor- 
 dination, and still more subarcuation, though they may be 
 brought into harmony with flowing forms, are certainly 
 not direct exponents or developments of their principles, 
 
88 
 
 or FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 but are merely remuauts of an earlier system worked, as 
 far as may be, into conformity with the leading idea of its 
 successor. The jiiercings in the head of a Flowing ivin- 
 dow, being still essentially figures, admit, though less ex- 
 tensively than in Geometrical, of unoccupied spaces or 
 spandrils, which are now most appropriately foliated. The 
 general effect of this beautiful style is still, as in the best 
 and purest Geometrical, rather pyramidal than directly 
 vertical, but the pyramidal tendency is now produced by 
 the actual course of the lines, and not by the mere group- 
 ing and piling of the figures. 
 
 § 2. Subdivisions of Flowing Traceryl 
 
 As in almost every other case of architectural develop- 
 ment, not only was an attempt made to engraft the princi- 
 ples and forms of the new style upon those of the pre-exist- 
 ing one, so as to produce a period of Transition, but the 
 forms themselves of the Flowing style were to a great 
 extent developed out of those of the Geometrical. And 
 this was done in two ways, so as to form at once two great 
 classes, under which the varieties of Flowing tracery may 
 be ranged with but few exceptions. We have, first of all, 
 those forms which were the direct results of the Flowing 
 principle, that is, of the desire to fuse the whole composition 
 together, by continuing the mullions in the tracery. This 
 attempt ivould of course in the first instance be made on 
 the pre-existing Geometrical patterns, which it would be 
 sought to bring under the operation of the new principle. 
 This might be done either by the production of analogous 
 figures, suggested by, and derived from, experiments on the 
 individual Geometrical figures ; or by endeavouring to bring 
 whole Geometrical patterns and combinations into con- 
 forniitv with Flowing ideas. The results of the former 
 
SUBDIVISIONS or BLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 89 
 
 process constitute the first class, including the purest and 
 most typical kinds of Plowing tracery, which are merely 
 suggested by and analogous to certain forms of Geome- 
 trical. The second class comprehends those directly 
 derived from patterns essentially Geometrical, and which 
 though they have assumed a completely Flowing character, 
 and indeed produce some of the most beautiful, and even 
 of the most continuous, of Flowing windows, cannot be 
 considered as such direct emanations from its principle. 
 As chronological exactness is throughout less my aim than 
 an investigation of ideas, I shall, in conformity with my 
 rule, postpone the consideration of those transitional speci- 
 mens between Geometrical and Flowing, which exhibit a 
 combination of the details of the two styles, until I have 
 classified the different forms of the Flowing. We shall 
 also find, as in Geometrical, many anomalous examples 
 which cannot be well forced within the bonds of any 
 stringent arrangement ; but in most instances they exhibit 
 sufficient resemblance to some one or other class to be 
 placed with it, although not strictly under it. 
 
 Of the first class we have two forms, answering to the 
 two Early classes of Geometrical and Arch tracery, being in 
 fact the idea of those forms respectively translated into 
 Flowing language. 
 
 § 3. Of Reticulated Tracery. 
 
 The first is that Avhich is knoAvn as the Reticulated. 
 This according to Mr. Petit®^ is “ probably among the earli- 
 est Flowing windows known, and continues throughout the 
 style I have no doubt but that this is perfectly correct, 
 and moreover it will be found to be retained to the very 
 latest period. 
 
 The characteristic of this variety is a figure which, as con- 
 
 [ “ Architectural Character, p. 12. 
 
90 
 
 OP PLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 sistiiig of a vesica with one or both extremities converted 
 into an ogee arch, may be called an ogee vesica ; this I 
 consider to be to the Flowing style precisely what the circle 
 is to the Geometrical, and accordingly this variety answers 
 to the earliest and purest form of Geometrical tracery, that 
 composed of circles only. This figure, according to its pro- 
 portions, may be considered as a development either of the 
 circle or of the vesica ; the shorter ones being struck from 
 a single centre, the more elongated from two. (Fig. 1.) 
 The former is more usual in windows of more than two 
 lights, which woidd appear to be simply the result of an 
 attempt to fuse together several circles placed in the man- 
 ner in which they usually are in the head of an early Geo- 
 metrical window (2). We shall however find, even in 
 large windows, examples of elongated figures, which are 
 traceable to the vesica. But in either case, the idea is that 
 of an infinite expanse of figures of this kind, cut through 
 at an arbitrary point. It is impossible to avoid the recur- 
 rence of imperfect figures at the sides except by surrender- 
 ing the whole principle of formation. 
 
 But the genuine development of the style is to be 
 studied, as in every other case, in its smaller examples. 
 And though the development from the vesica in the head 
 of a two-light window is the most simple and natural, yet 
 on account of the extreme rareness of that figure, we shall 
 find the circle to be in practice the great source of the 
 present style. And we can easily trace the steps by which 
 the two-light Geometrical window with the circle in the 
 head was converted into the two-light Reticulated. We 
 have seen that the substitution of the ogee for the simple 
 arch*^, round or pointed, is the essence of the style; this is 
 
 ** It is clear that a circle may be con- derived from a similar application of two 
 s'dered as produced by the junction of pointed ones, which may of course be of 
 two round arches, having different direc- an}' pitch, 
 tions ; and the vesica, more naturally, as 
 
? 1 . 22 . 
 
OF RETICULATED TRACERY. 
 
 91 
 
 first applied to the lights, which become ogee, the circle 
 remaining perfect, and the apices of the lights being made 
 to flow into its circumference, as they best may, which is 
 effected with different degrees of skill in different examples ; 
 we find this stage at Icklesham, Sussex, Bearstead, Kent, 
 Tewkesbmy Abbey, Cowley, Middlesex, and in the beau- 
 tiful and elaborate windows in the south side of the clere- 
 story at St. Cross (3). All these have the circle simply foli- 
 ated, or not differing therefrom in general effect, unless we 
 except Cowley which has a spiked foliation (4). At St. Cross 
 a number of arcs, secants to the circle, form a sort of 
 spherical hexagon with concave sides within it, something 
 in the same way as in one of the windows at Dorchester 
 mentioned in the last Chapter®. But here it is merely an 
 ingenious device to allow of the introduction of a pointed 
 foil without the unpleasant contrast with the circle, which 
 that form usually produces with pointed foils. The next 
 stage seems to be to omit the lower part of the circle, as in 
 the clerestory of Brecon Priory, and that of Everdon, 
 Northants (5), which, though perhaps rather of later date, 
 certainly belongs in idea to this point. Finally, the upper 
 portion follows its example, and the sides either flow at 
 once into the arch, or are carried up in an ogee form, as 
 at Rothersthorpe, Northants. (6.) 
 
 When this last is the case, especially when, as in the in- 
 stance selected, we have the inchoate figures at the sides, 
 one ean hardly fail to consider the two-light window as a 
 development from those of larger size. In the other pro- 
 cess, though otherwise natural enough to have occurred 
 with the circle, we must acknowledge the influence of the 
 vesiea. The two-light window with the vesiea in the head, 
 so rare in its pure state, now becomes an important element 
 of formation. It is one which it is almost impossible to 
 
 c P. 04. 
 
93 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 hinder from sliding into the Flowing form, so great a temp- 
 tation is given to let its lower portion run into the arches 
 of the lights between which it is placed. This occurs, as at 
 Holton, Oxon (7), while the arches still remain pointed, and 
 with the apices standing free, as can hardly fail to be the 
 case with a vesica in the head. The next stage is to avoid 
 this, either by the use of an ogee arch, or by making the 
 figure broader, so as to approximate to that formed from 
 the circle. This produces (8) the most familiar type in 
 which the lines flow into the arch, without any inchoate 
 figures. This, with ogee lights, and with the vesica filled 
 with a large qnatrefoil piercing adapted to the flow of the 
 tracery, is perhaps the commonest two-light window of the 
 style, and occurs Avitli several minute variations, according 
 to the proportions of the lights and of the containing arch. 
 It also occurs, but more rarely, with other varieties in the 
 number and arrangement of the foliations. 
 
 This form is more common in two-light windows than 
 the actual ogee vesica, as it avoids that cutting through of 
 the imperfect figures on each side, Avhicli is rendered neces- 
 sary by the employment of the latter. This last hoAvever is 
 far from uncommon, a rich double-cnsped example at Cnd- 
 desden has the ogee head so completely developed as to 
 allow of foliations above it, and in one at Wytham (9) 
 it is so low that the lines actually begin the reversed 
 flow. 
 
 This seems to be the natural course of the development 
 as I have draAvn it out, but many anomalies occur, all of 
 Avhich it Avonld be tedious to enumerate. One of the most 
 remarkable is one at Chacombe, Northants (10), Avhere a 
 vesica is foliated in a circle Avith truncated crisping. Again 
 in the chancel AvindoAvs at Slymbridge, Gloucestershii’e (11), 
 the arrangement of No. 7 is reversed, the pointed arches of 
 the lights and the lower arch of the circle are quite perfect 
 
OF RETICULATED TRACERY. 
 
 93 
 
 and distinct, while the upper part flows into the arch. The 
 effect is certainly not pleasing. 
 
 Windows of Reticulated tracery of three and five lights 
 are very common, and have very much the same general 
 effect ; the quatrefoiled piercings being brought prominently 
 forward, and completely giving the character of the win- 
 dow. A little diversity may be occasionally observed in 
 the proportions of the vesicae, which are occasionally, as 
 at Higham Ferrers, extremely elongated, and in the form 
 of the foils. St. Aldate’s and St. Mary Magdalen in Ox- 
 ford, Kidlington, St. Giles, Northampton, and many other 
 churches will supply good examples of their most ordinary 
 form. The chief source of variety is whether the spaces 
 external to the central vesicee are left imperfect and cut off 
 by the architrave, as in No. 6, or whether their lines are 
 made to flow into the architrave, as in No. 8, and whether 
 the imperfect figures are foliated or not. Some again have 
 the complete figure in the head, in others the lines flow in to 
 the arch, that is, they have the figure directly derived from 
 the vesica, (as in No. 8,) as in the beautiful east window 
 of Milton Malsor, near Northampton. At Stanford and 
 Welford in the same county are windows purely Reticulated 
 except that the line of the lower external figure is reversed 
 so as to introduce a figure of Flamboyant shape. There 
 is a somewhat similar example at St. Catharine, Pont 
 Audemer (12). These would in strictness be consi- 
 dered as examples of combination, but their general 
 effect is too purely of this style to allow us to class 
 them elsewhere. Some, especially in Northamptonshire, 
 have ogee heads, as at Earl’s Barton ; of this sort are the 
 very graceful windows in the Choir at Fligham Ferrers^ and 
 the equally inelegant ones in the aisles at Llandaff. At 
 Floby in Leicestershire is a window of this sort with the 
 
 Nortliamptoiibliiie Cluuclies, p. 9. 
 O 
 
94 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 quatrefoils (13) foliated again, and the imperfect figures 
 minutely cnsped, giving it a very rich effect. This form of 
 tracery is common in Jersey, but there the heads of the 
 vesicm alone are foliated, according to the distinction men- 
 tioned above (14). I have seen the same in a two-light 
 window at Tloore, Northamptonshire. This is a decided 
 approach to Elamboyancy, but it is very far from an 
 improvement. It is only long narrow piercings wdiich har- 
 monize well with foliations at one end. This form of 
 tracery decidedly requires the complete quatrefoil, which is 
 admirably suited to the fidness and roundness of its out- 
 line. At Einedon the Reticulated window occurs Avithout 
 foliation, but the effect is very meagre, and the east Avindow 
 of Cransley church in the same county is another example 
 of unfoliated Reticulated tracery of five lights under an 
 ogee arch. The arches are of course generally of the simple 
 pointed form, the equilateral pitch being most usual ; other 
 shapes hoAvever are met with. There is, unless my memory 
 fails me, a AvindoAv of this kind under a semicircular arch at 
 Alvechurch, Worcestershire ; and one under a segmental 
 arch occurs at Hedenham, Norfolk. 
 
 Sometimes we find an unusually long vesica employed, 
 not only Avhen, as in the examples at Higham Eerrers, the 
 Avhole AvindoAv is elongated, the arrangement in other 
 respects remaining the same, but Avhere they give an entirely 
 new character to the design. Thus among the numerous 
 remarkable Avindows at TeAvkesbury, there is one of four 
 lights'^; this, according to the ordinary arrangement, Avould 
 of course have had six figures in the head, in three 
 diminishing ranges of three, tAvo, and one ; but here Ave 
 have only a single range of three attenuated vesicae, the 
 apex of the central and longest one coinciding Avith that of 
 the Avindow. Something of the same kind, though the 
 
 d Petit’s Tewkesbury, p. 33. 
 
OF RETICULATED TRACERY. 
 
 95 
 
 figures are less elongated, and from the different form of the 
 window the difference in arrangement is less observable, may 
 be found in the annexed (15) flat-headed window at St. 
 Michael’s, Cambridge. It will be observed that, with this 
 arrangement, the height of the figures necessarily increases 
 towards the centre, while in the ordinary Reticulated 
 design they are of the same size throughout. 
 
 The Reticulated tracery appears to me to be the purest 
 type of the Flowing style, that most typical, and most free 
 from any taint either of Geometrical or Flamboyant. The 
 side openings are the chief difficulty ; to leave them to be 
 cut through is awkward, whereas to make them branch 
 into the tracery and form distinct figures which must be of 
 a different form from the others, seems contrary to the 
 general principle on which this form of window is designed. 
 Otherwise the figures fit into each other in an easy and 
 natural way ; the lines are purely Flowing ; free and con- 
 tinuous, but not vertical; the species of foliation most 
 adapted to it is that typical of the style, completely affect- 
 ing the figure, but not retaining a separate existence, as in 
 Geometrical, or having a positive direction as in the later 
 Continuous styles. It is a kind of tracery which is always 
 satisfactory ; its monotony and incapacity of any elaborate 
 and varied design preclude it from the higher beauty of the 
 most successful attempts in other varieties, while at the 
 same time it is equally defended from the awkward forms 
 frequently produced by an ineffectual striving after what 
 was beyond the designer’s reach. It preserves in short a 
 creditable mediocrity. 
 
 No class of tracery affords more instances than this of 
 anomalous forms not coming within its definition, but yet 
 more nearly apjiroaching to it than to any other. Some of 
 these are, in strictness, transitional forms, as that in which 
 a figure prevails formed on the way between the circle and 
 
96 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 the Ogee vesica, a semi-circle, namely, placed on an Ogee 
 arch as in No. 5. And this, though in idea transitional, is 
 by no means confined to early examples, as it is found in 
 the square-headed windows in the Octagon of the Cam- 
 panile at Irthlingborongh, undoubtedly one of the latest 
 buildings of the style. There is a good three-light example 
 at Crick, and a very fine one, doubly foliated, in Southwell 
 Minster (IG) ; a very elaborate and anomalous window at 
 Sprowston, Norfolk, is formed on this principle in the 
 more important lines of its tracery ; it is remarkable for its 
 spiked foliations. 
 
 With Keticnlated windows we must also class, though not 
 strictly coming within their literal definition, a few windows 
 which must be considered as the Plowing versions of the other 
 forms of pure Geometrical tracery. Thus examples occur in 
 which a figure prevails which is hot easily described, but 
 which may be considered as standing to the spherical 
 triangle in the same relation as the Ogee vesica does 
 to the circle ; it is therefore naturally trefoiled just as the 
 latter is naturally quatrefoiled. It is not common, but 
 is far from unpleasing. The only two examples of this 
 kind with which I am prepared, are of three lights, 
 and have the Ogee vesica in the head, a position in 
 which the figure in question could hardly occur. There 
 are no inchoate figures, but large spandrils unavoidably 
 oecur. One is from Heckington ; the other from Southwell, 
 doubly foliated, and probably from the same hand as the 
 last-mentioned example from that Minster (17). 
 
 These must be considered as the Plowing version of 
 those pure Geometrieal windows in whieh the spherical 
 triangle is predominant. And we might even go on to 
 add to these one or two examples in whieh the figure 
 in the head seems to be derivable from the spherical 
 square. In one in the tower at Stoke Bruern, Northamp- 
 
18 
 
 20 
 
 19 
 
 
OF OGEE TRACEllY. 
 
 97 
 
 tonslure (18), the only difference in general effect from a 
 common two-liglit window is in the greater size of the 
 quatrefoiled figure. Another departing more widely from 
 the Reticulated type occurs at St. Dunstaii’s in Canterbury 
 (19). The figru’e which occupies the head is a kind of 
 quatrefoil, being in fact the vesica of the Reticulated form 
 with its sides assuming the Ogee shape as well as the upper 
 and lower extremities ; the figure is octofoiled in a curious 
 manner. In the lower spandrils are two trefoiled piercings 
 of Flamboyant character. 
 
 And we may add to these some examples which show 
 that even Foil tracery was not excluded from contributing its 
 share to the development of tracery of this kind. There 
 is a natural tendency in windows of this kind to employ an 
 Ogee foil-arch in the lights, which at once fuses with the 
 figure above, and produces a strong approach to continuity. 
 From these the transition is easy to a few examples, as a 
 two-light example at Haydon, Lincolnshire, and a three-light 
 at Heckington(20),inwhich theperfect effect of a Reticulated 
 window is produced without its lines, by the mere use of 
 quatrefoils ingeniously shaped and fused together®. These, 
 which must almost have been preceded by the appearance 
 of some true Reticulated examples, stand in precisely the 
 same relation to that style in which Foil tracery does to 
 the pure Geometrical ; and show how much more the real 
 effect of a window depends upon its piercings than upon 
 its mere unfoliated skeleton, and how completely our ar- 
 rangements are baffled by the ever-shifting productions of 
 ancient art. 
 
 § 4. Of Ogee Tracery. 
 
 The second variety of Flowing tracery is that which 
 
 In Wells Cathedral are some (figured by Britton,) with the usual lines, un- 
 foliated, rising from cinquefoiled arches. 
 
98 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACE HY. 
 
 answers to the Arch tracery of the previous style, exactly 
 as the Reticulated does to the Geometrical. As that is formed 
 exclusively by combinations of the simple arch, so does its 
 Flowing correlative owe its origin to the form of arch more 
 in harmony with the general character of the style, the 
 Ogee. We shall find that it presents diversities very nearly 
 analogous to the two main subdivisions of its predecessor ; 
 namely whether the arched lines intersect or not ; the variety 
 however in which this is not the case is of far less import- 
 ance even than its correlative in the earlier style. We 
 shall also see that, as in that style, different from almost all 
 others, its principles and varieties cannot be really studied 
 in windows of a smaller number of lights than three. This 
 we wull call Ogee tracery. 
 
 The form in which the arches do not intersect simply 
 presents two or three Ogee arches under an arch or a scjuare 
 head. The latter is excessively common as a clerestory win- 
 dow ; it also occurs of two lights under a segmental arch at 
 Etchingham, Sussex (21), and Ancaster, Lincoln. When this 
 occurs under a pointed arch, as at Barkby, it requires the 
 minutest examination to distinguish it from the common 
 two-light Reticulated window. In the clerestory at Oundle 
 (22) it appears with three lights, being the three-light window 
 of the old Arch tracery with the arches ogeed. Some of 
 the windows at Byfield are similar with a flattened arch. 
 
 On a form presenting so little variety, and most of whose 
 examples hardly deserve the name of tracery at all, it will 
 be necessary to delay no longer, and we will accordingly 
 proceed to the more important variety in which the Ogee 
 arches intersect. And with these as in the otherArch tracery, 
 we may class some examples of two lights, which do not 
 literally fall under the definition. 
 
 The simple two-light windows of this class sometimes 
 onsist of merely two lights grouped under an Ogee arch, 
 
n. 25 . 
 
 25 
 
or OGEE TllACERY. 
 
 99 
 
 of which pure examples are to be found in the Law School at 
 St. Mary’s, Oxford; Coaiey, Gloucestershire; and Wimborne 
 Minster (23) ; and a similar one, only with a flat-sided arch, 
 occurs at Ditton in Kent ; the space between the lights 
 and the spandrils are in the latter quatrefoiled. 
 
 But this class of wundows is really to be studied in its 
 three-light examples ; as but few of a less number, so hardly 
 more of a greater, exhibit its most distinguishing peculiari- 
 ties ; they are composed of Ogee arches intersecting one 
 another, and fall readily under the two following heads. 
 
 In the first, which is both rare and unsightly, and yet 
 is perhaps the more typical of the_ two, the whole three 
 lights are grouped under a single Ogee arch, continued 
 from the outer sides of the outer lights, and whose apex 
 coincides with that of the Avindow, this arch being inter- 
 sected by other imperfect ones of the same form continued 
 from the centre light. The result is two small quatrefoiled 
 spaces side by side, which are most characteristic of every 
 variety of this class of tracery, with a larger one over them ; 
 but from the peculiar direction of the tracery, the concave 
 lines are brought prominently upon the eye in a manner 
 any thing but satisfactory. The examples at Cranford 
 St. Andrew’s, Northants, and St. George’s, Stamford (24) 
 are far from beautifid, and that at Queniborough, Leices- 
 tershire, being, at present at least, unfoliated, is positively 
 ugly. I am not prepared with any other three-light exani- 
 })les, but Ave may fairly class with them two specimens of 
 two-light windows from Barnack (25) and from St. Michael’s 
 at Albans, which with great difference of proportion in the 
 figures, have nearly identical lines of tracery. The effect 
 of the head is decidedly that of a three-light Avindow, and 
 besides its lack of elegance in other respects, may be con- 
 sidered as too intricate for the lights below. 
 
 In the other far more familiar type, two lights only are 
 
100 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 grouped under an Ogee arch, consequently in a window of 
 three lights, there are two such, the central light being of 
 course common to both. In such windows placed under a 
 common pointed arch, by far the most usual variety of this 
 class, the two lines continued from the outer sides of the 
 outer arches assume a contrary direction at the apices of 
 the Ogee arches, and converge towards the apex of the win- 
 dow, forming a large vesica over the two characteristic 
 cjuatrefoiled spaces. No lines are continued beyond the 
 limits of the two Ogee arches, consequently a large spandril 
 is left on each side. 
 
 This form of window is interesting, as forming in cases 
 of combination, the skeleton of some of the most splendid 
 windows in existence. In its pure form it is not uncommon, 
 and, with the exception of some small varieties in propor- 
 tion, the general character of all the examples is identical, 
 and the outline is not very pleasing, as both the vesica in 
 the head and the spandrils are too large and somewhat 
 unmanageable. Troni the different ways of treating these 
 parts arise whatever diversities the style is capable of. 
 The vesica is left unfoliated in the windows of Oriel Col- 
 lege chapel, which are of this type, though debased imita- 
 tions of late date, and the effect is consequently most un- 
 pleasing ; sometimes quatrefoiled as at Lichfield Cathedral, 
 and Moulton, Northamptonshire; sexfoiled, as at Peter- 
 borough Cathedral, and Sileby, Leicestershire (26) ; octo- 
 foiled, as at Barton, 'Warwickshire, and Bedingham, Sussex. 
 The spandrils are left unfoliated in one example at Lich- 
 field ; themselves foliated at Sileby and Peterborough ; 
 filled with Plamboyant figures, some simple, some more 
 complicated, in another at Lichfield, and that from Barton. 
 At Moidton and Stratford on Avon, the outer sides of the 
 Ogee arches are turned back exactly like the inchoate 
 figures in Ileticidated tracery, and the space foliated. The 
 
OF OGEE TRACERY. 
 
 101 
 
 shape of the arch greatly affects that of the vesica in the 
 head. At Barton and Peterborough it is much more obtuse 
 than in the rest, and in one at Newton, Cambridge, it is 
 hardly to be distinguished from a circle. 
 
 One would hardly have looked for a Foil version of this 
 kind of tracery, but one occurs at Wadworth, Yorkshire (27), 
 standing in just the same relation to the last class that the 
 Heckington window (20) does to the common Reticulated 
 form. 
 
 But though this three-light pointed window is decidedly 
 the typical form of this variety, it is by no means the only 
 shape that it assumes. It is clear that the very simple two- 
 light example of Ogee tracery, which I mentioned anterior 
 to my division of it into two classes, (such as No. 23,) may with 
 equal propriety be reckoned under either head; they belong 
 to the first, so far as the Ogee arch includes all the lights ; 
 to the second, so far as those lights are only two in number. 
 But there is another kind of window more decidedly to be 
 classed with those which we are at present considering, 
 those namely which are designed on the same principle of 
 construction, and have the same most characteristic row 
 of quatrefoiled spaces, but which, being square-headed or 
 under flat arches, do not allow room for the characteristic 
 vesica in the head, but only a foliated space or spaces 
 above the heads of the Ogee arches, whose size and import- 
 ance necessarily depends upon the form of the head. 
 
 There is a good two-light example at Hilston under a 
 segmental arch, which has the inner sides of the light pro- 
 longed, and another at Helpstone, Northants, with the soffit 
 cusp ; of three-light examples we have Willingham under a 
 four-centred arch^. Over, and Fulbick, the former an ex- 
 ceedingly fine window, segmental. 
 
 The old church at Braunston (28) had a square-headed win- 
 
 f Rickman, p. 1 IS. 
 
 P 
 
102 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 dowof this kind of four lights, alocalism of course unheeded s 
 in its present rebuilding ; and that at Yelvertoft one exactly 
 similar but without any foliations at all. It will be seen 
 that several of this class do not observe the rule of not 
 carrying any line into the spandrils ; imperfect Ogees are, 
 as in some of the first class, continued from the inner sides 
 of the outer lights. A more remarkable one with a seg- 
 mental head occurs at Hawkhurst, Kent (29), where the 
 arch is somewhat higher than the apices of the Ogee lights, 
 which are connected by lines introducing spherical triangles 
 at the sides. 
 
 It is very rare to meet with examples of this kind of 
 tracery in a pure state in windows of more than three 
 lights ; almost every instance of the kind having a strong 
 tendency to Perpendicular. There is one however in 
 Exeter Cathedral (30) which may be considered as exhibit- 
 ing the idea of the three-light ivindow consistently carried 
 out on a large scale, namely with five lights. It presents 
 two rows of quatrefoiled spaces, and two of vesicas, one 
 consisting of that in the crown. As the Ogee arches them- 
 selves cannot be prolonged beyond their apices, we may 
 consider a new series as commencing at that point ; the 
 tracery above which is precisely that of a three-light win- 
 dow. I am not aware of any four-light examples of this 
 kind perfectly clear of Perpendicular elements ; one may 
 imagine such an one, but it would be decidedly inferior 
 either to the three or the five-light, as it could hardly have 
 a crowning vesica in the head. 
 
 But even the Exeter window cannot be considered as 
 perfectly satisfactory; the same line meandering along in so 
 many, and those rather formal, curves, produces an idea of 
 weakness and imperfection ; and if, as is most naturW, we 
 
 t-' Unless indeed the design has been changed from the engraving originally pub- 
 lished. 
 
PL 26 
 
OF OGEE TRACERY. 
 
 103 
 
 consider the upper range of tracery as a new series of 
 Ogee lights, they violate the laws of decorative construc- 
 tion, and produce an appearance of insecurity by the want 
 of a proper impost. These large windows also manifest, 
 what does not strike the eye so forcibly in the smaller ones, 
 that this kind of tracery, no less than the Reticulated, is 
 simply cut out of an infinite plane ; the Ogee lines are either 
 left imperfect, or cut through by the arch of the window at 
 an arbitrary point. And a more minute examination will 
 shew how closely the two forms, with all their diversity of 
 effect, are connected in their origin or construction. Both 
 are formed by the repetition of ranges of arches, alternately 
 reversed and in their natural position ; those in the Ogee 
 tracery, (notwithstanding, or rather in strict accuracy 
 because of, the predominancy of lines of the Ogee form in 
 the main effect) being of the simple form, those in the 
 Reticulated of the Ogee. If, in an infinite series of Ogee 
 tracery, or in the imaginary four-light window given above, 
 the Ogee arch be everywhere substituted, in the reversed 
 as well as in the simple-pointed ranges, the inequality of 
 the piercings will be at once destroyed, and the tracery will 
 be converted into Reticulated. But farther than this, it is 
 clear that, as the Ogee arch itself is formed on this very 
 principle of alternately natural and reversed simple-pointed 
 arches, a side of each being omitted (31), the Ogee tracery 
 is virtually contained in the Reticulated ; the latter in fact 
 only differs in the consequence of the fact last stated, the 
 absence of intersections. If in a series of Ogee tracery (32) 
 each alternate mullion, and the lines of tracery sj)ringing 
 from it, be omitted, the series at once becomes Reticulated. 
 Or vice versa, if in a Reticulated series, mullions are 
 inserted, and tracery lines drawn, alternate to the original 
 ones, it is at once converted into one of Ogee tracery. 
 This process is clearly seen in an infinite series, though it 
 
104 . 
 
 01' FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 is naturally less easy to be perceived in the common forms of 
 windows ; the common three-light Ogee window for in- 
 stance does not contain (as being of an odd number of 
 lights) sufficient Reticulated tracery to form a window. 
 ]hit the two-light Reticulated will produce the four-light 
 Ogee and vice versa. 
 
 We have thus considered the two purest and most essen- 
 tial types of Flowing tracery, though producing by them- 
 selves by no means the most beautiful windows of the style. 
 If any one character is more deeply impressed upon both 
 than another, it is that both are cut out of an infinite plane 
 of tracery at an arbitrary point. 
 
 § 5. Or Flowing Wheel Tracery. 
 
 In the two last sections we have examined those forms 
 which appear to be the purest emanations of the Flowing 
 principle ; the course of our subject now leads us to those 
 varieties of the style which derive their origin directly from 
 one particular class of Early windows, namely those in 
 which, without any actual centre-piece, a central point is 
 assumed in the head, around which the tracery arranges 
 itself. It will be remembered that there were two kinds 
 of this enumerated, one in which the idea was that of a 
 wheel with its spokes ; the other that of a number of 
 vesicae united at one point. These two in their pure form 
 ran so much into one another that it was very difficult to 
 establish a line of demarcation between them, and in this 
 derivative style one is still more at a loss to distinguish the 
 exact proportion respectively referable to the two combined 
 elements. It is clear however that the spokes of the wheel 
 diverge from the centre, while the vesicae, so long as they 
 retain their purity, may with equal truth be said to diverge 
 from or to converge to the point around which they range. 
 
Of’ FLOWING WHEEL TRACERY. 
 
 105 
 
 It follows almost naturally that the latter, being a sort of 
 stationary figure, is most appropriately filled with a foliation 
 affecting the whole figure, while the other, having a ten- 
 dency or direction to a point, is more naturally foliated at 
 the end farthest from the centre. This latter is also not 
 in strictness a figwe, but simply a s^jace left between two 
 spokes of the wheel. From this source we can hardly 
 doubt that we derive the long space foliated at one end, 
 which, in different modifications, is the soul both of Flam- 
 boyant and Perpendicular tracery, and which continually 
 obtrudes itself both into Geometrical and Flowing windows^ 
 Moreover when this mode of foliation had once been intro- 
 duced, it might easily be applied to the vesica whenever 
 it assumed the long narrow shape which it often does in 
 tracery of this kind. As soon as this is done, the figure 
 receives a direction, it diverges or converges, according 
 as the end at which it is foliated is that nearest or farthest 
 from the centre. Foliation alone effects this, though, as 
 is natural, the form of the figure itself is often modified 
 so as better to admit of a treatment of this kind. We may 
 then safely divide tracery of this kind into two kinds. 
 Divergent and Convergent, the distinction of direction 
 being made partly by the shape of the figures and partly 
 by their foliation. The difference between them and the 
 Geometrical form out of which they arose is that the 
 tracery is no longer independent of the lights ; the former 
 is made to rise from the latter, or at least the two are 
 fused together, and the central point is always found either 
 at the apex of a light or at the point of divergence of two. 
 It almost necessarily follows that it must be confined to 
 small windows, as it would be almost impossible to pre- 
 serve the connexion between a single centre and many 
 lights. In its pure state this tracery can scarcely be 
 applied to a window of more than two or three lights. 
 
106 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACEllY. 
 
 though in combination we shall find it aftecting windows 
 of the greatest size and magnificence. 
 
 a. Of Bivergent Tracery. 
 
 This form is of less limited application than the other, as 
 it is rather extensively used for two-light windows, and is 
 indeed by far the most graceful form for windows of that 
 size. It also, though the pimer offspring of the wheel, retains 
 less of Geometrical effect, and it is altogether impossible to 
 avoid the belief that a direct imitation of vegetable life had 
 great influence on its production. It consists of figures 
 thrown off from a central point between the two lights, like 
 branches from a trunk. This can hardly be done in a win- 
 dow of more than two lights without introducing more or 
 less of some other principle of formation, and it is almost 
 impossible to construct a window with an odd number of 
 lights in this style without considerable awkwardness. The 
 centre, in a two-light window, is afforded by the top of the 
 mullion, wdiich throws off three vesicse, one to each side, and 
 a third vertically, occupying the head of the wdndow. From 
 the position of the centre, the direction of the lateral pierc- 
 ings is by no means horizontal, being partly supported by 
 the arches cf the lights. Of course they usually coincide 
 each with one side of the arches, whether they be pointed, 
 as at Church Brampton (33), which is usually the case, or 
 round, as at East Iladdou, or ogee, as at Iver, though less 
 easily and gracefully in the latter case. But at Asfordby 
 (34) is one with ogee lights not coinciding ; the effect is 
 quite different, and far from pleasant ; it rather recalls the 
 window at Chiu’ch Brampton given in pi. 19, fig. 85. 
 
 The chief soiu’ce of variety in this class is the foliation, 
 as there is less room for diversity in the proportions of the 
 figures than in most kinds of tracery, unless in such rare 
 
OF FLOWING WHEEL TRACERY. 
 
 107 
 
 cases as one at Spixworth, Norfolk, where an altogether 
 different effect is produced by the employment of a seg- 
 mental arch. Perhaps the most usual type has the upper 
 figure wholly quatrefoiled, and the other two trefoiled at one 
 end. Considering however that all have a direction, perhaps 
 the ideal of this particular variety — not certainly however its 
 ideal beauty — would require the Plamboyant foliation in 
 the upper vesica also, but this, though it does occur, is 
 much less usual. 
 
 The three-light side windows of the magnificent chancel 
 of Great Claybrook’’ in Leicestershire, will shew how diffi- 
 cult it is to work out this style on a greater scale than 
 two lights. The centre here is necessarily the apex of the 
 central light, and two pair of piercings, besides the crown- 
 ing vesica, are thrown off from it ; the result is that 
 the central line is vertically prolonged a long way, and the 
 tracery itself is indeed most beautiful and vegetable, but it is 
 quite cut off from the work below ; everything depends on 
 the centre light ; the two others have the tracery simply 
 laid upon them without any continuity, a Geometrical idea 
 with Plowing forms. An awkward space thus left between 
 the heads of the central and the side lights on each side is 
 as awkwardly filled with a sort of trefoil figure ; another 
 trefoiled figure creeps in on each side in the exterior span- 
 drils of the side liglits. The tracery of these windows will 
 hardly satisfy a critical examination, but their effect is 
 splendid ; all the mouldings of the jambs, mullions, and 
 tracery are most elaborately executed, and considerable por- 
 tions of stained glass remain. The general appearance of 
 the lofty chancel is most striking ; and tlie whole church 
 presents a most valuable study. 
 
 A four-light window in the little church of Maxstoke in 
 Warwickshire, if a drawing taken long ago is at all accurate. 
 
 '' Sluirpe’s Windows. 
 
108 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 is perhaps a better attempt at carrying out this style on a 
 larger scale ; here we return to the central mullion, and the 
 three piercings springing from it, but they are of dispro- 
 portionate size, having a meagre appearance, and the two 
 side lights have no connexion with the general design, 
 throwing off two piercings in an unmeaning and uncon- 
 nected manner. 
 
 b. Of Horizontal Convergent Tracery. 
 
 The form which I denominate the Convergent is the 
 opposite to that just considered, and is so far from partaking 
 of the grace of that most lovely though fleeting form, that I 
 cannot but look upon it as the least satisfactory variety of 
 Flowing tracery witli wliicli I am acquainted. In this, 
 instead of a central line from which the piercings are thrown 
 off, the two principal piercings converge more or less hori- 
 zontally from the sides to a central point. No form can be 
 less harmonious ; the figures do not melt into each other in 
 the same graceful way as in most of the other varieties, but 
 are simply thrown together with even less connexion than 
 in some Geometrical patterns, and without the purity and 
 beauty of the latter. This kind of tracery is found with 
 little difference in windows of a single light', as in the 
 campanile at Irthlingborough. And as the type requires 
 two large piercings converging to the point of an Ogee arch, 
 the single-light window exhibits it in its greatest purity, as 
 requiring nothing below. 
 
 In two-light examples, the lights are obliged to be grouped 
 under the Ogee arch, leaving a space which is usually qua- 
 trefoiled, as in the Ogee style. In three-light examples, the 
 lights are also grouped under the Ogee arch, somewhat in 
 
 » Norlhants Churches, 118. Rickman, 152 . 
 
w 
 
PJ 
 
 I 
 
OF FLOWING WHEEL TRACERY. 
 
 109 
 
 tlie manner of a triplet, the central being the bigliest, and 
 commonly, thonglpas at Newport,Essex, not invariably, itself 
 of the Ogee form, and with its apex coinciding with that of 
 the containing arch. According to the form of this last, as it 
 is more or less flat, there is usually a greater or less span- 
 dril between the central and side lights ; in an example 
 in Oxford cathedral (36), the space is large enough to 
 be occupied by a sort of Flamboyant figure. It is easy 
 to trace the development of the Convergent piercings ; they 
 are originally formed by merely making the ends of the 
 lateral vesicae fuse into the side lights (in such examples 
 as PI. 19, fig. 86) ; and still retain the point of the vesica 
 at the other end, as in one at Shiffnal (37), which, as 
 the style advances, is changed for a round termination. 
 There is a good deal of diversity in the foliation of the 
 lights in these examples ; that from Shiffnal, and one at 
 Heckington, have a trefoil in the head of the central light 
 like the Arch and Foil tracery. 
 
 At Ringstead there is a window in which Convergent 
 lines prevail, but without any decided centre, or rather ivith 
 two centres, for instead of the vesica in the head is another 
 pair of Convergent piercings with a cjuatrefoiled space above, 
 but the effect is still more ungraceful than that of the usual 
 arrangement. There are also several anomalous ivindows 
 with more or less of Convergent character, but which do not 
 come under the definition, and which it would be tedious 
 to enumerate. 
 
 It may be observed that in none of these examples is 
 the principle of convergency consistently carried out, no- 
 where does it extend beyond the two large horizontal 
 figures. The head of the window is never affected by 
 it, but either remains void, or more usually is occupied 
 by a figure of another kind, the same crowning vesica 
 which marks the Reticulated and Divergent varieties. 
 
 Q 
 
110 
 
 OF FLOW-ING TllACERY. 
 
 There is no attempt to make this figure converge, which 
 might easily have l)een done, and of course in some ex- 
 amples with which I am not acquainted may actually be 
 done, by giving it a Flamboyant foliation at its lower 
 extremity. The extreme ungracefulness of this treatment 
 may have been the reason for its not being employed. 
 
 In all these examples the two convergent figures start 
 from the side of the window, and their direction, so far as it 
 is not strictly horizontal, is upwards. I will therefore mark 
 it as the Horizontal Convergent, to mark it from another 
 variety, less frequent, but of perhaps more importance. 
 
 c. Of Reversed Convergent Tracerg. 
 
 Ill this the two Convergent piercings, instead of springing 
 from the sides of the window, or in any way rising from, 
 or being supported by, the lights below, start as it were 
 from above and come down to meet them, in a manner 
 which I cannot but consider both nnmeaning and un- 
 sightly. The nearest approaches to windows constructed 
 wholly on this principle with which I am acquainted, 
 occur at Amesby, North Moreton, Berks (39), and Hart- 
 well, Northants, which have the same general lines, though 
 diftering in foliation, and a different proportion being 
 given to the second by its more acutely pointed arch. 
 Here the two reversed figures have a quatrefoiled figure 
 in the head, and mere spandrils at the sides. Except in 
 the Convergent piercings having distinct terminations at the 
 bottom, and not flowing into the lights, their lines diflfer not 
 at all from the simplest form of Flamboyant tracery, in 
 producing which they may probably have had some share. 
 
 § 6. Of Combix.vtion in Flowing Windows. 
 
 Having thus ascertained the principles to which, with 
 
OF COMBINATION IN FliOWING WINDOWS. Ill 
 
 the exception of a few anomalies, almost all Flowing forms 
 may be traced up, our present business is with the splendid 
 combinations A^dlich these different forms assumed, espe- 
 cially in windows of larger size, and the manner in which 
 the principles of the Continuous style were engrafted upon 
 the earlier forms of the Geometrical. I have already men- 
 tioned the two ways in which combinations are effected, 
 whether by tracing out a pattern of one kind and filling 
 it lip with another, or by a mere commingling of two or 
 more varieties. I before mentioned that actual subordi- 
 nation was not in the genius of the Flowing style, but 
 was simply retained from its predecessor; and without 
 subordination the former mode of combination can hardly 
 be considered perfect : it is at least always suggested by 
 it. Consequently we may assume the presence of a Geo- 
 metrical trace in all windows of this kind ; and they are 
 developed so naturally and gradually out of the larger 
 Geometrical ones that they will be more appropriately 
 treated of in a subsequent stage of our inquiry ; the latter 
 will best follow immediately on the establishment of the dif- 
 ferent varieties of Flowing tracery. Most of the windows 
 of this kind are of three lights, there being hardly room 
 for combination in a smaller space, and larger ones being 
 usually combined on the other principle. 
 
 a. Comhincdion of Reticulated and Ogee Tracery. 
 
 Reticulated tracery will be found to enter into combina- 
 tion with almost every other, notwithstanding its manifest 
 pretensions to fill the whole expanse of every window into 
 which it is introduced, and which consequently render it 
 very difficult to effect the combination in a satisfactory 
 way. Yet we find it united even with the somewhat 
 inflexible lines of the Ogee tracery in a manner not alto- 
 
112 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 gether unpleasing, in one of the many splendid windows 
 at Crick (4(J). Here in a four-light window commenced 
 on the Reticulated principle, the u])per part changes to 
 the Ogee in a maimer more easy and natural than might 
 have been expected. The tracery of a three-light Ogee 
 window commences at the centre of the lower range of 
 vesicrn. 
 
 b. Combination of Reticulated and Divergent Tracerg. 
 
 The Reticulated is much more frequently intemiingled 
 with the different kinds of Tlowing wheel tracery. 
 
 The first class Avliich I shall mention is owing to a 
 mixture of the Reticulated and the Divergent patterns 
 which has given birth to a considerable number of very 
 graceful wdndows. Many three-light examples have a 
 lower range of quatrefoiled spaces of a Reticulated or quasi- 
 Reticnlated wdndow Avhile the upper part contains the three 
 Divergent vesicas. Instances of this, differing in little 
 except the proportion and foliation of the piercings, occur 
 at Oxford Cathedral ; Garsington, Oxon ; Green’s Norton 
 and Towcester, Northamptonshire ; Gaddesby, Misterton, 
 and Kirkby Bellars, Leicestershire; and Corsham (41), 
 Wiltshire ; the latter being perhaps on the whole the 
 most satisfactory in its lines, though it admits some small 
 and rather Flambovant figures at the sides, which detract 
 somewhat from its purity. There is one almost identical 
 at Shottesbrooke'^. All the remarks I have made on the 
 varieties of these two forms of tracery may be applied 
 to the portions of these windoAvs respectively constructed 
 on their principles. Thus the Oxford and Corsham ex- 
 amples have Ogee vesicee below turned rather outwards, 
 Avhile the rest have the round-headed substitute, Avhich 
 
 ^ Butterfleld’s Shottesbrooke. 
 
i 
 
Pi. 28 
 
 45 
 
OF COMBINATION IN FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 113 
 
 does not agree nearly so well with the other lines. Tliat 
 at Garsington has the vesica in the head omitted, a mere 
 quatrefoiled space being left. 
 
 At Kirkby Cellars wa may remark that, owing to the 
 more obtuse form of tlie arch, the Divergent piercings are 
 thrown off too horizontally, and seem to crush the figures 
 beneath them. 
 
 c. ComMnation of Retimlaled and Convergent. 
 
 In a window at Oundle (42) w'e have the Convergent 
 and Reticulated forms intermingled in a manner exactly 
 analogous to the class just described. The Reticulated por- 
 tion is below, with the ordinary Convergent figures above, 
 crowned as usual with a quatrefoiled vesica. 
 
 The same elements are found united in another and far 
 less elegant manner in a very singular window at Southam, 
 Warwickshire (43) ; round-headed, of four lights, with an 
 Ogee vesica springing from the two central, and a pair of 
 Convergent piercings joining it from the sides. 
 
 d. Combination of Divergent and Convergent. 
 
 But the most numerous class of windows owing to com- 
 binations of this kind arise from the commingling together 
 of the three classes whose origin we have traced to the 
 traceiy of the wheel, the Divergent and the two varieties of 
 the Convergent, the latter indeed hardly exist without it. 
 Thus the Hoi-izontal Convergent is found commingled with 
 the Divergent. In three-light examples there are com- 
 monly two large Convergent piercings immediately above 
 the lights, with the tracery above Divergent. Of this sort 
 is one at Badby, Northamptonshire, which is hardly to be 
 called pure Blowing, as the Convergent piercings retain the 
 point of the vesica at the un foliated end. In examples at 
 
114 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 Hcirpswell(4-4),Claycoateii, and Lutterworth, this is avoided, 
 and in two of them the upper piercings are more Flamboy- 
 ant, those at Badby andClaycoaten being completely foliated. 
 In other respects they present just the same sort of differ- 
 ences as the several examples of Convergent. A three-light 
 window at Bolton Abbey, has below a pair of Convergent 
 piercings, wdth others from the side lights, like the Divergent 
 one at Maxstoke, with the usual Divergent tracery above. 
 In these windows we find the wheel idea, allowing for the 
 direction of the Convergent piercings, in far greater purity 
 than when any of these classes is used alone. Two other win- 
 dows from Bolton are very curious, both having the Diver- 
 gent portion below ; in one the Convergent piercings are so 
 small as to have but very little effect upon the general 
 character of the window, which is singvdarly anomalous ; 
 the other has a remarkable figure in the centre, like an 
 Ogee vesica placed horizontally. 
 
 It is in windows of this kind that we see the importance 
 of the Reversed element, and that, though all but ideal in 
 a pure state, it has an abundant right to be considered 
 as a real variety of Flowing tracery. We shall find 
 it entering largely into the composition of many win- 
 dows, though it can seldom or never be considered as 
 adding to their beauty. It occurs in combination with 
 Divergent tracery at Filton and Horbling, two windows 
 in which the position of the Divergent and Reversed 
 ])iercings are interchanged. The lines of the former are 
 almost identical with one at Dunchurch, and the latter 
 with those of a window at Sleaford (45), which has 
 all the additional grace and delicacy pervading all the 
 examples in that church and its neighboiu Ileckington. 
 Three-light windows at Purton, Wilts, and St. Peter’s, 
 Oxford, exhibit a combination of all three forms. The 
 pattern is the same with the exception of a wide differ- 
 

 
 A- 
 
 .is 
 
 
OE COMBINATION IN PLOWING WINDOWS. 115 
 
 ence in the proportion of the piercings, greatly to tlie 
 advantage of the Oxford example. The Divergent work at 
 Purton is far too small, and deserves still more strongly 
 the censure which Mr. Petit' has bestowed on a similar 
 one at Amney St. Mary. 
 
 The east windows of St. Benedict’s in Lincoln (47), 
 and Shottesbrooke, exhibit the same combination with five 
 lights; these have a good deal of Flamboyant tendency 
 about them, and some strong vertical lines, as indeed most 
 of them have more or less. 
 
 e. Combination of Beticulated, Divergent, and Convergent. 
 
 Though none of these examples can pretend to any very 
 high degree of beauty, still there is a certain analogy in the 
 varieties of which they are composed, which so long as they 
 are treated with any degree of skill, prevents any remark- 
 able incongruity or want of harmony. It is not so when 
 they are combined on a large scale with Reticulated tra- 
 cery ; a large window of that kind, such as to present any 
 considerable expanse of its characteristic figures, will not 
 admit of commingling with any other. Even the rich and 
 elaborate east window of Etchingham (48), cannot escape 
 this censure ; the formal Reticulated range in its lower 
 part cannot be made to harmonize with the free and varied 
 patterns of its upper part, and in which the converging 
 vesica3 come out very strongly. With this we may place a 
 very inferior window from Cheltenham (49); as it is only a 
 combination of Reticulated and Divergent, I might have 
 spoken of it above ; but its effect is very difierent from that 
 of smaller windows of the same type, and its great fault is 
 precisely the same as that of Etchingham, with the addition 
 of an unpleasant flatness, as at Spixworth and Kirkby Bellars. 
 
 ' Arcliiletiiiral Ch.iracter, p. 1?. 
 
L 10 
 
 OP PLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 We have as yet Lad but one solitary instance of the 
 Ogee tracery being commingled with otlier forms ; its 
 somewhat hard and stiff outline almost precludes its enter- 
 ing into combinations of the kind which we are now con- 
 sidering. Yet the east window at Moulsford church (50), 
 Berkshire, cannot be otherwise described than as exhibit- 
 ing a distorted form of its chief pattern in combination 
 with Reversed forms ; but the crowning vesica has well- 
 nigh shrunk into a central quatrefoil. 
 
 § 7. Op the Transition from Geometrical to 
 Flowing Tracery. 
 
 Having in the previous sections of this chapter traced out 
 Mdiat Flowing tracery is, and what forms and combinations 
 it assumed, our present business is to follow the steps by 
 which it Avas engrafted on the preceding st)de. And we 
 shall here meet both with genuine transitional examples, 
 that is, those which are strictly intermediate betiveen the 
 two styles, and ivitli those combinations of both, Avhich are 
 so far transitional as marking a period Avhen the struggle 
 betiveen the two ivas as yet undecided, but Avhich certainly 
 imply the previous existence of some complete examples of 
 the later style. 
 
 Mr. Paley indeed'" says that “ as there is no medium 
 betAveen a secant and a tangent (for a line in contact Avith a 
 circle must be one or the other), so there is properly no 
 transition betAveen the principle of Geometric and that of 
 FloAving tracery, unless in AvindoAvs Avhose tracery is made 
 up partly of one and partly of the other.” I do not profess 
 to enter into the mathematics of the question, but there is 
 certainly an intermediate stage betAveen the centre-piece of 
 the perfect Geometrical, totally distinct from the lights 
 
 m 
 
 Goflilo .Vrcliifecture, p. 173. 
 
OF THE TRANSITION FROM GEOMETRICAL. 
 
 117 
 
 below, and that of the perfect Flowing, completely fused 
 together with them. There certainly are windows uh ch 
 may (or may not) have their tracery made up partly of one 
 and partly of the other, but whose main skeleton strictly 
 belongs to neither, but exhibits an intermediate form. 
 
 These strictly transitional windows, a small but very 
 interesting class, we will first consider, and then proceed 
 to examine the less valuable examples of mere commingling 
 of the styles according to either of the ways in which such 
 intermixture may be effected. 
 
 The grand instance of genuine transition is to be found 
 in the way in which the circle resting on two arches, the 
 most congenial outline of the Geometrical style, was de- 
 veloped into the Flowing form which succeeded it. Tliis 
 process we have already traced out in windows on a small 
 scale, while examining into the origin of Reticulated tracery; 
 we have now to see it applied to large windows in which a 
 skeleton of this form is filled up with smaller patterns. Of 
 course the very purest form of transition is where the ap- 
 proach to the Flowing style is simply manifested in the 
 lines of the skeleton, the filling up remaining purely Geome- 
 trical ; for it is clear that wherever the fenestella3 or the 
 centre-piece contain complete Flowing tracery, the example 
 is no longer one of pure transition, but of combination of 
 the two forms. And we shall actually find that this process 
 was really carried out in windows of this kind, so as to 
 result in a class, though a small one, of windows of Flowing 
 outline filled in with Geometrical patterns. But among 
 the ever varying forms of a transitional epoch, we must not 
 expect to meet with a perfectly consistent series ; and in 
 some stages we shall have to introduce examples which do 
 not illustrate this position. And I by no means imply that 
 windows of this kind are necessarily earlier than those in 
 which Flowing tracery is introduced into the minor details ; 
 
 R 
 
118 
 
 01’ FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 indeed I am inclined to think that, generally speaking, such 
 Avas not the case. The Geometrical outline filled up par- 
 tially or wholly with Flowing patterns, is a type so much 
 more usual, that it seems probable that Flowing tracery, 
 developed undoubtedly in the first instance in windows of 
 two and three lights, began as a general rule to influence 
 the parts of large windows before it was applied to their 
 main outlines. It w^as natural to construct the fenes- 
 tella3 of a compound window according to a method which 
 had been found pleasing in small windows, before ventur- 
 ing so bold a step as to endeavour an analogous develop- 
 ment of the grand outline. All that I contend is, that, 
 whatever be the date of their respective introductions, the 
 one class is an example of genuine transition, the other of 
 mere intermixture of two distinct principles. 
 
 The idea of employing the Ogee arch in the fenestellae 
 and making it flow into the circle, was one at once very 
 likely to occur of itself, and which might have been inci- 
 dentally suggested by such instances as some of those at 
 Exeter“, in which this form is actually produced by the 
 circles and the figures in the spandril, the pointed arches of 
 the fenestellae remaining untouched below. The instance 
 earliest in idea in which the heads of the fenestellse them- 
 selves are affected is to be seen in the magnificent seven- 
 light window at° Fen Stanton, where the arches are Ogee, 
 but do not as yet floAV into the circle. The fenestellae have 
 rich Reticulated tracery ; the circle is filled with wheel 
 tracery round the centre, with a range of spherical triangles 
 beyond, room being found for Flamboyant figures in their 
 spandrils, as well as in the larger lateral ones. In the next 
 stage the Ogee lines flow completely into the circle ; though 
 the latter remains perfect, being just the same outline as the 
 examples of two lights already mentioned at St. Cross and 
 
 See above, pi. 15. fig. 74. 
 
 ° Figvirecl in the Oxford Sheets. 
 
PL 30 
 
 .53 
 
OF THE TRANSITION FROM GEOMETRICAL. 
 
 119 
 
 CowleyP. Two-light specimens of this kind with the centre- 
 piece filled in occur at Norton by Daventry and Barnwell 
 St. Andrew’s (51) where the circle is filled with three tre- 
 foiled spherical triangles, with their spandrils also trefoiled ; 
 another at Stanion has three trefoils in the circle ; both 
 compositions, especially the former, seem too elaborate for 
 the broad open lights below. 
 
 Of four lights we have the well known and beautiful 
 windows at Kidlington, and St. Mary Magdalen church, 
 Oxford, which are injured only by the unmeaning figures in 
 the spandrils. Of the same number of lights is the east 
 window of Portishead church, Somerset, where the circle is 
 a fair composition of wheel tracery, but the arch being 
 somewhat obtuse, the fenestellae are rather crushed by it. 
 
 When we come to windows of five lights, we are again 
 met by our old difficulty about the complementary light. 
 Of this class there is a good example in 'Exeter Cathedral, 
 with Arch and Eoil tracery in the fenestellae, and circles 
 in the centre-piece. Tewkesbury Abbey** has two remark- 
 able examples ; in one the circle contains three long vesicae, 
 and the whole window has a certain analogy with the quasi- 
 reticulated example in the same church already raentionedb 
 The other (52) is very like that at Portishead, but better 
 proportioned, and with a more elaborate wheel. 
 
 Of six lights is a superb window at Chipping Norton, 
 (53) which, except that it has Flamboyant tracery in the 
 spandrils, belongs wholly to this class ; the prevailing 
 figure is the spherical triangle, but it is mingled with 
 Arch and Eoil tracery in the fenestellae. 
 
 I may here add as perfectly analogous a three-light 
 window at Market Harborough (54), in which the figure 
 introduced is not a circle, but a spherical triangle, treated 
 
 P Fig. 3, I. 
 
 "i Petit’s Tewkesi)ury, p. 33. 
 
 ” P. 94. 
 
120 
 
 OF PLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 in precisely the same manner; it contains three spherical 
 squares qnatrefoiled. 
 
 Still however the circle was felt not altogether to har- 
 monize, even when thus fused into the general design, with 
 the requisitions of the blowing style, and in some instances 
 it is found imperfect ; thus we find, just as in the two- 
 light examples, the lower part of the circle omitted, being 
 fused with the Ogee lines below. A typical example of 
 this is found at Boughton Alnph'' in Kent, of four lights, 
 but with the same fault as the window at Portishead in 
 a higher degree. More curious is the effect in windows 
 of an odd number of lights, as at Northfleet®, Kent, of 
 three, with a beautiful centre-piece of spherical triangles 
 with spiked foliations, the lower ones necessarily flowing 
 into the lights with the circle itself. Of the same character 
 of five lights is the rich and very singular east window of 
 riawklmrst in Kent (55). The wheel tracery of the 
 circle is very satisfactory ; still one cannot help feeling 
 that something is wanting ; the large central light seems 
 to have broken through the circle, and gives an incomplete 
 and divided look to the whole composition ; had the lights 
 consisted merely of two fenestellse without a central light, or 
 even were it of the same Avidth as the rest, this would have 
 been avoided. This window is probably of late date, and 
 shews how long the circle remained a leading idea in the 
 minds of our architects. The juxtaposition of the Perpen- 
 dicular and Plowing line in the same space in the fenes- 
 tellae must be noticed, and the wheel is so contrived as to 
 give a vertical line produced from the central light. The 
 figures in the spandrils seem borrowed, rather incongru- 
 ously, from those common over Perpendicular doorways. 
 
 Just as this last form was analogous to a very common 
 type of two-light window, so we find that suggested by 
 
 ■■ Petit’s Church Architecture, i. 184. and Brandon’s Analysis. * Brandon. 
 
OF THE TRANSITION FROM GEOMETRICAL. 
 
 121 
 
 that used at Slymbridge (11) also employed on a large 
 scale. Though no natural stage of the development, it 
 was a very natural process to omit the top of the circle, 
 where its round head comes into collision with the pointed 
 arch of the window, and make it flow gently into it. This, 
 if my drawing is at all accurate, is the case with the west 
 window of Brecon Priory (56), and the same outline has 
 been — I cannot think at all judiciously, — adopted in com- 
 pleting the east window at Dorchester. 
 
 As the vesica is to the Plowing what the circle is to the 
 Geometrical style, it is no wonder that we find the two 
 figures run into one another ; when the two last-mentioned 
 processes are combined in a window of an even number of 
 lights, it is manifest that a form is produced in which the 
 principal lines describe the tracery of a Reticulated window 
 of two lights. This is one of the most usual, perhaps 
 indeed the very commonest, form, assumed by Plowing 
 tracery when a primary pattern is employed, and is of 
 course simply an instance of combination of this particular 
 kind. Yet I cannot but think that its use is rather derived 
 from a gradual development of the large Geometrical win- 
 dow, than from the same form in two-light windows. We 
 have seen that every step between the pure Geometrical 
 and this form can be traced with the most perfect accuracy, 
 and it is unreasonable to suppose, either that the form in 
 which they finally issue is not to be assigned to them, but 
 to another source, or that these transitional stages are only 
 so many applications of the analogous phases of the two- 
 light window. And the other form, the Ogee, which most 
 frequently occurs as a skeleton, is hardly ever found in any 
 other than a perfect form*, or including any other than per- 
 
 ‘ The only exception I know is the complete circle in the centre-piece instead 
 ruined east window of Howden as re- of the vesica, just as in the analogous 
 stored by Mr. Sharpe (Parallels). Here stage of the present subject, 
 the Ogee skeleton, otherwise pure, has a 
 
122 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 feet Flowing patterns. The use of these for this purpose 
 was clearly an application of the form which had become 
 familiar in smaller windows ; this could not have taken 
 place till the Flowing style was perfectly matured ; whereas 
 it is clear that the Reticulated skeleton was in use before 
 Geometrical elements had been quite extirpated. Again, the 
 form almost invariably assumed in this case is that which 
 is most easily and naturally developed from the Geometrical 
 skeleton ; the later forms of the two-light window — those 
 derivable from the Reticulated expanse — hardly ever occur. 
 I only know of the example at Great Milton". 
 
 We may then safely consider this very fine form of 
 Flowing tracery as a direct development from the analo- 
 gous Geometrical one, and rank as the final examples of 
 the Transition such examples of it as retain any trace of 
 Geometrical tracery in their secondary patterns. Thus in 
 a two-light window at Bozeat, Northants (57), the centre- 
 piece has strongly-marked wheel tracery, and we find the 
 same in one of four lights at Stratford on Avon, with 
 Divergent fenestellae. In the open window at St. Mary’s^ 
 Beverley, we have also wheel tracery, but with the Geome- 
 trical element more strongly marked by being included in 
 a concave spherical square, the spandrils of which with the 
 centre-piece form long Flamboyant figures meeting others 
 in the outer spandrils in a Convergent manner. In others 
 the fenestellse are Geometrical, the centre-piece Flowing, 
 as in a two-light example in the triforium at Gloucester 
 (58), and a four-light at Tickhill, Yorkshire. 
 
 Thus far we have the natural development of the circle 
 and its supporting arches, in which both of those two great 
 features remain, having assumed the character and qualifi- 
 cations of the new style. AVe shall now come to less 
 natural ones, in which one of the two completely disappears. 
 
 Oxford Society’s Guide, p. 306. 
 
 ^ Sharpe's Windows ; Rickman, 156. 
 
M 
 
1 Kt L. 
 
 50 
 
OF THE TRANSITION FROM GEOMETRICAL. 
 
 123 
 
 while the other remains actually or in its vestiges. Thus 
 we sometimes find the fenestellae remain while the centre- 
 piece, as a distinct figure, is gone, as iii an example (59) at 
 Chipping Norton, where Divergent fenestellae support no 
 circle, but a centre-piece of wheel tracery. 
 
 In the other form of this stage the fenestellae are rejected, 
 the Geometrical centre-piece remaining ; this is not always 
 a circle. At Stoke Bruern, Northants (60), is one in which 
 a spherical square remains, but, as is always the case with 
 that figure when introduced with the least skill, fits well 
 into the other lines of the tracery. Perhaps however the 
 large quatrefoil in the square is too much for the work 
 below ; yet the figure would hardly have admitted of the 
 insertion of a subordinate pattern. 
 
 In some examples however, the circle itself is found, as 
 in one in the North Transept at Nantwich^ which has the 
 circle imperfect at the top. This is of five lights, un- 
 doubtedly of late date, with very Plamboyant lines and 
 not free from an inclination to Perpendicular, yet this 
 Geometrical element, though without any actual subor- 
 dination, is its most conspicuous feature. Another at 
 Marston St. Lawrence, Northants (61), of three lights, 
 has two long Convergent piercings, and above these a 
 circle, containing four Flamboyant figures according to 
 an arrangement which we shall find very frequently re- 
 curring, and which would seem to be the F'lamboyant 
 version of the spokes of the wheel. 
 
 This leads us immediately to a form of Tracery on which 
 the stamp of the circle is very strongly impressed, but from 
 which its actual figure is absent. This is that in which 
 there is no subarcuation, no circle, but the upper part of 
 the window is filled with tracery diverging from a centre. 
 In principle this is clearly Geometrical and not Continuous, 
 
 y Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
124 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 and it is no easy matter to distingnisli this class from the 
 strictly Geometrical ones of the same kind ; indeed both 
 might be called Transitional. But in the windows which 
 I shall class here, though the tracery diverges from a 
 centre, it still usually is also in some sort a continuation 
 of the mullions below, whereas in the others it is formed 
 in total independence of the lights, which have seldom 
 room to branch into any of the usual forms, but are left 
 to combine with the centre-piece how they best can, often- 
 times in a very awkward manner. This form admits of 
 great variety ; sometimes the wheel is very prominent, 
 straight lines diverging from the centre and terminating 
 in arches with foliations. One of the windows at Barkby, 
 Leicestershire (62), is a very singular example, its upper 
 part is precisely that of a wheel, so arranged as to produce 
 an exceedingly strong vertical line ; its side lights. Arch 
 and Foil, are completely independent of the composition 
 in the head, having almost the importance of fenestellae. 
 When the lines in the head are four in number, the figure of 
 a cross or saltire is very strongly marked, as at Deeping, 
 and at Attleborough, Norfolk (63). In some examples, as 
 in Rochester cathedral, and Hethersett in Norfolk (64), with 
 three lights, we have a greater number of Divergent figures, 
 which in the actual examples, though by no means of 
 necessity, tend to make the Continuous element weaker 
 than in the last class, though of course the lines are less 
 stiff. As if to make up, the lines from the side lights, 
 which bound the tracery, reminding us of the broken 
 circles at Northfleet and Hawkhurst, are in the last ex- 
 ample completely Perpendicular. 
 
 I have thus traced all the stages of what may be most 
 truly called Transitional windows ; and we are now fairly 
 set down among true Plowing forms, the Divergent and 
 Convergent varieties being immediately derived from the 
 
H.32. 
 
OF THE TRANSITION FROM GEOMETRICAL. 125 
 
 class just now described. But I am far from having ex- 
 hausted all the combinations and intermixtures of Geo- 
 metrical and Flowing tracery, and in the next section I 
 will proceed to consider those which, according to the rule 
 laid down above, would appear to be a later idea than the 
 appearance of the latter style in its perfection. 
 
 § 8. Combinations of Geometrical and Flowing 
 Tracery. 
 
 a. Geometrical Skeletons containing Flowing Fatterns. 
 
 Flowing tracery appears to be combined with almost 
 every variety of the earlier forms, and according to both 
 methods of combination ; but by far the most important 
 variety is one which exhibits a pure Geometrical skeleton 
 filled up more or less completely with Flowing patterns^ 
 Of this class, though not very numerous, several large 
 and splendid examples remain. These are mostly of five 
 lights, some of only four, and form the east windows of 
 several very fine Churches. 
 
 The part of the window in which the Flowing element 
 seems first to appear, is in the filling up of the fenestelliE, 
 which are found Heticulated at a very early stage, as in the 
 splendid east window of Wellingborough", and those of 
 Market Harborough, and Geddington, which are of very 
 similar design, though somewhat plainer, and in the rich 
 but strange and incongruous window at Canterbury 
 figured by Professor Willis*. The three former have re- 
 markably fine Foil centre-pieces, and the latter is in every 
 other part much more Geometrical than Flowing, and has 
 the spiked foliations; yet it is so late as 133G. The 
 next stage still retains a skeleton purely Geometrical, but 
 
 * Sharpe’s Windows; Oxford Sheets. “ Arch. Hist. Canterbury, p. 115. 
 
 S 
 
126 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 the filling up becomes gradually more and more Flowing. 
 An excellent example is to be found in the east window 
 of Tlmrnham Church, Kent (65) ; this is of four lights, form- 
 ing two Divergent windows, whose containing arches sup- 
 port a circle with the tracery of a wheel window; the 
 centre is occupied by a small quatrefoiled circle, from 
 which diverge eight spokes united by trefoiled Ogee arches ; 
 the space between the lights and the circle is trefoiled, and 
 the spandrils contain each a single Flamboyant piercing. 
 This window is remarkable for the purity with which the 
 features of the two styles are preserved in the portions 
 belonging respectively to each of them, which will not be 
 found quite so strong in other examples. It is pro- 
 bably late in the style, having a Flamboyant tendency 
 in its foliations, and shews how the influence of circle, 
 and the actual form itself, were retained throughout the 
 whole period of Flowing tracery. The east window of 
 Grafton Underwood'', Northants, has the tracery of the 
 wheel, but far less pure^^and distinct than at Tlimmliam, 
 having only four arms in saltire ; the groupes have Conver- 
 gent tracery with a mere foliated space in the head, a dis- 
 position by no means elegant. A window at Chaddesley 
 Corbet, of three lights, might be considered quite Geome- 
 trical, except for the tendency, which does not extend 
 throughout, to Flamboyancy in the filling up of the circle. 
 This does not quite come under the definition above given, 
 though the effect is very similar ; the skeleton, considered 
 as a Geometrical one, is very singular, and approaches to 
 Subarcuation. At Plympton St. Mary’s (66), is a large five- 
 light window of the usual form, a circle on two arches 
 formed by the grouping of the side lights ; the tracery of 
 these is a mixture of Convergent and Reticulated ; the 
 
 Northainptonshire Clmrclies, p. 163. 
 
t 
 
COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRICAL AND FLOWING, 127 
 
 circle is very elaborately filled with tracery of a mixed 
 kind ; long qnatrefoiled piercings diverge from the centre, 
 and are fused into a rim of trefoiled spherical triangles 
 round the circumference. The Flamboyant treatment of 
 circles seen here and at Marston, is the only Flowing element 
 in a very fine otherwise Geometrical window at Exeter (67), 
 of a skeleton resembling one in the same Church already 
 described*’. 
 
 b. Arch Skeletons containing Floioing Patterns. 
 
 ‘ We also find Arch Tracery and Flowing combined ac- 
 cording to the same principle, the arch skeleton being per- 
 fect, and the openings filled with Flowing tracery. 
 
 The most common way of filling an arch is still that by a 
 single arched light supporting a vesica ; and when, as is 
 most frequently the case, both are Ogee, and the spandrils 
 foliated, the composition is a very pleasing one, decidedly 
 Flowing — as indeed the other often is — and perhaps on 
 the whole the most satisfactory way of forming tracery of 
 that kind in the head of a single light. 
 
 Of the pure Arch tracery without intersection, with the 
 skeleton filled in with the forms just described, several ex- 
 amples occur in Kent, as at Rochester Cathedral, Would- 
 ham (68), and East Mailing ; the mode of filling the 
 spandrils differs in all three ; in the curious window from 
 Mailing, with its segmental head, spherical triangles are 
 inserted. 
 
 At Brackley are three- and four-light windows filled 
 with real Convergent tracery, and the spandrils occu- 
 pied with Flamboyant figures. And finally (69), I may 
 mention the extraordinary window at Oundle, of five lights, 
 
 c See above, pi. 15, fig. 74. 
 
128 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 in whose filling up, circles, spherical triangles, and Conver- 
 gent tracery are combined. Windows which are founded 
 upon an intermixture of Intersecting Arch tracery and the 
 Continuous forms, are by no means uncommon, and indeed 
 most of the numerous varieties of the former kind will be 
 found to enter into the combination. I have already men- 
 tioned the intersecting windows where the piercings are 
 only foliated at the apex, which seem to point this way. 
 At Brackley (70) and Wardington are several good ex- 
 amples of an intersecting skeleton really filled up to a 
 greater or less extent with Flowing tracery, but generally 
 the intersecting lines are not complete. We find also 
 the incomplete intersection intermingled with Geometrical 
 figures; as at Luton (71), Beds., where the strictly Arch 
 lights are tilled with Convergent tracery, being somewhat 
 analogous to the Oundle window just mentioned. 
 
 c. Floioing Skeletons eontaining Geometrical, ^c. patterns. 
 
 Thus far, as is most natural, the skeletons are of the earlier, 
 the secondary pattern of the later form. We but seldom 
 find the process reversed, yet examples do occur of a Flow- 
 ing skeleton filled up with patterns usually of Foil, or Arch 
 and Foil, tracery, a form which could hardly be employed 
 the other way. Thus a very graceful window at Trent, Somer- 
 set‘d, is a fine example of imperfect Reticulated, with its long 
 vesicae filled with sub foiled trefoils; and at Chipping War- 
 den (72), are instances somewhat similar, though the primary 
 pattern here also is not pure Reticulated, but an approach 
 to Flamboyant, which we shall have hereafter to consider. 
 We also find the like the case with Ogee tracery, but 
 chiefly with the simpler and less developed forms of that 
 variety. There is however at Wardington, Oxon (73), a church 
 
 '' Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
n 
 
COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRICAL AND FLOWING. 129 
 
 containing a great variety of windows, though none of any 
 great merit, one of the typical form, which may be so far 
 considered an example of this stage as that the vesica in the 
 head is divided into two smaller ones. At Aldwinkle All 
 Saints, Northamptonshire, we find a two-light window, like 
 No. 21, with Arch and Eoil Tracery in the lights. At Hale, 
 Lincolnshire (74), are some three- and four-light windows, 
 where we find the substitute for Arch and Foil tracery 
 used in the same way. Indeed there are several instances 
 where compositions otherwise purely Flowing have, not 
 unnaturally, long lights, where they occur, filled up in this 
 way. Such instances, where there is no other Geometrical 
 element introduced, and no great difference is made in 
 the general effect, I shall not think it necessary to mark as 
 cases of combination. 
 
 d. Commingling of Geometrical and Flowing Patterns. 
 
 Thus far, we have been concerned with skeletons of one 
 class filled in with secondary patterns of another. These 
 are of course by far the most beautiful and intrinsically 
 important variety, though a numerical majority would pro- 
 bably be on the side of those which exhibit nothing be- 
 yond mere confusion and intermingling of Geometrical and 
 Flowing forms. 
 
 The derivation of the Reticulated form of Flowing tracery 
 from the former class has been already mentioned, and the 
 continually recurring influence of the circle in windows of 
 that class can hardly have been forgotten. To these we 
 must add, the frequent occurrence of the complete circle, 
 thrust in, never to its advantage, among purely Continuous 
 tracery to occupy a spandril or otherwise do the duty of a 
 stop-gap, as in the great East window of Carlisle Cathe- 
 dral, that of Wymmington Church, and even the late Per- 
 
130 
 
 OF PLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 pendiciilar west window of St. Mary’s. Other examples 
 occur in which the circle is more predominant. At East 
 Farleigh in Kent (75), is a two-light window, each of 
 whose lights supports a qnatrefoiled circle, the spaces above 
 and below which are cjuatrefoiled ; the lines of the lights 
 and of the cireles combine so as to form a kind of Ogee 
 Arch. At Heckington are three-light windows, whose 
 tracery contains two circles below and an Ogee vesica in 
 the head. At Qneniborongh, Leicestershire, and Ancaster, 
 Lincolnshire (76), are examples of the same outline, in which 
 the circles are filled with the Flamboyant translation of the 
 wheel tracery. Different varieties of this form, as well as 
 other comminglings of Geometrical and Flowing lines, 
 appear from Mr. Rickman’s collection to be especially used 
 in Scottish windows. 
 
 One of the large windows at Crick (77) exhibits a design, 
 chiefly, but not purely of the Reticulated variety, which is 
 interrupted by the insertion of a large circle in the centre, 
 whieh at present, at all events, is without foliation, though 
 provided with cusps in Rickman’s drawing, and has an 
 effect as poor and unmeaning as can be conceived. An- 
 other in the same Church of rich, but not easily described 
 tracery, has two circles inserted in a manner only less un- 
 sightly. With these may be classed one or two examples in 
 which the Geometrical figure introduced is not the cii’cle 
 but the spherical triangle. There is a three-light window 
 of this sort at St. Clement’s, Norwich (78), of three lights, 
 of tracery analogous to Reticulated, and even exhibiting 
 a Perpendicular tendency, which has the usual vesica in the 
 head, but sexfoiled triangles are substituted below. 
 
 From the comparative rarity of pure Foil tracery it is not 
 to be expected that many examples of its combination Avith 
 Flowing forms should be found. The east window of Chad- 
 dcsley Corbet, Worcestershire (79), is a fine example; it is 
 
ri. 
 
 79 
 
COMBINATIONS OF GEOMETRICAL AND FLOWING. 131 
 
 of five lights, constructed on the Arch and Poil principle ; 
 the tracery above is confused, presenting reticulations, 
 spiked foils, and the Mowing spherical triangle ; in the 
 head is a circle containing spiked foils. We also find 
 similar comminglings of Arch and Flowing tracery in those 
 examples where the lower part of the window has perfect 
 intersections, which themselves turn into Flonung lines 
 in the head, as at Tydd St. Giles, Cambridgeshire, and 
 Brigham (80), Cumberland, with which we may reckon as 
 identical in principle, although the number of its lights 
 excludes any actual intersection whatever, one at Bristol 
 Cathedral (81); the terminations of its cusps are exceed- 
 ingly elegant. 
 
 Finally, as the most superb example of combined Arch 
 and Flowing tracery, we may mention the vast and won- 
 derful east window at Dorchester, a design, whose unique 
 splendour-and the charm attaching to its recent and happy 
 restoration, almost forbid a critical examination. The idea 
 of filling the whole window with tracery was a bold one, 
 and, in this case, admirably carried out. A composition 
 whose tracery commences below the spring of the arch, if 
 that arch be a simple-pointed one, is always unpleasing ; 
 the tracery should only occupy the head of the window, and 
 the head in this case is defined by the impost line. One 
 of the richest windows in Oxford Cathedral violates this 
 rule, and fails accordingly. But at Dorchester, though the 
 whole is one expanse of tracery, this rule is still observed : 
 the tracery of the head is confined to the head. The mul- 
 lions are broken by two ranges of Reticulated figures, which 
 in fact are, to the eye at least, a nobler kind of transom, 
 but no divergence of lines, no division or diminution of the 
 lights, commences till the arch of the window springs, and 
 with it the intersecting arches of the tracery, themselves 
 intermingled with Flowing lines, and now again upholding 
 
132 
 
 or FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 the gorgeous Flamboyant wheel. But whether the division 
 of the window below the wlieel into two quite distinct por- 
 tions, by the interposition of a solid buttress, be in alto- 
 gether good taste, may be open to doubt. It may have 
 been owing to constructive reasons, to some failure in the 
 masonry, discovered after the commencement of the work, 
 which would have rendered so wide an expanse of open 
 net-work unsafe. In any case, though no one would think 
 of proposing it for modern imitation, it has the charm be- 
 longing to the strange and the marvellous ; and, as such, 
 must be held to confer an additional attraction on a fabric, 
 which, though its claims to a high place on the score of 
 pure beauty may be contested, must ever rank as one of 
 the most uni(|ue and wonderful of England’s churches. 
 
 § 9. Of Subarcuated Flowing Windows. 
 
 The very important class of windows which comes under 
 this head will be found to present nearly all the stages of 
 Flowing tracery, from the days of its first emergence from 
 the stiff bondage of the Geometrical till it had died away 
 into the equal stiffness of the Perpendicular. Yet throughout 
 we can trace the presence of a foreign element. It is to the 
 abiding influence of the Arch tracery that we must attribute 
 their distinguishing feature. It indeed is found in some of 
 the most splendid umidows of the style, and if it does not 
 actually add fresh beauties to them, at all events by divid- 
 ing the window into parts, it obviates the difficulty of design- 
 ing a single pattern which should embrace the whole com- 
 position ; still the hard curved line, the very division into 
 parts, and especially the centre-piece, all savour rather of 
 the stiffness and separate existence of parts of the Geo- 
 metrical than the fusion and unity of the Flowing style. 
 With this proviso we shall proceed to examine this nu- 
 merous and important class of windows. 
 
OF SUBARCUATED FLOWING WINDOAVS. 
 
 133 
 
 a. Combination of Geometrical and Floioing tracery in 
 
 Subarcuated windows. 
 
 In many instances very considerable traces of the earlier 
 fonns are retained. A singular six-liglit (82) window at 
 Potterdale, Westmoreland, presents a curious example of 
 tracery — otherwise (except the subarcuation) of the sim- 
 plest Geometrical kind — presenting an approach to Reticu- 
 lation of the slightest extent, yet still of such a character as 
 to shew that it is a case of real commingling, and that Avin- 
 dows of more advanced Plowing tracery must have preceded 
 it. At Ledbury is a fine four-light window, which might 
 have been considered an excellent example of the earlier 
 style, but for the long Reticulated vesicse of the fenestellae. 
 
 b. Subarcuated windows with Geometriccd centre-pieces. 
 
 It is not uncommon to find a purely Geometrical outline 
 with a circle in the head. A three-light example at Chip- 
 ping-Warden, Northamptonshire, presents the common ap- 
 pearance of that style, save in the Flamboyant treatment of 
 its circle. In one of five lights at Offbrd® in Kent, the fenes- 
 tellse have a sort of elongated Reticulated figure trefoiled ; 
 the tracery in the circle is very peculiar and not easily 
 described, but full of Geometrical elements. The five-light 
 east window at Wrington (83) has the long vesica in the fenes- 
 tellse ; the centre-piece is a circle, quatrefoiled and double- 
 foliated. The number of lights render this window, and 
 Offbrd, more satisfactory in outline than any of the larger 
 ones which Ave have hitherto mentioned ; but in both the 
 tracery is somewhat meagre. 
 
 An objection similar to that made^ above to the east Avin- 
 
 ' Oxford Sheets. 
 
 ' P. 25. 
 
134 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 clow at Raunds might at first sight be thought to lie against 
 the live-light east window of Scottow church (84), Nor- 
 folk, where the subarcuations intersect, having a light com- 
 mon to the fenestellge, which are fine three-light compo- 
 sitions. It is manifest that such a design leaves even 
 less room for the circular centre-piece than in the other 
 example ; but this very fact diminishes the objection ; its 
 prominence is so small, that it does not strike the eye as a 
 centre-piece, nor call for the proportions of one. 
 
 A four-light window at Melton (85) deserves attentive 
 observation for the rare use of the vesica as a centre-piece. 
 It is very early, as in this case it is hardly possible to keep 
 the lights and the figure from fusing together, and so pro- 
 ducing Flowing lines. 
 
 It is by no means uncommon to meet with figures retain- 
 ing traces of a Geometrical shape, but one more adapted to 
 the Flowing line than the circle or any other such regular 
 figure. Thus in the magnifieent east windows of Albrighton 
 in Shropshire, and Gnosall in Staffordshire, (ivliich are iden- 
 tical, except in the oecurrence of a transom at Albrighton,) 
 a spherical square, ogeed at the bottom, is plainly described, 
 though the actual subordination in mouldings extends only 
 to the lines of subareuation ; the traeery still retains a pro- 
 minent centro ; the fenestellae are Divergent. 
 
 At Granchester, and North Walsham (86), figures occur as 
 centre-pieces which are less easily described, like a circle 
 breaking out into Ogees, which is most fully developed at 
 AValsham, where the four points are thus treated ; at Gran- 
 chester the lower part remains circular and it contains wheel 
 tracery, while that at Walsham is octofoiled. It should be 
 remarked that the smaller piercings at Granchester are left 
 unfoliated, while at Walsham the foliation is very round and 
 bold, approximating somewhat to the preceding style. 
 
 The very fine east window of Penkridge (87) church bears a 
 

OF SUBARCUATED FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 135 
 
 considerable resemblance to that at Gnosall, but the centre- 
 piece, unmarked, as there, by subordination, is a long Ogee 
 vesica filled with a by no means uncommon mixture of 
 Convergent and Reticulated tracery ; the arch of the win- 
 dow itself is slightly ogeed. 
 
 c. Subarcuated loindows with loheel centre-pieces. 
 
 In a very numerous class no actual containing figure 
 occupies the head, but it is filled with tracery retaining 
 strong vestiges of the wheel, in all the different shapes 
 which have been described. 
 
 In some the straight line, the diverging spoke, is still 
 predominant, in others the divergent vesicse. But it will 
 not be necessary to describe many examples at great length, 
 as windows of this kind are usually composed of two 
 elements, both of which have been sufficiently treated of ; 
 wheel tracery in the head, and some form or combination 
 of Flowing forms in the fenestellae. At Frisby, Leicestershire 
 (88), is a three-light window with Divergent vesica? ; the 
 east window of Soham (89) is one of the finest of the class, 
 retaining the hard stiff outline of the crown ; that of Attle- 
 borough (90), Norfolk, is remarkable, as having the same 
 outline as at Scottow, and so introducing as it were two 
 centre-pieces. 
 
 But by far the largest and most beautiful window of this 
 class with which I am acquainted is the truly magnificent, 
 though utterly incongruous, eastern window of Bristol Ca- 
 thedral (91). The wheel principle is still very strong in the 
 centre-piece, which is almost entirely of Early character, 
 while the fenestellm are advanced very far on the road to 
 Perpendicular, showing how long the two methods of form- 
 ing tracery existed side by side. This splendid composition 
 
136 
 
 OF FLOWIxNG TRACERY. 
 
 is of nine lights, with fenestell® of three, and the other 
 three forming the centre. The fenestellae have the Reticu- 
 lated outline filled up in each vesica with Divergent tracery 
 in a manner to be hereafter described, forming each a rich 
 and magnificent window of that class, though of com’se the 
 arch is far more acute than is usual in distinct windows. 
 The forms of the vesicre are, judiciously as I think, not 
 adapted to this, not being much longer than usual, but 
 merely cut out of an infinite series, having of course a 
 greater number than common. The heads of the three 
 central lights range with the others, but almost immediately 
 above is a transom, the space between being fiUed by four 
 small piercings diverging from the apex of each arch, the 
 mulhons being continued vertically, and forming a triplet, 
 under an arch nearly ranging with the subarcuations. This, 
 as well as the tracery above, is Arch and Foil ; in the head 
 of each light of the triplet a trefoil arch supports a trefoil. 
 From the apex of this triplet diverge six spokes of a wheel, 
 the space of the two lower ones of the eight which might 
 have been expected being occupied by the triplet ; these 
 form three pairs of piercings grouped under round arches, 
 the central mullion of each figure thus formed simply branch- 
 ing into the arch ; each piercing has an Ogee trefoil arch 
 supporting an Ogee trefoil, with a diagonal quatrefoil in 
 the head of each ; the spandrils above are trefoiled ; those 
 beloTV between the triplet and the fenestellae are filled with 
 long trefoil-headed piercings. It is manifest from the 
 incongruous mixture of principles in this sumptuous win- 
 dow that it cannot altogether approve itself to a critical 
 examination, and it has at least one fault conspicuous at 
 first sight, the great width and comparative bareness of the 
 centre and the upper part, when viewed together with the 
 elaborate tracery of the sides ; the effect of the transom is 
 also far from pleasing. Still its general appearance is mag- 
 
FL. 
 
 91 
 

OF SUBARCUATED FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 137 
 
 nificent in the extreme, and as an architectural curiosity 
 few windows surpass it ; it possesses also, if I mistake not, 
 very great interest for the supporters of the symbolical 
 theory. 
 
 d. Siibarciiated windoios with Flowing centregneces. 
 
 We now come to windows in which the subarcuation 
 itself is the only trace, if trace it be, of Geometrical influ- 
 ence, both the fenestellm and the centre being purely Flow- 
 ing ; a class which will embrace some of the most beautiful 
 windows of all sizes. 
 
 The most convenient division which can be made, which, 
 as well as many of the remarks which I shall have to make, 
 will of course apply equally to the Subarcuated windows 
 which, for other reasons, have been already treated of, is that 
 already made, whether there is or is not a complement ; a 
 division very nearly, though not universally, coinciding with 
 another, namely, whether the number of lights is odd or 
 even. It is clear that where it is odd there can be no 
 central mullion, where it is even, there necessarily is one, 
 though it does not follow that the subarciiations must rise 
 from it, though such is usually the case. 
 
 a. With a Complementary light. 
 
 Of the first class, where one or more complementary lights 
 are left between the fenestellse, our village churches supply 
 many excellent examples of three-light windows ; the side 
 lights have most commonly an Ogee arch supporting a vesica 
 as before described, with the spandrils foliated ; a strong ver- 
 tical line is continued from the head of the central light, which 
 branches off into the tracery of a two-light Divergent window ; 
 
138 
 
 OP PLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 the space necessarily left below being filled up with figures 
 usually more or less of a Convergent character. Windows 
 of this kind, with some small variations as to the proportion 
 and foliation of the different piercings, are by no means 
 uncommon in Northamptonshire. Examples occur at the 
 east end of Hellidon Church, at the east end of the south 
 aisle at Church Brampton, and the® west end of the nave 
 at Irthlingborough. Others with the same arrangement 
 of the centre occur at Rothersthorpe, in the same county, 
 with a round arch in the fenestellae supporting a simple- 
 pointed vesica, and at Wickham chapel, where the fenes- 
 tellae have Convergent tracery. Awindowin Rochester Cathe- 
 dral differs from the type first described only in finding 
 room for a smaller pair of Divergent piercings beneath the 
 principal ones of the centre-piece ; another at Amesby (92) 
 has three pair, reducing the crowning vesica to a most 
 insignificant size. The window at Castle Ashby, selected 
 as a frontispiece to the Glossary, has the central light rising 
 awkwardly above the other two ; its tracery has two pair of 
 small Convergent figures below the usual Divergent ones ; 
 the side lights are of the usual arrangement, with the excep- 
 tion of two unmeaning circles thrust into the spandrils. At 
 Darfield in Yorkshire is a window (93) conforming nearly 
 to the general type, but the Ogee heads of the lights are so 
 extraordinarily flat in the shoulder and pointed in the apex, 
 that the lower spandrils both of the centre and sides be- 
 come Reversed piercings of most singular proportions ; the 
 centre-piece has a very bold look. The east windows*' of 
 the aisles at Howden, have fenestellae of earlier character 
 with the complement almost Elamboyant. 
 
 Four-light windows of this class sometimes occur, in which 
 of course theAwo middle lights form the complement. A 
 very meagre one is given by Rickman from Aslackby ; the 
 
 K Northamptonshire Churches. Rickman, p. 147. Sharpe’s Parallels. 
 
H 39 
 
or SUBARCUATED FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 139 
 
 fenestellse are simply cinquefoiled without further tracery ; 
 the centre is merely a quatrefoiled vesica awkwardly dis- 
 joined from the subarcuations, but which would have been 
 still more awkward had it touched them. A richer but 
 not very satisfactory window of this kind occurs (94) in the 
 choir at Ely Cathedral ; the side lights are Convergent, 
 the centre is confused and not easily described, but has a 
 good deal of Divergent character about it. The predom- 
 inance of the vertical lines cannot fail to be observed. At 
 Eordham, Cambridge (94 a), and Shiere, Surrey \ are ear- 
 lier and better examples, both, especially the latter, retaining 
 considerable traces of the wheel in the centre-piece. But 
 this disposition of the lights is never pleasant ; the fenes- 
 tellse of a subarcuated window should always be far more 
 important than such an arrangement allows. 
 
 Five-light windows of this kind form a most appropriate 
 termination for chancels of moderate size. The fenestellae 
 have usually Divergent tracery, which prevails also in the 
 centre-pieces, which differ little from those of three-light 
 windows. The east window of Houghton-le-Springi is a 
 most perfect design, though there is something rather 
 squat and awkward in the actual forms of the piercings. 
 The central vertical line is very prominent, and throws off 
 two pair of Divergent piercings above the small Conver- 
 gent ones ; the two upper ones are so large and round 
 that they trench considerably upon the due proportions of 
 the crowning vesica. Perhaps even this is surpassed by a 
 superb, though nameless, window in Rickman’s collection 
 (95) which has certainly the most faultless centre-piece 
 of this kind that I have ever seen. The east window of 
 Granchester is very fine and well known, and has a predom- 
 inant vertical line, though not so strongly marked as at 
 
 ■ Brandon’s Analysis, Appeiuli.x, 49- 
 
 1 Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
140 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 Houghton, and a centre-piece of the usual form except two 
 very small unfoliated piercings on each side the crowning 
 vesica. At Long Stanton, All Saints, M^e have a nearly 
 similar one with Convergent tracery in the fenestellae. The 
 east window of Wymmington, Bedfordshire, has a centre- 
 })iece of the usual form springing up from an Ogee light 
 higher than the rest, and two incongruous circles thrust in 
 below the diverging point, being nearly the same defects 
 as were mentioned in the window from Castle Ashby. It 
 is very remarkable that this window in a church probably 
 belonging to the latest days of Decorated — its founder died 
 in 1391, and its general appearance is quite Perpendicular, 
 though with very little admixture of the actual details of that 
 style — should have these Geometrical remnants, and should 
 farther have the vertical line scarcely appearing, while in the 
 other two examples it forces itself on the eye at first sight, 
 and should have all its piercings completely foliated, and of 
 a much earlier look, retaining more of the pure vesica in 
 opposition to the Flamboyancy of the other two. Moreover 
 in the very same front are contemporary lancet windows. 
 
 All these, notwithstanding diversities of considerable 
 moment, still retain a marked similarity in their main out- 
 lines ; that at the east end of the south aisle of the Holy 
 Trinity Church at Hull has a totally different character'", 
 and agrees ivith them only in the number of lights and in 
 the use of subarcuation. There is throughout a strong 
 Flamboyant tendency, and that only in the lines of the 
 tracery, as every opening is completely foliated. The 
 centre-piece is mainly Reticulated, but of course is adapted 
 to the shape of the space to be filled by the introduction of 
 figures not purely of that character. The most prominent 
 figures in the fenestellae are Convergent. Of seven lights 
 is the great north window at Witney, with fenestellae of 
 
 Sharpe's AVindows. 
 
OF SUBAllCUATED FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 141 
 
 three lights, of tracery combining Reticulated and Con- 
 vergent, and with a Plowing Wheel centre-piece. 
 
 Finally comes the famous east window of Carlisle Ca- 
 thedra] ', of nine lights. It is invidious to depreciate an 
 example held in such general estimation, and still more 
 dangerous when it is one of which the writer is not an eye- 
 witness, but I must confess that, as far as I am competent 
 to judge from Mr. Sharpe’s engraving, I cannot think 
 that, stately and elaborate as it is, it at all deserves the 
 honour in which it is commonly held as the most beautiful 
 Decorated window in England. I cannot but consider 
 many smaller specimens as far surpassing it in real taste 
 and symmetry of composition. Subordination occurs to a 
 greater extent than in any other window with which 1 am 
 acquainted, patterns being traced within each other almost 
 to infinity, but it is not well managed ; take for instance 
 the centre-piece, it does not appear why the crowning 
 vesica and the Divergent figures immediately beneath 
 should have an additional subordination to those below. 
 But there are greater faults in this centre-piece, which does 
 not cohere together upon any intelligible principle whatso- 
 ever ; a circle is placed immediately on the central light, 
 utterly breaking all continuity, and violating an important 
 rule even of Geometrical tracery, that no figure be placed 
 on a single arch. The portions above cannot after this be 
 expected to have much connexion, and are further marred 
 by the thrusting in of two cii'cles in the upper part. The 
 imperfect vesica of the centre-piece is any thing but satis- 
 factory ; the intruding circle appears again in its spandrils, 
 and the fenestellse are far from elegant. The great vesica 
 of the principal pattern is far too large for the supporting 
 arches, and thrusts them in an unpleasant manner to the 
 sides ; this and the vesica within form a fine Flamboyant 
 
 ' Sharpe's Windows. 
 
 U 
 
142 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 outline, but the tracery with which it is filled up is incon- 
 gruous, in the lower part excessively so, all continuity being 
 broken. I do not’ see how this window can for a moment 
 be compared with the faultless East window of Ringstead 
 soon to be described, with the magnificent, though not 
 quite consistent, examples at Sleaford or Heckington, or 
 the smaller examples of this very kind at Albrighton' and 
 Granchester; though its vast size and elaborate design 
 gives it of coiu’se an immense advantage over its more 
 lowly rivals. 
 
 /3. With a central Midlion. 
 
 In the other class, where the subarcuations diverge from 
 a central mullion, we first meet with two-light examples 
 which present but little variety, having the lights usually 
 treated in the common way for a single light, and the 
 head quatrefoiled. Eour-light examples of our present 
 class are not uncommon. In some the tracery is very 
 simple, and indeed meagre; thus in one in Gloucester 
 Cathedral, the fenestellae assume the form of a two-light 
 Reticulated window, while the head is merely a quatre- 
 foiled space. Another at Gaddesby (96) improves upon 
 this, by having a quatrefoiled figure in the head ; and the 
 arrangement is similar in one in the triforium at Ely, which 
 is remarkable for having its arch of six centres, what may 
 be more practically and intelligibly called an Ogee four- 
 centred arch. 
 
 There are however four-light windows of this kind of far 
 more elaborate character, and exhibiting nearly the same 
 varieties as the other kinds of subarcuated windows, both 
 in the fenestellae and the centre-piece. I may however 
 remark that the form of the latter does not seem so well 
 adapted to the pure Divergent pattern, as when the pre- 
 
OF SUBARCUATED FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 143 
 
 sence of a central light affords a greater space. Hence we 
 do not so often find the predominant vertical line in the 
 centre, though when it does occur, as in the east window 
 of the north aisle at Gaddesby (97), it is very predominant 
 indeed. In the other examples from St. Mary Redclifife, 
 Kidlington, Long Stanton, and Ely Cathedral, are various 
 mixed combinations, retaining more or less of the wheel 
 notion. In the last we must remark the curious composition 
 of the fenestellae, with the intrusive pair of circles in each. 
 More unusual, both in its fenestellae and centre-piece, es- 
 pecially the latter, is the design of one at Eordham (98). 
 
 Of six lights we have the superb east window of Little 
 St. Mary, Cambridge, each of whose fenestellae again 
 forms a subarcuated window of three lights ; we may 
 remark again the intrusive circles in the centre-pieces and 
 the awkward effect of the lights not rising from the same 
 line. Of the same number of lights and the same arrange- 
 ment, are two windows at Algarkirke“, Lincolnshire. The 
 fenestellae of one are especially remarkable, as showing how 
 long Geometrical forms continued, and how early the Per- 
 pendicular development commenced. The latter is clearly 
 to be traced in the heads of the lights, while the centre- 
 pieces are spherical squares, totally disjointed, and contain- 
 ing wheel-tracery. 
 
 e. Quasi- Subarcuated Windoios. 
 
 We have now done with actual subarcuation, but we 
 
 "■ Mr. Rickman’s collection contains 
 a large number of windows from the Ca- 
 thedral at Rotterdam exhibiting tracery 
 of many patterns, hut chiefly subarcuated 
 of this kind. It does not agree with my 
 design to enter into a minute descrip- 
 tion of them ; but I may mention that 
 most of the classes into which I have 
 divided English Flowing tracery appear 
 
 among them, though they generally re- 
 ceive a character somewhat different from 
 what they possess in our own country. 
 Some retain foliated circles and other 
 Geometrical traces, while others mani- 
 fest a near approach to Perpendicular ; 
 in others the fleur-de-lys is very con- 
 spicuous. 
 
144 
 
 OF FT-OWING TRACERY. 
 
 may here most appropriately consider one or two forms 
 which seem connected with it. 
 
 There is a window (99) at St. John Maddermarket, 
 Norwich, of five lights, with what we may call qnasi-sub- 
 arcnations rising from the top of the central light, so that 
 it has rather the air of a window of six lights ; but the 
 arches are not strongly marked, and, to judge from the 
 drawing, there does not seem to be any subordination in 
 the mouldings. The quasi-fenestellae contain strong traces 
 of the wheel. 
 
 I before mentioned a form in which lines of Arch tracery 
 assumed a Flowing direction towards the top. In one or 
 two instances we find this taking place with lines of subar- 
 cuation. This we find even while the circle remains in its 
 purity, though the change seems much less natural than in 
 the case of the pure Geometrical skeletons. The west 
 front of Howden is undoubtedly Early Decorated, and 
 nothing can be more essentially Geometrical than the 
 centre-piece and indeed the whole character of the aisle 
 Avindows. Yet the lines of subarciiation are fused into the 
 circle in the head in a manner which cannot be called any- 
 thing but a foreshadowing of the Flowing style. The like 
 is also the case in a somewhat more advanced window at 
 Sampford Spiney, Devon (100). And the same occurs 
 in the magnificent southern Avindow at Exeter, AAdiich very 
 much resembles the northern one, Avith exactly the same 
 Avheel in the head. But we meet the same arrangement 
 in quite late AvindoAvs, Avith no subordination and no Geo- 
 metrical centre-pieces. But the finest examples I know 
 are the superb eastern AvindoAvs of Ringstead" and Cotter- 
 stock, Northamptonshire (101), the latter the croAvning 
 point of one of the most splendid Chancels in England, the 
 former, though part of a far less striking whole, exceeding 
 
 Sharpe’s AA'indows. 
 
n. 40 
 
 90 
 

 
 . 
 
 I 
 
 
 
 1 
 
 
OF SUBARCUATED FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 145 
 
 in pure, graceful, and harmonious beauty, not only its 
 fellow, but, I hesitate not to add, every window, of whatever 
 style or date, with which either personal inspection or the 
 pencil of others has made me acquainted. The two have 
 a considerable resemblance, though they are not identical ; 
 both are of five lights, without subordination of mouldings 
 or any containing figure in the head ; the subarcuations are 
 curved inwards at the top, so as to make as few spaces as 
 ])ossible between the fenestellae and the centre-piece. The 
 former have in both a very Flamboyant air, and differ 
 chiefly in the foliations, which are more elaborate at Cotter- 
 stock. There is a greater difference in the centre-piece, in 
 which consists the great superiority of Ringstead, which has 
 one of the best examples of the pattern usual in subarcuated 
 windows of five lights, while Cotterstock has only a quatre- 
 foiled space above the Divergent piercings, and two long 
 and awkward Reversed figures below them. Even at Ring- 
 stead the difficulty always recurring in the last-mentioned 
 part cannot be said to be completely overcome. The great 
 merit of these two noble windows lies in combining the 
 beauties of the Subarcuated and the Flamboyant window. 
 The peculiar curve given to their subarcuations hinders the 
 stiffness of a Subarcuated window, while the relief of its 
 divisions remains, and nearly all the flexibility of the Flam- 
 boyant style is bestowed on a design in which the richer 
 foliations of the Flowing are almost exclusively employed. 
 
 As instances of quasi-subarcuation, though very different 
 from the last class, I will add one or two examples which 
 revive, with a greater or less infusion of Flowing forms, the 
 Geometrical outlines of the east window of Ely Chapel °. I 
 might here have placed a fine window at Exeter already 
 given (67), where all is Geometrical, save the Flamboyant 
 patterns in the circles. At Standish, Gloucestershire’’, is 
 
 ° See above, p. 61. i’ Glossary, pi. 137. 
 
146 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 one on the model of those at Stafford'! and Cheltenham, only 
 filled with Plowing patterns. 
 
 § 10. Of Subordination in Flowing Windows. 
 
 The examples at Ringstead and Coiterstock exhibited a 
 Flowing development of the thoroughly Geometrical idea 
 of Subarcnation; we have now to consider a class which com- 
 prehends most of the largest and most splendid windows in 
 existence ; those namely in wdiicli the hard stiff line of snb- 
 arcnation is completely lost, but which still exhibit a predom- 
 inant pattern traced out by the greater prominence of certain 
 lines. Whether this, though certainly derived from a Geo- 
 metrical origin, can be in strictness considered as a vestige 
 of the Geometrical style, may be doubted; inasmuch as it is 
 very difficult to construct a very large Flowing window wuth- 
 ont calling in the aid of this principle, and in the case of Per- 
 pendicular, the difficulty almost amounts to an impossibility. 
 Yet it is clear that this subordination of patterns prevents 
 the w'indow from becoming that one perfect whole wffiich is 
 supplied by the level expanse of a pime Flamboyant window. 
 Subordination then may be considered as not interfering 
 with the purity, as most assuredly it does not with the 
 beauty, of a grand Flowing wundow ; still it is not a genuine 
 emanation of the Flowung principle ; it is something re- 
 tained and pressed into its service from a former style. 
 Consequently in a view like the present, which endeavours 
 to trace the history of a principle from its first origin to its 
 final disappearance, Ave may fairly consider this feature, 
 wdiich gives their chief splendour to the airy net-w'ork of 
 Sleaford and Heckington, as a parasitical retainer wdiich 
 has been simply allowed to remain from the days of Lin- 
 coln Presbytery. 
 
 <1 See above, pi. 19, fig. 88. 
 
OF SUBORDINATION IN FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 147 
 
 In a subordinated Flowing window the patterns most 
 usually traced out by the primary lines are those of a 
 Reticulated or Ogee window, and those chiefly employed in 
 filling up are those derived from the circle. This is only 
 natural ; the latter we have seen are almost incapable of 
 existing by themselves, while they are admirably calculated 
 for filling up the figures and spandrils supplied by a large 
 subordinated window. 
 
 And even the Retieulated type will be found to have but 
 a very limited application. It is chiefly confined to a two- 
 light pattern with the vesica flowing into the head ; a form, 
 as we have seen above, not strictly Reticulated, although 
 identical in general effect. This form may be just as truly 
 considered, as indeed we have already considered it'', as a 
 natural development from the most ordinary pattern of a 
 large Geometrical window. The true Reticulated window 
 only influences a small class, and those not examples of 
 strict Subordination. 
 
 The life and soul of Subordinated windows is the Ogee 
 form. We have seen that it was the analogous Geometrical 
 variety which gave birth to the greatest number of exam- 
 ples of the kind, especially to that form of it which was to 
 possess the most extensive and abiding influence. And 
 viewing the case more directly and immediately, we shall 
 find the analogy still stronger. As the long narrow pierc- 
 ings of the Geometrical Arch tracery, which mere foliation 
 was not sufficient to preserve from meagreness, produced 
 both Arch and Foil tracery, and a very important class of 
 transitional patterns ; so the long bare centre-piece and 
 spandrils of the most ordinary variety of the Flowing Arch 
 tracery, absolutely cry for something to relieve their bare- 
 ness. Thus in a rich window at St. Mary’s, Beverley®, the 
 centre-piece and spandrils are filled in with subordinated 
 
 ' F. 122. 
 
 " Sharpe's Windows. 
 
148 
 
 or FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 jiatterns ; and we may here most naturally introduce some 
 examples in which the same arrangement is followed, 
 though without any actual subordination in the mouldings, 
 as in Oxford Cathedral, St. Peter-le-Gowts, Lincoln, and 
 Aynhoe*^, Northants. All these preserve exactly the same 
 outline, though with considerable differences in the filling 
 up ; the centre-])iece naturally preserves in most instances 
 more or less of the wheel notion. That at Aynhoe, perhaps 
 the most satisfactory of all, has a strong Flamboyant ten- 
 dency in the treatment of the spandrils, and has not 
 a single space left unfilled in the whole window. The 
 greater part of the tracery of this window is merely un- 
 pierced panelling. 
 
 But the same arrangement produces very much larger 
 windows, and is that prevalent in the magnificent Avin- 
 dows of Sleaford, Heckington, and the Decorated parts of 
 NcAvark. One of the latter (102) I look upon as the most 
 beautiful, though by no means the largest, of its class. It is 
 of six lights, consequently the primary Ogee figure is pre- 
 served in its purity ; we have three groupes of a two-light 
 Divergent pattern ; the quatrefoils in the spaces above have 
 naturally developed into compositions of four converging 
 vesicas, Avhile the centre-piece and spandrils are filled with 
 gracefid patterns, introducing the figure which I have 
 called the Flowing spherical triangle. 
 
 It is clear that it is only where the number of lights is a 
 multiple of three that the primary pattern can be strictly 
 preserved ; in no other can the lights be ranged in equal 
 groupes. Thus in windows of five and seven lights, of 
 Avhich several splendid examples occur, the pattern is very 
 much distorted. The great south window at Heckington ^ 
 besides a disproportion in the lines, has quite lost the cha- 
 racteristic row of quatrefoils, and in the still finer one at 
 
 ' Rickman, p. ! 17. ^ Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
OF SUBORDINATION IN FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 149 
 
 Sleaford (103) the original character of the primary lines has 
 quite vanished. The seven -light examples, as the superb 
 east windows of Heckington^ and Selbyr, preserve the Ogee 
 pattern in much greater purity, the actual lines remaining 
 untouched, and filled up in an appropriate manner. Both 
 are noble compositions, and it is hard to decide to which 
 the preference is to be given. That at Selby has a strong 
 Flamboyant tendency in many parts, especially in the fill- 
 ing of the spandrils, resembling that in the smaller window 
 already mentioned at Aynhoe ; we may also remark that its 
 central groupe has a three-light Ogee pattern. Still in both 
 examples, one could wish the number of lights to have been 
 different, as the lines of the primary pattern are very much 
 distorted, and an unpleasant shape thereby given to the 
 quatrefoil compositions. Indeed it is possible that this 
 distortion may have been actually sought after, as we see it 
 m a smaller degree, where no such compulsion required 
 it, in the magnificent six-light window in the transept at 
 Sleaford', otherwise closely resembling, in its chief lines, 
 the beautiful window at Newark. It retains however the 
 circles in the centre-piece. 
 
 The east window of Bolton Abbey appears to be a com- 
 bination of this kind of tracery with Subarcuation. It is 
 of seven lights grouped precisely as in those at Selby and 
 Heckington, so that the fenestellse contain two lights only. 
 It retains the prominent vesica in the head, and all the 
 primary lines external to the fenestellm are nearly identical 
 with those of the five-light examples lately mentioned. 
 
 All these exhibit as their prevailing idea the most perfect 
 form of the intersecting Ogee tracery ; one or two others 
 may be mentioned which introduce its more rudiment al 
 varieties. In one of the most elegant windows at Sleaford 
 
 * Sharpe’s Windows. y Ditto. ^ Ditto. 
 
 X 
 
150 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 (104), remarkable alike for the graceful flow of its pattern, 
 and the delicate purity of its execution, the primary pattern 
 is the simplest Ogee form, the two Ogee arches; while its 
 filling up strongly resembles that of the beautiful six-light 
 window at Newark. 
 
 An almost imperceptible difference in the primary lines 
 brings us back to the form already mentioned in which the 
 piimary pattern is Reticulated or cjuasi-Reticulated. Of 
 this kind are also numerous fine windows, at Sleaford b 
 Nantwich'^, Cottingham®, Beverley‘S. The varieties in propor- 
 tion and in the secondary pattern are very numerous : one 
 of the finest at Sleaford with a very strong vertical line 
 retains some slight traees of Arch and Foil tracery. An- 
 other from Boston‘s, with what may be called the same 
 primary lines, through difference in proportion, and a com- 
 plete difference in the filling up, has an effect altogether 
 dissimilar. 
 
 Of the same general pattern are the second range of 
 windows in the towers of York Minster, which have this 
 singular peculiarity that both the fenestellae and the centre- 
 piece are filled up with continuous Reticulated tracery, so 
 that the primary and secondary lines intersect, as is in- 
 deed often the case in Perpendicular, to which this udn- 
 dow must be considered as transitional, while traces of the 
 Ogee formation may be detected in the filling up of the 
 spandrils. 
 
 The orreat west window of the same Cathedral, one of the 
 most magnificent in England, and perhaps on the whole 
 the most thoroughly vegetable of all that we have come 
 across, is an example of subordination carried to a great 
 extent, but in which the primary lines describe a figure 
 not usual in such compositions, being a Divergent pattern 
 
 ^ Sharpe’s Windows. •’ Ditto. Ditto. 
 
 Rickman, p. 14?. ® Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
OF SUBORDINA.TION IN FLOWING WINDOWS. 
 
 151 
 
 of two lights, but of DO great boldness, as the central and 
 crowning figures seem as it were to stick close together, 
 and the former do not project so far as to touch the archi- 
 trave, leaving room for immense spandrils, which, as well 
 as the principal figures, are filled up with the same Diver- 
 gent tracery. The fenestellse assume the form of a subar- 
 cuated four-light window with an Ogee head; their fenes- 
 tellae are two-light Reticulated windows, and the centre- 
 pieces Divergent. 
 
 The last traces of Subordination, before it is utterly lost 
 in full-developed Flamboyancy, are to be found in windows 
 where there is a subordination of pattern without any 
 subordination of mouldings. The primary pattern, the 
 leading idea of the whole, is here left to be disentangled 
 from the whole as it best may, instead of being at once 
 forced upon the eye by the greater prominence of the lines 
 by which it is traced. I will not say positively that there 
 is no subordination of mouldings in any of the windows 
 which I am now going to mention, as some of the examples 
 were drawn before I had paid sufficient attention to the 
 subject of mouldings as affecting tracery. In others how- 
 ever, which I have examined with particular reference to 
 this point, there is certainly none ; consequently 1 have 
 quite sufficient evidence to establish the existence of the 
 class, although it is possible that I may have referred to it 
 one or two examples, which would have been more cor- 
 rectly placed elsewhere. 
 
 In those most strictly coming under this head we shall 
 find the influence of Reticulated forms predominant. There 
 are two classes ; in the first of which we have a Reticulated 
 or quasi-Reticulated pattern of two lights traced out by 
 what are in idea the primary lines. This is very success- 
 fully done in two simple but elegant windows at Crick and 
 at St. Saviour’s in York (105), which, except in the filling up 
 
152 
 
 OF FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 of the spaiidrils, are nearly identical, and in the former at 
 least there is certainly no subordination of mouldings. The 
 filling up is Reticulated below and Divergent above, and is 
 remarkable for its graceful and harmonious composition. 
 The different figures both have their lines well fused to- 
 gether, and are well proportioned in point of size to each 
 other and to the lights below. No part of the window can 
 be called either crowded or meagre. 
 
 The same quasi-Reticulated outline, though Avith con- 
 siderable difference in proportion, maybe traced in two very 
 curious and nearly identical windows at Grouville and St. 
 Saviour’s in Jersey (106). In neither hoAvever can this pattern 
 be called predominant ; as a concave spherical square being 
 inscribed in the vesica produces a large central quatrefoil, 
 which is decidedly the most conspicuous point in the com- 
 position. It maybe remarked that this figure is so managed 
 as to give the principal lines of the tracery the shape of one 
 of the conventional forms of the Cross. In these examples — 
 but hoAv small a class would they represent — we manifestly 
 have intentional and intelligible symbolism influencing the 
 composition of tracery. The only difference between these 
 two is in the direction of the thoroughly Rlamboyant figures 
 surrounding the central quatrefoil. 
 
 Ill the second class Ave find a rare but very elegant form 
 of AvindoAv, in AAdiich a Reticulated pattern has each of its 
 vesicle filled in Avith Divergent tracery. As this of course 
 admits of every variety of the two forms of Avhich it is com- 
 pounded, the dNersity is very considerable. There is a 
 good three-light example at Shiffnal (107), and another at 
 Grouville in Jersey, and a magnificent one of four lights at 
 the east end of St. Helier’s Church in the same island. The 
 latter has the vesica in the apex much larger, and imperfect, 
 so as to give great prominence to its filling up. As the 
 Divergent tracery almost involves a strong vertical line, 
 
P1.42. 
 
 106 
 
 107 
 
OF SUBORDINATION IN FLOWING WINDOWS. 153 
 
 many such naturally occur in a window of this kind, and 
 produce the general effect of a marked advance towards 
 Perpendicular. 
 
 The last faint trace of Subordination is to be found in 
 windows which have no primary pattern at all, but which 
 in a manner seem as if they ought to have ; in which the tra- 
 cery of different parts seems to be designed with reference to 
 an imaginary boundary of this kind. Thus there is a four- 
 light window at Crick (108), which looks almost like a clumsy 
 reproduction of that at Great Milton with its primary lines 
 omitted. There is another at Sleaford^, and a very strange 
 one at Walcot, in which the side-lights form actual fe- 
 nestellee under a containing arch, while the centre-piece 
 has no containing figure, though it seems very much to 
 want one ; there is another of six lights at Grantham. 
 The very beautiful five-light window in the west front of 
 King’s Sutton Church® has a very near approach to a con- 
 taining pattern, but it is imperfect, the principal lines spring- 
 ing from the apex of the central light, exactly as in the 
 quasi-Subarcuated window quoted from Norwich. The 
 identity in general idea of this window with the two lately 
 mentioned at Crick and at St. Saviour’s, York, needs hardly 
 to be pointed out. Still more remarkable than any of these 
 is one at Sutton at Hone^, Kent, which has precisely the 
 most usual tracery of a three-light subarcuated window, 
 only the actual lines of subarcuation are gone, and part of 
 the tracery of the complement runs into that of the fenes- 
 tellas. In another at Crick (109) Convergent and Ogee 
 elements are found, but it is one which cannot be well 
 described. 
 
 Pinally, as no unworthy close to our review of Flowing- 
 tracery, we may mention the superb eastern window of the 
 same church (110), one than which no other has contributed 
 
 Sharpe’s Windows. 
 
 s Glossary. 
 
 '' Brandon’s Analysis, Appendix, 53. 
 
154 
 
 OE FLOWING TRACERY. 
 
 a greater number of singularities to om’ stock of examples. 
 Magnificent however and elaborate as it is, it must be 
 confessed that it is extremely confused. It has neither the 
 broad unity of a good Flamboyant window, nor the unity 
 in diversity of most Decorated. Three principal centres 
 may indeed be discerned from whence the main lines of 
 the tracery spring, but they are far less strongly marked 
 than in the last example ; and it wmuld be hard to define 
 the bounds to which their respective influence extends, or 
 to circumscribe them within any primary pattern. More- 
 over smaller figures are continually occurring which seem 
 altogether unmeaning and unconnected. And, stiU worse, 
 many spaces are awkwardly left unfoliated and some even 
 unpierced ; this fault being chiefly oAving to the great pre- 
 dominance of the circle throughout. On the whole, though 
 the size and richness of this example render it excessively 
 striking, it will not pass the same critical ordeal as the 
 faultless east Avindow at Ringstead, or the more stately, 
 though certainly not lovelier examples at Heckington and 
 Sleaford. 
 
CHAPTER III. 
 
 OP COMPLETE CONTINUOUS TRACERY, FLAMBOYANT AND 
 PERPENDICULAR. 
 
 § 1. Of Plamboyant Tracery and its Origin. 
 
 Having thus endeavoured to trace out the difFereiit 
 forms assumed by the Geometrical and Plowing varieties 
 of tracery, we are now led to those which succeeded them, 
 the Plamboyant and Perpendicular. Por several reasons 
 there will not be the same occasion for a minute examina- 
 tion of these forms as of those which preceded them. 
 Distinctively Plamboyant tracery is, as we ail know, ex- 
 cessively rare in England j and neither it nor Perpen- 
 dicular appear capable of being analyzed and classified 
 with the same minuteness as the previous styles. Con- 
 sequently, as far as regards the styles themselves, I shall 
 only cursorily point out the chief varieties which are to 
 be found among them ; but their relation to the preceding 
 forms will require to be discussed at length, as there is no 
 question in the whole history of tracery more full of in- 
 terest, or which has given rise to more controversy. 
 
 No two architectural forms look at first sight more 
 totally different from one another than a Perpendicular 
 and a Plamboyant window. The soft, waving, curves of 
 the one, and the hard, unbending stiffness of the other, 
 seem to be as complete opposites as can well be devised. 
 We might even feel inclined to divide tracery into two 
 
 Y 
 
156 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 great classes, one including Perpendicular alone, the other 
 including all other forms ; and an easy definition of each 
 might be given as tracery composed of straight and of 
 curved lines. And of the curvilinear forms it might be 
 thought that the hard curves of Geometrical and Arch 
 tracery had more affinity to the Perpendicular than the 
 bold, we may say wild and unfettered, freedom of Plam- 
 boyancy, aj)parently as little controlled by the stiff rule 
 which guided the lines of Wykeham and Waynflete, as 
 the chainless element from which it derives its name. 
 
 Definition of Flamboyant Tracery. 
 
 But before we go deeper into the arguments by which 
 I shall endeavour to prove the strong connexion between 
 Perpendicular and Plamboyant tracery, we may most 
 properly attempt something like a definition of the latter. 
 And it so happens, paradoxical as it may seem, that the 
 very rareness of the style in England is a great advantage 
 to us in this attempt. Foreign Plamboyant tracery, the va- 
 rieties namely that occim in the buildings of the Plamboyant 
 style, presents a confused aggregation of forms, for the 
 most part exceedingly unsightly, and often not to be re- 
 ferred to any intelligible principle whatever. Many are 
 simple vagaries, unmeaning freaks of which it would be 
 vain to attempt a classification ; others are clumsy imi- 
 tations of earlier varieties, reproducing some of their forms 
 without their spirit. Of both these classes, especially of 
 the latter, we have indeed abundant examples in England ; 
 we shall soon see how exceedingly common it is to find 
 Flowing and even Geometrical tracery reproduced in win- 
 dows of the latest Perpendicular date. But they are not 
 the prevalent forms of any period ; they are only a nu- 
 merous class of exceptions to the rule of real Perpendicular 
 
or FLAMBOYANT TRACERY. 
 
 157 
 
 tracery. In tlie foreign style, on the other hand, the real, 
 ideal Plainboyant, the form of tracery most truly deserving 
 the name, is only one form among many contemporary 
 ones ; and has to be picked out by individual examples 
 from the mass of hideous and unmeaning monstrosities 
 perpetrated in its name. 
 
 In a strictly archaeological sense there is certainly no 
 Flamboyant building, and probably no Flamboyant win- 
 dow in all England. There is none which exhibits all the 
 peculiarities of the style, of which of course the tracery is 
 only one among many. Even in the most purely Flam- 
 boyant windows there is generally something even in the 
 tracery itself, especially in the foliations, (not to mention 
 points, like jamb-mouldings, which are external to the 
 question of tracery,) which would in strictly antiquarian 
 eyes deprive it of all title to Flamboyancy. But in the 
 view which we have all along taken, we shall find the 
 Flamboyant principle busily at work in many of our later 
 Decorated windows ; numerous examples have their lines 
 thoroughly Flamboyant, though it must be confessed that 
 we continually find some distinctively Flowing feature in- 
 termingled. And our Flamboyant tracery is of the very 
 best kind, that most approaching to the ideal suggested by 
 the name, and, what is very remarkable, it appears not to 
 have arisen entirely from imitation of foreign examples, 
 but to have been deduced from the Flowing forms by a 
 natural and gradual process of transition. 
 
 The idea of pure Flamboyant tracery seems to be the 
 prolongation of the mnllions in waved lines. The Flowing 
 style still gave us figures ; figures indeed formed by a con- 
 tinuation of the mnllions, but still actual figures, retaining 
 somewhat of separate existence. In Flamboyant we lose 
 the notion of individual figures altogether, we have nothing 
 that can be at all imagined apart ; we see simply a pro- 
 
158 
 
 Oi' CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 longatiou of the mu] lions with foliated spaces between 
 them. Hence a good Flamboyant window is the strictest 
 and most intense unity that can be imagined ; subordina- 
 tion is generally discarded ; a void space is hardly ever 
 found ; the mnllions themselves, diverging in different di- 
 rections, fill up the whole head ; there is no subarcuation, 
 no centre-piece ; no part or point is thrust upon the eye 
 to the exclusion or overshadowing of any other ; the un- 
 fettered flow of the lines wandering side by side over its 
 imiforni expanse, might almost suggest the late watch- 
 words of the nation among whom it attained the greatest 
 prevalence, and a Flamboyant window be deemed an ar- 
 chitectural exposition of Liberty, Equality, and Fraternity. 
 
 The Flamboyant piercing is naturally long and slender, 
 and is most naturally foliated with a trefoil at the upper 
 end, by which means the cnsping aids in keeping up the 
 soft vertical flow of the lines. This trefoil however some- 
 times less appropriately occupies the lower end, and in 
 foreign examples continually degenerates in a bifoil af- 
 fecting the whole piercing, which is very far from elegant. 
 In England, as might be expected, the piercings often 
 retain the quatrefoil of the Flowing style, which goes very 
 far to chano;e the character of the window as far as its 
 general effect is concerned. Sometimes the whole, or a 
 portion, is unfoliated, as in one at St. Saviour’s, Jersey (1), 
 which of course greatly diminishes the beauty of the com- 
 j)osition, although by no means to the same extent as in 
 any other form of Continuous tracery. A very character- 
 istic example is given by Rickman^ from St. Germain, 
 Pont Audemer, and one equally characteristic, though 
 less skilfully managed, is figured by Dr. WhewelP. That 
 given from St. Ouen’s in the Glossary® is less pure, having 
 subordination of mouldings, and several void spaces left 
 
 * Appendix, p. lix. German Churches, p. 253. ' Art. Flamboyant. 
 

or FI.AMBOYANT TRACERY. 
 
 159 
 
 in the tracery. But of all the windows I know, the most 
 beautiful and the most nearly approaching to an ideal 
 riamboyancy is an English example, the well known 
 window at Salford in Warwickshire'’. There is one at 
 St. Clement’s (2), Jersey, with nearly the same lines, but 
 certainly less elegant on the whole, though with the ad- 
 vantage of having all its lights of the same width. Of 
 English windows I may mention two at Amesby (3) and 
 Chipping Norton (4) as exhibiting lines in the main Elani- 
 boyant with strong national modifications. 
 
 Derivation of Flamboyant Tracery from Reticulated. 
 
 Throughout the whole of our investigation of Flowing 
 tracery we have had frequently to remark the constant 
 recurrence of a Flamboyant tendency ; we have perpetually 
 seen the long narrow piercing intrude to the prejudice of 
 the general design, and piercings of Flowing proportions 
 finished with the Flamboyant foliation. On the other 
 hand, in the English windows most nearly approaching to 
 a pure Flamboyant, the signs of that style must for the 
 most part be looked for in the lines, as windows of very 
 Flamboyant outline are continually found filled up with 
 the broad quatrefoil of the national form ; the cinquefoil 
 also is often retained in the lights, which in the true 
 Flamboyant are usually, if I mistake not invariably, tre- 
 foiled. Nor is this to be wondered at, as the English 
 Flamboyant is, for the most part, a manifest off-shoot from 
 the typical exhibition of that feature in the Reticulated 
 variety of Flowing traceiy. Flamboyant tracery, or some- 
 thing having a very Flamboyant effect, may indeed®, as we 
 have seen in some Jersey examples, be produced by the 
 simple process of applying a partial, instead of a com])letc 
 
 Engraved in llie Glossary, pi. UiO. ’’ See above, pi. 21 , fig. 11. 
 
160 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 foliation to tlie Reticulated piercings. But this does not 
 occur to any considerable extent in England, where Elain- 
 boyant was developed out of Reticulated in another manner. 
 
 We have already mentioned how thoroughly any ex- 
 panse of Reticulated tracery is a mere fragment cut at an 
 arbitrary point out of an infinite series of panelling ; we 
 have seen also that the disadvantages of this were con- 
 stantly felt, and remarked the numerous shifts by which 
 they were sought to be avoided. The attempts to make 
 the imperfect piercings flow into the containing arch almost 
 necessarily generated Flamboyant figures, and a somewhat 
 bolder experiment in the same direction gave the whole 
 window a Flamboyant cast. It may have been felt that 
 these imperfect figures were in any case a dilemma ; un- 
 sightly if left cut through ; if fused into the arch, they 
 destroyed the unity of idea in the whole window. A pe- 
 culiar proportion of arch, and an ingenious disposition of 
 the tracery, has done away with them altogether in a 
 window at Great Claybrook (5). Yet this example is even 
 less satisfactory than the ordinary kind ; a kind of im- 
 perfect figures do exist, though not pierced, and conse- 
 cjuently useless lines occur which do not divide glass, and 
 make the whole heavy and clumsy. To dispense with 
 these lines altogether was a natural but a bold step ; it 
 was but applying to the perfect figures the process which 
 had been so often applied to the imperfect ones ; fusing 
 them into each other and into the window arch. This 
 process gives us a not uncommon form of three-light windorv 
 occurring at St. Mary Magdalen in Oxford, at Kidlington, 
 at Yelvertoft, and Duston, Northamptonshire (6), Mis- 
 terton, and Thrussington, Leicestershire, and Baldock, 
 Hants, all of which, among considerable varieties of pro- 
 portion and foliation, retain the same general character. 
 They have lost the flatness and uniformity of the Reti- 
 
T1.4i5 
 
OF FLAMBOYANT TRACERY. 
 
 161 
 
 Ciliated, but they are not Flamboyant ; they have something 
 of the freedom of that style and its complete filling up of 
 the window-head ; their figures are in a very high degree 
 of fusion, but they are still decided figures, and not mere 
 spaees between tracery -bars. Through the whole process, 
 though the Reticulated variety was doubtless the ground- 
 work, yet ideas seem to have been often suggested by 
 others ; and it is impossible not to perceive the resem- 
 blance between these windows and some examples of 
 Reversed Convergent traeery, as at Hartwell, Northampton- 
 shire^. The piercings are identical ; all that is required is 
 to fuse the reversed lines into those of the lights, and the 
 form in question is at onee produeed. 
 
 A magnifieeiit double-foliated window inserted in the 
 west front of Southwell Minster (7), and evidently pro- 
 ceeding from the same hand as the two from the same 
 Church^ mentioned in the last chapter, may be instanced 
 as a case in whieh this innovation has not accomplished its 
 end. The figures have attained the same free lateral flow 
 as in those just mentioned, but the spandrils are retained ; 
 though the manner of their foliation hinders any appear- 
 ance of imperfeetion, and there is not the same objection 
 in a design of this sort as in the pure Reticulated to this 
 alteration of their character. But a design more thoroughly 
 combining richness with simplicity can hardly be imagined. 
 
 When this form of three-light window was thoroughly 
 established, — for I am not prepared with any example of 
 greater size, though of course there may be many such, — 
 it was a natural process to attempt to fill up the principal 
 figures thus formed with smaller ones formed on the same 
 principle. In a window at Bolton Abbey (8), we have 
 each figure filled up with four*' others evidently standing 
 
 ' See pi. 27, fig. 39. in the filling up of purely Flowing out- 
 
 PI. 24, fig. 16, 17. lines, as indeed most of our Flamboyant 
 
 ■' This is however a form not unusual figures are. 
 
162 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 in the same relation to Reticulated forms as the principal 
 lines themselves. But they retain the complete foliation, 
 and many of them are too scpiat to have any very strong 
 tendency, though the Flamboyancy of the lines is strongly 
 marked. The west window of St. Mary Magdalen church 
 in Oxford (9) is decidedly nearer to the Flamboyant ideal, 
 although retaining far more palpable traces of Reticulated ; 
 a pure ogee vesica quatrefoiled being left in the head 
 of the window, and a similar one in that in each of the 
 other figures. But these are only filled up with three, in- 
 stead of four, figures, and consequently the two lower ones 
 have more room to develop the long wavy form of the true 
 Flamboyant piercing, and their foliation is at one end, 
 though unfortunately at the lower one. This window is 
 less elaborate than the Bolton example, but the size of its 
 piercings is far more in accordance with that of the lights 
 below. A more dexterous disposition of the tracery, and 
 a more characteristic foliation of all the piercings, produces 
 the admirable Salford window already referred to. Its 
 lines are identical with those at St. Mary Magdalen, but 
 the proportions are different ; the crowning vesica there 
 is neither left of its original importance, nor yet filled up. 
 It is reduced to the size of the other figures, and all trace 
 of subordination has vanished. One of the curious win- 
 dows at Etchingham (10) may have resulted from a 
 thoughtless imitation of examples of this kind ; its tracery 
 has much of the same general character, but, as there are 
 only two lights, of course it cannot be properly continued 
 from the single mullion. It may be classed with those at 
 Crick and King’s Sutton mentioned at the end of the last 
 chapter, which seem as though they ought to have had a 
 primary pattern, though it is not really to be found. 
 
 But still these windows have not supplied the most 
 genuine and thoroughly Flamboyant manner of dividing 
 
OF FLAMBOYANT TRACERY. 
 
 163 
 
 the quasi-Reticulated figures. They must not be divided 
 into four or three, but into two parts only by a line whose 
 peculiar curve, better understood than described, at once 
 gives the wavy and flame-like appearance distinctive of the 
 style. This is done in the two lower figures of a window 
 at Hawton (11), where the crowning vesica is not affected, 
 that being a feature so remarkably abundant in English 
 Flowing tracery. In one at St. Lawrence, Jersey (12), the 
 same process is applied to that also, apd the whole is 
 completely Flamboyant, the foliations presenting a near 
 approach to the characteristic, though unsightly, bifoil, 
 while at Hawton, though the foliation is not complete, it is 
 quite different, being^ something, so to speak, intermediate 
 between a trefoil and a cinquefoil. It is however singular 
 that these two examples, though so much more Flam- 
 boyant than those previously mentioned, should have the 
 primary Reticulated pattern far less affected than any of 
 them. 
 
 This window at St. Lawrence is worthy of notice as the 
 first example which we have as yet met with of a charac- 
 teristic, by no means universal in Flamboyant windows, 
 though altogether peculiar to them ; namely, that it is 
 unsymmetrical. In all other windows. Geometrical, Flow- 
 ing, and Perpendicular, all alike, if the window be divided 
 vertically into two parts, every tittle of the one will* exactly 
 correspond to the other. In many Flamboyant windows 
 this is not the case, and it is clear that as the secondary 
 figures in such a window as we are now considering are 
 not themselves symmetrical, when this principle is applied 
 to the crown, the whole window at once ceases to be so. 
 As far as I am aware, this arrangement, so utterly con- 
 
 ‘ A few windows occur, wliicli are in diet tlie letter of the text, hut they arc 
 
 iiianncr lop-sided, the external part of not real exceptions ; the two sides agree 
 
 one side being wanting. These contra- as far as they go. 
 
 Z 
 
164 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 trary to the ordinary treatment of the crown in English 
 windows, is not to be found in our own country. 
 
 Combination of Flamboyant and other forms. 
 
 But this is not the only way in which Reticulated tracery 
 influenced Flamboyant, even in English Avindow^s. There 
 are several two-light examples, in wdiicli a Flamboyant 
 pattern, that of. Salford, is traced within the crowning 
 vesica of a quasi-Reticulated window. Instances, with 
 differences in proportion and foliation, occur at Polebrook 
 and Aldwinkle, All Saints, Northamptonshire, and St. 
 Saviour’s, .Jersey. These retain the crowning vesica, which 
 in the two English examples is quatrefoiled ; in the Jersey 
 one, in common with the rest of the tracery, it is unfoliated ; 
 while, in one at Baldock, Hants (13), by the most truly 
 Flamboyant arrangement of all, it is trefoiled at the upper 
 end. The tracery of these wundows is certainly described 
 Avithin a quasi-Reticulated skeleton, but they far more 
 vividly remind us of a tAvo-light Divergent window, having 
 the same predominant vertical line in the centre. It is in 
 fact the pattern which Avould be formed by an attempt 
 to fuse together the lateral and crowning piercings of 
 such a Avindow, by exactly the same process as Ave have 
 just seen a Flamboyant version of Reticulated produced^ 
 This is also very striking in a large four-light Avindow 
 at St. John’s, Jersey (14), Avhose (ideally) primary lines 
 describe the same quasi-Reticulated pattern, which is filled 
 up Avith just the same Flamboyant version of Divergent 
 tracery, though in all these cases the foliation is unfor- 
 tunately at the loAver end. Of course the central line 
 
 j It is employed in this way in the sition brought into conformity with the 
 quasi-fenestellae of the grand windows general flexible character of those superb 
 at Ringstead and Cotterstock ; being evi- compositions, 
 dently the ordinary tracery of such a po- 
 
16 
 
 17 
 
 18 
 
OF FLAMBOYANT TRACERY. 
 
 165 
 
 is here even stronger than in the smaller specimens. Still 
 however, we must not exclude the Reticulated element, as 
 in a window at Grouville, Jersey, we find the vesica divided 
 into two unsymmetrical piercings (15), a form on which 
 Divergency could have no influence. I hardly knoAv 
 whether it is fair to add one of the very odd windows in 
 Peterborough Cathedral (16), as the Plamboyant tendency is 
 perhaps not greater than in some others which we have 
 referred to different types of the Flowing style. Still it is 
 very strongly marked in the upper part. There is a sub- 
 ordination in the mouldings, and a further subordination 
 in idea of the most curious kind. 
 
 It is clear that I might add many more examples in 
 which a strong Flamboyant tinge is apparent; but almost 
 all of them are essentially Flowing, with merely an infusion 
 of the other style, and, as such, have been discussed in 
 their place among the different varieties of the Flowing 
 forms. I have here classed only those in which the air of 
 Flamboyancy is so decidedly predominant that they could 
 not be with propriety reckoned among examples of Flowing 
 tracery. I will however add a small, but interesting, 
 class of examples, which seem to approach more nearly 
 than any others to a strict combination of Flamboyant and 
 other forms, though it might not be easy to specify the 
 forms with which it is combined. These are three windows 
 of three lights in the Churches of Kingscliffe, Ringstead, 
 and Raunds, Northants (17), whose tracery, with some 
 unimportant variations, has the principal lines of each 
 identical. These consist of two intersecting round arches, 
 from the centre of which, and fused better together with 
 the lower part than might have been expected, rises a 
 composition of the sort which we have considered as the 
 Flamboyant version of the Divergent tracery. The foli- 
 ations are mostly complete, though, in two of the examples, 
 
16G 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 small figures of thoroughly Plamboyant character occupy 
 the spandrils. These windows are the more curious when 
 taken in connexion with a very singular one at Etchingham 
 ( 18 ), which is clearly the two-light form of the same type. 
 Here however we have .scarcely a Flamboyant line; the 
 main figure, the vesica, is Geometrical ; and the pattern 
 in the spandrils is not distinctively Flamboyant. Still the 
 general effect of that style is not to be mistaken, it is a 
 Geometrical form invested with a Flamboyant spirit. 
 
 I must here terminate my brief sketch of the Flam- 
 boyant style, which, meagre as it is, may perhaps be 
 a tolerable account of the approximations to it, rather than 
 actual specimens of it, which occur among English win- 
 dows. Did my design embrace any extended inquiry into 
 foreign tracery, or had I sufficient experience to conduct 
 such an inquiry, I might of course have continued it to a 
 much greater length ; but at present I must proceed to the 
 investigation of the contemporary development of our own 
 land, the style of William of Wykeiiam. 
 
 § 2. Of Perpendicular Tracery. 
 
 I before stated that, notwithstanding their great diversity 
 in appearance, Flamboyant and Perpendicular are identical 
 in principle. Their common point, one of far more import- 
 ance in a philosophical point of view than any such general 
 dissimilarity, is that in both the tracery is a simple prolon- 
 gation or repetition of the mullions ; the point of distinc- 
 tion is that in Perpendicular they are prolonged in straight 
 lines instead of in curves. But in both we have lost the 
 independent figure, in both we have the long narrow space, 
 in both the incomplete foliation. The same principle of 
 continuity and unity is predominant in both, different as 
 are the means by which it is sought to be carried out. 
 
OF PERPENDICULAR TRACERY. 
 
 167 
 
 If we are to enter into a comparison between the two, I 
 should be inclined to give the palm to ideal flamboyant 
 and to practical Perpendicular. The best Perpendicular 
 is indeed very inferior to the best Flamboyant, but the very 
 worst Perpendicular can hardly be considered as rivalling 
 the badness of the worst Flamboyant. Its mere poverty 
 and meagreness are not so unpleasant as the positive ugli- 
 ness of its competitor. Perpendicular tracery has much 
 the same character of mediocrity as Reticulated ; the same 
 incapability of the highest excellence, the same preservative, 
 unless wilfully abandoned, against the lowest deformity. 
 A good Perpendicular window does not, as is sometimes 
 the case with the splendid productions of earlier styles, 
 draw to itself the attention which belongs of right to the 
 whole building. It does not stand out as an independent 
 object, but is content to contribute towards the production 
 of a great and harmonious whole. It has sufficient merit 
 to do this subordinate work in the most effectual manner, 
 while it has neither sufficient individual merit nor sufficient 
 individual deformity, to distract the mind from the con- 
 templation of the whole of which it forms a part. 
 
 “ Our English Perpendicular,” says Mr. Petit, “ may be 
 said to bear a certain analogy to the Early Geometrical 
 Gothic, however different in appearance. For as the one 
 obtains richness by the repetition and reduplication of 
 circles and figures composed of circular arcs, so the other 
 effects it by the repetition of upright lights, or compart- 
 ments in panelling. Between the two comes the Flowing- 
 Decorated ; as beautiful, but as transient, as the flowers 
 whose outline it loves to imitate ; transient, I say, in its 
 very nature, from the difficulty of the task it imposes upon 
 the designer and workman. The principle of rejietition is 
 in a great measure abandoned ; the artist is thrown upon 
 his own resources for variety, and hence, in many cases. 
 
1G8 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 contents himself with a meagre, naked, and unornamented 
 style, such as the Decorated of our village Chiu’ches some- 
 times presents ; or else, in his pursuit after novelty, falls 
 upon the intricate and unsuitable combinations of the later 
 Flamboyant, and utterly confuses the design he is attempt- 
 ing to enrich. The introduction of the Perpendicnlar line 
 saved the English Gothic from debasement. When it was 
 discovered how ornament might be multiplied, to an almost 
 indefinite extent, upon a system the most simple and easily 
 understood, and, above all, the most in accordance with 
 the known principles of Gothic architecture, — an important 
 step was taken’^.” 
 
 Thus far the most clear-sighted and philosophical of all 
 architectural writers, with whose sentiments I need hardly 
 say that I fully agree. The Perpendicidar tracery has 
 certainly a very strong analogy with the Geometrical, not 
 merely in the sort of mathematical precision and stiffness 
 which belongs to both, but in another most important 
 respect. Both introduce the arrangement by horizontal 
 stages, which is to be found in no other form except in that 
 which is the most palpable link and transition between 
 them, the Keticulated. And the mere pyramidal rising by 
 stages, not by continuity of lines, as it is most strongly 
 shown of all in the simplest Geometrical, has perhaps more 
 influence on Perpendicular than on Reticulated tracery. 
 As the simple Geometrical, the pure and perfect style of 
 Lincoln Presbytery, lays ranges of circles on one another, 
 unconnected except by this pyramidal tendency of the 
 whole, so the Perpendicular piles up ranges of open panel- 
 work, in which, after all, the mere lines are less unbroken 
 than the Reticulated, and the ascent is made almost as 
 much by stages, as by the vertical mullions. It is clear 
 that, unless the arches of the lights be ogee, the lines of 
 
 ‘‘ Church Architecture, i. 206 . 
 
OP PERPENDICULAR TRACERY. 
 
 169 
 
 tracery rising from their heads, though connected with- 
 out any break or open space, are actual continuations of 
 nothing. And I am not clear that, when the arch is ogee, 
 and the lines, consequently, wholly continuous, any thing 
 is gained for vertical effect, and whether the rising of the 
 stages, as in a lofty tower, or in ranges of panelling or 
 arcading, is not quite sufficient. It is the carrying out in 
 tracery of that great principle of the Perpendicular style, 
 that the predominance of the vertical line should be dis- 
 played by its triumph over a strongly-marked and yet 
 manifestly subordinate horizontal one, of which we shall 
 soon see more distinct examples in tracery itself*. 
 
 I have before said that I do not consider Perpendicular 
 tracery as so beautiful in itself as either Geometrical, 
 Plowing, or good Plamboyant. Its lines are clearly less 
 pleasing, and there are one or two positive faults, or at least 
 difficulties, attending it. Its lines cut unpleasantly into the 
 arch ; and, though the bad effect of this is almost always 
 avoided by the ingenious disposal of small arches and folia- 
 tions, it is clear that a form which does not require such 
 shifts, but whose mere skeleton is satisfactory, is a higher 
 effort of art. The primary skeleton of a Plowing or Plam- 
 boyant window is of course poor and meagre compared 
 with its appearance when filled up, but excepting the 
 Reticulated variety, there is not, or at least need not be, 
 any positive jar or contradiction in the lines. Tliis is not 
 the case with the skeleton of a Perpendicular, any more than 
 with that of a Reticulated window; in both these the Arch 
 cuts through the lines of the tracery. At the same time the 
 Perpendicular has the advantage that a skilfully disposed 
 secondary pattern will render the general appearance of a 
 window truly “ self-contained,” which, with Reticulated, 
 
 * On the priiici])le of contrast in Gotliic see “History of Architecture,” p. 306, 
 architecture, especially in I’crpcndicular, 347, ct seipp 
 
170 
 
 or CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 can, as we have seen never be the case, except by a total 
 siiiTender of its animating principle. 
 
 Perpendicular tracery has another fault, which it also 
 shares with Reticulated, as indeed, though less strikingly, 
 Avith pure Geometrical, and with every imaginable style 
 constructed wholly on the principle of repetition. When 
 spread over a large expanse, it becomes wearisome and 
 monotonous. The monotony of the Reticulated is indeed 
 much less wearisome, but it has not the same means of 
 escape from it which the others have. Geometrical avoids 
 it by subordination ; the east window of Lincoln, did it pre- 
 sent a mere expanse of equal circles, would be intolerable ; 
 subordination converts it into a harmonious and highly 
 vertical composition. Perpendicular avoids the same diffi- 
 culty partly by subordination, (which though less striking 
 here than in other styles, prevails to an immense extent,) 
 but more palpably by subarcuation and other forms bor- 
 rowed from preceding styles. Here is the confession of 
 its inferiority ; the subordination of the Geometrical is but 
 the repetition of itself, without the introduction of any 
 extraneous element; Perpendicular in its most splendid 
 specimens, is fain to forsake its own principle, and to trust 
 to altogether dissimilar ones to avoid a manifest deformity. 
 To illustrate this, we need only eompare the west win- 
 
 See above, p. 93, 95. 
 
 " There can be little doubt but that 
 tlie instances of subordination of mould- 
 ings in Perpendicular far exceed nume- 
 rically those in any other style, but it 
 does not usually exercise the same im- 
 portant influence on the design as in the 
 earlier kinds of tracery. Nothing is more 
 common than to see the mullion carried 
 up into the architrave on one plane, while 
 the arches of the lights and the tracery 
 above them are on a subordinate one. 
 But this is not subordination in the sense 
 in which that arrangement has been so 
 conspicuous in other parts of our in- 
 quiry; subordination in the higher sense 
 requires the existence of a primary pat- 
 
 tern which might e.xist as a window were 
 the secondary one removed. It is clear 
 that such subordination as that just men- 
 tioned does not enter into this definition, 
 as it forms no primary pattern which can 
 be conceived as existing by itself. Sub- 
 ordination, as exercising any important 
 influence on the composition, is by no 
 means common in Perpendicular, and is 
 chiefly conflned to one variety. Between 
 such complete subordination and the un- 
 important sort mentioned above, several 
 intermediate varieties may be observed, 
 but in describing particular windows I 
 .shall not think it necessary to allude to 
 the presence of subordination, except 
 when it really enters into the composition. 
 
OF PERPENDICULAR TRACERY. 
 
 171 
 
 dow of All Souls’ College Chapel with that of St. Mary s 
 Church. The former is pure Perpeiidicular, and the ef- 
 fect is wretched in the extreme ; the latter ranks among 
 the most magnificent productions of Gothic art, but its re- 
 lief from the same fault rests almost entirely upon the non- 
 Perpendicular element of its multiplied subarcuations. 
 
 Again, Perpendicular tracery has another fault (if fault 
 it be, which is shared more or less by almost every preceding 
 form) which Flamboyant avoids, namely the leaving of unoc- 
 cupied spaces. The tracery itself consists indeed entirely 
 of spaces between mullions, instead of figures ; but what I 
 here mean are spaces or spandrils exterior to the ranges of 
 batement-lights, which, closely as they cohere together as 
 far as they go, manifestly cannot fill up the whole of an 
 arched window-head, but leave a much more considerable 
 spandril than occurs in Flamboyant. And when sub- 
 arcuation is introduced to remedy the general mono- 
 tony of the whole design, this particular defect is in- 
 creased, as similar spaces are introduced into other parts 
 of the window. 
 
 I think then that not only is Perpendicular tracery in- 
 ferior in mere beauty both to Geometrical and Flowing, 
 but that as a mere development of the ideas of continuity 
 and unity it is inferior to ideal Flamboyant. The latter 
 kind of tracery is as fully, perhaps more fully, a continu- 
 ation of the mullions ; it has an equally ascending direction 
 in its principal lines, while the lines themselves are of a 
 more graceful form ; and if a predominance of vertical lines 
 be desired, it may be obtained without either compromising 
 the Flamboyant pi'inciple or introducing Perpendicular 
 stiffness ; finally it is the more complete and harmonious 
 filling up of the whole window-head, and for this, and for 
 other causes, is especially adapted to those magnificent 
 circular windows which are among the chief glories of the 
 
 A a 
 
172 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 Frencli Flamboyant, but wliicb seem altogether excluded 
 from the English Perpendicular. Ideal Flamboyant I am 
 inclined to call the very perfection of tracery ; it is indeed 
 a little inferior in mere beauty to some of the best Flowing 
 forms, but it so far surpasses them in unity, continuity, and 
 general vertical effect, as quite to compensate for this slight 
 aesthetical dereliction. In fact it combines the highest 
 merits both of the Flowing and the Perpendicular style. 
 Bat the misfortune is that this ideal perfection is almost 
 purely ideal, it nowhere exists as a predominant style, 
 hardly as a style at all. As was before said, the mass of 
 existing Flamboyant is among the worst, and especially 
 among the least vertical or continuous, forms of tracery 
 existing. To design even a tolerable Flamboyant window 
 requires a great artist ; his ideal is so refined and abstract, 
 his path so beset with difficulties and temptations, and so 
 few safeguards afforded against them, that it is not to be 
 wmndered at if in the mass of instances the designer utterly 
 failed, and produced something as far from the Flamboyant 
 ideal as can well be imagined. Hence I have no hesitation 
 in concluding with Mr. Petit, whose argument above quoted 
 I have been endeavouring to draw out at greater length, 
 that practically Perpendicular is to be preferred ; the Flam- 
 boyant standard is higher, but then we may well call it 
 T^v vTT^p rjixa.9 apeTrjv, ppcoLKrjv tlvol koI OeLav ; it is one 
 which no artist ought to think himself able to attain. 
 Perpendicular is more within the grasp of ordinary men ; 
 with no possibility of compassing the heroic ideal of its 
 rival, it has safeguards which, unless wulfully disregarded, 
 prevent it from falling into its practical hideousness. Per- 
 pendieular, I will not say ideal, but fair Perpendicular, 
 preserves a kind of equable and decorous stateliness ; Ave 
 might venture to liken it to the bard of Colonus, who, if 
 his genius could never rise to the Scythian rock of Pro- 
 
or THE VARIETIES OF PERPENDICULAR TRACERY. ] 73 
 
 metheus, or to the oath of the seven Chieftains, at all 
 events has preserved us from the nursery details of the 
 Choephorse. 
 
 § 3. Of THE Varieties of Perpendicular Tracery. 
 
 It is by no means so easy to make a classification of 
 Perpendicular as of the earlier forms of tracery ; that is, it 
 is much harder to draw it out on paper, for the varieties 
 which exist are easily enough perceived by the eye. It 
 almost necessarily follows from the stiffness and uniformity 
 of the style, that it should not present the same striking 
 and palpable varieties as its predecessors ; it is impossible 
 to ring so many changes upon a series of hard vertical lines 
 as upon curves allowed free scope in every conceivable di- 
 rection. And besides it happens that such varieties as 
 occur, would for the most part establish cross divisions, 
 being neither incompatible with each other, nor yet neces- 
 sary concomitants. Thus Mr. Paley° makes three classes, 
 Transonied, Plain Siipermullioned, and Compound; the latter 
 being what I have called Sicbarcuated. These are certainly 
 three of the most striking forms of the style, though they 
 exclude one of no less importance ; but they are not a 
 logical division, inasmuch as a window may very easily be 
 all three at once. And that not merely in the same way 
 that I have mentioned Decorated windows as coinbinino: 
 different principles of construction ; in this last .case each 
 of the elements may be consistently applied to the com- 
 position of a whole, which cannot take place with two of 
 Mr. Paley’s classes ; for a window cannot be merely tran- 
 somed or subarciiated ; it must exhibit those principles in 
 connexion with some other. The only real logical class of 
 the three is the Supermullioned ; this, with two others 
 
 ° Gothic ArcliiteoUii’e, p. 137. 
 
174 
 
 01' CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 which he has omitted, will, if I mistake not, make an 
 exhaustive division of pure Perpendicular tracery, being 
 the only three consistent methods in which we can con- 
 ceive the vertical lines disposed. Of the Sujjermullioned 
 we cannot do better than accept Mr. Paley’s definition, 
 “ when a tracery-bar rises from each mullion and from the 
 crown of the separate lights consequently the batement- 
 lights are only half the wddth of those below; in the other 
 two classes they are of the same width, tracery-bars being 
 continued only from one of the two series of points from 
 which they are in the Supermullioned. In the first, which I 
 will call Alternate, a tracery -bar rises from the crown of the 
 separate lights, but none from the mullions. In the other, 
 the mullions only are continued, no tracery-bars springing 
 from the crowns of the lights. Thus the batement-lights 
 ai'e a mere repetition of those below ; an arrangement, 
 meagre enough at any time, and only tolerable when the 
 tracery is transomed. Such a form as this hardly deserves 
 the name of tracery; it is mere open panelling of the poorest 
 kind. I will therefore call it Panelled tracery. 
 
 Before I proceed to give a more minute account of these 
 classes, I will mention what may be considered as the cross 
 divisions, those which do not themselves exhaust the whole 
 style, but which require to be engrafted upon one or other 
 of the primary ones. In idea they might be equally ap- 
 plied to all, but we shall find that in practice they have but 
 very little, influence over the Alternate variety. I will also 
 mention a few points common to both forms. 
 
 The two main cross divisions are those mentioned in 
 Mr. Paley’s classification, the Transomed and the Subarcu- 
 ated. By the first must be understood not those examples 
 in which there is merely a transom below across the lights, 
 but wdiere a horizontal line is drawn across one or more 
 points of the tracery itself, either immediately above the 
 
OF THE VARIETIES OF PERPENDICUI.AR TRACERY. 175 
 
 heads of the lights, or across the baternent-lights. That is, 
 the horizontal line which is formed in idea by the heads of 
 each tier of baternent-lights, is actually marked. This is 
 very common in Supermnllioned, and, as far as I am aware, 
 universal in Panelled tracery. 
 
 Siibarcuation is, of course, strictly speaking, a non-Per- 
 pendicular element, and a direct vestige of an earlier style ; 
 but it is so frequent, and in many cases interferes so little 
 with the general character of the window, that it may be 
 fairly considered as not hindering its claim to be considered 
 as pure Perpendicular. When the arch principle is, as in 
 many cases, much more predominant, so as decidedly to 
 interfere with the supremacy of the vertical lines, this is 
 certainly a deviation from the Perpendicular idea, and I 
 shall not hesitate to class such examples, of whatever date, 
 among those which exhibit a mixture of Decorated and 
 Perpendicular forms. 
 
 On the other hand, Subarcuation is sometimes, especially 
 when the tracery commences below the spring of the arch, as 
 inexamplesP from Higham Ferrers and Weedon Beck, North- 
 ants (19), of such slight importance that it gradually sinks 
 into another tendency of the style, which may also be con- 
 sidered as a dereliction from its purity, although as helping 
 to avoid meagreness and monotony, it must, like Subar- 
 cuation itself, be considered as adding greatly to the rich- 
 nes.s and beauty of individual examples. I allude to the dis- 
 position to group lights together whenever possible. This 
 is most conspicuously manifested in the head of a window 
 or compartment. Whenever, as is necessarily the case in 
 all Supermnllioned windows, and frequently also in other 
 kinds, a tracery-bar would be naturally continued into the 
 apex of the window, it is clear that the lines which are to 
 form the heads of the baternent-lights must diverge from 
 
 These are al.so examples of TransnmrrI tracery, the latter in two places. 
 
176 
 
 OP CONTINUOUS TRACERY, 
 
 it*!. Hence, this direct continuation of the tracery-bar, 
 which is in itself unpleasant, is quite unnecessary, and 
 it may be stopped at the point of divergence, leaving, as at 
 Weedon, a space, which is often foliated, and which some- 
 times grows into an actual figure, often, as in the fenes- 
 tellae of the Higham example, the quatrefoiled figure of the 
 Reticulated. In other cases, we find it treated in a manner 
 more in accordance with the style, after the principle of 
 Alternate tracery. When either the foliated space or the 
 Reticulated figure prevail to any great extent, the window 
 ceases to be purely Perpendicular ; and such examples will 
 be treated of in another portion of our inquiry. AVhen it 
 does not greatly affect the composition of the window, we 
 may be content, as in the case of subarcuations, to reckon 
 them under the ordinary varieties of Perpendicular. 
 
 But this grouping is not confined to the heads of win- 
 dows or compartments ; sometimes combinations of two or 
 more lights, with spaces or figures in the head, occm’ in 
 other parts, which are treated with regard to the batement- 
 lights as the principal lights in ordinary cases. Rushden 
 Church, Northants (20), has ’'several examples, especially 
 the east window®, where the range of five such groups 
 is very rich and effective. It is in fact a substitute, and 
 a very elegant one, for a transom, marking the stages of the 
 batement-lights in a far more pleasing way. Yet in the 
 Rushden examples it is combined with its use. On this 
 arrangement we may make the same remark as twice be- 
 fore ; used in moderation, it does not affect the Perpendi- 
 cular character of a window ; when very predominant, so 
 as to form groups of several lights, it must be reckoned 
 
 "I This is also the case with all the 
 other bars, but it is only the central one 
 wliere its continuation is not required: 
 the others must run into the architrave, 
 to form the heads of the ascending series 
 
 of batement-lights. 
 
 ■■ See the author's description in the 
 Northamptonshire series, p. 178. 
 
 ‘ Figured in the same series, p. 180. 
 
OF SUPERMULLIONED TRACERY. 177 
 
 among the instances of combined Perpendicular and Arch 
 tracery already mentioned. 
 
 One or two desultory remarks will conclude this part of 
 the subject. The lights in a Perpendicular window may 
 be either simple pointed or ogee, and the character of the 
 window depends very much upon which is employed. 
 Foil arches are not quite excluded, though very rare. An 
 example from Churchdown, Gloucester, is given by Brandon ‘, 
 and there are several in the parish Churches of Exeter. The 
 chancel of Paston Church, Northants (21), is also lighted 
 by square-headed windows of this kind with trefoil arches 
 in both ranges. They are very early in the style, as their 
 label has the notch-head termination, and the mullions are 
 not carried into the head. A transom is not unfrequently 
 foliated without an arch in a very unsightly manner ; this 
 may be considered as a flattened foil arch. 
 
 A pure Perpendicular piercing, the space namely be- 
 tween two upright tracery-bars, should not be completely 
 foliated. Whenever it is so, (and in one case to be here- 
 after mentioned, it is almost invariably so,) it must be con- 
 sidered as the retention of an earlier idea. It may how- 
 ever, when its shape allows, be foliated at the lower, as 
 well as the upper end. 
 
 § 4. Of Supermullioned Tracery. 
 
 This form is by far the most usual in windows of more 
 than two liglits, and is certainly the most essential and 
 typical form of Perpendicular, presenting by far the great- 
 est number of vertical lines and narrow upright open- 
 ings. In two-light windows it is not common, the Alter- 
 nate form being more generally used ; examples however 
 are not wanting, as at Nettlestead, Kent. The purest 
 
 ‘ Analysis, ii. 2i. 
 
178 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACEKY. 
 
 Superraullioned tracery, in which no principle whatever is 
 introduced beyond the mere prolongation of the tracery- 
 bars, is too monotonous to be employed in windows of any 
 great size ; but in conjunction with transoms, subarcua- 
 tions, and other means of avoiding its meagreness, it forms 
 the ground-work of most of the grandest windows of the 
 style. Even in smaller ones these sources of variety are 
 very frequently introduced ; and different groupings of 
 lights in the head, as at Nettlestead, Kent, Castle Ashby, 
 Northants, and Cherry Hinton, Cambridgeshire, are per- 
 haps as commonly met with as not. 
 
 There is a large and fine purely Supermullioned window 
 in the west front of Canons Ashby Priory Church (22) 
 which is remarkable for the form of its arch, which is 
 struck from six centres, but which may be more practically 
 described as a four-centred arch ogeed ; a form however 
 not unknown in earlier times, occurring in Decorated work 
 in the Palace at St. David’s. 
 
 Supermullioned Windoivs with Open Transoms. 
 
 When the form of the window is such as to produce very 
 long batement-lights, a mode of dividing their height is 
 often introduced which is more elegant than the transom, but 
 which has the same effect of marking the horizontal stages. 
 This is “ by cusping the lights of the upper series at the 
 foot as well as at the head, and uniting them with those of 
 the lower series without any intervening tracery bar“.” The 
 mullion is occasionally interrupted so as to form a space ca- 
 pable of foliation, but is more commonly unbroken. This ar- 
 rangement, which may be perhaps called the Ope7i Traiisond, 
 
 “ Brandons’ Analysis, i. 32. The ’ The open transom is after all only a 
 authors call the effect “ rich, but scarcely less prominent exemplification of the ten- 
 legitimate.” I do not understand the dency to group lights together already 
 reason of the last epithet. referred to. 
 
R.4 
 
OF SUPERMULLIONFD TRACERY. 
 
 179 
 
 like the use of the transom itself, applies equally to the junc- 
 tion of the principal lights with the batement-lights, and to 
 ranges in the batement-lights themselves. It is applied to 
 both in the fine east window of Swinbrook, Oxon"', and on 
 a smaller scale at Harpole, Northants (23), and Canterbury 
 Cathedral ; at Marston, Oxon, and Staverton, Northants, 
 to the lower point only. 
 
 Supermullioned TFindows Transomed. 
 
 The real transom is excessively common in tracery of 
 this kind. Thus in the west window of Canterbury Cathe- 
 dral we have the batement-lights twice divided in this 
 way, and as there is grouping in the head of each compart- 
 ment, monotony is pretty well avoided, even in so large 
 a window, without the aid of Subarcuation. Different ap- 
 plications of the transom will be seen above in the win- 
 dows from Weedon and Rushden. Other examples will 
 be found, with a transom over the heads of the principal 
 lights only, in Winchester Cathedral, four lights, with 
 much grouping in the head ; across the batement-lights 
 only, of three lights, at Penkridge, Leighton Buzzard, 
 Titchmarsh, Cherry Hinton, and Middleton Cheney, 
 (where the transom crosses the central compartment 
 only, ranging with a prominent quatrefoiled figure in the 
 lateral ones ;) of five lights, at Stanton Harcourt, at 
 Leighton Buzzard, St. Giles, Northampton, andThurcaston, 
 Leicestershire (24), having the transom foliated without 
 arches ; with the transom in both positions, at Penkridge, 
 of four lights. The common and the open transom are 
 sometimes combined, as in the rigidly Superinullioned 
 west window at Merton College Chapel. The transoms, it 
 
 » Figured in tlie Glossary, jil. 162. 
 
 B b 
 
180 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 will be observed, are not uncommonly fringed with bat- 
 tlements, an ornament certainly to be called out of place, 
 on the same principle as the sculptured enrichments at 
 Merton, Dorchester, and Barnack. 
 
 Siibarcuafed Siipermullioned Windows. 
 
 Subarcuation now meets us at almost every step ; and 
 we must remember that not being in the least degree 
 inconsistent with the presence of transoms of both kinds, 
 we shall lind it in many cases in conjunction with them. 
 In large windows the arches of subarcuation and the 
 tracery-bars continued from the mullions frequently describe 
 a primary pattern ; but as in most cases of subordination 
 in the Perpendicular style, and especially in this variety of 
 it, they are of less^ consequence than in subordinated Deco- 
 rated windows, as the primary pattern is not, as in the 
 case of the latter, one which could exist by itself. Still the 
 subordination thus formed is certainly of more consequence 
 than in most other Perpendicular instances. And as sub- 
 arcuation entails thus much of affinity to the previous 
 style, it also introduces another more marked resemblance. 
 Whenever a fenesteUa consists only of a single light, the 
 Perpendicular treatment has a very awkward appearance, 
 and it is consequently far more usual to find a vesica in- 
 serted over the arch of the light, just as in subarcuated 
 Plowing windows. And this frequently produces yet an- 
 other Decorated feature, for a spandril is thus left between 
 the subarcuating arch and the nearest tracery-bar which 
 can hardly be filled up in the true Perpendicular manner. 
 Sometimes it is sufficiently small to be itself foliated, as at 
 
 ^ Nothing, for instance, is more com- are on another. We even find the mul- 
 nion than for the mullions to be con- lions themselves on one, and the lights 
 tinned in the head on one plane, while on an inferior. But subordination of this 
 those rising from the heads of the lights kind is of no importance in our view. 
 
OF SUPERMULLIONED TRACERY. 
 
 181 
 
 Cuddesden, or left unfoliated, as at Brington, Northants, 
 and Winchester College ; but more frequently a long 
 Divergent piercing is inserted, as at Wroxham, Norfolk^ 
 (25), or even a quatrefoiled circle, as at Merton College 
 Chapel ^ I before remarked that when the arch was very 
 much depressed, or when from other causes the tracery 
 commences considerably below its spring, subarcuation was 
 of less account ; in examples of the former kind, such 
 a fenestella is simply a light with a sharper arch than 
 usual, and is often treated as such, which has always a 
 meagre effect, as at Moseley, Warwickshire, and Shorwell, 
 Isle of Wight (26), where the window is set under a square 
 head, with enriched spandrils like a doorway. 
 
 We may make exactly the same distinction in Per- 
 pendicular subarcuated windows as in Decorated ones, 
 whether the subarcuations spring from a central mullion 
 or whether they leave a complementary light or lights. 
 
 a. With a Complementary Light. 
 
 Of the latter class, of three lights, we have those just 
 above referred to as illustrating the treatment of the fenes- 
 tellae, which are the most typical windows of this variety. 
 Those where the fenestellse are differently treated, are 
 chiefly where the tracery begins below the spring of the 
 arch, as in the rich windows in the Chancel at Adderbury, 
 fine examples of the open transom, and one at St. Simon 
 and St. Jude, Norwich (27). In both these the spandril 
 above the fenestellae is foliated, and the fenestellae treated 
 in the ordinary Perpendicular manner ; though in the 
 Norwich example we have a very conspicuous quatrefoiled 
 
 y So Headcorn, Kent (Glossary, pi. College. 
 
 161), and others at Purton, Winston, * Glossary, pi. 161. 
 
 St. John’s, Winchester, and Winchester 
 
182 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 figure in tlie bead. This one is also remarkable for the 
 trefoil arches of its lights. All these windows, as well as 
 the rest which I shall have to mention, exhibit many of 
 those varieties in the treatment of the heads of compart- 
 ments, which have been already alluded to, and which it is 
 unnecessary to describe in each particular case. 
 
 Of four lights, with two complementary, is the window 
 at Shorwell already mentioned ; much better, though still 
 meagre examples occur at St. John’s, Winchester, and Maid- 
 stone, and one at Buckland, Berks, with a round arch, and 
 the open transom in the complement. 
 
 Of five lights, with fenestellae of two and one comple- 
 mentary, are many windows of extreme richness and beauty, 
 which of course afford every variety of grouping and of tran- 
 soms. I have thrown the chief classes into a note and 
 will here mention a few of the most remarkable instances. 
 At Wantage the central light is wider than the rest, and 
 in the head is a very conspicuous multifoiled figm’e, and 
 another more awkwardly introduced at St. Sepulchre’s, 
 Northampton; Brington (28) has a rich quatrefoiled figure, 
 double- foliated ; and though there is not the same occa- 
 sion as in the class mentioned above, the Perpendicular 
 tracery of the fenestellse is not continued into the spandrils 
 above, which are occupied by trefoiled circles. St. Michael’s, 
 Lichfield, has a remarkable intermixture of Alternate tra- 
 cery, and the lower transom is very curious, from the in- 
 
 • Without transoms, arch simple pointed. 
 Wantage, four-centred, east win- 
 
 dows, Brington and Whiston, Northants, 
 the latter with grouping in the fenestellae. 
 
 With transom' across complementary 
 hatement-lights, arch simple, St. Sepul- 
 chre’s, Northampton, east window. 
 
 With transom at head of lights and 
 across complementary batement-lights, arch 
 simple, St. Michael’s, Lichfield, east 
 window. 
 
 With transom in batement-lights of fe- 
 
 nestellee, arch simple, Peterborough Ca- 
 thedral, west window. 
 
 With open transom at head of lights, 
 arch four-centred, St. John’s, Northamp- 
 ton. Do., with open transom across comple- 
 mentary batement-lights, Deddington, 
 Oxon. 
 
 With open transom across complement- 
 ary batement-lights. School-house, High- 
 am Ferrers, east window; Corpus Christi 
 College, Oxford, east window ; Congres- 
 bury, Somerset. 
 
OF SUPERMULIilONED TRACERY. 
 
 183 
 
 troduction of quatrefoiled circles. In that at Peterborough, 
 the transoms, apparently stuck at random in the tracery, 
 look very ill. And here I must mention the east window 
 of Adderbury as one of the finest of the examples with 
 depressed arches. Yet the actual tracery dates only from 
 the last restoration, as the print in Skelton represents it 
 without any ; whether it was restored from any record of 
 its original form I know not ; if not, nothing can be more 
 creditable to the restorers. 
 
 Five lights, with three complementary, is an unpleasant 
 form occurring in one at Hornsey and in otherwise very 
 rich designs at Maidstone and Ashford ; it is of a piece 
 with the four-light windows from the former church just 
 alluded to ; but in all the disposition is clearly unnatural. 
 
 A fine example of six lights, with two complementary, the 
 arch four-centred, and a rich display of the open transom 
 in two ranges, occurs at the east end of St, Stephen’s, 
 Bristol. 
 
 Of seven lights with fenestellse of three lights and one 
 complementary, are three most magnificent and extremely 
 similar windows, the east window of Winchester College 
 Chapel, the great north window of Merton Chapel and 
 the west window of St. Mary’s, Oxford®. Though built at 
 different times, and with the lapse of a full century between 
 the first and third, the differences, as far as tracery is con- 
 cerned, are to be found only in the most minute details. 
 In all the fenestellse are treated as three-light windows 
 with a further subarcuation, and the two Oxford examples 
 have quatrefoiled circles in the spandrils of what we may 
 call the sub-fenestellae. All three have very conspicuous 
 figures in the head. The same arrangement is found in 
 the east and west windows of Bath Abbey, but the treat- 
 ment is very inferior. 
 
 ^ Figured, Rloxam, p. 192. 
 
 « Glossary, pi. 162. 
 
184 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACEHY. 
 
 Of the same number of lights and of equal magnificence, 
 although of a totally different character, is the east window 
 of the splendid Church of St. John at Glastonbury (29). 
 The arch here is four-centred, and the window is mani- 
 festly the development on a grander scale of such examples 
 as the east windows of Winston and Brington. The fenes- 
 tellse are of two lights, leaving three complementary ; yet 
 there is not the same bad effect as in the analogous case of 
 the window lately mentioned at Romsey. This is partly 
 from the less importance attaching to subarcuation in win- 
 dows of this form, partly because the fenestellse, though 
 occupying less space than usual in the window, are really 
 of considerable size, but above all from the exceeding grace 
 and richness of the whole design, in which it is surpassed 
 by no Perpendicular window with which I am acquainted. 
 J'he tracery of the complementary lights is decidedly Super- 
 mullioned, though that of the fenestellae is rather to be 
 classed with a variety of Alternate tracery to be hereafter 
 mentioned. Still the general effect is so completely of this 
 style that it would be much less appropriately placed else- 
 where. Nowhere can Ave find better examples of grouping 
 and of the open transom. In the head is a large octofoiled 
 vesica supported by two thoroughly Plamboyant piercings. 
 And we must remark a very singular vestige of, or return 
 to, earlier forms in the presence of actual Poll figures in 
 the spandrils above the fenestellae ; and, as looking the 
 same way, though not in strictness affecting the tracery, 
 we may observe the unusual presence of external shafts 
 attached both to the jambs and to the primary mullions. 
 With this we may class the west window of Pahford, of the 
 same number of lights similarly arranged, and of much the 
 same proportion, but the smaller patterns are different, the 
 figures in the head and spandrils being absent. 
 
 The west window of Canterbury Cathedral is of eight 
 
OF SUPERMULLIONED TRACERY. 
 
 185 
 
 lights, three in each fenestella, and two in the complement ; 
 but there is no great skilfulness of design, and the two 
 transoms produce considerable stiffness. 
 
 Of nine lights is the east window of Berkeley Church. 
 Its existing tracery, I believe, like that at Adderbury, is 
 modern, but it is exceedingly well done, and I cannot con- 
 ceive it being other than a literal reproduetion of an ancient 
 design. It belongs to the same class as those at Brington 
 and Glastonbury, being four-eentred, with three comple- 
 mentary lights, and three in each fenestellse. It lacks how- 
 ever the singular grace and beauty of the last example ; 
 and it suffers a little from its great number of lights, the 
 space not requiring more than seven. 
 
 b. Without a Complementary Light. 
 
 In the other class of subarcuated windows, where the 
 subarcuations spring from a central mullion without any 
 complementary lights, the number of lights is necessarily 
 even. There is one of two lights at Wymondham, Nor- 
 folk (30), with rather an ingenious disposition of tracery 
 in the fenestellse, ineluding in fact an Alternate figure ; in 
 the head is a mere quatrefoiled spaee. 
 
 Four-light examples are not uncommon. The east win- 
 dow of Floore Church, Northants, (simple-pointed,) and the 
 side windows at Whiston (four-centred) exhibit the Super- 
 mullioned tracery in its most unmitigated form. In others, 
 as at Yatton and the ehancel windows at Cuddesden, the 
 central mullion is not continued directly, but is made to be 
 supported by the subarcuations in a manner analogous to 
 the open transom. The space thus formed is foliated at 
 Cuddesden, and plain at Yatton. Winchester Cathedral 
 will supply examples of the open transom, the east window 
 of Hotliersthorpe, Northants, of a plain transom across the 
 
186 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 complement, and one at Newark (31), of two ranges of 
 transoms foliated without arches. In Romsey Abbey is an 
 example where the space in the complement between the 
 two tracery-bars continued from the fenestellae is simply 
 cjuatrefoiled, the central mullion not being prolonged. 
 
 In the porch of Hereford Cathedral (32) is a four-light 
 window chiefly of this kind, though a sort of enlarged open 
 transom introduces a tendency to the Alternate variety ; 
 the tracery begins below the spring of the arch, so that it 
 altogether has much the appearance of a window of eight 
 lights. The complement resembles those at Yatton and 
 Cuddesden. 
 
 A real example of that number occurs in the west win- 
 dow of Rochester Cathedral, for the beauty of which but 
 little can be said. It is chiefly remarkable for the use of 
 the round arch, both to the lights, and in the numerous 
 groups formed by the batement-lights. As at Glastonbury, 
 we find a purely Geometrical vestige in the free quatre- 
 foils, in this case set diagonally in the heads of the fenes- 
 tellse. 
 
 § 5. Of Alternate Tracery. 
 
 The definition of this variety has been ah’eady given. It 
 may be perhaps on the whole considered as the most 
 graceful of the three principal classes of Perpendicular. 
 With less opportunity for richness and variety in the lines 
 than the Supermullioned, there is far less of that stiffness 
 and monotony which the sources of enrichment belonging 
 to its rival are after all merely expedients to escape. An 
 Alternate window retaining its natural lines, with merely 
 foliations, though less elaborate and dazzling to the eye, is 
 perhaps more really satisfactory than the most gorgeous 
 Supermullioned window, with all its disguises of subarcu- 
 
34 
 
OF ALTERNATE TRACERY. 
 
 187 
 
 ations, groupings, and open transoms. While maintaining 
 the most complete ascendancy for the continuous and ver- 
 tical line, it retains a good deal of the real spirit of the 
 previous style, without introducing so much of its mere 
 detail as we have seen in the Supermullionecl. Its pierc- 
 ings are naturally far less long and narrow than in that 
 style, retaining in many cases much of Reticulated cha- 
 racter, as all the openings are of the same width, and their 
 ranges alternate in the same way. The larger windows 
 have the advantage of avoiding most of the difficulties of 
 the Supermullioned form ; there is but little use of sub- 
 arcuation or transoms, because the simple outline of the 
 style is satisfactory without them ; and, as the alternation, 
 like the reticulation, can be prolonged to any extent, there is 
 less difficulty as to the treatment of the head of the win- 
 dow. It has the same general effect as the Reticulated, 
 the same uniform expansion over the whole design, and 
 the same difficulty with regard to the imperfect piercings 
 or spandrils, though with far better means of obviating 
 them. But, like Reticulated also, there is a degree of 
 monotony about it ; a very large window cannot well be 
 designed solely on its principle, and it rejects the aids by 
 which the Supermullioned evades its own natural deti- 
 ciencies. I am not acquainted with any pure Alternate, 
 any more than any pure Reticulated window, of a greater 
 number of lights than five. 
 
 From the much squatter and broader form of the 
 piercings in this style than in any other variety of Per- 
 pendicular, it almost necessarily follows that the complete 
 foliation is not entirely excluded. It is of course the re- 
 tention of a Decorated idea, but it would be quite una- 
 vailing to class as instances of actual Transition all the 
 Alternate windows in which it is found. In the two-light 
 window of this style, (by far the most common type of 
 
 c c 
 
188 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 be] fry- window during tlie whole duration of Perpendicular, 
 and not unusual in other parts of churches,) the single 
 piercing which occupies the head is almost universally 
 quatrefoiled ; of this the north aisle of St. Giles’, Northamp- 
 ton, contains some very good examples to which we shall 
 again have occasion to refer. In the Refectory of the 
 Cathedral at Winchester, now the Deanery, are some 
 exceedingly graceful examples in which the space in ques- 
 tion is sexfoiled ; a similar one occurs at All Saints, Here- 
 ford (33), with trefoil arches to the lights. Par less com- 
 mon is it to find the head of the piercing trefoiled, as at 
 Hampton-in-Arden, Warwickshire, and the belfry-windows 
 at Coaley, Gloucestershire. In windows of a greater num- 
 ber of lights, the piercings more commonly follow the 
 general rule, but the complete foliation is still common. 
 These larger windows fall naturally into two classes, those 
 in which the heads of the lights are simple-pointed, and 
 those in which they are ogee. In the former case the 
 piercings are often cusped only at the upper end, but 
 perhaps more commonly have a complete foliation. In 
 the latter we seldom find a complete foliation, but gene- 
 rally a trefoil or cinquefoil at each end. Three-light 
 windows have usually not room for more than a pair 
 of batement-lights, with a space (sometimes occupied by a 
 figure) in the head, but in those of five lights a double 
 range is usually introduced, completely filling up the 
 window. 
 
 Of the first class good three-light examples occur in 
 Rochester Cathedral and at Bozeat, Northants (34). The 
 former has a third piercing in the head, all three being 
 quatrefoiled and doubly foliated ; in the latter the third 
 piercing is absent, its presence or absence of course de- 
 pending upon. the pitch of the window-arch, and the size 
 of the lower piercings. The belfry-wfindows at Cam, 
 
i 
 
 
38 
 
OF ALTERNATE TRACERY. 189 
 
 Gloucestershire, have nearly the same lines as the example 
 from Bozeat, but both lights and batement-lights are 
 merely trefoiled in the head. The east window of Bar- 
 row-upon-Soar has a curious effect given to it by the 
 batement-lights being ogeed, while the arches below are 
 simple-pointed. 
 
 Of five-light windows of this class I cannot name a 
 more beautiful example than the very fine east window at 
 Towcester (35). This example deserts to a certain extent 
 the usual Alternate formation in the arrangement of the 
 four bold sexfoiled piercings in two groups under arches ; 
 but it must be allowed that this is a great improvement 
 in point of effect, as the space in question generally pre- 
 sents a great difficulty in windows of this number of lights. 
 It is indeed sometimes very awkwardly treated, even in 
 otherwise fine windows, as at St. Cuthbert’s, Wells, and in 
 those (very inferior) in the aisles of Bath Cathedral, which 
 have quite another character given to them by the de- 
 pressed arch, and the awkward figures in the upper spaii- 
 drils ; others occur at St. Werburgh, Bristol, and Kidwelly, 
 Caermarthenshire (36). 
 
 In the other class, though, from the use of the ogee arch, 
 the lines approach much nearer to the Beticulated type, the 
 Reticulated foliation is much less usual. The treatment of 
 the space just mentioned is often much more skilful, as 
 in the east windows of Sutton Coldfield and Church Bick- 
 enhill (37), in Warwickshire, where another pair of pierc- 
 ings is introduced, in the former case with a complete 
 quatrefoil. In the east window of Lutterworth, the ar- 
 rangement is more like that of Wells. At Sutton Coldfield 
 the batement-lights are only foliated in the head, but we 
 more usually find a foliation at each end, whenever the 
 lights are ogee-headed, as at Gaddesby and Wanli[), 
 Leicestershire, and Raunds, Northants, of three lights. 
 
OP CONTINUOUS TRACERt. 
 
 Of four lights — if we are so to reckon it, for the case is 
 by no means clear, and the part of the window with 
 which we are concerned has much more the effect of one 
 of three only — is the*^ south window in the presbytery at 
 Dorchester, an early example of the use of Perpendicular 
 tracery, for such it undoubtedly is in character, though 
 apparently contemporary with the Decorated work adjoin- 
 ing. Of five lights we have examples in the east window 
 of Church Bickenhill, mentioned above, and of Wanlip, 
 where there is a return to actual Reticulated forms in an 
 ogee vesica crowning the whole ; as there is in another 
 form, in that of All Saints, Hereford (38), where a com- 
 mon quatrefoiled figure comes in at the sides. 
 
 Subarcmted Alternate Windows. 
 
 We have already seen that in windows of this kind there 
 is no place for Subarcuation, transoms, open transoms, or 
 any of the other devices by which monotony is avoided in 
 those of the Supermullioned variety. They are not at all 
 in character with the equable and gentle diffusion of the 
 design over the whole space. Yet, as ideas borrowed from 
 one form are continually found obtruding themselves into 
 others, a few examples of such anomalies do occm*. At 
 Hales Owen, Salop, Marston St. Lawrence, Northants, Por- 
 tishead, Somerset, Yate and Wickwar, Gloucestershire, and 
 the west window at Tong (39), we have four-light win- 
 dows of this kind subarcuated, and the last is further dis- 
 figured by a partial transom across the heads of the lights, 
 not extending to the spandrils of the fenestellae. At Por- 
 tishead and Marston the piercing in the complement has an 
 awkward sort of complete foliation. So it is at Yate and 
 Wickwar (40), where the lights are ogee. There is a 
 
 Addington's Dorchester, p. 25. 
 
OF ALTERNATE TRACERY. 
 
 191 
 
 similar window of five lights at Usk, Monmouthsliire. But 
 in none of the examples is the effect good; they have 
 rather the general appearance of meagre Supermullioned, 
 than of Alternate windows ; as the complement presents 
 an insuperable difficulty to the extension of the principle 
 of the latter over the whole composition. We may add 
 to them the large west window at Yatton®, though the 
 tracery in the complement is Supermullioned. 
 
 Combinations of Alternate a7id SiipermuUioned Tracery. 
 
 The open transom, it is clear, hardly can occur in a window 
 of this kind retaining any claim to purity of design ; the 
 examples which might seem capable of being referred to 
 this head may be more accurately considered as instances — 
 imperfect ones indeed — of one of the finest classes of win- 
 dows which any date or style has produced, and which has 
 been already referred to as furnishing the only distinct case 
 of genuine subordination in the Perpendicular style. This 
 is where there is a combination of Alternate and Super- 
 mullioned tracery ; the finest examples of this, perhaps on 
 the whole the most satisfactory variety of Perpendicular, 
 are to be found in the unrivalled Churches of Somerset ; 
 the less perfect type I have chiefly observed in Gloucester- 
 shire, a district whose architecture in this, as in several 
 other respects, seems to present a kind of foreshadowing 
 of its more favoured neighbour. 
 
 In tlie complete type of this kind an Alternate pattern 
 is described by the primary lines, the straight-sided arch 
 being very commonly used in the batement-lights, and each 
 compartment is again filled in with an Alternate pattern 
 of two lights. The piercing in the bead of this is most 
 
 ' See Frontispiece to History tif Architecture. 
 
192 
 
 or CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 usually trefoiled or cinquefoiled in the head, being, by 
 reason of the straight lines above it, much more elongated 
 than is generally the case when such a composition stands 
 distinct. It will appear from this account that, in strictness, 
 this class of windows is not, as it was defined above, a 
 combination of Alternate witlfi Supermullioned tracery, but 
 rather of Alternate tracery with itself : but in its general 
 effect it exhibits a mixture of the two ; the primary lines 
 are Alternate, while the whole expanse, if considered 
 without reference to the subordination, is Supermullioned. 
 This kind of window can be made of all sizes without re- 
 quiring any extraneous aid whatever, as its own principle 
 
 is quite suffioiont to fill tip any required opaoo witliout any 
 
 monotony whatever. It has the expansion and equability 
 of the simple Alternate, with an immense addition of splen- 
 dour and elaborateness. It is in fact a translation into 
 Perpendicidar language of one of the finest Flowing forms, 
 and surely very little of its spirit has evaporated in the 
 process. 
 
 The analogy between the Reticulated and Alternate 
 forms of tracery has been already mentioned. This pre- 
 sent variety in like manner suggests a comparison with 
 that very elegant, though by no means common form, in 
 which a Reticulated outline has each of its vesicae filled in 
 with a Divergent pattern. I am not aware of any instance 
 in which any trace of the latter form is retained in win- 
 dows of the class which we are now considering, but the 
 two-light Reticulated composition, so similar in general 
 effect to the two-light Alternate, is occasionally substituted 
 for it ill the secondary patterns. This occiu’s in a very 
 pretty two-light example at Grafton Regis, Northants 
 ( 41 ) ; and in a very inconsiderable degree in the splen- 
 did five-light east window at Yatton, which I am inclined 
 to consider as being, upon the whole, the most perfect 
 
PI. 
 
OF ALTERNATE TRACERY. 
 
 193 
 
 and faultless Perpendicular window with which I am ac- 
 quainted. For other examples without this peculiarity 
 we may refer to the following ; of three lights, St. Augus- 
 tine’s, Bristol, Didcot, Cardigan, Kingsthorpe, Hutton, 
 Banwell ; of four, Winscomb, Churchill, and Wrington ; of 
 five, Yatton, north transept (42), Cardigan east window, 
 and several in St. Mary Bedcliffe : of these it will be ob- 
 served a large majority come from the favoured county of 
 Somerset. 
 
 In the other kind, instead of a complete Alternate 
 figure being inserted in each primary piercing, we have 
 simply grouped batement-lights, forming an open transom 
 at the head of the lights. In fact the lines are identical 
 with those of the common Supermullioned type, except that 
 the primary lines describe an Alternate pattern, though 
 often a very imperfect one. This kind, though far inferior 
 to the magnificent windows just described, is, when worked 
 with any degree of skill, decidedly above the level of the 
 ordinary Supermullioned forms. In some instances, as in 
 three-light windows at Yalding, Kent, and Marston, Oxon, 
 the lights have simple-pointed arches, but in the Glouces- 
 tershire type they are more appropriately ogeed. Of this 
 kind are several windows in Dursley Church and the west 
 window of Coaley, of three lights, and many others in that 
 neighbourhood, several in Monmouthshire, and the west 
 window at Brewood, Stafibrd.shire (43). And with these 
 we may fairly rank a very fine window in the south 
 transept of Bristol Cathedral (44), which presents the 
 same outline better worked ; but each of the ogee- 
 headed compartments is filled up with a Reticulated pat- 
 tern of two lights, so that window is actually of six lights, 
 of the same width as the batement-lights, just as in pure 
 Alternate tracery. 
 
 As the true Alternate tracery is now and then subar- 
 
194 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 ciiated, we might not unnaturally look for the same modi- 
 fication in windows of this last type, in which, as the 
 general effect of the Supermullioned class so decidedly pre- 
 vails, it could hardly fail to be at least as appropriate as it 
 is to the latter. We ffnd two four-light windows of this 
 kind (45) at Dursley, which are very good, except in the 
 awkward shape and want of foliation in some of the smaller 
 piercings, the former effect being owing to the arches of 
 the batement-lights not coinciding with that of the window. 
 Of the same kind, with a four-centred arch, are the aisle 
 windows^ of St. Mary’s in Oxford. I am not certain that, 
 with this pattern, the shape of the head is not an advantage, 
 and they are remarkable for the beauty and elegance of 
 their workmanship. 
 
 § 6. Op Panelled Tracery. 
 
 The last, the least important, and by far the most un- 
 gracefid variety of Perpendicidar, or indeed of any kind of 
 tracery, is that to Avhich I have already given the name of 
 Panelled. It is a real logical division of the possible ways 
 of forming Perpendicular tracery, and thus must be allowed 
 to rank side by side with the Supermullioned and the Alter- 
 nate ; otherwise it is so unsightly, and, in any thing like 
 a pure form, so rare, as hardly to deserve the honour of a 
 separate classification ; especially as its title to the name of 
 Tracery at all must be allowed to be not a little dubious. 
 It is formed by a simple continuation of the mullions alone, 
 Avithout any bars springing from the head of the lights. 
 It agrees with the Supermullioned in the prolongation of 
 the mullions, and in fact retains its primary lines ; with 
 the Alternate in its batement-lights being the same Avidth 
 as those below. As nothing springs from the apices of the 
 
 ' Figured, Blo.xam, p. 192. 
 
OF PANELLED TRACERY. 
 
 195 
 
 lights, it almost necessarily follows that a transom should 
 be thrown across at that point, as otherwise the unfinished 
 appearance of the arches unconnected with any thing would 
 be intolerable. In Panelled windows therefore Ave cannot 
 draw any distinction between a transom across the tracery 
 and a transom across the lights. In fact this form of win- 
 dow is exactly identical with the familiar arrangement of 
 transomed batement-lights, if we consider these last irre- 
 spectively of the lights below. And in many cases, where 
 the tracery commences below the spring of the arch, this 
 is really the view we take ; the batement-lights alone give 
 the character of the design, and we practically estimate the 
 number of lights at double its real amount. As far as 
 effect is concerned, the east window of Rushden, and even 
 the west one of the Bede-house at Higham Perrers, are 
 much more truly of ten lights than of five. Much more 
 so the long three-light windows in the former Church, and 
 the four-light from Hereford (32), which we might easily 
 conceive cut off at their lower transom, and thus converted 
 into Panelled windows of six lights. 
 
 The only pure example of this style which I can recollect 
 is one at Clent, in Staffordshire (46), which I visited so 
 long ago, before I had paid any especial attention to the 
 subject of tracery, that I cannot rely on the minute accu- 
 racy of my drawing, especially whether some portion of the 
 window may not have been mutilated. Still I have not 
 hesitated to insert this example, because, even if it should 
 happen not to be a correct representation of any existing 
 window, it exhibits the typical form of a class which cer- 
 tainly exists in idea, and which constitutes an element in 
 several windows of some importance, though I can point 
 to no other instance of the full purity of its deformity. 
 
 The one however with which I must commence my 
 series of windows in which the Panelled influence is ob- 
 
 D d 
 
196 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 sei’vable is one of but little beauty or interest. This is 
 the east window of the north aisle at Cam, Gloucester- 
 shire, of three lights, of which the central one is con- 
 structed on this principle, with an embattled transom. 
 Of three lights also I may mention the west window of Stone 
 Church, in the same neighbourhood, where the complement 
 of a subarcuated design is treated in this way with an open 
 transom. We may next mention, though exhibiting this 
 variety in less purity, even in the part of the window 
 which may be assigned to it, the windows in the western 
 part of the aisles® of Winchester Cathedral. These are 
 of four lights, divided by primary mullions into three 
 divisions, the central one, of two lights, being Panelled, 
 though changing into Alternate at the top. The side 
 lights are Supermullioned. Of five lights is a window at 
 Swansea (47) with fenestellm of three. Of seven we have 
 the certainly not beautiful, but strange and rich east win- 
 dow of Church Eaton, Staffordshire (48), remarkable as 
 thrust into a space far too small for it, and presenting in 
 its segmental head the most marked contrast to the high 
 gable above it. It is Panelled throughout, except that the 
 two side lights on each side are grouped under a sort of 
 weak subarcuation. The tracery in the head and under 
 the transom has some trace of Plowing character. Of 
 eight lights is the vast Avest Avindow of '’Potheringhay, sub- 
 arcnated, with the fenestellse subarcuated again, Avith com- 
 plements of tAvo lights, which, Aviththat of the AAundoAV itself, 
 are Panelled. A transom runs across at the springing of 
 the arch, foliated without arches. There are however tAvo 
 other Avindows, belonging to a great extent to this class, of 
 much better character. The first is the really grand Avest 
 window of Wrington (49), of six lights, subarcuated, Avith 
 Alternate fenestellse of two, and the two complementary 
 
 s AVillis’ AVincliester, p. 60. '' Figured in the O.xford Society’s Fotheringhay. 
 
EL.52. 
 
 
 4;7 
 
OF PANELLED TRACERY. 
 
 197 
 
 Panelled. This prepares us for the great west window of 
 Winchester, which is, in its main features, almost purely 
 a development of the Wrington example on a still larger 
 scale. Here we have nine lights, subarcuated, with the 
 three complementary entirely Panelled ; and the size of the 
 fenestellse admits the Panelled element into them also, 
 which was hardly possible in the Wrington window. They 
 are a kind of miniature of the general design, being them- 
 selves subarcuated, with the complementary light Panelled. 
 These two windows should always be classed together, and 
 if their resemblance be only a coincidence, it is a very 
 remarkable one. They exhibit what Panelled tracery is 
 capable of, namely a very considerable degree of richness 
 when judiciously combined with other forms. Their great 
 size admits of a wide application of the transom, both 
 above and below the spring of the arch, which could not 
 be in the small example at Clent, and which takes away 
 from the meagreness of the design. In the vast window 
 at Winchester the whole is one expanse of horizontal and 
 vertical lines intersecting, mere open panelling. The di- 
 vergence of the arches of the fenestellse is the only mark 
 enabling us to say that the tracery commences at one 
 point more than another. So far as the design can be 
 called tracery at all, the tracery extends over the whole 
 window ; it is a Perpendicular version of the east window 
 of Dorchester. Moreover, the subarcuation, though at the 
 expense of introducing an entirely different principle of 
 composition, takes away one main source of deformity in 
 the typical example, namely the horrible bareness of the 
 spandril over the external light on each side. Yet it may 
 be doubted whether the subarcuation itself has not intro- 
 duced, in the Wrington window at least, a dilficulty of a 
 nature somewhat similar to that which it has removed. In 
 both, the spandril above the fenestellm appears incongruous. 
 
198 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 as presenting a piercing or batement-Iight only half the 
 width of those which it immediately adjoins, as well as a 
 transom stopping suddenly. The latter perhaps could hardly 
 be avoided, but the former defect at Winchester is quite 
 supererogatory, arising from the piercing being unneces- 
 sarily divided. But at Wrington the defect is irreme- 
 diable ; the spandril was too large to be left bare or 
 merely foliated, the latter not being a very Perpendicular 
 arrangement, and the insertion, say of a circle, would 
 manifestly have been more out of place in a window of 
 this kind than even in any other variety of the style ; to 
 continue the mullion out of the fenestellse was the only 
 feasible treatment ; the mullion being supplied by its Al- 
 ternate tracery. This filling up of the fenestellae was the 
 only practicable one, as to have made this part of the 
 window Panelled would both have been extremely un- 
 sightly in itself, and have introduced into this part of the 
 window the very difficulty which the use of fenestellas at 
 all excludes from the general design. At Winchester the 
 sub-fenestella3 could hardly have been treated in any way 
 but that in which they actually are, with a vesica, according 
 to the customary arrangement of subarcuated windoAvs of 
 three lights. 
 
 It now only remains to remark that this poor form of 
 tracery gives birth by an easy process to one still poorer, 
 or rather to a complete absence of tracery. By omitting 
 the transom at the spring the design is reduced to a series 
 of arches between Perpendicular mullions, as at Longdon, 
 Staffordshire ; with a square head, this forms the common 
 domestic Avindow of the style, a purpose for Avhich it is 
 well adapted. It is needless to remark the strong simi- 
 larity between this and some forms of Arch tracery, Avith 
 Avhich indeed in some cases it becomes absolutely identical*. 
 
 i See pi. -20, fig. 03. 
 
DERIVATION OF PERPENDICULAR FROM FLOWING. 199 
 
 § 7. Of the Derivation of Perpendicular Tracery 
 FROM Flowing. 
 
 The transition from Flowing tracery to Perpendicular, 
 was one which differed in several respects from the earlier 
 one between Geometrical and Flowing. It presents the 
 remarkable phsenomenon of a change which introduced no 
 new principle, but merely confirmed and extended the 
 application of one already prevalent, causing a greater al- 
 teration in mere appearance than one which, in a philo- 
 sophical point of view, was of far greater importance. The 
 different varieties of Flowing tracery suggest the Per- 
 pendicular idea, and that easily and naturally, so easily 
 and naturally that it has been held to be a mere coin- 
 cidence. While the Flowing element was engrafted on 
 the Geometrical as something extraneous, each form of 
 Flowing tracery, in proportion as it more completely re- 
 alized its own idea, contained the Perpendicular idea as 
 an element, which only required to be developed into com- 
 plete ascendancy. Whether this was a change for the 
 better or for the worse is an entirely distinct question ; and 
 as far as regards the effect of a window considered by 
 itself is concerned, I am free to confess that it was de- 
 cidedly for the worse. But whatever opinion we may form 
 on this question, I apprehend that a diligent examination 
 can hardly fail to show that the fact is as I have stated it. 
 
 In no part of our subject is it more necessary to dis- 
 tinguish with the utmost accuracy between Intermediate 
 and Commingling specimens. We shall shortly meet with 
 abundance of the latter, but our present business is with 
 the most strictly Transitional examples, those which de- 
 cidedly illustrate the manner in which Perpendicular forms 
 were evoked out of their predecessors. 
 
200 
 
 OP CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 Bevelojwient of Reticulated Tracery into Perpendictdar. 
 
 I remarked above that the Alternate tracery retained 
 a strong impress of the preceding style, without introduc- 
 ing so much of its actual detail as the Supermullioned. 
 And I might have said that it is in one sense the typical 
 form of Perpendicular, but that the expression might be 
 liable to be misunderstood, as the Supermidlioned not 
 only introduces an actually greater number of Perpen- 
 dicular lines, but is more strictly Continuous in its actual 
 lines, and has the long narrow piercing far more predomi- 
 nant. Yet, as we have seen, an Alternate window of fom’ 
 or five lights may be purely Perpendicular, while a Super- 
 mullioned one of that size almost always requires the intro- 
 duction of some non-Perpendicular element to render it 
 satisfactory. It is more intensely Perpendicular than the 
 other, but, as in the case of many other extreme develop- 
 ments, it defeats its own end. The Alternate is the form 
 of Perpendicular which must be compared with the earlier 
 style ; it is the most natural and immediate derivation from 
 their purest and simplest forms ; consequently it is, in idea 
 at least, and probably in fact also, the earliest variety of 
 Perpendicular. The Supermullioned appears to be worked 
 out of it, not immediately derived from the Decorated 
 forms, although suggested by some of the shapes assumed 
 in their combinations. 
 
 What the pure Geometrical and the Reticulated are to 
 their respective periods, such is the Alternate Perpendi- 
 cular to its own. Their strong affinity is shown in all three 
 depending so much on the ascent by pyramidal stages, and 
 in their strong resemblance in general effect. The appear- 
 ance of the three in a small window seen at a distance, 
 when the quatrefoiled piercing only, and not the actual 
 
DERIVATION OF PERPENDICULAR FROM FLOWING, 201 
 
 lines of tlie tracery, is forced strongly on the eye, is almost 
 identical. And the Alternate is derived from the Reticu- 
 lated by a much more simple and natural process than that 
 which evolved the latter out of the simplest Geometrical. 
 In that case the nearest approach to a strictly intermediate 
 form is where the process which converts the one into the 
 other is applied to a portion of the figure only ; the Reti- 
 culated sinks into the Alternate by the most imperceptible 
 stages that can be imagined. In this transition we behold 
 the most conspicuous example of a fact which is in a greater 
 or less degree true of other varieties also, that Perpendicu- 
 lar tracery is Plowing or Flamboyant elongated or flattened. 
 The same lines, the same figures, only as it were beaten 
 out, will often convert a Plowing window into a Perpendi- 
 cnlar one, a process which cannot be applied to turn Geo- 
 metrical into Plowing. Imagine the point of junction 
 between two of the vesicee in a Reticulated window ampli- 
 fied into a line, and we have at once the Alternate Perpen- 
 dicnlar. And this mode of transition actually took place 
 in the most gradual and stealthy manner. The continually 
 recurring difficulty of the Reticulated style, the imperfect 
 piercings, suggested so many ways of treating the lines 
 external to the main vesicae, that it is not surprizing that one 
 should have been to carry them up vertically ; this accord- 
 ingly was soon done. In the south aisle of St. Giles, Nor- 
 thampton (50), is a two-light window, whose lines run up 
 thus Perpendicularly, and it requires the closest inspection 
 to distinguish it from its purely Plowing neighbours, with 
 which it is identical in effect. Yet this is a two-light Alter- 
 nate Perpendicular window, and it requires only to substitute 
 the simple arch for the ogee in the lights, and we at once 
 produce the undoubted Perpendicular windows of the oppo- 
 site aisle. This form is the one which takes the place of 
 the two-light Reticulated, both as a distinct window and as 
 
202 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 a portion of a larger composition. A curious intermediate 
 form will be found in the Refectory of St. Cross ; we have 
 already seen it in the fenestellm of the east window at 
 Hawkhurst'". In larger windows we find exactly the same 
 process at work, commencing with the crowning vesica, as 
 at Claycoaten, Northants (52), and in a more unmeaning 
 manner (as involving both lines) in the east window at 
 Thrapstone, and in a form, ugly, because uncusped, at 
 Oadby, Leicestershire. From this it proceeded to the im- 
 perfect piercings at the sides, as in one of three lights 
 at Upton Snodsbury, Worcestershire, where their lines are 
 drawn up vertically in a similar way ; apply but the same 
 process to the other two vesicae, and the tracery becomes at 
 once Alternate Perpendicular. In one at Tewkesbury (53) of 
 five lights, the upper part is treated like that at Upton, and 
 is quite Perpendicular, the lowest remaining Reticulated. 
 The very slight step between this and some distinctly 
 Alternate Perpendicular windows (as No. 37, 38) hardly 
 needs to be pointed out. 
 
 I cannot but think that this is natural and legitimate 
 development, and no sudden introduction of an altogether 
 contrary principle. Had Perpendicular tracery been no 
 development from Plowing, but a creation of the brain of 
 William of Wykeham, which sprang at once to matmlty, 
 it would not have been found thus stealthily creeping into 
 existence in these remote parish churches. The long 
 narrow piercing, the foliation at one end, Avithout which 
 there is no Perpendicular effect, is of far more importance 
 in general appearance than these minute modifications of 
 the lines of tracery, which leave the complete foliation, and 
 the general effect of the Reticrdated tracery, almost un- 
 
 PI. 31, fig. 55. I mentioned above This variety is seized on by the same in- 
 (pl. 23, fig. 9.) some two-light windows fluence, and the line carried up vertically 
 with the line continued beyond tbe apex in the spire-lights at Brigstock and Shot- 
 of the crowning vesica and turned back. tesbroke, (51). 
 
H.53. 
 
DERIVATION OF PERPENDICULAR FROM FLOWING. 203 
 
 touched. The points in whieh the vertical line makes its 
 first appearance would not have been those which would 
 have been selected by a daring innovator or his admirers. A 
 violent alteration would doubtless have first abolished the 
 characteristic quatrefoils, so much more inconsistent with 
 the vertieal effeet than the Mowing line itself ; yet they are 
 retained, as we have seen, even when the lines are com- 
 pletely Perpendicular, common as the other form was 
 throughout the period of the Plowing style. 
 
 Besides the genuine Reticulated window, these remarks 
 will also apply to that modifieation of it to whieh I have 
 traced up the English form of Flamboyant. If the two 
 principal piercings of a three-light window of this kind 
 instead of flowing into the arch with an ogee curve, leaving 
 a figure of their own size in the head, are elongated in the 
 same manner as the last variety, so as merely to leave only a 
 very small one, as at Dunchurch, or a space in the head, ano- 
 ther transitional form is produced. The principal feature is 
 the two long, and certainly ungraeeful, quatrefoiled figures 
 side by side, divided by an extent of Perpendicular line vary- 
 ing according to their comparative elongation, their outer 
 lines still remaining curved. A window in the north aisle 
 of St. Giles, Northampton, is a good example (54‘). By 
 foliating the upper end only we obtain the windows of St. 
 Nieholas’ Chapel, Peterborough, which may however be per- 
 haps considered as not representing a genuine stage in the 
 transition, having somewhat of a Flamboyant tinge. A veiy 
 slight ehange brings the window to the form at Tewkesbury 
 (54 a) which is much more Perpendicular than Reticulated, 
 and then, by straightening the outer line, a most gentle 
 operation, and introducing an appropriate form of cusjiing, 
 we arrive at the most elegant type of Alternate Perpend i- 
 
 ■ Othcr.s, witli varieties of no great shire, Misterton ami Lutterworth, Lci- 
 iniportance, occur at Milton Malsor, cestershire ; the latter being under a 
 Northants, King’s Norton, Worcester- much more depressed arch than the rest. 
 
 E e 
 
204 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 cuLtt, fis at Lechlacle, Gloncestersliire, and the late and 
 awkward, but not essentially different, specimens at Biir- 
 ring-ton, Somerset. 
 
 These examples lead directly to one definite form of Per- 
 pendicular ; and surely no transition ever was more natural 
 and gradual, more thoroughly a development of the style 
 itself. No violent change, no sudden introduction of an 
 unknown element, takes place ; the tracery merges gently 
 from Reticulated Flowing into Alternate Perpendicular, by 
 a course far smoother and more stealthy than that by 
 wdiich the former supplanted Geometrical, and in which it 
 is far less easy to fix a point at which it ceases to be one 
 and becomes the other. Most of the other varieties lead 
 also to Perpendicular, but none so directly ; the struggle 
 is harder, and the steps not so regular and easy to be 
 traced cut. 
 
 Development of Ogee Tracery into Perpendicular . 
 
 'file different forms of Ogee tracery lead most of them 
 easily to Perpendicular, not indeed in the same direct way 
 to any particidar variety, but they gradually introduce the 
 predominant vertical line, which of course is left to itself 
 for its own development. The simplest form of this kind, 
 where the tracery consists simply of ogee arches, early 
 manifested a tendency this way, as it is rather difficult to 
 draw the line at the exact apex, so that some vertical pro- 
 longation above it continually comes in, as in the tops of 
 square-headed Reticulated windows™, those at Dorchester 
 for instance. In two-light windows, which are separated 
 from Reticulated by so slight a boundary, the introduction 
 of this transitional element renders them identical. Three- 
 light windows afford some curious transitional forms. Thus 
 
 Figured in Addington’s Dorcliester, p. 5. 
 
f 
 
DERIVATION OF PERPENDICULAR FROM FLOWING. 205 
 
 a mere easy prolongation from the apex of the ogee arches 
 at once converts such windows as the "clerestory at Oundle 
 into the examples at Peterborough and Wootton Wawen 
 (55). At Hampton Poyle, Oxon, and Burton, are similar 
 examples, with rather more of Decorated flow altogether, 
 but not affecting the Perpendicular element. The "east 
 window of Sandford, near Woodstock, and one at Wark- 
 worth, Northants (56), are rather more advanced, the 
 latter especially, being the first example we have seen of a 
 mullion carried through to the head ; otherwise the two 
 are very similar, and remarkable as well as Burton, for 
 the curious kind of transom across the top of the side 
 lights. 
 
 The same process of straightening the existing lines also 
 converts the fully developed intersecting Ogee tracery into 
 Perpendicular. Thus in three-light windows the side lines 
 of the crowning vesica may be carried up straight into the 
 arch, exactly as in the analogous case of the Reticulated. 
 This is done in an example at Kings Sutton (57), and one in 
 Peterborough Cathedral, which do not deviate the least in 
 general effect from the ordinary type of their respective 
 forms, though the lines have become Perpendicular. In 
 windows of four lights the Perpendicular element comes 
 out more strongly, as in two awkward examples at Ded- 
 dington, Oxon, and Everdon, Northants (58) ; the latter 
 must be considered as an example, though but a very 
 bungling one, of Alternate Perpendicular, and yet, but for 
 this process of flattening, it differs not from a four-light 
 Ogee window. The fine windows in the Chancel at Kis- 
 lingbury, Northants (59), exhibit this transition in a more 
 advanced stage ; indeed they exhibit the introduction of 
 an element not strictly belonging to it, and are jirobalily 
 posterior in date to more complete Perpendicular windows 
 
 “ PI. 25, lig. 22. ” Figured in the Oxford Society’s Guide, p. 90. 
 
206 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACFRY. 
 
 from which they have borrowed hints. For the Alternate 
 piercings above the row of quatrefoils are filled with 
 Perpendicular patterns rising not very naturally from the 
 heads of the lights. In the splendid east window of five 
 lights the upper part of the head is finished with a fine 
 composition of Ogee tracery ; in the side windows of three 
 the vesica in the head is perfect, and the composition must 
 be considered as an example of a primary (in idea) Ogee 
 pattern being filled up with a secondary one, whose tracery 
 in this case is Perpendicular. The primary pattern is 
 identical with the five-light Ogee window at Exeter men- 
 tioned in the last Chapter p. 
 
 Origin of SiipermuUioned Tracery. 
 
 Plitherto our transitional examples have chiefly led us 
 to the Alternate variety of Perpendicular, for the super- 
 mullions at Kislingbury are not a natural development of 
 the Ogee pattern. Otherwise we have seen but little of the 
 Supermullioned variety, or that which could well give birth 
 to it, though the row of quatrefoils in the Ogee windows 
 might easily have helped to suggest the open transom. 
 Another form however may be found which will at once 
 })i'oduce that featime and Supermullioned tracery itself. 
 At the same time our position with regard to Perpendicu- 
 lar might be quite sufficiently established without seeking 
 any direct origin for the latter variety in the Flowing style. 
 Assuming Alternate tracery as the earliest form of Perpen- 
 dicular, the Supermullioned might easily be derived from 
 it by combination or intersection. But, even with this 
 view to fall back upon, if reipiired, we shall find that the 
 indications of the approach of Supermullioned tracery to 
 be found in other Flowing varieties, are hardly less clear 
 
 P See pi. 26, fig. 30. 
 
DERIVATION OF PERPENDICULAR FROM FLOWING. 207 
 
 than the steps towards Alternate afforded by those which 
 we have already examined. 
 
 The form alluded to in the last paragraph is that in 
 which we find two or more vesicm side by side ; if we 
 straighten their lines, as in the cases already given, we at 
 once produce Supermullioned tracery and the open tran- 
 som. Thus in the not very late Decorated windows on the 
 north side of the clerestory of St. Cross (60), we find this 
 done to the fine between the vesicae, but not to their 
 external ones, in a manner a good deal resembling an- 
 other class lately mentioned Did the latter follow the 
 same rule, the whole would be thoroughly Perpendicular. 
 The late Perpendicular window at Basingstoke'' exemplifies 
 this same connexion ; its batenient-lights being very little 
 more than elongated vesicm. 
 
 The Divergent form of Flowing tracery introduces the 
 Perpendicular line at every step ; in fact, as we have seen, 
 its very existence requires the presence of a predominant 
 vertical line. Reduce the vesica in the head to a foliated 
 space, as in an example at Ecton (01), and here also flatten 
 the sides, and we at once produce a two-light Supermul- 
 lioned window, as at Aldwinkle St. Peter’s, Northants, and 
 Sampford Reeds (62), or by a vertical, though not a 
 genuine Perpendicular, development the window may be 
 carried right through to the head, as at Marston St. Law- 
 rence. And when this form is much used in combination, 
 a like Perpendicular effect is produced, especially when in- 
 scribed in piercings formed by arches, in which case almost 
 any two-light filling up introduces the Supermullioned ele- 
 ment, as in the side windows of the transept of North- 
 borough, and the lower part of the west window at Etch- 
 ingham, the upper part of which is still more distinctly 
 Perpendicular. 
 
 T See fig. 5 f. 
 
 '' Figured, IlraiKloiis’ Analysis, I’erpendiculav, Sect. i. pi. -L 
 
208 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 Tliere is another class in which the Perpendicnlar line is 
 introduced in an equally stealthy and imperceptible manner. 
 There are those which seem equally capable of being re- 
 ferred to the Divergent or the Convergent type ; several 
 central lines being taken, from which piercings are thrown 
 off which meet at their points, and which therefore, accord- 
 ing to the view taken, may be said with equal truth either 
 to diverge or to converge. This process can hardly fail to 
 produce a series of strongly marked Perpendicular lines. 
 We see this in three-light windows at St. Michael’s, Cam- 
 bridge, and Deeping (63), the latter having a very Plam- 
 boyant cast, and more strongly in a square-headed example 
 in the very interesting south transept of Prisby Church, 
 Leicestershire, where the vertical lines are actually carried 
 into the head, though this is rather a forestalling of a later 
 stage than a real part of the present development. The 
 vertical tendency to which I am now referring is quite 
 complete without them. We shall find the same notion 
 carried out on a bolder scale in two larger windows fi’om 
 the same Churches, in which the main conception is iden- 
 tical, though the difference in the shape of the head renders 
 the proportions of the piercings and the general effect of 
 the windows altogether dissimilar. Both present three strong 
 predominant vertical lines, and yet there is no approxima- 
 tion to any thing otherwise distinctively Perpendicular ; 
 the verticality could not be the effect of clumsy imitation of 
 antecedent Perpendicular windows ; the Perpendicular lines 
 are introduced, incidentally as it were, by a certain, and 
 that a very natural, disposition of Plowing lines. This is 
 especially conspicuous in the Cambridge example (64) ; the 
 window at Prisby (65), though far more beautiful, is less 
 artistically constructed ; though much more Plamboyant, 
 both in its foliations and in individual figures, it does not 
 fill up the whole expanse so accurately as the other, which 
 
_Jn 
 
DERIVATION OE PERTENUICULAR FROM FLOWING. 209 
 
 has hardly any void spaces left, except those at the top in- 
 volved by the awkward form of areh employed. 
 
 In some slight degree analogous to this, are one or two 
 not very describable windows in which figures of this sort 
 are met by others of the same sort reversed, in a manner 
 somewhat resembling the Warkworth window given above®. 
 There is one from Burton or Barton (the county is not 
 added) in Rickman’s collection (66), of three lights. In one 
 of five at Oundle, they are inserted in the vesicse of a 
 strangely distorted Ogee pattern. 
 
 The Flowing form in whieh Reticulated and Divergent 
 are combined finds also its Perpendicular development in a 
 window at Stratford-on-Avon (67), where the vertical lines 
 and foliations are decidedly predominant, but which has not 
 quite lost all Flowing lines. The predominance of a cen- 
 tral vertieal line, whenever Divergent tracery is employed 
 on a large scale, is so general that to bring instances would 
 simply be to recapitulate all the examples of that kind men- 
 tioned in my last Chapter. The window at Frisby, for 
 instance, may, as far as that part is concerned, be con- 
 sidered as one of them. I may however refer to the west 
 window of York Minster as exhibiting it most conspicu- 
 ously on a gigantic scale. Of smaller proportion I may 
 mention two examples ; in one, the certainly not beautiful 
 east window of Peekleton Church, Leicestershire (68), a 
 combination of Reticulated and Divergent tracery, but with 
 the central vertical mullion wonderfully predominant. The 
 other (69) is at Tewkesbury ; the primary pattern is a 
 two-light Reticulated ; traces of Arch and Foil may be dis- 
 cerned in the fenestellae. 
 
 It is of course from Flowing traeery that Perpendicular 
 is historically derived ; at the same time the same sort of 
 connexion, besides the deeper and more general one, exists 
 
 Fig. 56. 
 
210 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 lietween Perpendicular and Flamboyant. Both, we have 
 seen, are vertical, but the latter employs curved lines ; yet 
 not exclusively ; it is not easy to design a good Flamboyant 
 window which shall not contain some Perpendicular lines, 
 at least nearly as strong as in those Decorated compositions 
 which approach nearest to Perpendicular. I would compare 
 the great window at Frisby with that in St. John’s, Jersey F 
 the latter is a Flamboyant version of the former, it fills up 
 the expanse more completely by the shape of its piercings, 
 and of course dispenses with the lateral vertical lines ; but 
 the central one is equally strong, and the tracery could 
 not, without altogether altering the design, have been so 
 disposed as to avoid it : yet the design is thoroughly 
 Flamboyant ; the Perpendicular line lurks in the latter 
 just as in the Flowing style. 
 
 § 8. Of the Combination of Perpendicular and 
 Earlier Forms. 
 
 In my last section I treated of what are most strictly 
 the Transitional examples between Flowing and Perpen- 
 dicular, those which exhibit a stage of tracery, both in idea 
 and in fact, intermediate between the two. I have now, in 
 accordance with the course which I have before followed, 
 to describe that class of windows which is not intermediate, 
 blit which simply exhibits a mixture and confusion of Perpen- 
 dicular and earlier forms. These, like other similar instances, 
 would seem in most cases to have followed the introduction 
 of the later style, if not in its complete development, at least 
 in a very advanced stage of transition. The artist must 
 have had examples of both kinds before his eyes; and he 
 commingled the two, either intentionally, from some notion, 
 right or wrong, of superior beauty to be derived from such 
 a course, or else without any formal purposes, from ideas 
 
 ' See above, fig. H. 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 211 
 
 derived from one style unconsciously recurring while lie 
 was endeavouring to design in another. In this particular 
 case, it appears most probable that both processes have 
 been actively at work at diflerent periods. For these in- 
 stances of commingling occur throughout the whole du- 
 ration of the Perpendicular style ; but they are far more 
 frequent at its commencement and at its close. The former 
 class are of course historically Transitional, and in recording 
 particular examples may often be most conveniently classed 
 as such ; they belong, as well as the genuine transitional 
 or intermediate examples, to a period when Perpendicular 
 tracery was coming in, but when its ascendancy was not 
 yet fully confirmed ; they are later in date than the earliest 
 Perpendicular windows, but earlier than the complete and 
 final establishment of the Perpendicular style. These no 
 doubt really are, in very many cases at least, the work of 
 artists wishing to design in Perpendicular, but unable, from 
 the power of habit, to free their compositions from ideas 
 derived from the forms with which they were more familiar. 
 This, as we have seen, is but one side of every Transition ; 
 but the other phsenomenon, the increased recurrence to ear- 
 lier details at the close of the Perpendicular style, is one of 
 extreme interest and difficulty. We shall see hereafter 
 that it sometimes, not unfreqiiently indeed in one class of 
 windows, proceeded to the extent of producing designs 
 from which the Perpendicular line is entirely absent. This 
 must be the result of a formal intention ; at least the 
 presence of earlier forms must ; for it is quite conceivable 
 that the presence of the Perpendicular portions may in this 
 case be attributable to the very same cause which in the 
 other class accounted for the Decorated ones ; the artist 
 may have intended to produce a Decorated window, and, 
 from force of habit, have intermingled some Perpendicu- 
 lar portions. This may be the real explanation of some 
 
 E f 
 
212 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS THACERY. 
 
 cases, but in most instances the Perpendicular element is 
 far too strong to have only this accidental origin. It is 
 oidy carrying out to a great extent, at the close of the 
 style, a tendency which pervaded it throughout. We have 
 seen that in a great majority of Perpendicular windows, in 
 nearly all in fact of the Supermnllioned variety, a non-Per- 
 pendicular element is found ; and this has greater scope 
 given to it by the fantastic eclecticism which prevailed in 
 the very last days of Perpendicular, when Gothic archi- 
 tecture was pretty nearly worn out. There is just the 
 same tendency in the foreign Planiboyant, which, among 
 other indescribable vagaries, not uncommonly returns to 
 Geometrical forms, or corruptions of them. In both, 
 though it may incidentally introduce more beautiful forms, 
 — though very rarely, for this revived Decorated is, for the 
 most part, extremely poor as Decorated, — it betokens a 
 declining state of art, when its true spirit is evaporating, 
 and an endeavour is made to supply its place by unmean- 
 ing and inconsistent, though often elaborate, prettinesses. 
 Such is Henry VII. ’s Chapel, and in the point of tracery — 
 though in no other — we must add that of King’s College, 
 compared with the vigorous Perpendicular of Winchester 
 and Canterbuiy, Wrington and Banwell. 
 
 In producing examples of these classes of windows, I 
 shall not attempt to distinguish with chronological accuracy 
 between those which may be considered historically Transi- 
 tional, and those which are examples of the Beturn to Deco- 
 rated. In my view they are all instances of combination 
 of Decorated and Perpendicular tracery, from a tendency to 
 which the latter style was never at any moment entirely 
 free, but which prevailed far more extensively in its earliest 
 and its latest days. A division more in conformity with 
 my usual principles will be whether the Decorated element 
 is one of Geometrical, Plowing, or Arch Tracery. The two 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DECOKATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 213 
 
 foiTiier I shall class together, as the Geometrical element, 
 though far from unusual, is not often of any great import- 
 ance, and is more probably to be referred to that occasional 
 introduction of Geometrical figures which we have seen 
 continued throughout the Flowing period, than to any 
 direct recurrence to the Geometrical style. 
 
 In making both these divisions there is great difficulty 
 as to drawing the line. I have not thought it necessary 
 to rank as an example of Combination every Perpendicular 
 window which has a Flowing figure in the head of a group 
 of lights, or even a Geometrical one thrust in to fill up a 
 spandril, as in the west window of St. Mary’s, Oxford, and 
 the eastern one of St. John’s, Glastonbury. Still less, 
 though the practice of subarcuation is undoubtedly de- 
 rived from Arch tracery, have I considered every subarcu- 
 ated Perpendicular window as a direct commingling of 
 Perpendicular with that style. It is only when the Deco- 
 rated element has a marked prominence, or at least strongly 
 influences the general effect, that I have thought it necessary 
 to remove the example to the present section. 
 
 Another difficulty occurs, but not very commonly, as to 
 distinguishing between our present class and the strictly 
 Transitional, or Intermediate, forms. For the most part, the 
 two kinds are very easily distinguished, but puzzling ex- 
 amples now and then occur. Thus in the very elegant 
 windows in the “presbytery at York, and the ’‘superb east 
 window of Trinity Church, Hull, it is by no means easy to 
 decide what is the nature of the Perpendicular element, 
 which is strongly marked in both, and in the York ex- 
 amples is decidedly predominant, even to the extent of 
 transoms in the tracery. It seems too prevalent to be the 
 mere result of development ; the windows are clearly far 
 more advanced towards Perpendicular than those mentioned 
 
 “ Rickman, p, 190. * Do., p. 189. 
 
 I 
 
214 
 
 or CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 above from Frisby and Cambridge ; yet the intermingling 
 is effected with so much skill, as quite to produce the effect 
 of real Intermediate windows. Perhaps the cause is to be 
 found in the capacities of the designer ; a first-rate artist 
 was able to produce a satisfactory and even strikingly beau- 
 tiful result out of a process which, in inferior hands, com- 
 monly issued in mere deformity. 
 
 For such undoubtedly is the usual character of this com- 
 bination of Decorated and Perpendicular. We have seen 
 that the combination of any two forms of tracery is always 
 a difficult and delicate process. It requires in any case 
 great skill to produce a satisfactory result, and many forms 
 eschew it altogether. And in particular is it difficult to 
 condjine well together the free curve of the Flowing and 
 the rigidity of the Perpendicular. Nor does the latter, 
 with all its strong analogy to the Geometrical, practically 
 agree better with that style. When the circle and the 
 right line are brought into juxta-position, the latter cannot 
 well help flying off at a tangent. With Arch tracery the 
 combination does better; between that style and Perpen- 
 dicular there is great affinity, and the principles of their 
 construction harmonize to a considerable extent. Windows 
 formed by a combination of this kind are often not un- 
 pleasing, though even these can hardly be said ever to ap- 
 ])roach the highest excellence. As a general rule, while 
 the Decorated window naturally and gradually approaching 
 to Perpendicular is one of the most elegant types in ex- 
 istence, no form of tracery is less deserving of our admi- 
 ration than that which exhibits the forced and artificial 
 commino-lina: of the two. 
 
 The combinations in these windows take place in so 
 many different ways that it is by no means easy to classify 
 them. Especially but few examples occur, as from the 
 nature of the case they hardly can occur, of by far the best 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 215 
 
 method of effecting combination, where a primary pattern 
 of one kind is filled up with a secondary one of another. 
 Sometimes however we have an approach to it ; and we 
 can at all events usually distinguish between general 
 mixed designs, which occasionally have a certain degree of 
 merit, or at least of richness, and those in which a Geo- 
 metrical or Flowing figure is thrust unnaturally into the 
 midst of an otherwise Perpendicular design, or where one 
 or two awkward vertical lines destroy the effect of an 
 otherwise Decorated composition. 
 
 Combination of Perpendicular with Geometrical and 
 Floioing Tracery. 
 
 We will first begin with combinations of Perpendicular 
 with Geometrical or Flowing tracery, among which I shall 
 reckon also those which are Subarcuated, or in other ways 
 affected by the Arch principle, in any degree which would 
 not, were the Geometrical or Flowing element absent, be 
 sufficient to remove them from the class of pure Perpen- 
 dicular windows. To find a Flowing outline filled in with 
 a pure Perpendicular pattern is by no means easy. An 
 approach to it may be found in a very strange window at 
 Tunstead’', Norfolk, of three lights, where the primary lines 
 form the common Reticulated design, of which the upper 
 vesica is filled in with a Flowing pattern, while the two 
 lower ones have each two vertical lines drawn through 
 them, so as to form a Perpendicular piercing trefoiled at 
 each end, with the spandrils on each side trefoiled This 
 example is undoubtedly of Transitional date, but it is not of 
 Transitional or Intermediate character ; the vertical lines 
 are unnaturally thrust in and in no way spring out of the 
 general design. We might also reckon here the windows 
 
 y Figured, Brandon, Introduction, n. .31. 
 
216 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 at Kislingl)iny% but tliese can only just be said to have a 
 primary pattern, and, such as there is, it is decidedly In- 
 termediate. To Perpendicular outlines filled in with Deco- 
 rated patterns we can make a nearer approach, though even 
 here our search will not be very successful. The simplest 
 form in which this notion is exhibited is in one or two 
 examples where a foliated circle is thrust in between the 
 vertical lines in the head of a two-light Alternate window, 
 as at Armitage, Staffordshire, St. Mary’s, Haverfordwest, and 
 Curdworth, Warwickshire (70), in a manner just analogous 
 to the form transitional between Geometrical and Reti- 
 culated. The best example I can give is one at St. George 
 Colegate, Norwich (71), where we have the lines of a three- 
 light subarcuated Perpendicular design filled in with tra- 
 cery almost wholly Decorated ; not only the fenestellse, 
 where a dash of that style is usually found, but even the 
 complement is filled with a composition, of wdiich the upper 
 stage is indeed Alternate Perpendicular, but the lower, and 
 more prominent, has Convergent tracery. The spandrils 
 are occupied by quatrefoiled circles, and we may remark 
 the transoms fringed with the Tudor flower. Of this class, 
 though of very different character, are the ^clerestory win- 
 dows in the naves of Winchester and Canterbury Cathe- 
 drals, where the spaces between the vertical lines of a three- 
 light Perpendicular window are occupied with the same 
 composition, — a vesica on an arch, — to which we are accus- 
 tomed in fenestellae. The Winchester examples are really 
 Subarcuated and consequently only differ from the usual 
 arrangement in the treatment of the central light ; it is 
 hard to say whether those at Canterbury are Subarcuated 
 or not ; butat all events the subarcuation is not marked in 
 mouldings, and is hardly to be distinguished from the 
 vesica ; they are altogether very inferior 
 
 '• See above, fig. 59. man, p. 203. 
 
 ^ Willis' Canterbury, p. 121. Rick- It might be almost an abuse of 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DFCORATED AND PERPKNDICULAR. 217 
 
 Some of the windows in which one part is Decorated, 
 and another Perpendicular, which I above called mixed 
 designs, are somewhat more successful, contrary to the 
 general rule in cases of combination. It is clear that the 
 btist opportunity for this is given in a Subarciiated window, 
 without a complementary light, as one of four lights. In 
 this case Perpendicular tracery in the fenestellae, and a 
 Flowing wheel pattern in the head may, if skilfully treated, 
 produce a not un pleasing effect. The window at Misterton, 
 Leicestershire (72), is by no means bad ; its effect is much 
 deteriorated in two nearly identical examples at Aldwinkle 
 All Saints, Northamptonshire, and St. Mary’s, Cambridge, 
 by the omission of the upper member of the wheel, and 
 the more meagre character of the tracery in the fenestellae. 
 There are several of somewhat the same idea in the cloisters 
 at Hereford, some of which (72 a) are spoiled by the ivheel 
 figures being cut off by Perpendicular lines. The example 
 I have given has other Decorated elements, but in the rest 
 the fenestellae are pure Perpendicular. One at OdelP, 
 Beds, has the same fenestellae as Misterton, and in the 
 complement a Divergent composition, thus introducing the 
 strong central vertical line so often mentioned, and while 
 possessing more Perpendicular lines than the other, ap- 
 proaching nearer to the graceful character of an Interme- 
 diate window. This is the best example I know of the 
 class of windows treated of in the present section. At 
 St. Martin’s, Sarum (73), the complement is occupied by 
 a septfoiled circle, the effect of which is very inferior to 
 any of the above, as the circle is both less in unison with 
 the other lines and in a position which, even in a Geo- 
 metrical window, it never occupies with any advantage. 
 
 terms to add to this class the old east sistingofa Reticulated design with Per- 
 
 wiiidow of St. Aldate’s in Oxford, which ))endicular lines driven through it. 
 
 may be more readily described as con- ' Figured, Brandon, Appendix, 57. 
 
218 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 On the same plan, but much better, as the circle is far 
 more prominent, is the great window of the Mayor’s Chapel, 
 Bristol, of eight lights, with fenestellm of three. The 
 two complementary are the worst part of the design, as 
 their Supemmllioned tracery does not harmonize with the 
 circle above, which is a wheel of twelve spokes. The actual 
 tracery is modern, but, I believe, a literal reproduction of 
 the old. 
 
 One might easily conceive the idea of the window at 
 Odell being carried out in one of five lights, the fenestellae 
 remaining the same, and the complement resembling those 
 at Granchester'^ or Wymmington ; but I am not prepared 
 with any example of this kind. Among the numerous 
 early Perpendicular windows at Maidstone (74) there is 
 one of five lights, following the common arrangement of 
 Perpendicular windows of that number, and with the tra- 
 cery compounded of Supermullioned and Alternate, both 
 in the fenestellse and the complementary light, but the 
 spandrils are filled with compositions of wheel tracery. 
 
 Recurring to the same idea as the Odell window, but on 
 a far larger scale, and of totally different proportions, are 
 some of the strange broad windows in the lateral chapels 
 of King’s College, which afford a valuable study of the return 
 to Decorated forms. They are all of eight lights, subar- 
 cuated from a central mull ion, but with the subarcuations 
 so heavy as almost to convert the design into two windows. 
 In those with which we are at present concerned, both fenes- 
 tellae are Perpendicular, while the complement must, I sup- 
 pose, be called Plowing ; but we shall presently have to 
 recur to this curious series. 
 
 Hitherto our fenestellae have been Perpendicular and our 
 complements Decorated. In the annexed window from 
 Carlby, Lincolnshire (75), we find this reversed. But 
 
 See above, p. 139. 
 
COMBINATIONS OT DKCORATKD AND PKETENDICULAR. 219 
 
 here the Decorated element is not stronger than is usual 
 in windows of its own type ; it is however of a different and 
 unusual nature, and has a far more marked influence on the 
 design. It is in fact the common Arch and Foil arrangement, 
 and we may also remark the foil arches® in the batenient- 
 lights. But of real Flowing fenestellae and a complement, 
 chiefly, though not entirely. Perpendicular, we have a gigan- 
 tic instance in a seven-light window in the Lady Chapel 
 of Ely. The fenestellae are three-light Subarcuated win- 
 dows of no great excellence ; in the complement the Per- 
 pendicular line has a decided predominance, though none 
 of the mullions actually go through into the head. 
 
 In a very odd window in a church at Southampton, 
 whose dedication I do not remember, and my drawing 
 of which I have unfortunately lost, we have an arrange- 
 ment somewhat analogous to that of one of the singuhir 
 windows at Oundle ^ already described ; as, like that, the 
 lower part would form a complete window without refer- 
 ence to the upper. It here forms a two-light Arch de- 
 sign under a very low head, with a circle thrust in ; 
 above which is Supermullioned tracery. 
 
 Of windows in which Decorated and Perpendicular 
 tracery is simply confused, portions of each being thrust in 
 together without meaning, so that we can hardly say that 
 any component part belongs to either, I shall not multiply 
 examples. They are numerous enough, but each must be 
 described for itself ; they defy classification, teach no lesson 
 or principle, and are equally worthless in an sesthetical 
 point of view, being among the ugliest that exist. Such 
 are the , unsightly designs at Burrington, Thornbury (70), 
 Normanton (77), and St. Giles, Norwich (78), which last 
 passes all human power of description, though its deformity 
 is much less than in some other instances. 
 
 ' See above, p. 177. ' See above, pi. 15, fig. 71. 
 
 g 
 
2.20 
 
 or CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 Ill some cases we sliall find the Flowing element in an 
 intermediate state, more than a figure or two unnaturally 
 thrust in, and yet not filling any actual component part of 
 the window. Such is the decidedly handsome east window 
 of Stratford-on-Avon (79), of seven lights subarcuated. 
 Here the Decorated element, as far as it goes, is of the 
 nature of a Flowing pattern filling up a Perpendicular 
 skeleton, but it does not extend through the whole de- 
 sign, occupying only the lowest range of batement-lights. 
 The fenestellae being themselves subarcuated, the sub- 
 fenestellae are occupied by a Convergent pattern, the Con- 
 vergent members of which are extended along the whole 
 range. Two small vesicae in the upper spandril need hardly 
 be mentioned, being in fact the batement-lights abbreviated. 
 
 1 have before alluded to the fact that this Renaissance, 
 as we may call it, of earlier tracery, had its final develop- 
 ment in windows of late Perpendicular date which do not 
 contain a single Perpendicular line. The steps by which 
 this is brought about are curious. In nearly all the win- 
 dows we have hitherto mentioned, the Perpendicular prin- 
 ciple, though allowed only a divided empire, is still deci- 
 dedly predominant ; they are Perpendicular windows with a 
 Geometrical or Flowing infusion. We shall now find some 
 from which the Perpendicular line is not excluded, but, as 
 if in earnest of its final extinction, is made decidedly subor- 
 dinate, and is nowhere allowed to go through to the head. 
 Such are the east windows of Uffington, Lincolnshire (80), 
 and Castor, Northamptonshire (81), which quite agree in 
 their general design, though with several points of diver- 
 sity. They are of five lights subarcuated, with one com- 
 plementaiy light ; the fenestellas are, at Uffington, Con- 
 vergent, at Castor, Arch and Foil; the complements 
 have the mullions continued as usual for some way, but 
 not allowed to run into the head, and terminating, as is so 
 
h: •• 
 
 i 
 
COMBINATIONS OT DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 221 
 
 common in Perpendicular grouping, in the tracery of a two- 
 light Retieulated window. These three vertical lines (at 
 Uffington transomed) are the only Perpendieular element 
 retained. Both windows have a transom across the lights ; 
 that at Castor has trefoil arehes below it. 
 
 The east window at Barwell, Cambridgeshire (82), of the 
 same number and arrangement of lights, exhibits this transi- 
 tion in an analogous stage, perhaps on the whole a little more 
 advaneed, though not altogether by the same steps. In 
 this case, the Perpendicular line reigns supreme in the lower 
 part of the design, but is utterly excluded from its higher and 
 more important portion. That is, the tracery commences 
 below the spring of the arch, (which, as at Castor, is four- 
 centred,) with a row of common Supermullioned batement- 
 lights, but at the impost the whole tracery becomes Decora- 
 ted ; the complement is Flowing, not without a Flamboyant 
 tinge, the fenestellse have a wheel composition in a circle. 
 This window is certainly more advanced towards the entire 
 abnegation of Perpendicular than the other two ; it contains 
 many more vertical lines, but they are by no means of the 
 same importance in stamping the character of the design 
 as the few in the others. Those few cannot be removed or 
 concealed from view by any process, real or imaginary. 
 But, as was said above®, the effect of Supermullioned bate- 
 ment-lights commencing below the impost is to double the 
 number of lights ; we can consider the upper ranges of 
 tracery without any reference to the lights below, and 
 regard it as a Decorated composition of ten lights ; we 
 could imitate it as such in practice, or in the engraving con- 
 ceal the lower part. But the few Perpendicular lines in 
 the other two are removable in no such way ; they cannot 
 fail to remain, and powerfully to affect the character of the 
 design. 
 
 . P. 19.5, 18G. 
 
OF CONTINUOUS TRACKRY. 
 
 But both these stages are straight-forward and natural 
 developments, which cannot be said of the extraordinary 
 process by which the change is effected in King’s College 
 Chapel, — I allude of coiu’se entirely to the lower range of 
 windows, the ipiper range being pure and excellent Per- 
 pendicular. I have already mentioned one example in 
 which the Decorated element, further than what is usual in 
 the sub-fenestellee, is confined to the complement. Another 
 type has in the one fenestella the same Perpendicular 
 pattern as in that just mentioned, in the other a Decorated 
 one, an extraordinary violation of one of the ‘'first laws of 
 tracery, and only to be explained by supposing that the 
 designer regarded them as distinct windows. The pattern 
 in this case retains three vertical lines, but two are by no 
 means strongly marked, and the third, as forming two of 
 the limbs of a cross, as in some examples' already men- 
 tioned, can hardly be considered as an offspring of the Per- 
 pendicular principle. In a third case all true Perpendicular 
 character has departed, and this fast mentioned cruciform 
 pattern occupies both fenestellae. 
 
 By these steps we have arrived at the extraordinary pliae- 
 nomenon before alluded to, of windows of Perpendicular 
 date, which do not contain any Perpendicular lines. In 
 some less important kinds of windows, to be mentioned in 
 another chapter, we shall find this complete return to the 
 Flowing, and even the Geometrical, line by no means un- 
 common, and even in regular and important windows we 
 shall soon see that a similar appearance of Arch tracery is 
 frequent enough. But I am not prepared with any long 
 catalogue of Geometrical and Flowing -^findows of Perpen- 
 
 •“ It was observed above (p. 163) that 
 in Flamboyant tracery the two sides 
 were not always identical, but this is 
 simply because of the peculiar form of 
 some of the piercings common to both. 
 
 The lines on both sides still correspond 
 throughout, and present no analogy to 
 the present example. 
 
 > See above, p. 32, fig. 63. 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 223 
 
 clicular date ; I might perhaps add a few rude and un- 
 certain examples, but I will confine myself to one of a very 
 interesting and remarkable nature. The church of Luff- 
 wick, Northamptonshire, well known on account of its 
 beautiful octagonal lantern, has a series of late Perpen- 
 dicular windows, several of which have more or less Deco- 
 rated character intermixed, though generally by a suffi- 
 ciently rude and clumsy process. One window however 
 (83) presents a complete Decorated design without any 
 Perpendicular admixture whatever, though it cannot claim 
 any high rank as a Decorated window. It is of four lights 
 subarcuated, under a depressed arch, the complement merely 
 quatrefoiled, and the fenestellse containing a wheel pattern 
 of four members. Now a merely architectural observer, 
 like myself, would have left the church simply remarking 
 the unaccountable caprice and eclecticism by which these 
 forms were repeated so long after their ordinary date. 
 But happily one of the subsidiary arts steps in to furnish 
 us with the key. The church contains a good deal of 
 stained glass, and I am informed by those conversant with 
 the dates and characters of different styles of glass-painting, 
 that some of this glass is Decorated and some Perpendi- 
 cular ; and not only this, but that throughout the church, 
 the unmixed Perpendicular windows contain Perpendicular 
 glass, while wherever Decorated tracery is returned to, it is 
 where Decorated glass is employed. The case then is quite 
 clear ; the former church of Luffwick contained, or the 
 founder of the present church had become in ^some other 
 way possessed of, a quantity of Decorated glass, which it 
 was determined to introduce in the new building, but 
 which was not sufficient in quantity to fill all the new 
 windows. But these pieces of glass were of a form which 
 
 j There were other ways of acquiring nufacture, if we believe the legend of the 
 stained glass besides purchase and ma- foundation of Fairford church. 
 
221. 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 did not allow them to be inserted in piercings of the or- 
 dinary form of the day ; consequently, wherever they were 
 introduced, the lines of tracery were so modified as to 
 allow of their convenient reception, and were perhaps, to 
 some extent, copied from the windows which had formerly 
 contained them. But where the architect was under no such 
 necessity, where his windows were to be filled Avith new 
 glass, he designed them in the ordinary style of his own 
 day. It is very possible that a careful investigation might 
 discover similar circumstances to account for other instances ; 
 but they cannot be the universal solvent, they cannot alone 
 account for a tendency to return to earlier forms, as clearly 
 marked, though of course of much more limited application, 
 as any other change in architectural taste. 
 
 Combinations of Perpendicular and Arch Tracery. 
 
 These are on the whole a more important class. They 
 are certainly more usual, and they are more natural and 
 satisfactory ; though hardly capable of attaining first-rate 
 excellence, they seldom, unless very unskilfully contrived, 
 possess the same character of utter botches, Avhich so com- 
 monly belongs to the class AAdiich we have just been con- 
 sidering. And they are not so generally confined to the 
 two ends of the style, to its incipient and its declining days, 
 but, though certainly far more common in the latter, will 
 be found, in some of their forms at least, to be not unusual 
 during the whole period of Perpendicular. 
 
 In fact it is not always easy to determine which examples 
 should be assigned to the present class, and which to the 
 pure Perpendicular. Subarcuation is of course an infringe- 
 ment on the pure Perpendicular principle, so is the grouping 
 of lights with spaces or figures in the head. Yet we have 
 seen how utterly fruitless it would be to relegate all the 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 225 
 
 examples of these two classes into the list of Combinations. 
 Yet in large windows a great number of lines often occur 
 where the Arch principle is introduced, as in a subarcuated 
 window of seven lights, with its three-light fenestellse 
 again subarcuated, or a four-light window in St. Helen’s, 
 Abingdon, with its fenestellae subarcuated, so as to produce 
 an imperfect intersection. Here is a very extensive use of the 
 arched line, but I think it hardly amounts to any further 
 direct influence of Arch tracery than is implied in every kind 
 or degree of Subarcuation. The rule I have endeavoured 
 to lay down is to introduce here only such examples as 
 either introduce the Arch principle in some other form than 
 that of ordinary Subarcuation or grouping, or which carry 
 those modes of formation to such an extent as to introduce 
 actually intersecting lines, or such as strongly suggest the 
 idea of intersection. They may be divided into two classes ; 
 those where the Arched element appears in the form of 
 Subarcuation, and those where it is excessive grouping. 
 
 a. Excessive Siiharcuation. 
 
 The most common case where Subarcuation produces in- 
 tersecting lines, is where the fenestellie consist of a greater 
 number of lights than half the number of the whole win- 
 dow ; so that instead of there being any complementary 
 lights, one or more are common to both fenestellse, the 
 fenestellm themselves being of course Subarcuated. Thus 
 in a five-light window with fenestellae of three lights, as 
 the west window at Loughborough (84), or in a seven- 
 light with fenestellae of four, as the east window at 
 Sleaford, we have a sub-fenestella of one light common 
 to both. The effect is certainly not good ; the single pair 
 of intersecting lines disturb the composition without in- 
 troducing their own idea; and the entirely distinct cha- 
 
220 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 racter of tlie single light in the centre of the window is 
 now brought out more strongly than when it remained in 
 obscurity at the side ; in fact the whole composition is 
 discordant and inharmonious ; and the introduction of tran- 
 soms, unless very skilfully managed, renders the matter 
 much worse, as not being carried across the whole window. 
 The east window of Mayfield, Sussex (85), though not very 
 satisfactory, at least attempts to avoid some of these diffi- 
 culties ; it is clear that the inharmonious character of the 
 usual form of the central sub-fenestella was felt by the 
 designer, though his substitute is not very successful. 
 
 This leads us to two of our most elaborate Perpendicular 
 windows. The great seven-light insertion in the west front 
 of Southwell Minster (86), may be best described as con- 
 sisting of two fenestellse of five lights, consequently as hav- 
 ing three lights common to both. But such an arrange- 
 ment almost necessarily requires the fenestellae themselves 
 to be subarcuated in the same way, with fenestellae of three 
 lights and one common. Plence it follows that the window 
 may be also considered as consisting of three designs of 
 three lights, subarcuated, the central one having its sub- 
 fenestellae common respectively with those on each side of 
 it. The whole is rich, but confusing, and the complication 
 is increased by the numerous points where tracery springs 
 and transoms intersect. 
 
 In the great nine-light east window of King’s College 
 Chapel the general effect indeed is altogether different from 
 the Southwell example, its proportions being completely 
 of another character. And, though perhaps superior in 
 this respect, it is less artistically composed, and exhibits a 
 certain degree of meagreness in the design. It may be 
 best described as consisting of three fenestellae of three 
 lights, not intersecting, or in any way interfering with one 
 another, except that the lines forming the sub-fenestellae of 
 
ri. 59 
 
 86 
 
09 Id 
 
COMBINATIONS OP DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 227 
 
 each are produced so as to meet, and form arches whose 
 apices are in a line with those of the fenestellse. The result 
 is that, as none of these arches, except the actual lines 
 of Subarcuation, are continued to the architrave, the Per- 
 pendicular lines above them appear somewhat unconnected 
 with the part below. 
 
 In others again, though we may truly call it subarcua- 
 tion, we find a more direct combination of complete Perpen- 
 dicular and Arch designs, both intersecting and otherwise. 
 Thus at Rothley, Leicestershire (87), is a window which 
 seems at first sight to have much in common with the 
 clerestory windows at Winchester and Canterbury, but 
 which is not identical with either of them. It has the 
 common arrangement of a three-light Arch window without 
 intersection, (each light being filled up fenestella-wise,) with 
 Perpendicular lines driven through. In this case the latter 
 are of no great consequence ; but where the Arch lines are 
 intersecting, the result is very singular, the effect being 
 so equally divided between the two component elements. 
 This is well shown in the indescribable, but not, on the 
 whole, unpleasing, west window of Luffwick (88), of three 
 lights ; the same arrangement may also be seen on a larger 
 scale in a five-light window (89) at Thaxted, Essex, but 
 here the intersecting design is interrupted by a central light 
 wholly Perpendicular. The last window from Luffwick 
 gave us a complete intersection filled up to a certain ex- 
 tent with Perpendicular lines, though not introducing any 
 expanse of Perpendicular tracery. An intersecting design 
 more completely filled up with tracery of that style is to 
 be found in the porch of Hereford Cathedral (90), of five 
 lights, or more practically of six, the central light being 
 double the width of the others, and treated in the tracery 
 as two. 
 
 In nearly all these windows we see a great use of that 
 
 H h 
 
228 
 
 OF CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 treatment of single lights, which, though usual throughout 
 the Perpendicular style, is undoubtedly the retention of a 
 Decorated form. If it were only for this cause — though 
 we must remember that this kind of combination is hardly 
 so much as more common at the close of the style, but 
 is usual throughout its whole duration, and many of the 
 examples now to be mentioned are actually Transitional in 
 point of date — it would not be wonderful for more extensive 
 traces of Plowing influence to be often found in windows 
 of this class. The temptation was very great to fill up 
 these lights with tracery of a more elegant kind and more 
 distinctively Flowing type. This is done in a fine five-light 
 window at Perrington St. Clements, Norfolk, where some 
 other smaller Plowing vestiges may also be discerned. In 
 another at Isleham, Cambridgeshire (91), this is not done, 
 the sub-fenestellse being treated in the common way; the 
 Decorated influence appears in another part, quite as natu- 
 rally. There seems no absolute necessity to carry up the 
 Perpendicular lines, whose design is completed in the 
 fenestellse, into the irregular quadrangular figures which 
 form the complements above them. The space, from its 
 size and proportion, is well adapted to a composition of 
 wheel tracery, which in this case we actually find. But 
 neither of these arrangements, though introducing forms 
 undoubtedly elegant in themselves, can be considered 
 improvements in estimating the general merit of the win- 
 dows ; they do but add to the inharmonious effect of 
 the design, whicli in any case is sufficiently unconnected. 
 
 I may perhaps best place here two rather anomalous win- 
 dows, which have on the whole more affinity to this class 
 than to any other. The north windows at Thurlaston, 
 Leicestershire (92), have an intersecting skeleton, with the 
 heads of the lights filled in with a sort of Foil version 
 of those reversed Perpendicular figures of which we have 
 
5v 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
PI. Gl. 
 
COMBINATIONS OF DECORATED AND PERPENDICULAR. 229 
 
 seen one or two specimens'^. The other is at Sheldwich, 
 Kent (93), and seems quite like a Perpendicular ver- 
 sion of the anomalous sort of Arch tracery which we have 
 found at Ely Chapel and elsewhere '. 
 
 b. Excessive Grouping. 
 
 This class is not a very important one, though it con- 
 tains some fine windows. It is not uncommon to find the 
 arches of the groups continued into the architrave, so as 
 to fill the head with a series of piercings exactly resem- 
 bling those of an Intersecting Arch window, while the 
 batement-lights below remain purely Perpendicular. It is 
 clear that, if these arches were continued downward, they 
 would produce a complete intersection over the whole win- 
 dow. Some of the examples with depressed arches are 
 very poor, as a four-light one in St. Mary’s, Haverford- 
 west (94), where the piercings are left unfoliated; but 
 with pointed heads and foliated piercings, the effect is very 
 good. Most of the examples I know occur in the west of 
 England and in South Wales. There are good examples 
 of four lights at Newport and Christ Church, Monmouth- 
 shire, at St. Mary’s, Haverfordwest, and St. Werburgh’s, 
 Bristol; five at Cardiff (95), Christ Church, and Carew, 
 Pembrokeshire ; the latter being inferior to the others on 
 account of the obtuseness of the arch, which has the bad 
 effect of flattening the quatrefoils in the head. 
 
 It is clear that from either of these classes the transition 
 is but very slight to mere Intersecting tracery, without any 
 Perpendicular lines at all. The use of this form during the 
 Perpendicular period I have already mentioned ; the simple- 
 pointed examples are only to be distinguished from the 
 
 ■* See above, fig. 66. 
 
 P. 61. 
 
 P. 45. 
 
230 
 
 OP CONTINUOUS TRACERY. 
 
 Early ones by details not entering into the definition of 
 tracery; but those under depressed arches of course re- 
 ceive a character of their own. 
 
 I might enumerate numerous other examples in which 
 Perpendicular tracery is more or less mixed or confused 
 with Arch forms. But the examples are mostly ugly and 
 unimportant, and I will therefore conclude with one more 
 specimen from the great stock of singularities at Rush- 
 den (96). 
 
CHAPTER IV. 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 In this concluding chapter I intend to treat of several 
 classes of windows which could hardly have been introduced 
 with propriety into the general history of tracery ; chiefly 
 those whose form compelled some variation from the ordi- 
 nary types of their respective periods. In most of these 
 cases it will be found that they have their own history, their 
 own origin and development, along-side of the common 
 forms, distinct from them, though continually influencing 
 and influenced by them. 
 
 It follows from the origin of the traceried window of 
 several lights, as drawn out in the first chapter of the pre- 
 sent essay, that its typical form is a pointed arch set on a 
 rectangle, the tracery being confined to the arched head, as 
 representing the arches of the original distinct lights and 
 the figure over them. The tracery, as has been often said, 
 should never extend below the impost. The only legiti- 
 mate exception is where a depressed arch is used, so that 
 there is not sufficient room for the tracery in the actual 
 window-head. But even in these cases, the imposts of the 
 arch and of the tracery are usually made to coincide at least 
 in the decorative construction ; the label, which marks the 
 
232 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 extent of the arch, is brought down as low as the point 
 where the tracery commences. The true way of regard- 
 ing such cases is to look upon the window-head as an 
 instance of what is called a stilted arch, that is, one in 
 which the mechanical and the decorative imposts do 
 not coincide. 
 
 But there are other forms of windows which do not owe 
 their origin to the approximation of two lancet lights and 
 the figure above them, and which are consequently not 
 subject to the laws which the requirements of that origin 
 impose. There are forms which had an origin and de- 
 velopment of their own, and to which it is as necessary 
 that the tracery should fill up the whole space, as in the 
 arched window that it should be confined to a portion of 
 them®. These are circular, triangular, and square windows. 
 The square-headed window also, as distinguished from 
 the square, appears to have a development of its own, 
 analogous and contemporary with that of the pointed win- 
 dow, yet still distinct from it. Finally, there are windows 
 in certain positions, as towers and spires, which will require 
 a short notice ; since, though subject to the general laws of 
 the pointed window, their shape and position often involves 
 peculiarities of their own. 
 
 § 1. Oe Circulae Windows. 
 
 The distinct figure, circle, triangle, multifoil, &c., was 
 one of the component elements of the pointed window. 
 But, existing thus altogether independent of it, and being 
 in fact the earlier invention, it Avas only natural that it 
 
 " I?y analogous reasoning it follows if there be any label, it should be carried 
 
 that as in a pointed window the label is round the whole opening. Too corn- 
 
 carried only round the arch, so in these, monly, however, such is not the case. 
 
OF CIRCULAR WINDOWS. 2.‘33 
 
 should still remain in use, and have distinct developments 
 of its own, while it was equally natural that those develop- 
 ments should be greatly affected by the other forms grow- 
 ing up along-side of them. As the circle was one of the 
 elements of the pointed window, and supplied it with 
 designs for its elaborate centre-pieces, in like manner the 
 forms of tracery in circular windows are often greatly af- 
 fected by the contemporary varieties employed in pointed 
 windows. 
 
 The circular window on a large scale has never attained 
 in England that frequency and importance which belongs 
 to the vast roses of many foreign, chiefly French, Cathe- 
 drals ; still we have a few fine examples of considerable size, 
 and a series of smaller ones fully sufficient to enable us to 
 trace out historically its principal varieties. 
 
 The use of the round window, both in England and 
 abroad, was earlier than that of the pointed window with 
 tracery. That is, the circular piercing developed itself into 
 a distinct window before it had contributed as an element 
 to the other form. Round Norman windows, perfectly plain, 
 without tracery or cusping, occur in the clerestory of South- 
 well Minster, in the Chapter-house of Oxford Cathedral, 
 and in Canterbury Cathedral. Whether that which for- 
 merly filled the west front of Iffley contained any tracery is 
 not clear. Small round windows with foliation are common, 
 especially in clerestories, both in Early English and Deco- 
 rated ; an unusually large one occurs over the north door of 
 Uffington church, Berks. Another, of later character*', but 
 with a remarkably bold foliation, reminding us of the 
 examples already mentioned from Peterborough and Lin- 
 coln®, occurs in the tower at Stratford-on-Avon. It is 
 liowever with the examples containing tracery that we 
 
 '' Figuied in the Oxford Slitcts. 
 
 ' I’l>. 17, 2.7. 
 
234 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 are at present concerned ; these seem to divide themselves 
 into three classes ; those whose tracery consists of Geome- 
 trical figures ; those in which it is formed by the spokes 
 of a wheel; and, lastly, those in which it is distinctively 
 Flowing or Flamboyant. The two former I conceive to be 
 altogether distinct developments, only incidentally affected 
 by the tracery of the pointed window ; the latter is some- 
 thing altogether extraneous and borrowed. 
 
 a. Circular Windoivs loitli Geometrical Tracery. 
 
 The different forms of these are of course much the 
 same as what we have already seen in the centre-pieces of 
 Geometrical windows. Thus at Stone, Gloucestershire'*, 
 (PI. 62, fig. 1,) we find two small windows, each contain- 
 ing three spherical triangles ; at Cheltenham is one with 
 the same figures, but the spandrils foliated, additional rich- 
 ness being gained by the sacrifice of strict Geometrical 
 purity. In the north transept® of Minchinhampton church 
 (2), in the same county, is one containing three quatrefoiled 
 circles ; while in that of Tewkesbury Abbey (3) is a larger 
 example, containing six circles arranged round a central 
 one. One at Dundee, among Rickman’s collection, is 
 similar to this, only with the three circles in a line placed 
 in a vertical, instead of a horizontal direction. How early 
 this development began is shown by the occm’rence of a 
 window not altogether dissimilar to these two Decorated 
 ones, and — though unfoliated — still more complicated in its 
 principal lines, in Norman work at St. James’, BristoP. 
 
 d This county is remarkably rich in of churches, even when they do not oc- 
 round windows of all sizes. cupy the north or south front. 
 
 ® This sort of window seems more * Rickman, p. 60. 
 common in transepts than in other parts 
 
1 
 
/ 
 
 
OF CIRCULAR WINDOWS. 
 
 235 
 
 b. Circular Windows with Wheel Tracery. 
 
 The use of wheel tracery in a circle is far older than the 
 pointed window, being common in the Lombard style of 
 Italy, and occurring in England in late Norman or Transi- 
 tion work®, as at Barfreston**, and in pure Lancet, as at Peter- 
 borough \ In these the division is made by shafts — those at 
 Peterborough must be called mullions with shafts attached, 
 though the latter are decidedly predominant in appearance 
 — from which diverge trefoil arches with the spandrils 
 not pierced. As the style advances, the spandrils are 
 pierced, and the shaft sinks into a mullion, as in one at 
 Temple Balsall (4) with twelve spokes, and another at 
 Exton, Rutland^, with only eight. Those exhibit a form 
 analogous to complete Geometrical ; we next meet with 
 distinct Elowing traces, though not so as to destroy the 
 genuine character of wheel tracery. Thus in one at Strat- 
 ford-on-Avon^, of six spokes, the arches are ogee ; so too 
 in the superb window in the north transept at Cheltenham “, 
 where they are extremely elongated, and have a row of 
 spherical triangles beyond. This wheel has more numerous 
 spokes, but altogether greatly resembles the centre-piece 
 of the grand window at Plympton St. Mary". Another 
 variety, which looks like a tendency to Perpendicular, has 
 the spokes continued into the rim, with arches between ; 
 this occurs in the grand window in the hall of the Bishop’s 
 Palace at St. David’s", of sixteen spokes, four being marked 
 as primary. 
 
 The usually small size of our round windows pre- 
 
 B See History of Architecture, p. 180, 
 3‘29. 
 
 '■ Glossary, pi. 1(33. 
 
 ' Rickman, p. !)5. 
 
 Brantlon’.s Analysis, Appendix, 39. 
 
 ' Oxford Sheets, Rickman, p. 150. 
 Ibid. It is greatly to he regretted 
 
 that the effect of this most magnificent 
 window is so lost by its position in the 
 east wall of tlie transept, instead of its 
 front. 
 
 " See pi. 32, fig. (hi. 
 
 " Glossary, pi. Ki3. 
 
236 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 vents any great display of tracery ; we shall presently come 
 across a good English example at Milton Malsor, North- 
 amptonshire, where the tracery is Divergent, though still 
 thoroughly possessed with the wheel notion. The great 
 Abbey of Ardennes'’ has one with the same sort of Flowing 
 tracery, six “ leaves” containing Divergent figures. 
 
 A few cases occur, which seem to present forms inter- 
 mediate between these two classes, and that too, sometimes, 
 at a very early period. Thus in an Early English one in 
 Beverley Minster h there are four circles cut in the solid, so 
 arranged and modified that the space between them forms 
 the four arms of a cross. In the window over the south 
 door at Berkeley’’ we find three circles arranged as in No. 
 2, only worked together as it were by straight lines at the 
 centre. And to these we may perhaps add the strange and 
 indescribable Avindow in the clerestory at Eerrington St. 
 John’s, Norfolk®. These tAvo last examples are the only 
 ones in Avhich the centre is not marked by some figure, as 
 a circle or quatrefoil ; at Berkeley indeed, there is a small 
 circular knob, though not pierced. 
 
 c. Circular Windows with Flowing Tracery. 
 
 In many of the examples in the last class we have seen 
 the use of Elowing tracery, but ahvays Avith lines diverging 
 from a centre. We have noAv to see the centre entirely 
 forsaken, and the AvindoAV filled up with a pattern altogether 
 independent of it. I am only provided Avith one example 
 of this, but that is one of extreme splendour, being no 
 other than the celebrated Avindow in the south front of 
 Lincoln iMinster (5). It Avill be at once seen that this is in 
 no sense a rose or Avheel AvindoAv ; the tracery is designed 
 
 P See AVliewell’s German Churches, Ibid. 
 
 „ <)C)o * Hickman, p. 150. 
 
 ^ ' Glossary, pi. 103. 
 
or CIRCULAR WINDOWS. 
 
 237 
 
 with no reference whatever to any central point. It con- 
 sists of two vesicee and their spandrils, an arrangement 
 which has always struck me as being exactly analogous in 
 a circular window to siibarcuation in a pointed one. The 
 tracery in each fenestella consists of a beautiful Divergent 
 skeleton, the central vertical line being very marked — filled 
 in with patterns partly Divergent and partly Convergent. 
 The tracery in the complements is chiefly of the latter kind, 
 and by no means so well managed. On the whole indeed, 
 magnificent as this window is, there is still something about 
 it not altogether satisfactory. The fact is that the tracery 
 is in no sort adapted to the shape of the window. In a 
 circular window it seems natural for the tracery to be de- 
 signed with reference to a central point ; instead of which 
 we have here no centre at all, but two large distinct com- 
 positions, with the merest stop-gaps by way of comple- 
 ments. And even in the fenestellae, the extremely veget- 
 able tracery, so beautiful in itself, certainly seems out of 
 place. In a pointed Divergent window the central vertical 
 line is the natural continuation of something below; but 
 here it neeessarily springs out of nothing ; we have only the 
 branches of the tree without its trunk. 
 
 Advaneing on to Perpendicular, we find it truly ob- 
 served by Mr. RickmaiP, that “large circular windows do 
 not appear to have been in use in this style ; but the 
 tracery of the circles in the transepts of Westminster 
 Abbey appear to have been renewed during this period.” 
 The reason why the rose window, never a national favourite, 
 went completely out of use at this time is doubtless to be 
 found in what was hinted at in the last paragraph. Per- 
 pendicular tracery cannot possibly be designed with refer- 
 ence to a central point ; it is of its very essence that it 
 should all spring from below ; hence forms ivhere a centre 
 
 ‘ r. 201. 
 
238 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 is required, of which tlie circle is the chief, either went out 
 of use, or were filled with tracery of an earlier character 
 than was usual at the time in other positions ; w^e shall 
 find examples of this as we go on. 
 
 § 2. Of Triangular Windows. 
 
 The triangular window has considerable affinity with the 
 circular, just as we have seen a connexion between the two 
 figures, when used as elements in the composition of pointed 
 window's. In this also the tracery usually has reference to 
 a central point, namely the centre of the circle in which the 
 triangle may be conceived as inscribed, and which, w^hen, 
 as is most common, the triangle is equilateral, is equidistant 
 from its three angles. But it is far more common merely 
 to find Geometrical figures arranged round such a centre, 
 as in the first class of circular windows, than lines actually 
 diverging from it. 
 
 I am not a^vare of the existence of any triangular win- 
 dows of considerable size in England; the shape is not 
 at all adapted to large dimensions or a prominent position, 
 and accordingly we generally find them quite subordinate. 
 It is not unusual to meet Avith small examples merely fo- 
 liated, either of the common spherical form, as in the clere- 
 story at Barton Segrave, Northamptonshire", and at Ged- 
 dington (6) in the same county, or less usually with straight 
 sides, as in the clerestory of the transept at Frisby (7). 
 This last sort is most generally found as a gable window, 
 and sometimes contains tracery, as at ]\Ierton. 
 
 The most common tracery in a triangular AA'indowis three 
 Geometrical figures. Thus in the Abbey Barn, Glaston- 
 bury (8), we find three trefoiled triangles ; in the clerestory 
 of Lichfield Cathedral (9) they are circles trefoiled with the 
 
 “ Bloxam. 
 
■■■- :tA. 
 
 1: 
 
 •' .'* <v i 
 
 '■?' 
 
 
 
 A 
 
 I 
 
 7i 
 
 i- f '- 
 
 V: 
 
 t 
 
 1 
 
 ?U» J 
 
 
 
'.1 ' ''v V:-'*-' 
 
 
OP TRIANGULAR WINDOWS. 
 
 239 
 
 soffit-cusp; Tewkesbiuy Abbey and Perth (10) afford later 
 examples of the same kind sexfoiled. Poll figures also 
 oeeur ; three trefoils at the Maison Dieu, Dover’^, and the 
 same also in Bristol Cathedral (11), but differently arranged, 
 and with a smaller trefoil in the centre. In the very rich 
 and singular west front of the south aisle at Gaddesby 
 (12), there is a window of this kind whose tracery consists 
 of three spherical squares, doubly foliated, a more elaborate 
 form of the centre-piece at Market Harborough^. 
 
 A singular window is engraved in the new edition of 
 Riekmanh whose traeery consists of a mixture of Geome- 
 trical and Plowing figures, which may either be described 
 as ranged round a coneave spherical triangle with its angles 
 in the sides of the window, or as inscribed in convex 
 triangles each having two sides coineiding with those of 
 the window. Another unusual design oecurs at Catworth, 
 Huntingdonshire (13) ; we here have an adaptation of 
 wheel tracery, but necessarily in a form somewhat varying 
 from that employed with the circle. Six spokes diverge 
 from the centre, but they are carried on into the sides 
 and angles of the window, and have the whole spaces 
 between them trefoiled ; there is no room here for the 
 arch at the end. 
 
 I may here bring in a few examples of a tendency found 
 both in circular and triangular windows, which is easily 
 recognized, though very far from easy to express in words. 
 Wo sometimes find windows with a circular or triangular 
 portion which does not actually constitute the whole of the 
 ojiening, and yet is clearly far more than a mere eentre- 
 piece, being the essential part of the design, and entirely 
 giving its character. Thus in the superb south window at 
 Minchinhampton (14), the life and soul of the composition 
 is clearly the wheel, a magnificent one, almost identical 
 
 * Rickman, p. 153. y PI. 30. fig. 54. P. 153. 
 
 K k 
 
240 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 with that at Cheltenham. It is a circular window set in 
 a pointed frame, with a little tracery most awkwardly 
 thrust in to fill up gaps. The rose by itself would have 
 been a far nobler ornament of this wonderful transept. 
 Somewhat similar, among Rickman’s collection of Scotch 
 windows, is one which seems to occupy the same position 
 in the church of Linlithgow (15). The window head is 
 triangular, filled with tracery of very rich character ; the 
 principal portions being circles containing Convergent pat- 
 terns. How far a triangular window would do to occupy 
 a front, like a circular one, may be doubted ; but it cer- 
 tainly is not improved by placing five lights beneath it, 
 merely foliated under the base of the triangle, as if it were 
 a curved transom. The form of the window, completely 
 filling the head, excludes any of the other supplemental 
 devices which occur at Minchinhampton. 
 
 In many of the grand foreign fronts we find the circular 
 portion connected, though less intimately, with a range of 
 tracery below, a square transom with spandrils being carried 
 under the wheel. This last practice is well exemplified in 
 two fine triangular windows from Carenton (16, 17) among 
 Rickman’s drawings, but whether there is any tracery 
 below I am unable to state. They are good specimens of 
 riamboyant tracery adapted to windows of this shape‘s. - 
 
 This same practice may also be traced in a beautiful 
 wheel window at Milton Malsor (18), where eight spokes 
 diverge from the centre, without any central figure, and 
 terminate in a sort of Divergent tracery, not without a 
 strong Flamboyant tendency. The design thus far is one 
 of singular beauty, but its effect is greatly marred by its 
 
 “ At Oppenheim there are good ex- 
 amples of circular windows inscribed in 
 pointed frames, with nothing below ex- 
 cept the necessary spandrils ; also win- 
 dows of a pointed-arch form filled with 
 
 Geometrical and Wheel tracery. These 
 last are the Carenton form with the base 
 of the triangle removed. See the Builder, 
 viii. 366. 
 
i’l, 
 
 20 
 
 21 
 
OP SQUARE WINDOAVS. 
 
 241 
 
 being set in a square, with the spandrils open and foliated. 
 To this introduction of the square form by opening of 
 spandrils, we shall have again to refer. 
 
 § 3. Of Square Windows. 
 
 Besides the circle and the triangle, other Geometrical 
 figures, as multifoils'’, vesiccB*’, &c., occasionally occur as 
 distinct windows, but usually quite of small size, without 
 tracery, in gables and other subordinate positions. They 
 therefore do not claim any particular notice here. 
 
 The square is a shape of rather more importance. From 
 the extreme rarity of its spherical form in England as an 
 element in composition, one could not expect to find it 
 often occurring as a distinct window. The fine gable 
 window in the west front of Canterbury CathedraF exhibits 
 a curious modification of this form ; the date is Perpendi- 
 cular, but the lines of the tracery are Geometrical, I have 
 already observed that Perpendicular tracery can find no 
 place in a circular window, neither can it in a square, or 
 any form designed with reference to a centre, and com- 
 pletely filled with tracery. 
 
 I am not aware of any Early square windows ranking 
 with the numerous instances of the circular and triano-ular 
 
 O 
 
 forms. But during the late Decorated and Perpendicular 
 periods, the square form is very common in one position, 
 namely in what are called air-holes or sound-holes in 
 towers®. From their being found at that date only, I 
 am inclined to think that the shape was suggested by the 
 then increasing prevalence of the square head in ordinary 
 windows. But we must accurately distinguish between 
 
 As at York; Glossary, pi. 163; Strix- Summerley’s Canterbury, p. xii. 
 
 ton ; Rickman, p. 95. ' See the new edition of Rickman, 
 
 Beverley; AichtEoloj^ical Proceed- )ip. 152, 220, wliere tiiis subject is well 
 ings at York, p. 1. treated. 
 
242 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS AVINDOWS. 
 
 the miillioiied window merely terminated with a square 
 head instead of a point, and the actual square win- 
 dow, filled with tracery diverging more or less from a 
 centre. The tracery in these windows is, for the reasons 
 above mentioned, usually Decorated, even when the date is 
 Perpendicular. A lozenge window — a form less usual than 
 the common square — at Spaldwick, Hunts (19), has tracery 
 of the form mentioned above ^ as intermediate between 
 Reticulated and Plamboyant ; but it is more common to 
 find a more decided centre, as at Wroxham, Coltishall (20), 
 and Cromer s churches, in Norfolk, the county where these 
 windows most abound. The two former have patterns 
 much like those we have seen as centre-pieces at Eydon ’* 
 and Brecon * ; the last an exceedingly rich and complicated 
 one. The key to it is however not difficult ; it is divided 
 into four squares by right lines interrupted by a central 
 quatrefoiled circle ; each of these compartments is oc- 
 cupied by a Divergent pattern, their central lines being 
 placed in saltire. The consequence is that the lateral 
 piercings in each compartment are Convergent to those in 
 the next, as Ave have seen in some of the incipient forms of 
 Perpendicular'^. 
 
 In some cases the square form is simply produced by 
 piercing the spandrils of a circle or other figm’e. Here Ave 
 most probably find the origin of the form. We have 
 already seen instances at Stratford-on-Avon' of circular 
 Avindows employed in this sort of position. The increasing 
 use of the square head in other AvindoAvs might easily sug- 
 gest including them under a label of this form ; I cannot 
 at this moment lay my hand on an example of this kind 
 Avith a regular square, but there is one among Rickman’s 
 
 f See pi. 44. fig. 6. 
 i ri. 31. fig. 5(1. 
 
 s Rickman, 230. 
 
 '* See above, p. 20S. 
 
 “ PI. IS. fig. 81. 
 ’ See above, p. 235. 
 
OF SQUARE WINDOWS. 
 
 243 
 
 drawings from Eaton Socon in Bedfordshire, where a circle, 
 containing four spokes in saltire, is thus inscribed in a 
 lozenge. But one would conceive that the form must have 
 existed with the square in this incipient stage, as instances 
 occur with the spandrils pierced, just as at Milton Malsor"'. 
 Two very fine examples occur at Worstead, Norfolk"; in 
 one of them the tracery closely resembles that at Chelten- 
 ham and Minchinhampton. From these to the forms men- 
 tioned in the last paragraph the transition is very simple ; 
 it is only to omit the circular rim, and extend the diverging 
 lines over the whole square. 
 
 A vesica occurs similarly inscribed in a lozenge at Great 
 Addington, Northamptonshire"; the tracery may be con- 
 sidered either as that of a two-light Reticulated window 
 adapted to the form, or, better, as transitional from Diver- 
 gent to Perpendicular. It will be observed that this small 
 vesica shares exactly the same fault as those in the great 
 window at Lincoln 
 
 In all these cases whatever the date, we have found the 
 forms Decorated, most generally exhibiting the tracery of 
 the wheel. At North Walsham, Norfolk (21), we have an 
 attempt to fill up a whole square with an expanse of Per- 
 pendicular tracery, consisting of three Alternate ranges ; 
 but the result is, as might be expected, simply a square- 
 headed Alternate window with the lights vastly too short. 
 
 § 4. Of Elat-headed Windows. 
 
 By fiat-headed windows I understand all those whose 
 heads, whether quite square, or terminated by a segmental 
 
 There is really no difference between 
 tlie two forms, but these air hole-windows 
 form so marked a class by themselves 
 that it seemed better to keep their his- 
 tory distinct. 
 
 a Brandon’s Analysis. 
 
 " Northamptonshire Churches, p. 95 ; 
 Rickman, p. 152. 
 
 I' See above, p. 237. 
 
244 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 arcli, (most usually round, but occasionally slightly pointed,) 
 are sufficiently depressed materially to affect the tracery 
 itself. In Perpendicular, the ranges of lights are generally 
 merely as it were thrust down ; for here the pyramidal 
 finish at the top is less essential, while in most forms of 
 Decorated it is much more important, and consequently its 
 necessary loss in a square-headed window often gives, 
 unless the tracery be very sldlfuhy managed, an air of 
 decapitation. 
 
 I believe however the square-headed window to have an 
 origin of its own, distinct from the pointed, though both 
 contemporary and closely analogous. But though this 
 native development is very interesting, and may easily be 
 traced, it was not very important or enduring, as the 
 square-headed form had no sooner arrived at perfection, 
 than it began, almost of necessity, to borrow the forms of 
 the pointed window. The segmental-headed windows seem 
 to belong entirely to this latter class. 
 
 a. Origin of Square-headed Windows. 
 
 Mr. Paley observes that “ many windows of the four- 
 teenth century have square heads, and we have met with 
 such scarcely clear of the Pirst-pointed [Early English] 
 style, as at Helpstone, Northamptonshire, and Barholme, 
 Lincolnshire. These are apt to deceive the eye, and will 
 often be found of greater antiquity than they wmuld at first 
 sight appear‘d.” In fact I have little doubt that the origin 
 of the square-headed form may be traced up to the very 
 first days of tracery. The churches of Northamptonshire 
 are singularly rich in such examples, and from them a most 
 interesting series may be made out. 
 
 T Gothic Architecture, p. 179. 
 

 ’ \ 
 
 t'yy ;.•- 
 
 
 
 • '■■ • ■ :>-V \ 
 
 
 
 ^ ^ ' • til ' ■ . 
 
 
 /f,^.. .V 
 
 ' V' / 
 
 
 if 
 
 'm- 
 
 -=^‘ I'S' .- . . ■'■' .'• 
 
 
 • , 
 
 ^<1- 
 
 •.^^V.-W.''"'' • ■,-. 
 
 ^rfsjS^"'r ,.f !•'• 
 
 
 ' - 1 ^ 
 
 
 .^) 
 
 
 i* 
 
 'w,<’ % 
 
 
 ,1 
 
 
 t'T •' -i » . 
 
 
 
 ,^A' 
 
 
 ■ •••1 
 
 >i. 
 
 \' 
 
 ' %, 
 
 ' }j 
 
FI. F,6. 
 
 24 
 
OF FLAT-HEADED WINDOWS. 
 
 245 
 
 The square-headed window of more than one light 
 appears to me to owe its origin to the occasional use of the 
 square label over an arch or arches, just as the pointed 
 traceried window originates in a similar use of the pointed 
 label. The square label over doorways is one of the 
 most familiar features of the Perpendicular style, but is 
 occasionally found much earlier, as at Dorchester and 
 Stanton St. John’s, and still more conspicuously in a door- 
 way near the west end of Gloucester Cathedral. Over win- 
 dows it is much rarer, but it occasionally occurs, as in 
 the west window at Towcester, and, as we have seen, with 
 enriched spandrils at ShorwelD. Now in the chancel of 
 Stanion church, Northamptonshire, we find couplets of 
 lancets with the string carried over them as a square label 
 (22) ; internally there is a segmental rear-arch. To convert 
 these into one window is a process almost identical with 
 that which produced the simplest Arch tracery ‘ ; only pierce 
 the three spandrils, and we at once have a two-light Arch 
 window, with a square head. This, with the soffit-cusp, 
 occurs in the same church of Stanion (23), and in its neigh- 
 bour of Brigstock ; (here the window internally forms two 
 distinct trefoil lights ;) the same form is found at Blakesley, 
 but whether with the soffit-cusp, I do not remember. An- 
 other stage is to foliate the middle spandril, which is done 
 at Wootton (24), in several windows of extreme delicacy of 
 moulding and general workmanship. In the same church 
 we find, exactly matching those just mentioned, and appa- 
 rently contemporary, some of the earliest specimens of the 
 same form with ogee arches (25) ; this, of a later date and 
 rougher work, forms the commonest Decorated clerestory 
 
 ’ I speak thus to distinguish the class helped to suggest the square form, hut 
 of which I am speaking, from decapitated hardly more. 
 lancets, as at Cowley and Ringstead. s See above, pi. 4S, fig. 2(1. 
 
 See History of Architecture, 3.58, 455, ' See above, p. 40. 
 
 and Rickman, 94. These may have 
 
246 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 window throughout Northamptonshire, and is only too 
 common in other parts of the churches. These exactly an- 
 swer to the simplest Ogee tracery, just as the others do to 
 the earlier Arch ; but I cannot but think that the develop- 
 ment is merely analogous and not actually borrowed. 
 
 We have seen in many instances that a Foil version fol- 
 lows, like a sort of shadow, upon almost every sort of 
 tracery. It meets us here also. A couplet of round-headed 
 trefoil lancets under a square label occurs at Polebrook 
 (26 ) ; of pointed trefoil lancets in the clerestories of Little 
 Harrowden and Aldwinkle All Saints". Here again, pierce 
 the spandrils, and we produce such a window as at Help- 
 stone (27) ; we have here the accidental Perpendicular line, 
 as often in Arch tracery and so strongly marked that one 
 might possibly look upon this as formed by the approx- 
 imation of decapitated lancets ; but the same form occurs in 
 the clerestory at Aldwinkle aU gn one plane. 
 
 To these I may add two extraoi’dinary, and, as far as I 
 am aware, unique examples at the west ends of the aisles 
 at Glapthorn. One (28) has two square-headed trefoil 
 lights under an arch of the same form — reminding one of 
 the windows at Haverfordwest^ — a square label over all. 
 In the other (29) the form must, according to the same 
 analogy, be called a square-headed sept-foil. 
 
 Thus far we have had the natural development of square- 
 headed windows ; the series is carried on in those Perpen- 
 dicular ones which have no tracery, but simply resemble 
 Nos. 24 and 25 respectively, with the mullion carried into 
 the head between the lights. 
 
 " W^e have already found it in tlie in- logons. The square-headed trefoil is so 
 /erior of the Brigstock example. rare a form in windows that it has no 
 
 * See above, p. 81. effect upon tracery; in Chepstow Castle 
 
 t PI. i. fig. 2. Compare also below, are some couplets of this kind grouped 
 pi. 71. fig. 14, whicli is somewliat ana- under a round arch. 
 
OP FLAT-HEADED WINDOWS. 
 
 21.7 
 
 b. Of Square-headed Windoios loith Tracery. 
 
 The preceding class, as I before said, seems to be a dis- 
 tinct development; it borrows nothing from the pointed 
 window, and contains nothing deserving the name of tra- 
 cery. But when the use of the square head was once esta- 
 blished as a recognized form of window, nothing was more 
 natural than to introduce into it those forms of tracery 
 which had become familiar in windows of other shapes, 
 with only the changes involved in the differences of pro- 
 portion between the two. 
 
 This commenced during the Geometrical period ; a 
 square-headed window at St. Kenelm’s, Salop (30j, is a good 
 example of Arch and Foil tracery adapted to this form. We 
 may remark the vertical line carried into the head between 
 the lights. This is more than the accidental Perpendi- 
 cular line already commented on’' ; it is a genuine piece of 
 translation from one form into the analogous one in another 
 system. As a square head is substituted for the pointed 
 arch of the whole window, the treatment of each lio-ht is 
 naturally similar ; the vertical line represents the subarcua- 
 tions branching from the central nmllion. In like manner 
 we find the quatrefoil, which in an arched window is much 
 less graceful, rightly employed instead of the trefoil, which 
 would not so well have filled up the space. 
 
 In a rather later stage, as in a window at Congresbury, 
 Somerset (4<1), we still find the same vertical line. This 
 is, according to the same analogy, a rectangular version of a 
 subarcuated window of four lights. The tracery a})proaches 
 to that Foil version of Beticulated which we have seen at 
 Flaydon and Ileckington’^. 
 
 Most of the varieties of Flowing tracery arc found, more 
 
 See p. 81. 
 
 “ See pi. ' 1 1', lig. 20. 
 
348 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 or less frequently, with the square head, though naturally 
 there are more examples of the Retieulated than of any 
 other. This was to be expeeted both from that being the 
 commonest type of the style, and from the greater facility 
 with which it may be adapted to the square form. The 
 mere Reticulated expanse, cut through at an arbitrary 
 point, may just as well be cut through by a straight line 
 as by an arch. 
 
 The commonest form of the square-headed Reticulated 
 window has a single range of the piercings, with as it were 
 the commencement of a second cut through by the head, 
 just like the inchoate figures at the side of a pointed Avin- 
 doAv, which of course themselves occur also. Those at 
 Dorchester’^ Avould be very typical examples did they not 
 introduce the slightest possible vertical line Sometimes, 
 as at Irthlingborough, the circular-headed figure'’ is em- 
 ployed, which of course avoids any> inchoate figure in the 
 head. An example of this kind at Cameringham (32) sin- 
 gularly, and indeed inappositely, introduces the foliation at 
 one end, as in Jersey ®. 
 
 When the space or ipchoate figure above the range 
 receives a complete foliation, the character is very much 
 changed, just as in the analogous case in pointed AvindoAvs. 
 The notion of cutting through at an arbitrary point is 
 lost, but as in the analogous case, at the expense of the 
 general harmony of the design. This may be seen in a 
 very slight degree in the rich and Avell knoAvn windoAV at 
 Ashby Tolville, Leicestershire but it is far moi’e conspicu- 
 ous in an elegant design at St. Donat’s, Glamorganshire 
 (33), Avhere Ave have the elongated vesiccE, as at Higham 
 Terrers®. From this the transition is easy to various 
 
 attempts to avoid the spaces both at top and sides, just 
 
 Addington, p. 5. ' See above, p. 201. Do. p. 96. 
 
 ‘ Do. p. 9 K ‘ Glossary, pi. 15S. ® P. 93. 
 
OF PLAT-HEADED WINDOWS. 
 
 249 
 
 as in some pointed windows mentioned in a former chap- 
 ter’*. Such is the example at Orton-on-the-Hill, Leices- 
 tershire where a sort of Convergent figure is thrust in on 
 each side. Several such occur at Chelveston and Denford, 
 Northamptonshire'" ; one of the latter — considered however 
 by Mr. Poole to belong, in point of date, to the late Per- 
 pendicular Henaissance ' — has an attempt to introduce a 
 second range, but they are flattened, and the effect is very 
 awkward, the just proportions of the window allowing only 
 one™. We may compare this with such a pointed example 
 as that at Wytham". 
 
 Of square-headed ogee windows we might produce num- 
 berless examples, if we are to reckon all the examples of 
 two or three ogee lights under a straight head”. But of 
 these we have already traced out the history’’, and they 
 hardly deserve to be called examples of tracery at all. I 
 have already observed how nearly, even under a pointed 
 arch, this form approximates to Reticulated ; and most of 
 the square-headed examples look much more like decapi- 
 tated Reticulated windows than any thing else, and the 
 diversities in the foliation in the head, as in the example 
 given above'*, produce just the same effect that we have 
 just been considering in those really Reticulated. 
 
 Of the more complete forms of Ogee tracery, where in- 
 tersection is introduced, I have already mentioned the 
 large examples at Braunston and Yelvertoftk There is a 
 two-light example at Coggs, Oxon", of the same general 
 
 '' Ibid. PI. 23, fig. 12. felt. It is easy to recognize a point — 
 
 ■ Glossary, pi. 158. answering to the impost, and marked as 
 
 ** Nortliainptonsliire Churches, p. 77. such by the label — below which the 
 1 This seems probable in itself, and tracery ought not to be brought, 
 the more so, as one of the others has " PI. 23, fig. 9. 
 some small Perpendicular lines very " Sec p. 98. 
 clumsily introduced. i> Do. p. 245. 
 
 m The proportions of a square-head n Fig. 25. 
 
 windowcannotbesoeasilydefinedastho.se '' PI. 2(i, fig. 28. 
 ofa pointed one, but they are no less easily * Glossary, pi. 158. 
 
250 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 cliaracter, but with the spaces at the top completely foli- 
 ated, the same differences occurring here also. 
 
 Wymmington church in Bedfordshire will afford us a 
 good study of other Flowing forms Avith square heads, as the 
 Divergent and Convergent. These, curious as it may 
 sound, occur in these specimens in a form more typical 
 than when the window has an arched head. The fact 
 is that we here no longer meet with the crowning vesica 
 which is rendered necessary by the form of the pointed win- 
 dow ; the typical figures can themselves occupy the Avhole 
 space, as in the excellent Divergent example (34). Con- 
 vergent tracery alone would not succeed so Avell, as it 
 Avould leave an aAvlcAvard spandriD; but the mixture of 
 Divergent and Convergent is very well managed (35). 
 We find this same mixture in a tAAm-light windoAv among 
 Rickman’s collection (36), divided by a vertical line in 
 the same manner as the earlier ones at St. Kenelm’s 
 and Congresbury. The composition just mentioned occurs 
 in the head of each light, the spandrils being all trefoiled. 
 It is clear that the tracery is too complicated for the space 
 beloAv. Nearly the same tracery is found in a four-light 
 window at Harps well, where the vertical line is omitted, 
 leaving a central qua trefoiled space. 
 
 It would be tedious and uninteresting to prolong this 
 series through all the classes of Perpendicular tracery, inci- 
 pient and fully developed. I need not say how extremely 
 common square-headed Perpendicular AvindoAvs are, but 
 they form a class far less important than the square-headed 
 Decorated. In the latter the tracery is much more influ- 
 enced by the form of the Avindow. But Perpendicular 
 tracery is but little altered by being inserted in a rectangu- 
 lar opening. The chief difference is that there is less room 
 
 ' One of the subsequent examples (No. 39) might be also considered as an 
 instance of this. 
 
OP FLAT-HEADED WINDOWS. 
 
 251 
 
 for siibarcuations, grouping, &c. ; the square-headed Per- 
 pendicular window is more intensely Perpendicnlar than 
 any other; something in the same way as I have just 
 remarked of the Divergent example at Wymmington. I 
 will only allude to two classes ; one, a Transitional form, 
 in which the ogee lights are divided hy Perpendicular lines, 
 the spandrils being trefoiled ; instances occur at Peckleton, 
 Woodstock (37), and elsewhere. The other is where Al- 
 ternate tracery is introduced, in which case the shape shows 
 itself to the best advantage, especially when the complete 
 foliation is employed — Supermullioned tracery in a rect- 
 angle is decidedly too stiff. There is a good example of 
 four lights at St. Giles, Northampton"; others, of two and 
 three, occur at West Drayton, Middlesex (38), where we 
 may remark the straight-sided arches in the tracery. 
 
 c. Of Square-headed Windows with Spandrils. 
 
 In another class the square head may be considered as 
 something almost accidental, as the actual tracery is con- 
 tained within an arch. This is where there is a square 
 spandril over the arch, pierced, either left plain or filled 
 up with some pattern ; an arrangement not very common, 
 but certainly more frequently met with than in proportion 
 to the occurrence of a square label over a pointed window. 
 We have seen this same practice already carried out’' in 
 the case of circular and similar windows ; the class we are 
 now considering is fonned by the same process as the win- 
 dow at Milton Malsor, with the sole difference necessarily 
 arising from the shape of the two. The round window, 
 completely filled with tracery, naturally has the rectangular 
 addition both above and below ; the pointed one, with its 
 tracery confined to the head, admits it only at the upper 
 
 “ Companion to tlio Glu.ssary. 
 
 * See above, p. 242. 
 
252 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 end. We have already seen this done in panel-work at 
 Shorwell ^ ; we have now only to pierce the figures which in 
 that example were left blank. 
 
 It is clear that this addition may be made to an arched 
 window of any size, shape, or style ; and as the real tracery 
 of the head is not in the least affected by it, I shall therefore 
 not think it necessary to follow out the subject at great 
 length, or accumulate any extensive list of examples. The 
 spandril may, according to its dimensions, be left plain, 
 foliated, or filled with patterns similar to those used in the 
 spandrils of doorways or in the Shorwell window already 
 mentioned. 
 
 One of the windows at Wymmington (39) may be cited 
 as an example of this class, though, as has been akeady^ 
 hinted, it has an equally fair claim to be reckoned else- 
 where. We may however regard it as an Ogee pattern 
 similar to those at St. Mary’s, Oxford, and Wimborne 
 Minster % inscribed in a square. 
 
 Some of the best square-headed windows of this kind con- 
 sist of double windows thus brought together under a flat 
 head. A square label over a pair of belfry-windows some- 
 times occurs, as at Winston and Aldwinkle All Saints ; as 
 in the other cases, it only requires to be pierced. This 
 produces the elegant windows in the neighbouring churches 
 of King’s Sutton’’ and Aynhoe (40). Two distinct lights, 
 each, like those at Irthlingborough, with Plowing tracery in 
 the head, are grouped under a square head. At King’s 
 Sutton the spandrils are plain and a central mullion is car- 
 ried into the head ; at Aynhoe they are all trefoiled. 
 
 An amplification of the King’s Sutton arrangement leads 
 to some large Perpendicular windows of this class, of which 
 
 y See above, pi. 48, fig. 26. At Chip- sance. 
 ping Sodbury, Gloucestershire, are some ^ See above, p. 250, note, 
 large Perpendicular windows with shields * See pi. 25, fig. 23. 
 in the spandrils. The tracery is ifenais- '* Glossary, pi. 164. 
 
OF FLAT-HEADED WINDOWS. 
 
 253 
 
 we have nearly identical examples at Axbridge and Cheddar, 
 Somerset (41). Here two three-light Alternate windows 
 are placed side by side, each with its own pierced spandrils 
 resembling those at Shorwell. 
 
 To return to single windows under spandrils, we have 
 a gigantic instance in the east end of Bath Cathedral, where 
 a vast subarcuated window of seven lights is thus treated. 
 The spandril was blocked in a late repair, a daring, and 
 perhaps unjustifiable, innovation, but which certainly im- 
 proved the internal effect of the choir. A square head was 
 altogether out of place in so prominent a position in 'so 
 large a church, and it was impossible to bring it into any 
 harmony with the vaulting. 
 
 In all these instances the tracery in the arched head is 
 kept quite complete in itself and distinct from the spandril. 
 In a very odd window at Llancarvan, Glamorganshire 
 (42), the Perpendicular lines run into the spandril, having 
 nearly the same ill effect as those similarly prolonged into the 
 complement in some of those in the cloister at Hereford 
 The tracery itself is remarkable, having a great Geometrical 
 mixture ; it has been recently renewed, but I was informed 
 that it was a faithful reproduction of the original. 
 
 d. Of Segmental-Headed Windows. 
 
 The actual origin of the square-headed window we have 
 traced to a source quite distinct from that of the pointed 
 one ; its most common forms we have seen to be modifica- 
 tions of the latter; while its prevalent use, wherever it is 
 other than a mere matter of caprice, is owing to architec- 
 tural requirements arising out of the proportions of the space 
 the window has to occupy The segmental head may be 
 
 ' PI. fl(), fig. 72 a. wlicther square, segmental, or four-een- 
 
 1 liave elsewhere treated of this, tred. History of Architecture, p. 350, 
 with reference to all flat-headed window LlandafP Cathedral, p. 33. 
 
254 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 considered as simply a variety of the square under the two 
 latter aspects, and presents iio claim to a distinct consider- 
 ation at any length. Numerous examples have been already 
 brought in other parts of the work ; all that is left for the 
 present place is to mention some additional ones, and to 
 make a few desultory remarks. 
 
 By a segmental head I of com’se understand one in which 
 the centre (or centres) is very much below the line of the 
 constructive impost, so as altogether to alter the proportion 
 of the window. When the deviation is but slight, as in 
 the west window of All Soids Chapel or the great north one 
 at Stafford®, it still belongs to the ordinary class, though 
 the change generally has a bad effect, as in that quoted 
 from Portbury, Somerset ^ The rule would be, whether 
 the general character manifestly requires the tracery to 
 commence perceptibly below the impost. When it does, 
 as in many already given it belongs to this class. The 
 arch may of course be either round or pointed, but the 
 former has generally the more pleasing effect. AVhen it is 
 pointed, the curves often degenerate into right lines, just 
 as is the case with the four-centred arch. 
 
 The use of the segmental head seems to commence about 
 the same time as that of the square head with regular 
 tracery. Some examples of Foil tracery occur in Rickman’s 
 collection from the Hall at Penshurst ; but the most striking 
 among them (43) belongs to the same class as those at 
 Heckington and Congresbury, as it certainly approximates 
 to the Reticulated. The Arch examples are of more conse- 
 quence ; some of them have been already alluded to When 
 we have an intersecting window of this kind, as in the Arch 
 and Foil specimens at Barnack'and Byfield, or in the large 
 
 20 a; 2 d, 29; -55, 61; 60, 89. 
 
 As at Cliacoinbe, p. “iL 
 ‘PI. 11. 55, 
 
 “ PI. 19, fig. 88. 
 
 ‘ PI. 9, fig. 46. 
 
 8 PI. 11, fig._55; 22, 5; 24, 15; 25, 
 

 iy 
 
 iy 
 
 
50 
 
OF FLAT-HEADED WINDOWS. 
 
 255 
 
 window at Thaxted more recently described, the effect is 
 rather that of a pointed window inserted under a segmental 
 arch — as many are in Winchester Cathedral — the spandril 
 seeming something external to the general design, as the 
 intersecting expanse is cut through at such a very arbitrary 
 point The same may be observed in the rarer case of an 
 intersecting window with a square head, as in those at 
 Hexham "" ; here the effect is still more unpleasant, as the 
 segmental head does allow each arch to be cut through at 
 its apex, while here we have lopsided arches, with their 
 heads finished just like the perfect ones. 
 
 Segmental windows filled with Reticulated tracery hardly 
 differ from square-headed ones of the same class, except 
 that, with a greater number of lights than three, it is im- 
 possible to preserve the equality of the vesicse Of Ogee 
 tracery, whether simple or more complicated, we have al- 
 ready met with several examples ; one of those alluded to 
 at Bytield ® (44) deserves a more distinct notice on account 
 of the singular curve given to the central arch. 
 
 I remarked above ^ that in a window of Divergent or 
 analogous pattern, the effect of a square head was to 
 remove the crowning figure, and so to increase the purity 
 of the design at the expense of its beauty. The segmental 
 head has a worse effect. In one of those at Spixworth ‘‘ 
 (45), we find the vesica in the head of a two-light Diver- 
 gent window very much flattened ; and another from the 
 same church (46), of three lights, with a combination of 
 
 '' PI. 60, fig. 80. 
 
 ' This spandril is analogous to that 
 found in some ogee windows, (pi. 25, 
 24, 25 ; 26, 28, 30,) and to the imperfect 
 figures in Reticulated designs. 
 
 Bloxam,p. 167. 
 
 " This will be understood by com- 
 paring pi. 24, 15, with 26, 28. If the 
 former had a square head, the figures 
 might all have been kept on the same 
 
 level ; had the latter a segmental curve, 
 the central arch must either have had a 
 difFerent proportion from the rest, or have 
 had its apex vertically prolonged. This 
 also accounts for the introduction of an 
 irregular quadrangular figure between 
 the two triangles in pi. 26, 29. 
 
 0 P. 98. 
 
 l> P. 250. 
 
 1 P. 107. 
 
 M 111 
 
25G 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS AVINDOWS. 
 
 Divergent and Reticulated tracery, the greater width and 
 still flatter arch reduce it to complete insignificance; and 
 as the natural tracery of the pattern, which is adapted to the 
 pointed form, cannot he made to fill up the Avhole width, 
 some awkwmrd figures spring from the sides to meet the 
 Divergent ones. 
 
 It requires very little thought to show that neither real 
 subarcuation, nor any thing analogous, can have any place 
 in a segmental-headed window. Real subarcuation would 
 pass almost unnoticed where the arch is so flat, and the 
 vertical division, which we have seen occur as the analogous 
 form in a square-headed window b is not adapted to a win- 
 dow Avith an arched head however depressed. Yet in a 
 AvindoAV at Wymmington (47) Ave find the subarcuatiug lines 
 of a pointed window introduced, Avith a much better effect 
 than could have been expected ; in fact we do not regard 
 them as subarcuations at all, or as in any AA'ay connected 
 Avith the sides or head of a AvindoAv, Avhose constructive 
 arch springs from their apex. The complement is curious, 
 including a sort of PloAving spherical square, bearing some 
 resemblance to the singular figures at Granchester and 
 North Walsh am 4 
 
 § 5. Op Belfry Windoavs and Spire Lights. 
 
 It may perhaps have been observed that in the earliest 
 parts of this treatise, while we were considering the first 
 imperfect and rudimental forms of tracery, many of our 
 most typical examples were found among the unglazed 
 openings in towers and spires, while latterly — Avith one 
 remarkable class of exceptions* — they have been almost 
 
 f See above, p. 247. windows, (see p. 241,) which have no- 
 
 * PI. 3(5, fig. 86. thing to do with the class now under 
 
 t I allude to the square and circular consideration. 
 
OF BELFRY WINDOWS AND SPIRE LIGHTS. 
 
 257 
 
 withdrawn from our notice, and have perhaps never pre- 
 sented any distinctive character. Of ineipient and Early 
 Geometrical tracery they often afford some of tlie best 
 studies ; the peculiar character of the belfry-window of that 
 date " giving it great opportunities for so doing. But when 
 that distinctive character was lost, when all notion of the 
 composition of shafts and arches, as distinguished from that 
 of mullions and tracery-bars, had passed away, the belfry- 
 windows could but reproduce the forms employed in other 
 parts of the building. And it was but natural that it 
 should but seldom repeat them in their best shape ; the 
 belfry-window, forming no part of any internal view, and 
 even externally having its design obscured by luffer-boards 
 or their ornamental substitutes, and moreover being gene- 
 rally confined to a small number of lights, was the last 
 place in which we should now expect to find any rich or 
 instructive forms of tracery. “ Blowing tracery, properly 
 so called,” says Mr. Paley “ is very rare in clerestory ^ 
 and belfry- windows.” A two-light Ueticulated design is 
 as much as we generally find in the latter position : and it 
 is very usual to find the most meagre forms of Arch tracery 
 employed as a substitute throughout the Decorated style. 
 Such instances as Irthlingborough, Aynhoe, and King’s 
 Sutton are quite exceptions. And in Perpendicular we 
 have seen"' that the form usually met with is one of the 
 simplest and most common, though certainly also one of 
 the most elegant varieties of the style. 
 
 “ See p. 9. 
 
 ^ Gothic Architecture, p. 107. 
 
 ^ This fact is doubtless owing to clere- 
 stories of any pretension not being 
 usual in small churches till Perpendicu- 
 lar times. Even in Northamptonshire, 
 where Decorated clerestories are so com- 
 mon, they are generally so low as to be 
 filled, not with pointed windows, hut 
 with some small circular, square-headed. 
 
 or at most segmental-headed openings, 
 (as at Everdon, pi. 22, 5 ;) even painted 
 Reticulated windows, as at Kingsclifie, 
 at once call attention as something ex- 
 traordinary. I know of no parallel, in so 
 small a church, to the beautiful clere- 
 story at Rotherby in Leicestershire, 
 which has three pointed windows, each 
 containing a diflerent Flowing pattern. 
 
 See above, p. 188. 
 
258 
 
 MISCELLA.NEOUS WINDOWS. 
 
 With the spire-light the case is different ; that assumed 
 a moi-e distinctive character in the later days of tracery ; 
 and, if we have not had occasion to quote many examples 
 in the later stages of our inquiry, it is not because, like the 
 belfry-windows, they afford neither typical forms nor sin- 
 gularities, but because they form a class of themselves, 
 not capable of being brought under any of the divisions 
 which we have endeavoured to establish among other 
 windows. 
 
 The projecting spire-light with its acute pediment may 
 be divided into two classes. We have first those examples 
 in which a distinct pointed window is inserted under the 
 pediment, which forms a canopy to it. In this case there 
 is no reason why the window should differ from any other 
 of its own size and style. Thus we have Geometrical ex- 
 amples at Warmiiigton ; Arch at Polebrook, Kingscliffe, 
 and St. Mary’s, Oxford “ ; Reticulated at Bozeat, Aldwinkle 
 St. Peter’s, and Newark'’; Divergent at Pligham Perrers ; 
 Perpendicular instances are rare, as during the prevalence of 
 that style the other arrangement was more in use. This is 
 where there is no distinct window, but the acute pediment 
 is itself made the window-head. This began during the 
 first attempts at tracery, as the form is exceedingly well 
 adapted to the two lights and the figure in the head not 
 yet fused together with them. We have seen this in 
 the curious series at Paston ' ; others occur at Oxford 
 Cathedral and Witney But it is clear that the form is 
 not adapted for the ordinary Geometrical types, as an 
 awkward space would be left above the circle or triangle ; 
 nor are most of the usual forms of Plowing or Perpendicular 
 tracery much better suited to the position. A few unsuc- 
 cessful attenqits do however occiu’, as at Geometrical, at 
 
 “ Glossary, pi. 16-1. <= p], 7 ^ fig. 29, 30. 
 
 ii Do. ' Glossary, pi. 164. 
 
OF BELFRY AVINDOWS AND SPIRE LIGHTS. 259 
 
 Thrapston ; at Reticulated, (the least conspicuous failure 
 of the three,) at Rushden ; at Alternate Perpendicular, at 
 Frisby. A design better adapted to the position is pro- 
 duced at Stan wick (48) by a mixture of Reticulated and 
 Wheel tracery, which would have been better if the latter 
 element had prevailed exclusively. 
 
 But what we may set down as the typical forms are very 
 different. Perhaps the most usual in late Decorated and 
 Perpendicular spires is one which has no trace whatever 
 of the ordinary tracery of the period. Examples occur at 
 South Kilworth (49), and Wigston All Saints, Leicester- 
 shire ; the design is an awkward Geometrical one ; a sort 
 of unfoliated vesica is thrust into the space left above the 
 circle ; the notion is probably derived from the pattern 
 used in the spandrils of doorways. A far better effect, and 
 on the whole, much the best and most appropriate design 
 for this position is found by recurring to the use of straight- 
 lined intersecting tracery ®, as at Queniborough and Easton 
 Maudit (50) ; the form is not unpleasing in itself, and 
 exactly fills the required space. 
 
 ^ See above, p. 4!). 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 CHAPTER I. 
 
 Page 7, 1. 12. 
 
 The same form as at Haverfordwest occurs also in 
 Chepstow Castle, and we shall find a few other similar or 
 analogous examples. I however still look upon it as a 
 mere vagary, contributing nothing to the natural develop- 
 ment of tracery. In my drawing of the actual window at 
 Haverfordwest I have made the label a little too pro- 
 minent. 
 
 Page 8, 1. 20. 
 
 When I wrote this I was not aware how near an ap- 
 proach to tracery had been made during the Romanesque 
 period, not only in the triforia to which I am here allud- 
 ing, but in positions which, according to my view, have a 
 more direct influence upon its development. Mr. Sharpe® 
 gives examples from Fountains and Kirkstall Abbey 
 Churches, in which the space at the end of a chapel under 
 a barrel-vault is filled up with two long round-headed lights, 
 with a circle in the head, forming a decidedly nearer ap- 
 proach towards tracery tlian the fronts mentioned in page 6. 
 “The relation,” continues Mr. Sharpe, “which these three 
 
 * Decorated Windows, p. 12. 
 
262 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 openings bear to one another, and to the space in which 
 they are situated, is too evident to permit ns to doubt that 
 in this arrangement we have the type of the elemental 
 principle of Geometrical tracery * * and one of 
 
 the earliest examples of a Circle carried hy Two Arches!' 
 
 Page IG, 1. 5. 
 
 On these Avindows at Woodstock some good remarks 
 and illustrations are given by Mr. Sharpe ^ together with 
 instances of the more usual case, as at Etton, in which 
 the external side is the more advanced. It is clear that 
 when the composition was inserted under the flat rear-arch 
 common at the time, it was a further advance to intro- 
 duce an additional pointed arch beneath it : consequently 
 Ave find an external arch or label grouping the Avhole into 
 one AvindoAV, Avhile Avithin the lights and the figure remain 
 distinct. The reversal of this rule at Woodstock is to be 
 accounted for by the thoroughly anomalous character of 
 the AvindoAV. Without, the label is placed at so great a dis- 
 tance as to have no effect Avhatever upon the tracery ; 
 within, there is no distinct rear-arch, but merely an ela- 
 borately moulded jamb. 
 
 Page 18, 1. 1. 
 
 I have added a drawing of this AAundow (PI. 69, fig. 1), 
 as it may Avell be compared AAutli the form at Haverford- 
 west. 
 
 Page 18, 1. 4. 
 
 I shall presently consider this class more at length. 
 
 Decorated AA^indows, p. 23. 
 

 V 
 
 
 'r 
 
 •> *. 
 
 
 
 "iV 
 
 1 ^' ' . 
 
 '■♦ ’ 
 
 
 m 
 
 M 
 
 '4 
 
PJ 69. 
 
 5 
 
 6 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 263 
 
 Page 19, 1. 4 from bottom. 
 
 The earliest examples I have seen of this are two win- 
 dows in the refectory at Tintern. They are very remark- 
 able, as exhibiting a decided approach to the four-light 
 composition, while the component groups of two lights are 
 not comprized under an arch. In the first (2) we have two 
 groups, each of two trefoil lights with a circle pierced over 
 them ; an arch is thrown over all, but none over each 
 group. It may be remarked that, had such an one been 
 introduced, it must, from the size of the circles, have been 
 far more acutely pointed than usual. In the second (3) 
 the blank space left in the head is filled up by a third 
 larger circle. 
 
 This stage is clearly a false development, and only 
 shows the numerous attempts and experiments made by 
 the architects of that age, only a few of which were des- 
 tined to bear permanent fruit. It may have suggested a 
 more perfect form, but nothing more. 
 
 The other four-light examples which I have mentioned I 
 have unfortunately studied — or at least noted and drawn — 
 exclusively from without. I will therefore notice the great 
 window in the hall of Chepstow Castle as a good ex- 
 ample of their treatment within, and of the development 
 of the pattern. The window is very much mutilated, but 
 the design can be sufficiently made out. Two windows of 
 incipient tracery — Foil tracery it happens to be, but the 
 lesson is of course identical — are grouped side by side 
 divided by a heavy mullion with an attached shaft. The 
 arches — of the trefoil ® form — which it supports are in fact 
 
 ' The constructive arches are very oh- other rear-arches of the same or 
 tuse, the trefoil ones being only worked similar form, as at Farringdon, Berks, 
 
 in the mouldings. These must not be Bislcy and Kempsford, G louccstershire, 
 confounded with the Haverfordwest form, and one in anollier part of this very 
 being real rear-arches, to be classed with castle. 
 
 N 11 
 
264 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 the rear-arches of these windows, and there is nothing 
 deserving the name of a rear-arch to the whole composition, 
 merely a containing arch but slightly recessed. Hence it 
 follows that, while the (incipient) tracery in the fenestellae 
 is, as usual, mere thin frame- work across the external arch, 
 the circle in the head of the whole design is pierced through 
 the whole thickness of the wall ; consequently its foliation, 
 flush with the external wall, is hardly discernible from 
 within. The composition in fact consists of two arches and 
 a circle, kept quite distinct ; the arches being again filled 
 up with incipient tracery. 
 
 Page 23, 1. 9 from bottom. 
 
 The east window of Kempsford Church, Gloucestershire, 
 is very similar to that at Pont Audemer, with floriated 
 cusps in the circle. 
 
 Page 24, 1. 4. 
 
 Compare below, page 82. 
 
 Page 26, 1. 9 from bottom. 
 
 The fact with regard to this window I believe to be that 
 it is only accidentally subarcuated. Perhaps it may be best 
 considered as consisting of two window^s of the same type 
 as the others in the same transept. The latter have actually 
 straight sides, as in fig. 13; these have segmental arches 
 hardly differing ^ in effect ; — there may probably be a con- 
 structive reason why the actual straight-sided form w^as 
 not extended to so large a window. Now it wmuld be 
 almost impossible to group these under a containing arch, 
 
 " That is, in each fenestella taken separately. 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 265 
 
 whether with straight or pointed sides, which should not 
 coincide with them ; the appearance of such an one would 
 be preposterous. The result is this accidental subarcua- 
 tion ; the difference between it and real subarcuation being 
 that here, as in other pure Geometrical windows, we con- 
 sider the containing arch as thrown over the tracery, while 
 in a Subarcuated design we consider the tracery as in- 
 serted beneath the arch. 
 
 Page 30, 1. 9 from bottom. 
 
 This is in fact the same arrangement which in the case of 
 the spherical square is universal. Compare also the great 
 window at Linlithgow, pi. 04, fig. 15. 
 
 Page 36, 1. 14. 
 
 This use of the trefoil probably marks a later stage, as it 
 suggests not the circle but the spherical triangle. Like the 
 latter, 1 do not remember it anywhere except in complete 
 tracery. See the next page. 
 
 Page 42, 1. 5 from bottom. 
 
 The origin of the Arch window of more than two lights 
 without intersection deserves to be treated more fully than 
 is done in the text. 
 
 In the development both of Geometrical and Arch tracery 
 we may see two means at work of filling up the space be- 
 tween the lights and the containing arch. One is by simply 
 piercing the space, the other by inserting a distinct figure. 
 Each of these were tried under both systems, but as each 
 was adapted to one only, the otlier necessarily failed. The 
 piercing of the space was adapted only to Arch tracery, the 
 
2GG ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 inserted figure to Geometrical and Foil. In either case the 
 examples of the other method form a class of exceptions, 
 alongside of the typical form, and contributing nothing to 
 its genuine development. The pierced space in the Geo- 
 metrical ® is however so very unsightly that it is extremely 
 rare, and has hardly any influence on suhsecpient forms. 
 In Arch tracery the exceptional class, being much less im- 
 pleasing, is far more numerous and important. 
 
 The triplet or other composition having been inserted 
 under one containing arch, and it being thought desirable 
 to fuse the whole more closely together, several difficulties 
 occurred. The side lights of the triplet or quintuplet did 
 not coincide with the containing arch, and an awkward 
 space was left. When the space was pierced, as at Port- 
 bury and Berkeley (pi. 8, figs. 40, 41) its awkwardness 
 was made still more perceptible. Three ways of escaping 
 from this difficulty seem to have presented themselves. 
 
 1st. To make the containing arch very flat, so that the 
 space left should hardly appear. 
 
 2nd. To insert distinct figures in the spandrils. 
 
 3rd. To make the side lights more acute, so as to coin- 
 cide with the containing arch. 
 
 Of these three, the first, which may be seen in the win- 
 dows at Carlisle^ and Etton®, given by Mr. Sharpe, and in 
 analogous examples in the text is a mere evasion of the 
 difficulty ; the two others are real attempts to grapple with 
 it, the last being the true and successful one, which led to 
 the full development of the style. 
 
 When the second method is employed, a great deal 
 depends upon the form of the arch. Most commonly it is 
 very fiat, as much so as in the first case, for any how the 
 space is awdvward, and the figure thrust in a mere botch. 
 
 e See p. 7, note g:. 
 f Decorated Windows, pi. A. 
 
 s Do. p. 17. 
 
 “ PI. 9, tig. 45, 46. 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 267 
 
 Sucli is the window at Netley alluded to in the text ; such 
 also the east window (4) and some others at Cirencester, 
 where circles are inserted. This last is evidently a mere 
 false development, which could not possibly get any 
 further ; the other may have been developed into the 
 Tewkesbury and Lapworth (pi. 9, fig. 47) examples, or 
 they may have the origin suggested in the text. 
 
 The case where the containing arch is more acutely 
 pointed will require a more attentive consideration. The 
 typical example is the east window of St. Mary’s, Haver- 
 fordwest (5), where we not only have circles in the span- 
 drils, but a third placed over the apex of the central light. 
 This form might, as Mr. Petit seems to suggest have been 
 derived from the triplet at Wimborne ; if, instead of the 
 separate labels of the latter, the whole were thrown into 
 one, it would at once be produced. Yet I am inclined to 
 think it may more likely have been a mere experiment, 
 suggested by the Cirencester class ; an attempt, when the 
 circles were once introduced, to give them more import- 
 ance, and take away their ordinary character of a botch. 
 
 Now it is clear that the ordinary process of fusing toge- 
 ther would at once convert this window into that class of 
 three-light Geometrical window where the central light is 
 decidedly predominant as at Easton Neston. (PL 3, fig. 
 15.) Yet, as the perfect form is so much more usual than 
 the incipient, it seems more probable that this peculiarity is 
 on the whole rather due to the side influence of the triplet, 
 than to any direct development from the instance we have 
 given. The tendency found in tracery of all dates to raise a 
 central light above the others, of which this is but the strong- 
 est case, is probably an idea suggested by the triplet ; in 
 many cases it can have no other origin, or at all events can- 
 not be derived from the Haverfordwest type. Consequently 
 
 ' .Vrcliitectural Character, p. 10, 11. Page 18. 
 
268 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 wc may still, as in the text, consider the class of windows 
 referred to as pure Geometrical, only of a somewhat dis- 
 torted pattern. 
 
 Page 52, 1. 5. 
 
 A good example of this stage is found in the east win- 
 dow of Swansea chm’ch (6). The arch of the window 
 being obtuse compared with those of the fenestellae, it has 
 a good deal the air of a Subarcuated window, but it is the 
 usual five-light Geometrical design. Perhaps the arrange- 
 ment of the four qnatrefoils in the centre-piece may be 
 considered a little stiff. 
 
 Page 53, 1. 3 from bottom. 
 
 I have not made a distinct head of Geometrical skeletons 
 filled with Arch patterns, yet something like such an arrange- 
 ment may be discovered in the east window at Thornbury 
 (7), the fenestellae being filled in with the simplest pattern 
 of a two-light Arch window. But aesthetically it is rather 
 a case of intermixtiue ; the whole lower part is Arch, the 
 whole upper Geometrical ; the centre-piece being an excel- 
 lent pattern of spherical triangles, like that at All Saints, 
 Hereford, (pi. 5, fig. 23.) 
 
 Page 56, line 4 from bottom. 
 
 I have been misled by Hickman’s cbawing as to the 
 locality of this and another window alluded to in page 58. 
 They are not at Panterry, but in the parish church at Tin- 
 tern. I mention this lest any one should go to Panterry 
 in quest of them, and be rewarded, as I Avas, with a long 
 out of the way walk, and one of the most miserable churches 
 
ri. /u. 
 
 10 
 
 12 
 
ADDITIONS- AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 269 
 
 in existence at the end of it. The present example is the 
 east window. The upper part is cut off, but it must have 
 been much as I have copied it from Rickman. That men- 
 tioned in p. 58 I had not engraved, and I find Rickman’s 
 drawing not quite accurate. I have therefore given a 
 sketch of it (8). It is more strictly a case of intermixture 
 than I had supposed, and will be better understood from 
 the engraving than from a description. It will be seen that 
 intersecting lines are supposed throughout, though only a 
 small portion at the top actually exists. 
 
 Page 60, 1. 18, 
 
 I have added a good two-light example from Ciren- 
 cester (9). 
 
 Page 61, d. 
 
 When I wrote the description of this class I did not at all 
 look upon it as an original form. But whoever carefully 
 considers the examples given by Mr. Sharpe' from Grasby 
 and Dowsby, will see that it is a legitimate development 
 from the pierced space in the head of a (quasi-) Geometrical 
 window. In another not uncommon form the space is 
 simply foliated, without any line being prolonged into 
 the window-arch. 
 
 Page 65, 1. 17. 
 
 I ought not to have omitted the class in which a spheri- 
 cal triangle forms the centre-piece. There is one at Dor- 
 chester™, and another at the east end of Bisley church, 
 Gloucestershire (10). This use of that figure however, I 
 
 Decorated Windows, pi. R. 
 
 See p. 80. 
 
270 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 cannot but consider as a great error ; no other has so com- 
 pletely the appearance of being merely thrust in, without 
 reference to anything else. 
 
 Page 68, 1. 16. 
 
 Since I wrote this portion of the text, I have visited 
 Tintern, which was before known to me only by engravings, 
 and I am more than ever convinced of the inapplicability 
 of Subarcuation to large Geometrical windows. The great 
 east window, so skilfully restored " by Mr. Sharpe, is, as I 
 have ° remarked, a sort of corruption of that of Lincoln. 
 The component parts are the same, but all the harmony 
 and proportion is gone. The centre-piece of the whole is 
 far too small, that of each fenestella far too large. In the 
 north window the centre-piece is ill supported on the two 
 complementary lights, and in the fenestellse the acute form 
 of the arch leaves a painful gap over the circle. 
 
 Page 68, 1. 2,3. 
 
 I have added an engraving of this window (11). It will 
 be seen that the fenestellae are of unmixed Arch tracery, 
 somewhat recalling the east window of Thornbury. It is 
 similar, without foliations, in a four-light example at 
 Little Plarrowden, Northamptonshire*’. 
 
 Page 71, 1. 11. 
 
 This is the prevailing window at Malmsbury Abbey. 
 
 " Happily only on paper. I mention chseologia Cambrensis, 1850, p. 50 , 154. 
 this lest any one should suppose that the ° Page 82. 
 mania for patching up ruins had spread P Brandon's Analysis, App. 27. 
 from Oystermouth to Tintern. See Ar- 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 271 
 
 Page 80, 1. 5. 
 
 In these cases the angles of the convex and concave 
 triangles usually coincide ; but in a very singular example 
 at Capel, Suffolk, given in Brandon’s Analysis, the concave 
 triangle is placed transversely, so that its angles, vrhicli are 
 truncated, come in the centres of the sides of the convex 
 or outer triangle, while the foils fit into the angles of the 
 latter, and are therefore naturally pointed. What is still 
 more singular is that the lights are foliated in a similar 
 manner. 
 
 Page 80, 1. 9 from bottom. 
 
 The real germ of the class of windows mentioned in this 
 paragraph may perhaps be best looked for in a window in 
 Malmsbury Abbey (12), subarcuated,'of three lights, where 
 the centre-piece consists of a spiked-foil figure whose 
 nucleus is not a concave, but a common straight-sided 
 triangle. 
 
 Page 82, 1. 3 from bottom. 
 
 There is a similar arrangement in a window at Malms- 
 bury. 
 
 Page 83, 1. 7. 
 
 I will here insert some remarks connected with the class 
 of windows treated of in the preceding section, which, 
 owing to a change in the arrangement of the work, have 
 been necessarily removed from the place which they were 
 intended to occupy 
 
 1 I mention this, lest I should seem place, an example so singular, and an 
 either to have overlooked, or to have de- opinion deserving of such high respect, 
 signedly thrust into a less conspicuous 
 
 O O 
 
272 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 I have been endeavouring to collect instances of the Per- 
 pendicular line occurring, as I think, incidentally in Geo- 
 metrical windows. They may have possibly contributed 
 some hints to the inventors of the real Perpendicular style, 
 but they cannot be considered as having at all forestalled 
 its principle, or done more than accidentally stumble upon 
 some of its forms. This position has been altogether called 
 in question in a work of the highest value, although, as I 
 cannot but think, upon insufficient grounds. The Messrs, 
 Brandon have described and figured'' an exceedingly curi- 
 ous Geometrical window at Evington, in Leicestershire, 
 which I have not myself seen, “ the upper part of whose 
 tracery is divided by super-muUions and transoms into two 
 octo-foliated squares, and a row of trefoliated batement 
 lights.” The foliations are made by the soffit-cusp. “ Such 
 phgenomena,” they continue, “ afford ample scope for con- 
 jecture : shall we say that William of Wykeham introduced 
 Perpendicular tracery, when we thus find every one of its 
 essentials in a window of the time of Edward I. ? Shall 
 we not rather conclude, that in theu’ endeavours to arrive 
 at perfection in tracery, the early builders in the course of 
 their experiments, actually invented Perpendicular tracery, 
 proceeded to a partial development of its peculiarities, and 
 finally rejected it as unworthy ?” 
 
 To this I answer that the tracery of this Avindow is not 
 Perpendicular ; though it contains many vertical lines, the 
 general notion is altogether different. The essence of Per- 
 pendicular tracery is long narrow piercings ; nothing can be 
 more contrary to this tendency, or more totally preventive 
 of any vertical ascent, than the large squares which are the 
 
 ^ Analj'sis of Gothic Architecture, tracery in the time of Edward I., is stated 
 Introduction, p. 25. The still more ex- in the Handbook of English Eeclesio- 
 traordinary window at Rickenhall (see logy (p. 97) to be “ an instance of clever 
 Brandon, p. 24, and Raley’s Gothic Ar- recurrence to former details at a later 
 chitecture, p. 184, note), which is quoted period; which is not uncommon on the 
 as exhibiting complete Perpendicular Continent.” 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 273 
 
 principal featiu’e in this example. The square is a tho- 
 roughly Geometrical figure, and the only wonder is that we 
 do not more frequently find in it Geometrical tracery j its 
 extreme hardness was doubtless the cause. The Evington 
 window has indeed a row of something like batement-lights 
 below the squares, otherwise there would be hardly more of 
 Perpendieular effect in it than in one of the curious win- 
 dows at Barkby ’’ already mentioned. And these, which are 
 still very different from real batement-lights, (having their 
 arches in a secondary order, like a soffit cusp,) are only the 
 most natural way of filling up tlie space unavoidably left 
 between the lights and the squares ; just as the Flamboyant 
 piercing often accidentally finds its way into Geometrical 
 windows, when the requirements of some particular position 
 involve a figure of that form. This window is simply recti- 
 linear Geometrical, not Perpendicular, and is rather to be 
 paralleled with the‘ east window of Stanton St. John’s, 
 equally rectilinear, though the lines have a different di- 
 rection, the figures in the one case being squares, in the 
 other, far more successfully, lozenges. On the whole it 
 appears to me that this very singular window only differs 
 in degree from the other instances of straight lines already 
 accumulated ; and is closely paralleled by numerous early 
 square-headed examples It is probably unique as an in- 
 stance of wholly Rectilinear Geometrical, but it is not Per- 
 pendicular. The horizontal and vertical lines, which com- 
 pose the square, have an equal predominance ; in Perpen- 
 dicular, the horizontal, profusely as it is employed, exists 
 only to bring out more distinctly the supremacy of the 
 vertical. 
 
 » PI. 10, fig. 18. ‘ See p. 10. « PI. 60, fig. 21, 30, 31. 
 
274 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS, 
 
 CHAPTER II. 
 
 Page 93, 1. 13. 
 
 It will be seen that these imperfect figures are the great 
 difficulty of this form of tracery. Since writing the text, I 
 have seen in three neighbouring churches of Monmouth- 
 shire a way of escaping from it, which I have observed no- 
 where else, and which I certainly cannot hold up to imita- 
 tion, but whose boldness and ingenuity has a fair claim upon 
 our attention. This is no other than throwing aside the con- 
 taining arch altogether, and making the window itself of 
 the complicated form produced by following the external 
 ciu’ves of the lights and piercings. I first remarked this 
 in a two-light window at Magor, then in a three-light at 
 Roggiett, and, as they were without labels, and the work- 
 manship rather rough, I set it down as a mere sign of 
 rudeness. But that this cannot be the case is shown by 
 the elaborate west window of Caldicott church (13), where 
 the work is quite as good as is usual in small churches, 
 and exhibits the same form with a label following every 
 curve, and cut square at the top. The multifoiled piercings 
 are worth notice, showing hoAV much superior an octofoil is 
 to a quatrefoil foliated again. 
 
 This form appears to me to be another development of 
 the trefoil head at Haverfordwest, being just the same 
 notion of follownng the actual lines of the tracery. It must 
 therefore be taken in connexion with the chancel windows 
 in the same church, wdiicli would otherwise have no place 
 here. These (14) exhibit the ordinary foliated ogee couplet 
 of the South Welsh churches only, as might be expected. 
 
 ^ See Architectural Antiquities of Gower, p. 19. 
 
18 
 
 19 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 275 
 
 ciiiquefoiled instead of trefoiled, with a label over them, 
 following, in just the same way, their external curves, and 
 cut square at the top. 
 
 Page 97, 1. 19. 
 
 There is something of the same sort, though here the 
 lower part of the common Reticulated type does occur, in 
 an odd two-light window at Tewkesbury (15). The reverse 
 process is found in those in Wells Cathedral mentioned in 
 the note. 
 
 Page 101, 1. 7 from bottom. 
 
 I copied the name Hilston from a drawing of Rickman’s, 
 but as no such place occurs in the Clergy List, and the 
 window does not perceptibly differ from that mentioned 
 just after at Helpstone, 1 am inclined to think that Hilston 
 is .simply a miswriting for the latter name. 
 
 Page 116, § 7. 
 
 In an extremely able article in the Archajological Journal 
 for March, 1850, being a review of Mr. Sharpe’s “Paral- 
 lels” and “ Decorated Windows,” a view is propounded 
 with regard to the origin of Plowing tracery, which ought 
 not to be passed by without notice. This is, that the 
 essential difference between Geometrical and Plowing tra- 
 cery consists in the former having the centres of all its 
 
 y I cannot help expressing my grati- form of Reviews of Mr. Paley’s “ Gotliic 
 fication at the wonderful advance dis- Architecture” (vol. iii. p. 379 etseqq. ) 
 played in such an article as this, tho- and Mr. Poole’s “ Ecclesiastical Archi- 
 roughly acute, thoughtful, and philoso- tecture iu England,” (vol. v. p. 34(i). I 
 phical as it is, on the sort of talk which ought to add that I do not know wlio is 
 once ajipearcd iu the same Journal in the the author of any one of the three. 
 
276 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 figures within the figures themselves, while in Flowing 
 tracery, the centres are alternately] within and without 
 the figures to be described, and the author considers the 
 first germ of this to be found in the form with what I 
 have called Spiked Foliation, a name which I shall be very 
 glad to exchange for a better That the division here 
 made is an accurate mathematical distinction between the 
 two styles is perfectly clear as soon as it is once propounded, 
 though I am afraid that I might never have discovered it 
 for myself. Yet it appears to be one rather too recondite 
 to have had historically much influence on the development 
 of tracery ; it involves the supposition — one I think open 
 to great doubt — that the ogee arch ^ was never used earlier 
 than the instances of Spiked Foliation ; and it is open to 
 the primd facie objection, one fully grasped by the reviewer, 
 that the class supposed to be transitional, instead of ex- 
 hibiting forms intermediate between the two, seems to the 
 eye at least to have no connexion with either. The dis- 
 tinction in fact is rather of the nature of an abstract and 
 universal mathematical law, to be recognized after the 
 change had been made, than of a direct cause, acting either 
 consciously or unconsciously. The general unconscious 
 cause of the development of Flowing tracery out of Geo- 
 metrical was the gradual progress of Gothic architecture 
 towards greater verticality ; the particidar conscious form 
 taken by it was an attempt to fuse together the lights 
 and the figures in the head*’. It was a mathematical law 
 that this could only be effected by the change expressed by 
 the reviewer, but I cannot think that it at all acted as 
 a motive cause, or that Spiked Foliation “ led to the intro- 
 
 ^ I presume that the reviewer’s phrase required to carry it out. 
 of “ eccentric and extravagant tracery,” In some cases this must have begun 
 
 accurately descriptive as it is, is not in- fi'om the very beginning ; such a window- 
 tended as a piece of formal nomenclature. as pi. 36, fig. 85, is contemporary with 
 
 ” For the ogee arch involves the Flow-- pi. I. fig. 19 a. and probably quite early 
 ing principles, and is indeed all that is in the Geometrical period. 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 277 
 
 duction of a new kind of tracery, formed by the interfusion 
 of circles, struck alternately from centres within and without 
 the main design or its subordinate parts.” 
 
 Moreover Spiked Foliation does not stand alone ; where- 
 ever a slender vesica is used (pis. 15, 73; 22, 3, and the 
 window at Dorchester p. 64, note f.) the same change as to 
 the centre is introduced. 
 
 Page 121, note t. 
 
 I do not know the exact date of the Howden window, 
 but it strikes me that it must have been preceded by win- 
 dows of the Newark and Sleaford type. It seems an 
 attempt to combine their general outline with the circle in 
 the head. This of course is not very successful ; the usual 
 distortion in five and seven-light windows of this kind ® is 
 greater than ever. There are some smaller Geometrical 
 elements retained in other parts of the composition, but 
 not much greater in extent than in some windows at 
 Heckington, and the feeling which introduced the prin- 
 cipal circle would account for them also. 
 
 Page 123, 1. 2. 
 
 This is in fact what I have already alluded to in 
 p. 75. 
 
 Page 124, 1. 1. 
 
 The extreme difficulty is perhaps nowhere better shown 
 than in the side windows of the choir at Cotterstock (16). 
 
 Page 127, 1. 8. 
 
 In the text I have only mentioned instances of the two 
 
 ' Page 148. 
 
278 
 
 ADDITIONS AND COURECTIONS. 
 
 arches supporting a circle being filled in with Flowing 
 tracery. At Hingham Norfolk, is a more curious ex- 
 ample ; the skeleton here is the same as at Great Hale % 
 three lights supporting two spherical triangles ; the latter 
 contain a Flowing Wheel pattern, while the lights are filled 
 with Convergent tracery. 
 
 Page 128, 1. 9. 
 
 Some of the best examples of this are found in the 
 chancel of Carew church, Pembrokeshire (17) ; the west 
 window of Kempsford, Gloucestershire, a good deal re- 
 sembles them. 
 
 Page 128, 1. 8 from bottom. 
 
 Not unlike this a fine four-light window from Eving- 
 ton, Leicestershire, engraved in Brandon’s Analysis. The 
 outline is that of one at Tewkesbury^; the long vesicae 
 being quatrefoiled with the soffit-cusp, the lights Arch 
 and Foil. 
 
 Page 130, 1. 5 from bottom. 
 
 Other instances of commingled Geometrical and Flowing 
 patterns may be found in one of the indescribable windows 
 in the transept at Winchester (18) ; one in Caldicott 
 Castle, Monmouthshire (19), where a circle occupies the 
 head of a two-light Divergent window, and the primary 
 pattern of the east window at Howden akeady mentioned 
 
 Page 133,1. 11. 
 
 The earlier introduction of Flowing tracery in this posi- 
 
 Brandon’s Analysis, Appendix, 38. 
 ® See above, page 31 . 
 
 ' P. O'!, note d. 
 
 X P. 121, note t. 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 279 
 
 tion is easily accounted for ; the vesica is preferred to the 
 circle to obviate the bad effect of the latter remarked upon 
 in the east window at Tintern, and this figure once em- 
 ployed, it is, as is described in the next page, hard to avoid 
 Flowing lines. 
 
 Page 134, 1. 9. 
 
 In these remarks I did not mean to defend the circle 
 from the charge of want of coiigrnity, but merely from 
 that of disproportion. 
 
 Page 134, 1. 12. 
 
 The soffit-cusp is employed. 
 
 Page 135, 1. 3. 
 
 The ceutre-piece of the pretty three-light east window at 
 Datchett, Bucks (20), may be considered as a variety either 
 of the spherical triangle or of the spherical square. The 
 filling up has some Geometrical elements of a singular 
 nature, bearing some affinity to the imperfect triangles at 
 Exeter and Malrasbury. 
 
 Page 143, 1. 11. 
 
 The fault is the attempt to fill with Reticulated tracery a 
 space no way adapted to it, and which can only be properly 
 filled with Divergent. 
 
 Page 143, 1. 18. 
 
 See Lewin’s Churches of Flolland’’, p. 2. 
 
 Possibly some latent sensation of the be added at this point, instead of at the 
 accidental homonym caused the reference end of the paragraph, 
 to the note on Rotterdam Cathedral to 
 
 P p 
 
280 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 Page 154. 
 
 I have added a few additional examples of miscellaneous 
 Plowing windows from Rickman’s drawings. One (21), 
 from Stratford-on-Avon, under a four-centred arch, one 
 (22) from Grantham, and two (23, 24) from Bolton Abbey. 
 All serve to show the immense variety which this style may 
 assume, and yet it will be seen that, though they quite 
 beggar description, their tracery only consists of unusual 
 arrangements of the common figures, Reticulated, Diver- 
 gent, and Convergent. 
 
 CHAPTER 111. 
 
 Page 162, 1. 8. 
 
 A similar figure certainly occurs in the top of the Bolton 
 window, but so small as to have no effect upon the general 
 design. 
 
 Page 174,1. 12. 
 
 “ There are some good windows of which the heads have 
 the midlions alternate, that is, the Perpendicular line rises 
 from the top of the arch of the panel below it.” Rickman, 
 
 p. 200. 
 
 Page 177, 1. 10. 
 See also pi. 48, fig. 27, and 49, 33. 
 
ri.h 
 
 22 
 
 2ft 
 
 24 
 

 
 ■ - 
 
 *•3 
 
 ' ■ - 
 
 
 
 
30 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS 
 
 281 
 
 Page 178, 1. 14. 
 
 There is an inaccuracy in the engraving of this window 
 which I did not observe till too late ; the mnllions should 
 have been carried through into the head as usual. 
 
 Page 185, 1. 10 from bottom. 
 
 This window is in fact a subarcuated example of the 
 combination of Alternate and Supermullioned tracery de- 
 scribed in page 191 et seqq. I add a larger one of four 
 lights from Tenby (25), where the fenestelliB'’are of much 
 the same kind, but the complement, which could hardly be 
 otherwise treated, is simply Supermullioned. 
 
 Page 191, 1. 4. 
 
 I add an engraving of the Usk window (26), as being 
 the only five-light one I know. Prom its greater size, the 
 subarcuation is less of an interruption to the general design 
 than in those of four lights, but it prevents the meagreness 
 of the long piercings in the complement being diminished 
 by the introduction of another range, as in most of the 
 examples in plate 50. 
 
 Page 199, § 7. 
 
 I have in the text stated my view of the origin of Per- 
 pendicular tracery dogmatically, at the same time, I trust, 
 sufficiently confirming it by instances. I will now add a 
 few remarks in answer to an article in the Ecclesiologist 
 in which it is controverted at length. 
 
 Vol. V., p. 243 et seqq. 
 
282 
 
 AUDITIONS AND CORllEC I’lONS. 
 
 The author considers not only that Perpendicular is in 
 every respect a great deterioration from the previous styles 
 — a question with which I am not at present concerned — 
 hut that its tracery is not really derived from Flomng at 
 all, but was in the strictest sense an invention of William 
 of Wykehani. The objection to this at first sight is the 
 existence of the large class of strictly Transitional examples 
 described in the present section. The writer howevei' fully 
 grasps the fact that so many Plowing windows exhibit pre- 
 dominant vertical lines, and that these instances have been 
 usually looked upon as the germ of Perpendicular. But he 
 denies that this opinion is a correct one ; and continues, 
 
 “ that according to our hypothesis the inventor of Perpen- 
 dicular may have had such instances before his eyes, and 
 derived notions from them, is we think far from improb- 
 able. In so doing, however, he manifested a want of appre- 
 ciation of the spirit of the tracery, he mistook its general 
 bearings, and so converted what was but an accident into 
 the essential element. Clearly therefore such a forced 
 derivation is no true growth.” That is, if I mistake not, 
 the central mullion at York is as mere an accident as that 
 in the Geometrical windows mentioned above \ from which 
 the inventor of Perpendicular might easily have derived 
 notions. On the contrary, it is clear that continuity, of 
 which verticality is one form, (just as in another sense con- 
 tinuity is one form of verticality,) is an essential feature of 
 Plowing tracery, whereas in Geometrical it is quite the 
 reverse. The vertical mullion then, as being one way, 
 whether a good or a bad way it matters not, of expressing 
 an essential feature of the st}de, cannot possibly be an ac- 
 cident in a Flowino; wundow in the same sense as it is in a 
 Geometrical one. In one sense of course it is an accident ; ' 
 that is, a Plowing window may exist without it. But I 
 
 * PJ. 3, 13 ; 20, 93 ; 21, 94, &c. 
 
AUDITIONS AND COllllECTlONS. 
 
 283 
 
 imagine that there is no more fertile source of changes in 
 architecture, or in any art, than “ converting an accident” 
 of this kind “ into an essential element and to those who 
 prefer the earlier style to the later, such a change will 
 always seem to imply “ a want of appreciation of its spirit.” 
 This was exactly the case with Flamboyant ; the peculiar 
 form of piercing and kind of foliation which in Flowing 
 tracery is an “ accident,” frequently occurring, frequently 
 away, not required by the spirit of the style, yet not abso- 
 lutely repugnant to it, becomes the essence of the later 
 style. To the many instances of Flowing windows affected 
 by an occasional Flamboyancy we may apply the very words 
 of the Ecclesiologist ; the inventor of Flamboyant may have 
 had such instances before him, and derived notions from 
 them ; yet he manifested a want of appreciation of the 
 spirit of Flowing tracery, and converted an accident into 
 an essential element. Yet of this style the same Avriter™ 
 had previously said ; “ we assert that Flamboyant is but a 
 link of the long aelpj] ^pvaelr] of Christian Architecture, 
 as naturally and as immediately connected with Late Mid- 
 dle, [Decorated,] as this was Avith Early Middle, and that 
 with Late First-Pointed, [Early English.] We hold indeed 
 that Flamboyant was a deterioration from, Avhilst every 
 previous style had been an improvement upon, its prede- 
 cessor; but this consideration is manifestly alien to the 
 dry and technical one of mere relationship.” And this, as 
 I again repeat, is all that I here claim for Perpendicular. 
 It is clear that the Avriter’s intense depreciation of that 
 style, AAdiich he rates far below Flamboyant, has hindered 
 him from applying to this case the truth Avhich he had so 
 acutely grasped in the last quotation AAdiich I have made. 
 And I may here be alloAAud to ask, if there be this im- 
 measurable gap between Perpendicular and Flambo3’ant, if 
 
 "> r. 235. 
 
284 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 the latter he a genuine link of the a-eiprj thus 
 
 intimately connected with the style which preceded it, 
 while the former is held for iin- Gothic, and un-Christian, 
 and asserted to have no kind of connection with or deriva- 
 tion from its predecessors, on what conceivable principles 
 such opposite styles are to be classed together, as they are 
 by the Ecclesiologist, under the single head of “ Third- 
 Pointed.” I of course admit a very close connexion between 
 Perpendicular and Flamboyant, closer than between either 
 and any preceding style, but for a writer holding such a 
 view to throAv them thus together, is surely a piece of mere 
 arbitrary chronological arrangement which Rickman him- 
 self might have eschewed. 
 
 Having thus attempted to avoid the natural inference 
 from this important class of Flowing windows, the writer 
 thus proceeds to account for the existence of what are 
 usually considered as transitional examples between Deco- 
 rated and Perpendicular. “ But there are up and down 
 onr country churches a number of uncouth sprawling win- 
 dows, which ecclesiologists have heretofore been in the 
 habit of notino; down as transitional between “Decorated” 
 and “ Perpendicular ;” what do we say to them? What 
 we say is this, that if the fact of the sudden maturity of 
 “Perpendicular” be tme, then that these cannot be the 
 incunabula of that style. Assuming om' hypothesis, as- 
 suming the new style invented and published with great 
 pomp and with the authority of official sanction ; is it not 
 very probable that country architects would be anxious to 
 be in the fashion, and that they would use their best en- 
 deavours to learn the new style P Is it not also very probable 
 that most of them would learn its forms rather than its 
 spirit, whilst at the same time they would find it utterly 
 impossible to unlearn their old lesson : and would not 
 the natural result of this be, that when called upon to 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 285 
 
 design church windows they would produce those mon- 
 strosities which have been so highly prized as interesting 
 transitional specimens ?” 
 
 Now allowing for a little strength of language which I 
 cannot think even these unlucky examples altogether de- 
 serve, this is by no means an unfair description of the 
 origin of one class of transitional windows, but it contains 
 nothing peculiar to the transition between Decorated and 
 Perpendicular; it describes one side of all transitions. 
 It is in fact an accurate description of wdiat Professor Willis 
 calls Imitation specimens. Comminglings of two styles, 
 plenty of which certainly occur between Plowing and 
 Perpendicular. But it does not account for Intermediate 
 specimens ; it does not account for the tendency which 
 every form of Plowing tracery exhibits to run into vertical 
 lines when no Perpendicular effect is thereby produced, 
 and when the characteristic foliation is absent. The pro- 
 cess he describes accounts for every intermixture of the 
 two kinds of details, for windows generally Perpendicular 
 retaining some Decorated portions ; but it cannot account 
 for the gradual, stealthy, and apparently unmeaning intro- 
 duction of the vertical line traced out in the text. And 
 if the single central mullion can be accounted for by his 
 other theory, neither of them can account for the west 
 window of St. Michael’s Cambridge, or the great transept 
 window at Prisby“. This latter alone would I think be 
 sufficient answer to the theory of the Ecclesiologist, 
 that Perpendicular came to a “ sudden maturity,” and that 
 all transitional specimens are mere clumsy imitations. This 
 is a window of most rich and graceful tracery, 
 
 o anqjjbaTOvpyos S’ ov tcs evreXrjs dp’ rjv, 
 
 osTis t6S' epjov Miraae, 
 
 See p. 208. 
 
286 
 
 ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 its predomiDant vertical lines are naturally deduced from 
 its Flowing elements ; there is not the slightest trace of 
 imitation of more complete Perpendicular : the artist who 
 could design such a window, could clearly have copied a 
 Perpendicular one with far greater success. 
 
 Of the sense in which William of Wykeham may be 
 said to be the inventor of the Perpendicular style, I have 
 treated elsewhere °. 
 
 Page 202, 1. 12 from bottom. 
 
 At the same time there is no class in which the two 
 sorts of transition run more closely into one another. 
 Reticulated tracery was developed into Perpendicular, and 
 then the two were mingled together. The designer of 
 No. 52 was strictly a developer, the designer of No. 53 
 might very possibly have seen a more complete Alternate 
 window. I have therefore added a few additional examples 
 of this curious class. The window from Oadby (27) men- 
 tioned in the text, is very clumsy, and can be said to prove 
 but little, but that at Upton Snodsbury (28) is clearly a 
 case of the most genuine development, one step more 
 advanced than that at Claycoaten. In other examples the 
 two stages seem confused. In one at St. jMary’s, Mon- 
 mouth (29), we see at the sides the same genuine tran- 
 sition as at Claycoaten and Upton, but the lines inserted in 
 two of the vesicae would almost seem to imply that more 
 complete Perpendicular windows must have gone before it. 
 On the other hand in one at Asfordby (30) we seem to 
 have a commingling of Reticulated, Flamboyant and Per- 
 pendicular ; the vertical line however, though much stronger 
 in effect than at IMonmouth, does not in the same way take 
 Perpendicular for granted. It might be only tracing one 
 
 “ History of Architecture, p. 376. 
 
ri. 7 
 
ADDITIONS AND CORRECTIONS. 
 
 287 
 
 Flowing pattern within another as in PI. 42, fig. 107. One 
 at Shiplake, Oxon (31), seems in a manner intermediate 
 between these two. Finally one of the large windows at 
 Cheltenham (32) seems to imply a knowledge of complete 
 Supermullioned tracery, and may be fairly set down as a 
 clear case of Commingling. This may be very well compared 
 with those at Kislingbury (PI. 54, fig 59) ; the Ogee and 
 Reticulated element in each occupies an analogous position. 
 
 Page 209, 1. 5 from bottom. 
 
 I add two other examples of the predominant vertical 
 line. One at Slymbridge (33) is remarkable for its primary 
 lines not tracing out any real primary pattern, a pecu- 
 liarity as unpleasing as it is singular. The same might 
 almost be said of the west window of Cam (34) ; both 
 would seem to be attempts at a primary Divergent pattern. 
 
 Page 222, 1. 2. 
 
 The annexed window at Blymhill, Staffordshire (35), 
 curiously combines Supermullioned, Reticulated, and Con- 
 vergent. 
 
 Page 230, 1. 3. 
 
 Arch tracery without intersection, of Perpendicular date, 
 is less common ; there was an example, now destroyed, in 
 the south aisle at Cam (36), which, allowing for difference 
 of proportion was the Rothley window (PI. 60, fig. 87) with- 
 out its Perpendicular lines. 
 
vr 
 
I IN D E X. 
 
 A. 
 
 Alternate tracery, 174, 186 ; Analogy 
 with Reticulated, 187 ; Subarcu- 
 ated, 1 90 ; Combination with Su- 
 permullioned, 191. 
 
 Anoinalies in tracery, 6. 
 
 Arch tracery, its definition, 10 ; de- 
 velopment from lancets, 265 ; no 
 strictly transitional stage, 40 ; its 
 varieties, 42 ; Combination with 
 Geometrical, 53 ; Anomalous forms, 
 61 ; their origin, 269 ; introduction 
 of straight lines, 81 ; combined 
 with Geometrical, 127 ; with Per- 
 pendicular, 224 ; late use of, 229. 
 
 Arch and Foil tracery, 55 ; its varie- 
 ties, 56 ; its corruptions, 58. 
 
 B. 
 
 Battlements in tracery, 180. 
 
 Belfry windows, analogous to triforia, 
 9 ; their distinctive character, 256. 
 
 C. 
 
 Circle, the main element of Geome- 
 trical tracery, 11. 
 
 Circular windows, 232 ; rare on a 
 large scale in England, 233 ; their 
 early use, ih. ; with Geometrical 
 traceiy, 234 ; with wheel tracery. 
 
 235 ; with Flowing tracery, 236 ; 
 in connexion with tracery below, 
 239. 
 
 Combination of principles, different 
 ways of effecting, 3, 111. 
 
 Commingling of principles, 3. 
 
 Complementary lights, 137, 181. 
 
 Contrast, principle of, 169. 
 
 Convergent tracery, its origin, 105 ; 
 Horizontal, 108; Reversed, 110; 
 its combination with Reticulated, 
 113, 115: with Ogee, 116. 
 
 Cross, in tracery, 152. 
 
 Cusps, varieties of, 13. 
 
 D. 
 
 Decorated tracery, return to in late 
 Perpendicular, 212. 
 
 Divergent tracery, its origin, 105 ; 
 its vegetable efiect, 106 ; its com- 
 bination with Reticulated, 112 
 with Convergent, 113, 115 ; de- 
 veloped into Supermullioned, 207. 
 
 Doorways, double, how far admitting 
 tracery, 9. 
 
 F. 
 
 FenestellcB, 19. 
 
 Flamboyant tracery, use in England, 
 156, 7 ; its definition, 157 ; deri- 
 vation from Reticulated, 159 ; un- 
 
J290 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 symmetrical examples, 1 63 ; com- 
 bination with other forms, 164 ; 
 analogy with Perpendicular, 166, 
 210 ; comparison of the two, 167 ; 
 English Flamboyant developed into 
 Perpendicular, 203. 
 
 Flat-headed windows, 243. 
 
 Fleur-de-hjs in tracery, 77, 143. 
 
 Foil tracery, its definition, 11 ; its 
 character, 34 ; does not observe 
 Geometrical laws of support, 34 ; 
 Combination with Geometrical, 50 ; 
 with Flowing, 130 ; with Perpen- 
 dicular, 184. 
 
 Foliation, its effect on expression, 47 ; 
 complete and imperfect, ib. 
 
 G. 
 
 Geometrical tracery, its definition, 
 10 ; use of straight lines, 79, 82, 
 272 ; its character, 83 ; its de- 
 velopment into Flowing, 116 et 
 seqq. ; combination with Flowing, 
 125, 8 ; centre pieces in Subarcu- 
 ated Flowing windows, 133. 
 
 Geometrical, Early, distinguished from 
 Foil tracery, 11 ; its principles, 
 21 — 4 ; most accurately observed 
 iu England, 24 ; not imperative in 
 Foil tracery, 34 ; combination with 
 Foil tracery, 50 ; with Arch, 53. 
 
 Glass, Stained, 233. 
 
 Grouping in Perpendicular, 177. 
 
 I. 
 
 Imitation specimens, 15, 211, 285. 
 
 Impost, bounds the tracery in a 
 pointed window, 231. 
 
 Intersecting Arch iv&CQXj, 45 ; how far 
 Continuous, 47 ; late use of, 229. 
 
 L. 
 
 Label following the whole tracery, 
 274. 
 
 Lancets, their^ combinations, 5 ; the 
 couplet the chief source of tracery, 
 6 ; developed into square-headed 
 windows, 245 ; into Arch tracery, 
 265. 
 
 0 . 
 
 Ogee tracery, 97 ; answers to Arch, 
 98 ; its subdivisions, ib., 99 ; its 
 connexion with Reticulated, 103 ; 
 combination with Reticulated, 111; 
 with Convergent, 116 ; its import- 
 ance as a primary skeleton, 147 • 
 accounted for, ih. ; developed into 
 Perpendicular, 204. 
 
 P. 
 
 Panelled tracery, 174, 194; its final 
 extinction, 198. 
 
 Patterns, primary, secondary, ^c., 4. 
 
 Perpendicular tracery, 166 ; its con- 
 nexion with Flamboyant, ib., 210 ; 
 comparison of the two, 167 ; ex- 
 tract from Mr. Petit, ib. ; its faults, 
 169 ; less Continuous than the best 
 Flamboyant, 171 ; practical excel- 
 lence, 172 ; its varieties, 173 ; rules, 
 177 ; its derivation from Flowing, 
 199 ; from Reticulated, 200 ; its 
 development legitimate, 202, 282 ; 
 development from English Flam- 
 boyant, 203 ; from Ogee, 204 ; 
 combination with Decorated, 210, 
 215; Return to Decorated, 212, 
 220 ; combination with Arch, 224. 
 
 R. 
 
 Reticulated tracery, 89 ; its develop- 
 ment from Geometrical, 90 ; the 
 most typical Flowing form, 95 ; its 
 character, ib. ; anomalies, ib. ; its 
 
INDEX. 
 
 291 
 
 Foil version, 97 ; its connexion 
 with Ogee, 103 ; combination with 
 Ogee, 111 ; with Divergent, 112, 
 with Convergent, 113, 115 as a 
 primary skeleton, 1 50 ; developed 
 into Flamboyant, 159 ; into Per- 
 pendicular, 200. 
 
 S. 
 
 Segmental-headed windows, 253. 
 
 Soffi,t-cusp, peculiar to Early tracery, 
 13. 
 
 Somersetshire, its localisms in tracery, 
 191. 
 
 Spaces not to be foliated in Geome- 
 trical, 50 ; foliated in Flowing, 88. 
 
 Spiked Foliation, 79 ; its origin, 80, 
 271 ; whether the origin of Flow- 
 ing, 275. 
 
 Spire Lights, 258. 
 
 Square Windows, 241 ; in towers, ib . ; 
 with spandrils, 242. 
 
 Square-headed windows, their origin, 
 244 ; with tracery, 247 ; with span- 
 drils, 251. 
 
 Square, Spherical, rare in English 
 tracery, 32 ; common in Germany, 
 ib. ; its Flowing form, 96. 
 
 Subarcuation, its definition, 62 ; in 
 Geometrical, 63 ; in Foil,^ 69 ; in 
 Flowing, 132 ; with Geometrical 
 centre-pieces, 133 ; with Wheel, 
 135 ; with Flowing, 137 ; use in 
 Perpendicular, 175. 
 
 Subordination of mouldings, 4 ; its 
 importance in Geometrical tracery, 
 27 ; scarcely found in Foil, 39 ; 
 less desirable in Flowing, 87 ; a 
 vestige of Geometrical, 111, 146; 
 its last vestiges in Flowing, 151 ; 
 less importance in Perpendicular, 
 180. 
 
 Supermullioned tracery, 174, 177 ; 
 with open Transoms, 178; tran- 
 
 somed, 179 ; subarcuated, 180 ; 
 combination with Alternate, 191 ; 
 it origins, 206. 
 
 Sgmbolism, intentional, rare instance 
 of, 152. j 
 
 T. 
 
 Tangential tracery, 10. 
 
 Tracery, distinctively Gothic, 2 ; its 
 origin, 5 ; its incipient form, 6 ; 
 its first complete form, 8 ; its two 
 main divisions, 10 ; individual re- 
 ferences in, 77 ; not to reach below 
 the impost, 231 ; approximation 
 to in Eomanesque, 261. 
 
 Transition from Geometrical to 
 Flowing, 116; its purest form, 
 117 ; its stages, 118 et seqq. 
 
 Transition from Flowing to Perpen- 
 dicular, compared with the other, 
 199 ; natural and legitimate, 282. 
 
 Transition and Imitation specimens, 
 15, 211, 285. 
 
 Transom, open, 178. 
 
 Triangle, Spherical, use of in Geome- 
 trical, 28 ; a later idea than the 
 circle, 29 ; use of in an imperfect 
 form, 70 ; its Flowing form, 96. 
 
 Triangular windows, 238. 
 
 Triforia, up to what stage analogous 
 to windows, 8. 
 
 V. 
 
 Vesica Piscis, use of the term, 7 ; 
 rarity in Geometrical tracery, 28 ; 
 divergent vesicae in heads of Geo- 
 metrical windows, 76 ; its import- 
 ance in Flowing, 87 ; Ogee, 89 ; 
 leads naturally to Flowing, 134, 
 279 ; as a window is a lozenge, 
 243. 
 
292 
 
 INDEX. 
 
 W. 
 
 ^Yheel tracery, in Geometrical win- 
 dows, 72 ; without a central figure, 
 76j its Foil form, 78 ; its effect on 
 Flowing tracery, 104 ; centre-pieces 
 
 in Subarcuated Flowing windows, 
 135. 
 
 ^Yindov)s, their importance first re- 
 cognised in Gothic architecture, 1 ; 
 their importance in discrimination 
 of styles, 2 ; difi"erent forms used 
 simultaneously, 3. 
 
INDEX OE PLACES 
 
 Those marked with an asterisk (*) are engraved. Those in Italics are 
 described or engraved from the drawings of others. Under this last head 
 are included several instances, in which the author had visited the building, 
 but had not taken any note or drawing of the particular window referred to. 
 
 A, 
 
 Abingdon, St. Helen ... 
 Acton Burnell (1) 
 
 ( 2 ) ... 
 
 Adderbury (1) ... 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 Addington, Great 
 Addington, Little 
 Albans, St., Abbey (1) 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 Alban’s, St., St. Michael’s 
 Albrighton 
 
 Aldwinkle All Saints (1) 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 Aldwinkle St. Peter’s (1) 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 Algarkirke 
 *x\.ltenberg (1)... 
 
 * ( 2 ) 
 
 Alvechurch 
 
 PAGE 
 
 225 
 
 18 
 
 21 
 
 181 
 
 183 
 
 243 
 
 16 
 
 44 
 
 65 
 
 77 
 
 99 
 
 134 
 
 20 
 
 129 
 
 164 
 
 217 
 
 246 
 
 252 
 
 64 
 
 207 
 
 258 
 
 143 
 
 33 
 
 75 
 
 94 
 
 Amesby (1) 
 
 • (2) ... 
 
 * ( 3 ) ... 
 
 A niney St. Mary 
 Ancaster (1) ... 
 
 * ( 2 ) ... 
 
 Armitage 
 Arreton (1) 
 
 ( 2 ) ... 
 
 Asfordby (1) ... 
 
 ( 2 ) ... 
 
 * ( 3 ) ... 
 
 * ( 4 ) ... 
 
 Ashby, Canons... 
 Ashby, Castle (1) 
 
 (2) 
 
 Ashby Folville... 
 Ashford 
 
 * Askley 
 Aslackby 
 *Astell... 
 Aston-le-Walls 
 
 * Attleborough ( 1 ) 
 
 * ( 2 ) 
 
 Axbridge 
 Aynhoe (1) 
 
 • ( 2 ) ... 
 
 PAGE 
 
 no 
 
 138 
 
 159 
 
 115 
 
 98 
 
 130 
 
 216 
 
 15 
 
 17 
 
 28 
 
 30 
 
 106 
 
 286 
 
 178 
 
 138 
 
 178 
 
 248 
 
 183 
 
 35 
 
 138 
 
 65 
 
 41 
 
 124 
 
 135 
 
 253 
 
 148 
 
 252 
 
294 
 
 INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 B. 
 
 Badby (1) 
 
 ... 59 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 113 
 
 BaldocJc {\) 
 
 ... 160 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 164 
 
 Balsall Temple (1) 
 
 ... 18 
 
 * (2) ... 
 
 ... 23 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 51 
 
 (4) ... 
 
 ... 82 
 
 * (5) ... 
 
 ... 235 
 
 Ban well 
 
 ... 193 
 
 Barby 
 
 ... 37 
 
 Barfreston 
 
 ... 235 
 
 Barholme 
 
 ... 244 
 
 Barkby (1) 
 
 ... 17 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 39 
 
 • (3) 
 
 ... 51 
 
 * (4) 
 
 ... 61 
 
 * (5) 
 
 ... 73 
 
 (6) 
 
 ... 98 
 
 * (7) 
 
 ... 124 
 
 Bamack (1) 
 
 47, 1 80 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 57 
 
 * (3) 
 
 ... 99 
 
 Barnwell St. Andrew ( 1 ) 
 
 ... 36 
 
 . 1 (2) 
 
 ... 119 
 
 Barrow upon Soar (1)... 
 
 15 
 
 (2)... 
 
 ... 189 
 
 Barton on the Heath ... 
 
 ... 100 
 
 Barton, Earls ... 
 
 ... 93 
 
 Barton Se</rave 
 
 ... 2.38 
 
 • Barwell 
 
 ... 221 
 
 Basingstoke 
 
 ... 207 
 
 Bath Cathedral (1, 2)... 
 
 183, 253 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 1£9 
 
 Bayeux Cathedral 
 
 ... 73 
 
 Bearstead 
 
 ... 91 
 
 Bedale ... 
 
 ... 67 
 
 Bedingham 
 
 ... 100 
 
 Bedicin, Great... 
 
 ... 80 
 
 •Berkeley (1) ... 
 
 ... 43 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 185 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 236 
 
 Beverley Minster 
 
 ... ib. 
 
 St. Mary (screen) 
 
 ...9, 122 
 
 Beverley St. Mary (1)... 
 
 ... 147 
 
 (2)... 
 
 ... 150 
 
 •Bickenhill, Church ... 
 
 189, 190 
 
 Billinghorouejh (1) 
 
 ... 39 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 80 
 
 •Bisley... 
 
 263, 269 
 
 Blakesley 
 
 ... 245 
 
 Blisworth 
 
 15 
 
 Bloxham 
 
 ... 18 
 
 * Blymhill 
 
 36, 285 
 
 Blythfield 
 
 46, 180 
 
 Bolton Ahhey (1) 
 
 ... 114 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 149 
 
 * (3) ... 
 
 ... 161 
 
 * • (4, 5) 
 
 ... 280 
 
 Boston ... 
 
 ... 150 
 
 Bottisharn 
 
 ... 60 
 
 Boughton Aluyh 
 
 ... 120 
 
 Bourne 
 
 ... 17 
 
 * Bozeat (1) ... 
 
 ... 122 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 188 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 258 
 
 Brackley (1) 
 
 ... 127 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 128 
 
 •Brampton, Church (1) 
 
 76, 77 
 
 • (2) 
 
 ... 106 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 138 
 
 * Braunston 
 
 101, 249 
 
 Brecon Priory (1) 
 
 ... 91 
 
 • (2) ... 
 
 ... 121 
 
 •Brewood 
 
 ... 193 
 
 Bridlington (1) 
 
 ... 64 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 66 
 
 Brigham 
 
 ... 131 
 
 •Brigsmck (1)... 
 
 ... 202 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 245 
 
 Brington (1) ... 
 
 ... 181 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 182 
 
 Bristol, St. Augustine... 
 
 ... 193 
 
 * Cathedral (1) ... 
 
 ... 50 
 
 • (2) ... 
 
 ... 51 
 
 • (3) ... 
 
 ... 60 
 
 (4) ... 
 
 ... 67 
 
 (5) ... 
 
 77 
 
 • (6) ... 
 
 ... 82 
 
 • (7) ... 
 
 ... 131 
 
INDEX OF PLACES. 295 
 
 * Bristol Cathedral (8) 
 
 
 .. 135 
 
 * (9) 
 
 
 .. 193 
 
 * (10) 
 
 
 .. 239 
 
 St. James 
 
 
 .. 234 
 
 St. Mary KedclifFe 
 
 (1) • 
 
 .. 143 
 
 
 
 (2) . 
 
 .. 193 
 
 * Mayor’s Chapel 
 
 (1) • 
 
 .. 36 
 
 
 (2) . 
 
 .. 82 
 
 
 
 (3) . 
 
 .. 218 
 
 St. Werburgh 
 
 (1) • 
 
 .. 189 
 
 
 
 (2) . 
 
 .. 229 
 
 * Broad Blunsdon 
 
 
 ..16, 48 
 
 Buckland 
 
 . 
 
 .. 182 
 
 Burrington (1)... 
 
 
 .. 204 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 .. 219 
 
 Burton (I)-.. 
 
 . 
 
 .. 205 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 .. 209 
 
 Bushbury 
 
 
 .. 58 
 
 *Byfield (1) 
 
 
 . 57 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 . 98 
 
 * (3) 
 
 
 . 255 
 
 C. 
 
 
 *Caldicott (1, 2) 
 
 ... 274 
 
 * Castle 
 
 ... 278 
 
 Cam (1) 
 
 ... 81 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 188 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 196 
 
 *— (4, 5) 
 
 ... 287 
 
 Cambridge, Great St. Mary 
 
 ... 217 
 
 King’s Coll. (1) 
 
 ... 218 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 222 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 226 
 
 Little St. Mary 
 
 ... 143 
 
 * St. Michael (1) 
 
 ... 94 
 
 * (2,3) 
 
 ... 288 
 
 * Cameringharn 
 
 ... 248 
 
 Canterbm’y Cathedral (1) 
 
 ... 125 
 
 (2, 3) 
 
 ... 179 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 184 
 
 • (5) 
 
 ... 216 
 
 (6) 
 
 ... 233 
 
 * St. Dunstan ... 
 
 ... 97 
 
 * St. Stephen's ... 
 
 18, 262 
 
 Capel ... 
 
 ... 271 
 
 Cardiff 
 
 ... 229 
 
 Cardigan (1, 2) 
 
 ... 193 
 
 * Carenton , 2~) 
 
 ... 240 
 
 Carew (1) 
 
 ... 229 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 279 
 
 * Carlhy 
 
 ... 218 
 
 Carlisle Cathedral 
 
 129, 141 
 
 Carlton Scroope 
 
 ... 49 
 
 Cartmel (1) 
 
 ... .38 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 66 
 
 * Cassington 
 
 ... 35 
 
 * Castor 
 
 ... 220 
 
 * Cativorth 
 
 ... 239 
 
 Chacomhe (1) ... 
 
 ... 44 
 
 * (2) 
 
 92 
 
 Chaddesley Corhet (1) ... 
 
 ... 126 
 
 * (2)... 
 
 ... 130 
 
 Charlton 
 
 15 
 
 Horethorne ... 
 
 ... 64 
 
 Chartham (1) ... 
 
 ... 80 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 81 
 
 Charwelton 
 
 ... 44 
 
 ChecMey 
 
 ... 46 
 
 *Cheddar 
 
 ... 253 
 
 Cheltenham (1) 
 
 77, 146 
 
 * (2) 
 
 .. 115 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 235 
 
 * (4) 
 
 ... 287 
 
 Chelveston 
 
 ... 249 
 
 Chepstow Castle (1) ... 
 
 ... 248 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 261 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 ... 263 
 
 Cherry Hinton (1) ... 
 
 ... 178 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 179 
 
 * Chipping N orton (1) 
 
 ... 77 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 119 
 
 * (3) 
 
 ... 123 
 
 * (4) 
 
 ... 159 
 
 Chipping Sodhury 
 
 ... 252 
 
 Chipping Wardon (1)... 
 
 ... . 35 
 
 (2)... 
 
 ... 59 
 
 * (3)... 
 
 ... 128 
 
 (4)... 
 
 ... 133 
 
 Cholsey 
 
 18 
 
 Christ Church, Monmouth (1, 2) 229 
 
 R r 
 
296 
 
 
 INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 
 
 Churchdown ... 
 
 • • • 
 
 
 177 
 
 Cricklade, St. Sampson (4) ... 
 
 81 
 
 Churchill 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 
 
 193 
 
 Croft ... 
 
 • • • • 
 
 15 
 
 * Cirencester (1, 2) 
 
 
 
 267 
 
 Cromer 
 
 
 242 
 
 * (3) 
 
 
 
 2C9 
 
 * Cross, St. (1) ... 
 
 91 
 
 , 118 
 
 Claverley (1) ... 
 
 
 
 68 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 202 
 
 * (2) ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 76 
 
 * (3) ... 
 
 
 207 
 
 * (3) ... 
 
 
 
 78 
 
 *Cuddesden (1) 
 
 • • • • 
 
 61 
 
 Claybrook, Great (1) 
 
 
 ... 
 
 107 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 92 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 
 160 
 
 (3) 
 
 
 181 
 
 Claycoaten (1) ... 
 
 
 
 114 
 
 (4) 
 
 • •• 
 
 185 
 
 * _ (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 202 
 
 * Curdworth 
 
 
 216 
 
 * Clement, St., Jersey 
 
 
 
 159 
 
 
 
 
 Cleut (1) 
 
 
 
 61 
 
 
 1 
 
 
 * - (2) 
 
 
 
 195 
 
 
 D. 
 
 
 Coaley (1) 
 
 
 
 99 
 
 
 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 
 188 
 
 *Darfield 
 
 ... 
 
 138 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 
 
 193 
 
 *Datchett 
 
 ... 
 
 279 
 
 Coygs 
 
 
 
 249 
 
 David’s, St., Palace (1) 
 
 178 
 
 Compton, Long 
 
 
 
 30 
 
 
 
 (2) 
 
 235 
 
 Congreshury (1) 
 
 
 
 182 
 
 Deddington (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 18 
 
 * (2) 
 
 
 
 247 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 ib. 
 
 CorshoMi (1) 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 
 
 205 
 
 * (2) . . 
 
 
 ... 
 
 112 
 
 Deeping 
 
 
 124 
 
 Cossington (1) ... 
 
 
 
 54 
 
 
 
 
 208 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 
 60 
 
 Denford 
 
 ... 
 
 30 
 
 *Cotterstock (1) 
 
 
 144, 
 
 146 
 
 
 
 
 249 
 
 * (2) 
 
 
 
 277 
 
 Didcot... 
 
 ... ... 
 
 193 
 
 Cottesbrook 
 
 
 
 17 
 
 Ditton ... 
 
 
 99 
 
 Cottingham 
 
 
 
 150 
 
 * Donat’s, St. ... 
 
 ... 
 
 248 
 
 *Cottishall 
 
 
 
 242 
 
 Dorchester (doorway) ... 
 
 245 
 
 Courteenhall ... 
 
 
 
 46 
 
 
 
 (1) 
 
 17 
 
 Cowley, JMiddleses 
 
 
 91, 
 
 119 
 
 
 
 (2) 
 
 30 
 
 Oxon ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 245 
 
 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 46 
 
 Cranford St. Andrew 
 
 
 ... 
 
 99 
 
 
 
 (4) 
 
 47 
 
 Cransley (1) 
 
 
 
 64 
 
 
 
 (5) 64, 91 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 94 
 
 
 
 (6) 
 
 64 
 
 Crick (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 
 77 
 
 
 
 (7) 
 
 80 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 
 96 
 
 (8) 
 
 121, 131, 180, 
 
 197 
 
 * ( 3 ) 
 
 
 
 112 
 
 (9) 
 
 
 190 
 
 * (4) 
 
 
 
 130 
 
 (10) 
 
 204, 
 
 248 
 
 (5) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 130 
 
 Dover, Maison Dieu 
 
 239 
 
 ((5) 
 
 
 
 151 
 
 Dowshy... 
 
 
 
 269 
 
 * (7, 8, 9)... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 153 
 
 ♦Drayton, West 
 
 
 
 251 
 
 Cricklade, St. Sampson (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 64 
 
 Dun church (1) 
 
 
 
 79 
 
 * 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 68 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 114 
 
 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 ... 
 
 77 i 
 
 (3) 
 
 
 
 203 
 
INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 297 
 
 Dundee... ... ••• 
 
 Dursley (1) ••• ••• 
 
 * ( 2 ) 19 ^ 
 
 Duston ••• ••• 199 
 
 E. 
 
 Eastington ... ••• 65 
 
 ♦Easton Maudit 259 
 
 ♦Easton Neston (1) ... ••• 18 
 
 * (2) 60 
 
 ♦Eaton, Church ... 196 
 
 Eaton Socon ... 243 
 
 ♦Ecton... ... .•• ••• 207 
 
 Eling ... ... 
 
 ♦ Ely Cathedral (1) .. ... 139 
 
 (2) 142 
 
 (3) 143 
 
 (4) 219 
 
 (doorway) 9 
 
 (triforium) 8, 9 
 
 Ensham ... ... ••• 30 
 
 ♦Etchingham (1) ... ... 98 
 
 ♦ (2) ... ... 115 
 
 ♦ (3) 162 
 
 » (4) ... ... 166 
 
 (5) 207 
 
 Etton ... ... ... ...13, 15 
 
 Eoington (1) ... ... ... 272 
 
 (2) 278 
 
 Exeter 177 
 
 Cathedral (1) •• 32 
 
 (2) 50 
 
 (3) 52 
 
 » (4) ... ... ib. 
 
 * (5) ... ... 56 
 
 * (6) ... ... 57 
 
 * (7) ... 69, 118 
 
 * (8) 71 
 
 * (9) ih. 
 
 (10) 72 
 
 (11) 73 
 
 * (12) ih. 
 
 * (13) 78 
 
 * (14) 102 
 
 Exeter Cathedral (15) 
 
 ... 119 
 
 * (16) 
 
 127, 145 
 
 (17) 
 
 ... 144 
 
 ♦Eydon 
 
 ... 73 
 
 F. 
 
 
 Fagan, St. (1) ... 
 
 ... 35 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 57 
 
 Fairford 
 
 ... 184 
 
 ♦Farleigh, East 
 
 ... 138 
 
 Farringdon 
 
 ... 263 
 
 Fenstanton 
 
 ... 118 
 
 Ferrington, St. Clement 
 
 ... 228 
 
 St.JoJm ... 
 
 ... 236 
 
 Finedon (1) 
 
 ... 44 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 94 
 
 Fishtoft 
 
 ... 74 
 
 Fleet 
 
 ... 81 
 
 Floore (1) 
 
 ... 94 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 185 
 
 *Fordham (1)... 
 
 ... 138 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 143 
 
 Fotheringhay 
 
 ... 196 
 
 Fountains 
 
 ... 261 
 
 * Foionliope 
 
 ... 81 
 
 Frishy(l) 
 
 77 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 135 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 208 
 
 ♦ (4) 
 
 ... ib. 
 
 » (5) 
 
 ... 238 
 
 (6) 
 
 ... 259 
 
 Fulbich... ... 
 
 ... 101 
 
 G. 
 
 
 Gaddeshy (1) ... 
 
 ... 7, 28 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... . 15 
 
 ♦ (3) 
 
 ... 30 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 44 
 
 (5) 
 
 ... 112 
 
 * (6) 
 
 ... 142 
 
 ♦ (7) 
 
 ... 143 
 
 (8) 
 
 ... 189 
 
 • (9) 
 
 ... 239 
 
298 
 
 INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 112 
 
 Geddington ( 1 ) ... ... 30 
 
 (2) 126 
 
 * (3) 238 
 
 George, St., Glamorgan ... 19 
 
 Glapthorn (1) ... ... ... 7, 28 
 
 (2) 57 
 
 * (3,4) 246 
 
 * Glastonbury Abbey Barn ... 238 
 
 * St.John, 184, 186, 213 
 
 Gloucester Cathedral (1) ... 76 
 
 * (2) ... 122 
 
 (3) ... 142 
 
 Gnosall... ... ... ... 134 
 
 * Grafton Regis ... ... 192 
 
 Grafton Undericood ... ... 126 
 
 Granchester ( 1 ) ... • ... 134 
 
 (2) ... ■ ... 139 
 
 Grantham (1) ... ... ... 25 
 
 (2) 153 
 
 * (3) 280 
 
 Grashy... ... ... .. 169 
 
 * Graville ... ... ... 23 
 
 Greens Norton... ... ... 112 
 
 Grouville (1, 2) ... ... 152 
 
 * (3) 165 
 
 Guishorough {1) ... ... 32 
 
 (2) ... ... 52 
 
 (3) 59 
 
 (4) 67 
 
 H. 
 
 Harborough, Market (3) ... 125 
 
 * Harpole ... ... ... 179 
 
 * Ilarpsvxll ... ... ... 114 
 
 Harrowden, Little ... ... 246 
 
 Hartwell ... ... 110, 161 
 
 Haseley, Great... ... ... 68 
 
 * Haverfordwest, St. Mary (1) 7, 262 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 (3) 
 
 ( 4 ) 
 
 ( 5 ) 
 
 *Hawkhurst (1) 
 
 * (2) 
 
 * Hawton 
 Hay don 
 Headcorn 
 *Heckington (1) 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 (3) 
 
 (4) 
 
 ■ (5) 
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 *Hedenham (1) 
 
 ■ ( 2 ) 
 
 Helier, St. 
 Hellidon 
 Helpstone (1) ... 
 
 ( 2 ) ... 
 
 216 
 229 
 ib. 
 267 
 
 ... 102 
 
 120, 124,202 
 ... 163 
 
 ... 97 
 
 ... 181 
 ... * 38 
 ... 96 
 
 97, 101 
 ... 130 
 
 ... 148 
 
 ... 149 
 
 57 
 
 ... 94 
 
 ... 152 
 
 ... 138 
 
 ... 101 
 
 244, 246 
 31 
 
 * Hereford, All Saints (1) 
 
 * (2) ... 188 
 
 * (3) ... 190 
 
 Cathedral (1) ... 17 
 
 • (2) ... 26 
 
 * (3) ... 72 
 
 * (4) 186, 195 
 
 Haddon, East ... 
 
 110, 161 
 
 ^ 
 
 (5) ... 
 
 217 
 
 Hale, Great (1) 
 
 31 
 
 * 
 
 (6) ... 
 
 227 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 129 
 
 Herne ... 
 
 
 60 
 
 Hales Owen ... 
 
 ... 190 
 
 Hethersett 
 
 
 
 124 
 
 Hampton in Arden (1) 
 
 ... 30 
 
 Hexham 
 
 45, 
 
 255 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 188 
 
 Higham Ferrers (1) ... 
 
 41 
 
 ♦Hampton Poyle (1) ... 
 
 ... 51 
 
 — 
 
 (2) 
 
 93 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 205 
 
 — 
 
 (3) 
 
 175 
 
 Handsworth ... 
 
 ... 46 
 
 — 
 
 (4) 
 
 258 
 
 Harhorough, Market (1) 
 
 ... 42 
 
 — 
 
 Bede House 
 
 195 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... , 119 
 
 — 
 
 Schoolhouse 
 
 182 
 
INDEX OE PLACES. 299 
 
 Ilingham 
 
 ... 278 
 
 Hinksey, Ferry 
 
 ... 49 
 
 *Hoby(l) 
 
 ...60, 67 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 93 
 
 * Holton 
 
 ... 92 
 
 Horbling 
 
 ... 114 
 
 Horton on the Hill 
 
 ... 249 
 
 Houghton-le-Spring ... 
 
 ... 139 
 
 Howden (1) 
 
 ... 21 
 
 (2) 
 
 59 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 121 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 144 
 
 Howell ... 
 
 ... 83 
 
 Hull (1) 
 
 ... 72 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 140 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 213 
 
 *IIunton 
 
 ... 59 
 
 Hutton... 
 
 ... 193 
 
 I. 
 
 
 IcMesham 
 
 ... 91 
 
 *Iffley(l) 
 
 ... 36 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 233 
 
 * llsington 
 
 ... 66 
 
 Irthlingborough (1) ... 
 
 44, 248 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 96 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 ... 108 
 
 (4) ... 
 
 ... 135 
 
 * Lsleham 
 
 ... 228 
 
 I slip, Oxon 
 
 ... 50 
 
 Ltchington, Long 
 
 ... 48 
 
 Iver 
 
 ... 106 
 
 J. 
 
 
 Jersey 
 
 94, 159 
 
 »John, St., Jersey 
 
 164, 210 
 
 K 
 
 
 * Kempsford ( 1 ) 
 
 ...263,4 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 278 
 
 * Kenelm, St., Salop ... 
 
 ... 247 
 
 Kidlington (1) 
 
 ... 93 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 119 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 143 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 160 
 
 * Kidwelly 
 
 ... 189 
 
 *Kilworth, South 
 
 ... 259 
 
 Kingscliffe (1)... 
 
 ... 41 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 165 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 257 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 258 
 
 Kingsthorpe ... 
 
 ... 193 
 
 Kingston St. Michael ... 
 
 ... 64 
 
 Kirkby Bellars 
 
 112, 115 
 
 Kislinghury ( 1 ) 
 
 ... 205 
 
 (2) 
 
 206, 216 
 
 L. 
 
 Lapley... ... ... ... 44 
 
 * Lapworth ... ... ... 48 
 
 * Lawrence, St., Jersey ... 163 
 
 Lechlade ... ... ... 204 
 
 Ledbury ... ... ... 133 
 
 Leeds, Kent ... ... ... 15 
 
 Leighton Buzzard ... ... 179 
 
 Leominster ... ... ... 74 
 
 Lichfield Cathedral (1) ... 18 
 
 (2) ... 39 
 
 (3) ... 70 
 
 (4) ... 100 
 
 * (5) ... 238 
 
 St. Michael ... ... 182 
 
 Limburg ... ... ... 11 
 
 * Lincoln, St. Benedict ... 115 
 
 Cathedral (1) ... 8, 51 
 
 (2) ...11,27 
 
 * (3) ... 236 
 
 St. Mary-le-Wigford 6 
 
 St. Peter-le-Gowts ... 148 
 
 Lindfield ... ... ... 35 
 
 * Linlithgow ... ... ... 239 
 
 *Llancarvan ... ... ... 253 
 
 Llandalf Cathedral (1) ... 16 
 
 (2) ... 93 
 
 • London, Ely Chapel, 62, 77, 145,229 
 
300 
 
 INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 
 
 
 Longdon 
 
 • •• 
 
 189 
 
 Misterton (3) ... 
 
 • • • 
 
 
 203 
 
 ♦Loughborough 
 
 ... 
 
 225 
 
 * (4) ... 
 
 
 
 217 
 
 ♦LufFwick (1) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 223 
 
 Moreton, North (1) 
 
 
 
 71 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 227 
 
 ♦ (2) 
 
 
 
 110 
 
 * Luton... 
 
 
 128 
 
 * Morton 
 
 
 
 22 
 
 Lutterworth ( 1 ) 
 
 
 114 
 
 Morton Pinkeney 
 
 
 ... 
 
 15 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 189 
 
 Moseley 
 
 
 
 181 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 
 
 203 
 
 * Moulsford 
 
 
 
 116 
 
 
 
 
 Moulton 
 
 
 
 100 
 
 M. 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 N. 
 
 
 
 
 Magor ... 
 
 
 274 
 
 
 
 
 
 Maidstone (1) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 182 
 
 Nantwicli (1) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 
 123 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 183 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 
 150 
 
 ♦ (3) 
 
 
 218 
 
 Narborough 
 
 
 
 67 
 
 Mailing, East ... 
 
 ... 
 
 127 
 
 Netley (1) 
 
 
 
 21 
 
 ♦Malmsbury Abbey (1) 
 
 
 271 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 
 35 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 ib. 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 
 
 43 
 
 • Marlow, Great ( 1 ) ... 
 
 
 59 
 
 Nettlestead (1) 
 
 
 
 177 
 
 • (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 65 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 ... 
 
 178 
 
 Marston, Oxon (1) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 179 
 
 ♦Newark (1) ... 
 
 
 
 148 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 193 
 
 * (2) ... 
 
 
 
 186 
 
 ♦Marston, St. Lawrence (1) ... 
 
 123 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 
 
 258 
 
 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 190 
 
 *Mev'ent 
 
 
 
 48 
 
 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 207 
 
 Newnham, Northants... 
 
 
 60 
 
 •Maxstoke 
 
 107, 
 
 114 
 
 Newport, Monmouth 
 
 
 
 229 
 
 * Mayfield 
 
 
 226 
 
 Newton... 
 
 
 
 101 
 
 ♦jMelton Mowbray (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 28 
 
 *Normanton ... 
 
 
 
 219 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 64 
 
 Northampton, St. Giles (1) 
 
 
 45 
 
 
 
 134 
 
 
 /O') 
 
 
 93 
 
 
 .. . 
 
 
 
 
 Meopham (1) ... 
 
 
 18 
 
 
 (3) 
 
 
 179 
 
 
 
 54 
 
 
 - ('41 
 
 
 188 
 
 
 
 
 
 # *• 
 
 •Middleton Cheney (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 32 
 
 4^ 
 
 - (5) 
 
 
 203 
 
 f Ci\ 
 
 
 179 
 
 
 
 
 251 
 
 \^) 
 
 ... 
 
 
 
 - 
 
 
 Mildenhall 
 
 ... 
 
 69 
 
 St. John (1) 
 
 
 59 
 
 Milton Ahhey ... 
 
 ... 
 
 56 
 
 
 :2) 
 
 
 182 
 
 Milton, Great ... 
 
 122 
 
 153 
 
 St. Sepulchre (1) ... 
 
 46 
 
 Milton Malsor (1) 
 
 
 93 
 
 
 - (2)... 
 
 182 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 203 
 
 ♦Northborough (1) 
 
 
 ...13, 15 
 
 • (3) ... 
 
 236, 240 
 
 251 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 
 207 
 
 ♦Minchinhampton (1) 
 
 
 234 
 
 Northfield 
 
 
 
 45 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 239 
 
 Northfleet (1) ... 
 
 
 ... 
 
 36 
 
 Minden 
 
 
 75 
 
 (2)... 
 
 
 
 59 
 
 jMisterton (1) ... 
 
 
 112 
 
 (3)... 
 
 
 120 
 
 124 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 160 
 
 * (4) ... 
 
 
 
 201 
 
INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 301 
 
 Norton by Daventry ... ... 119 
 
 Norton, King’s... ... ... 203 
 
 * Nor wich, Si. Clement's ... 130 
 
 * St. Oeorge Colegate 216 
 
 * St. Giles 219 
 
 * St. John Maddermarket\A4^ 
 
 * St. Simon and St. Jude 181 
 
 0 . 
 
 *Oadby 
 
 202, 281 
 
 Odell 
 
 
 217 
 
 Offord ... 
 
 
 133 
 
 Oppenheim 
 
 
 240 
 
 Oundle (1) 
 
 
 13 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 17 
 
 (3) 
 
 
 20 
 
 * (4) 
 
 66, 73, 180 
 
 * (5) 
 
 98, 
 
 205 
 
 * (6) 
 
 
 113 
 
 * (7) 
 
 
 127 
 
 * (8) 
 
 
 209 
 
 Over 
 
 
 101 
 
 Oxford, All Souls 
 
 171, 
 
 254 
 
 St. Aldate’s(l) 
 
 
 93 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 217 
 
 * Cathedral (1) 
 
 • •• 
 
 109 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 
 
 112 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 
 
 148 
 
 (4) 
 
 
 233 
 
 (5) 
 
 ... 
 
 258 
 
 Corpus Christ! 
 
 
 182 
 
 St. Giles (1) ... 
 
 
 7 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 
 17 
 
 St. Mary (1) ... 
 
 
 99 
 
 (2) 130, 171, 183, 
 
 213 
 
 (3) 
 
 
 194 
 
 (4) 
 
 
 258 
 
 St. Mary Magdalen (1) 
 
 93 
 
 
 
 (2) 
 
 119 
 
 
 
 (3) 
 
 160 
 
 
 (4) 
 
 162 
 
 Oriel ... 
 
 
 100 
 
 St. Peter’s 
 
 ... 
 
 114 
 
 P. 
 
 »Panterry (1) 56, 268 
 
 (2) 58, 268 
 
 Paston (1) ... ... ... 36 
 
 (2) ib. 
 
 (3) ib. 
 
 (4) ib. 
 
 » (5) ib- 
 
 * (6) ib. 
 
 (7) ib. 
 
 (8) ib. 
 
 * (9) ... ; 177 
 
 Pattingham ... 6 
 
 Pattishall ... ... ... 54 
 
 * Peckleton (1) ... ... 209 
 
 (2) 251 
 
 *Penkridge(l)... ... ... 169 
 
 * (2) 134 
 
 (3, 4) 179 
 
 * Pensburst Hall ... ... 254 
 
 * Peterborough Cathedral (1) 17, 51 
 
 * (2) 39 
 
 * (3) 56 
 
 (4) 100 
 
 * (5) 165 
 
 (6) 182,3 
 
 (7, 8) 205 
 
 (9) 235 
 
 • St. Nicholas ... 203 
 
 *Piddington, Northants ... 41 
 
 Piddington, Oxon ... ... 44 
 
 Pilton ... ... ... ... 114 
 
 * Plymfton St. Mary ... ... 126 
 
 Polebrook (1) ... ... ... 41 
 
 (2) 164 
 
 * (3) 246 
 
 (4) 258 
 
 * Pont Audemer, St. Catharine 93 
 
 St. Germain U) 23 
 
 * (2) 25 
 
 (3) 1.58 
 
 * Portbury ( 1 ) . . . ... ... 43 
 
 * (2) 48 
 
 (3) 62 
 
 Portishead (1) 119, 120 
 
302 
 
 INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 Portishead (2) ... 
 
 ... 190 
 
 *Postwich 
 
 ...76, 83 
 
 * Potter dale 
 
 ... 133 
 
 Purton (1) 
 
 ... 114 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 181 
 
 Q. 
 
 
 
 Quarrington ... 
 
 
 ... 31 
 
 Queniborough (1) 
 
 
 ... 99 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 ... 130 
 
 (3) 
 
 
 ... 259 
 
 R. 
 
 
 
 Rate! life 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 30 
 
 Raunds (1) 
 
 
 7 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 25, 133 
 
 * (3) ...' 
 
 
 ... 165 
 
 (4) ... 
 
 
 ... 189 
 
 * Ravensthorpe 
 
 
 ... 42 
 
 Pay don (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 15 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 35 
 
 Ringstead (1) ... 
 
 
 ... 109 
 
 (2)... 
 
 
 144, 146 
 
 (3)... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 165 
 
 (4)... 
 
 
 ... 245 
 
 Ripon Cathedral 
 
 
 ... 52 
 
 Rochester Cathedral (1) 
 
 ... 127 
 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 138 
 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 ... 186 
 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 188 
 
 
 Roggiett 
 
 
 ... 274 
 
 Romsey (1) 
 
 
 17 
 
 (2) .. 
 
 
 .. 183 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 
 ... 186 
 
 Rotherby 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 257 
 
 Rothersthorpe (1) 
 
 ... 
 
 44 
 
 * (2) 
 
 
 ... 91 
 
 ( 3 ) 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 138 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 185 
 
 ♦Rothley 
 
 
 ... 227 
 
 Rothwell (1)... 
 
 
 ... 31 
 
 * (2)... 
 
 
 ... 57 
 
 Rotterdam Cathedral 
 
 • •• 
 
 ... 143 
 
 Rouen., St. Ouen 
 
 
 ... 158 
 
 Rudston 
 
 
 ... 21 
 
 Rushden (1) ... 
 
 
 ... 15 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 44 
 
 (3) .. 
 
 ... 
 
 ... 54 
 
 * (4) ... 
 
 
 176, 195 
 
 (5) ... 
 
 
 ... 195 
 
 * (6) ... 
 
 
 ... 230 
 
 (7) ... 
 
 
 ... 259 
 
 S. 
 
 
 Salford, Warwick 
 
 159, 164 
 
 Salisbury Cathedral ... 
 
 21 
 
 (transept) ... 
 
 ... 19 
 
 * St. Martin],... 
 
 ... 217 
 
 Sarnleshury 
 
 ... 68 
 
 * Sampford Reeds 
 
 ... 207 
 
 * Sampford Spiney 
 
 ... 144 
 
 Sandford, near Woodstock 
 
 ... 205 
 
 * Saviour, St., Jersey(l) 
 
 ... 152 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 158 
 
 * (3) 
 
 ... 164 
 
 Scottow... 
 
 ... 134 
 
 Selby ... 
 
 ... 149 
 
 Shalflete (1) ... 
 
 15 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 17 
 
 * Sheldwich 
 
 ... 229 
 
 Shiere (1) 
 
 ... 65 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 139 
 
 ShLfFnal (1) 
 
 ... 64 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 65 
 
 .(3) 
 
 ... 70 
 
 * (4) 
 
 ... 109 
 
 * (5) 
 
 ... 152 
 
 * Shiplake 
 
 ... 287 
 
 ♦ShorweU ... 181, 182, 
 
 245, 252 
 
 Shotteslroke 
 
 ... 202 
 
 * Sileby 
 
 ... 100 
 
 * Sleaford (1) ... 
 
 ... 114 
 
 • (2) 
 
 ... 149 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... ib. 
 
 * (4) 
 
 ... 150 
 
 (5,6) 
 
 ... ib. 
 
 (7) 
 
 ... 153 
 
INDEX OF 
 
 Sleaford (8) 
 
 .. 225 
 
 *Slymbridge (1) 
 
 92, 121 
 
 * (2) 
 
 .. 287 
 
 * Soest... 
 
 .. 37 
 
 *Soham 
 
 .. 1.36 
 
 Solihull 
 
 .. 62 
 
 * Southam 
 
 .. 113 
 
 Southampton ... 
 
 .. 219 
 
 Southwell (1) ••• 
 
 ... 17 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 96 
 
 * (3) 
 
 96, 161 
 
 * (4) 
 
 ... 161 
 
 * (5) 
 
 ... 226 
 
 (6) 
 
 ... 2.33 
 
 * Spaldwick {i) 
 
 ... 65 
 
 ■ (2) 
 
 ... 242 
 
 * Spixworth {1) ...107, 
 
 115, 255 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 255 
 
 Sprowston (1) 
 
 ... 96 
 
 Stafford, St. Mary ( 1 ) . . . 
 
 18 
 
 (2)... 
 
 ... 61 
 
 (3)... 
 
 ... 65 
 
 * (4)... 
 
 ... 66 
 
 (5)... 
 
 ... 67 
 
 (6)... 
 
 77, 146 
 
 * Staines 
 
 ... 44 
 
 * Stamford, St. George 
 
 .. 99 
 
 iStandish 
 
 ... 145 
 
 Stanford, Northants (1) 
 
 ... 45 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 93 
 
 Stanion (1) 
 
 ... 17 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 36 
 
 (3) 
 
 56 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 119 
 
 (5,6) 
 
 ... 245 
 
 Stanley St. Leonard ... ; 
 
 57 
 
 Stanton Harcourt 
 
 ... 179 
 
 Long (1) 
 
 ... 140 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 ... 143 
 
 St. John (doorway) 
 
 ... 245 
 
 
 49 
 
 ■*Stanwick 
 
 ... 259 
 
 Staunton 
 
 ... 16 
 
 Staverton, Northants ... 
 
 ... 179 
 
 Stoke Albany 
 
 ... 65 
 
 Bruern (1) 
 
 ... 62 
 
 PLACES. 303 
 
 *Stoke Bruern (2) ... ... 96 
 
 ■— (3) ... 122 
 
 Stone (1) ••• ••• 196 
 
 * — (2) 234 
 
 Stratford on Avon {\) 100 
 
 (2) ... 122 
 
 * (3) ... 209 
 
 ■* (4) ... 220 
 
 (5) ... 233 
 
 (6) ... 236 
 
 * (7) ... 280 
 
 Stubbington ... ... ••• 6 
 
 Sutton Goldfield ... ... 189 
 
 East ... ... 44 
 
 King’s (1) ... 153, 162 
 
 * (2) 205 
 
 ___ (3) 262 
 
 Swansea (1) ... ... ••• 64 
 
 * (2) 196 
 
 * (3) ... 267 
 
 Swinhrook ... ••• ••• l’^9 
 
 T. 
 
 *Tenby ••• 281 
 
 Tettenhall ••• ••• ••• 
 
 Tewkesbury (1) 43 
 
 ■ ( 2 ) 91 
 
 (3) 94 
 
 (4). 119 
 
 ■* (5) il>- 
 
 * — . (6) 203 
 
 » (7) 209 
 
 (8) 239 
 
 — (9) ib- 
 
 (10) 273 
 
 *Thaxted ... ••• 227 
 
 *Thornbury (1) 219 
 
 (2) 268 
 
 Thorpe Mandeville 41 
 
 Thrapstone (1) 202 
 
 (2) 259 
 
 Thrussington ••• 160 
 
 *Thurcaston ... ••• 179 
 
 *Thurlaston ... ••• 228 
 
304 
 
 INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 *Thurnham 
 
 Tickhill 
 
 *Tintern 
 
 Abbey (1) 
 
 (2) 
 
 (3) 
 
 (4) 
 
 (5) 
 
 * (6,7) 
 
 Titcbmarsh 
 Towcesfcer ( 1 ) ... 
 
 *• (2) ... 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 Trent, Somerset 
 
 * Trowse Newton 
 Trumpington (1) 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 (3) 
 
 (4) 
 
 Tv/nstead 
 TydclSt. Giles ... 
 
 U. 
 
 Uffington, Berks 
 
 * Uffington, Lincola ( 1 ) 
 
 * ^ ( 2 ) 
 
 * Upton Snodsbury 
 
 *Usk 
 
 * Utrecht Cathedral «... 
 
 W. 
 
 * Wadworth 
 
 * Walsham, North 
 
 Naltham Ahhey 
 Waulip (1) ...', 
 
 ( 2 ) ... ... 
 
 Wantage 
 AVardington (1) 
 
 * (2) 
 
 * Warkworth, Northants 
 AA'armington, Northants 
 
 126 
 
 122 
 
 268 
 
 16 
 
 68 
 
 73 
 
 81 
 
 82 
 
 2C3 
 
 179 
 
 112 
 
 189 
 
 245 
 
 128 
 
 37 
 
 39 
 
 42 
 
 44 
 
 47 
 
 213 
 
 131 
 
 ... 233 
 
 ... 136 
 
 ... 220 
 
 202, 286 
 191, 281 
 
 ... 74 
 
 ... 101 
 ... 134 
 
 ... 37 
 
 ... 189 
 
 ... 190 
 
 ... 182 
 ... 128 
 ... ib. 
 ... 205 
 
 15 
 
 *Weedon Beck 
 Welford 
 
 Wellingborough (1) ... 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 Wells Cathedral (1) ... 
 — St. Cutbbert 
 * — Palace {!) 
 
 (2) 
 
 * (3) 
 
 AVestminster Abbey (1) 
 
 -- { 2 ) 
 
 (triforium) 
 
 AVbiston (1) ... 
 
 ( 2 ) 
 
 (3) 
 
 — (4) 
 
 Whitby... 
 
 Wickham 
 
 ^AVickwar 
 
 AVigston All Saints ... 
 Willingham ... 
 AVimborne Minster (1) 
 
 (2) 
 
 ■* - (3) 
 
 * (4) 
 
 *Winchelsea ... 
 AVincbester Cathedral (1 ) 
 
 (2) 
 
 (3) 
 
 (4) 
 
 (5) 
 
 ( 6 ) 
 
 * ( 7 ) 
 
 College (1, 2) 
 
 (3) 
 
 Deanery . . . 
 
 St. John (1) 
 
 (2) 
 
 — (3) 
 
 Winscomb 
 Witney (1) 
 
 (2) 
 
 Wittenham, Long 
 Woodnewton ... 
 Woodstock (1) 
 
 * (2) 
 
 ... 175 
 
 ... 93 
 
 ... 36 
 
 ... 125 
 
 ... 97 
 
 ... 189 
 
 ... 31 
 
 ... 68 
 ... 86 
 ... 12 
 ... 237 
 ... 15 
 
 ... 181 
 ... 182 
 ... 185 
 
 ... 252 
 
 ... 180 
 ... 138 
 
 ... 190 
 
 ... 259 
 
 ... 101 
 ... 35 
 
 ... 44 
 
 ... 56 
 
 ... 99 
 
 ... 91 
 
 ... 33 
 
 ... 179 
 
 ... 185 
 
 ... 196 
 
 ... 197 
 
 ... 216 
 ... 278 
 
 ... 181 
 ... 183 
 
 ... 188 
 21 
 
 ... 181 
 ... 182 
 ... 193 
 
 ... 140 
 
 ... 258 
 
 ... 64 
 
 ... 17 
 
 16, 262 
 ... 251 
 
INDEX OF PLACES. 
 
 * Woolfield (1) 
 
 
 80 
 
 Y. 
 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 81 
 
 
 
 *Wootten Wawen 
 
 
 205 
 
 Yalding (1) 
 
 15 
 
 * Wootton (1, 2) 
 
 
 245 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 193 
 
 Wor stead 
 
 
 243 
 
 Yardley, Worcester ... 
 
 ... 71 
 
 Wotton Underedge 
 
 
 59 
 
 Yate 
 
 ... 190 
 
 *Wouldham ... 
 
 
 127 
 
 ♦Yatton (1) 
 
 ... 154 
 
 * Wrington (1)... 
 
 
 133 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 185 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 193 
 
 (3) 
 
 ... 191 
 
 * (3) 
 
 
 196 
 
 (4) 
 
 ... 192 
 
 *Wroxham {!)... 
 
 
 181 
 
 Yelvertoft (1) ... 
 
 102, 249 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 242 
 
 (2) 
 
 ... 160 
 
 Wymmington (1) 
 
 
 129 
 
 Fori- Cathedral (1) ... 
 
 33 
 
 (2) 
 
 
 140 
 
 (2) ... 
 
 •... 37 
 
 * (3,4) ... 
 
 
 250 
 
 (3) ... 
 
 ... 59 
 
 * (5) ... 
 
 
 252 
 
 (4,6)... 
 
 ... 150 
 
 * (6) ... 
 
 
 256 
 
 (6) ... 
 
 ... 213 
 
 * Wymondham 
 
 
 185 
 
 St.Matirice 
 
 9 
 
 * Wytham 
 
 92, 
 
 249 
 
 * St. Saviour 
 
 ... 151 
 
 OXFORD; PRINTFI) BY I. SIlRIMPTOX. 
 
=•/ 0; it' ■ 
 
BOOKS 
 
 PUBLISHED BY 
 
 PABKEH AND CO. 
 
 OXFORD, AND 6 SOUTHAMPTON-STREET, STRAND, LONDON. 
 
 EEV. JOHN BARON. 
 
 THE GEEEK OKIGIN OE THE APOSTLES’ CREED Illustrated 
 
 by Ancient Documents and Recent Research. By Rev. John Baron, D.D., 
 F.S.A. 8vo., cloth, with Seven Illustrations, 10s. 6d. 
 
 OSBORNE GORDON. 
 
 OSBORNE GORDON. A MEMOIR: With a Selection of his 
 
 Writings. Edited by Geo. Marshall, M.A., Rector of Milton, Berks, &c. 
 8vo., cloth, with Medallion Portrait, 10s. 6d. 
 
 DR. PRESTON. 
 
 THE LIFE OF THE RENOWNED DR. PRESTON. Writ by 
 
 his Pupil, Master Thomas Ball, D.D., Minister of Northampton in the year 
 1628. Edited by E. W. Harcourt, Esq., M.P. Crown 8vo., cloth, 4s. 
 
 REV. DR. HEURTLEY. 
 
 DE FIDE ET SYMBOLO : Documenta qusedam nec non Aliquorum 
 SS. Patrum Tractatus. Edidit Carolus A. Heurtley, S.T.P., Dom. Mar- 
 garetae Praelector, et Aldis Christi Canonicus. Editio Tertia, Recognita et 
 Aucta. Crown 8vo., cloth, 4s. 6d. 
 
 Uniform with above, 
 
 ST. LEO’S EPISTLE TO FLAYIAN : THE TOME OF ST. LEO : 
 
 Translated: with an Introduction: by the Rev. Charles A. Heurtley, D.D. 
 32 pp., Crown 8vo., in wrapper, price 6d. 
 
 ^ Translation of the De Fide et Symbolo, and the remaining Treatises, is in 
 the Press, and will be issued shortly in one volume. 
 
 REV. H. DE ROMESTIN. 
 
 THE TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES. AiSa^v 
 
 SciSeKa 'AvoaTShtov. The Greek Text with English Translation, Introduction, 
 Notes, and Illustrative Passages. By Rev. H. Db Romestin, Incumbent of 
 Freeland, and Rural Dean. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 3s. [Just ready. 
 
 S. AHGUSTINE DE CATECHIZANDIS RUDIRUS, and other 
 
 Treatises. The Edition as edited by the late Charles Marriott, with the 
 addition 6f the Enchiridion. Fourth Edition. Fcap. 8vo., cloth. [Just ready. 
 
 Also uniform, 
 
 SAINT AUGUSTINE on Instructing the Unlearned, concerning 
 
 Faith of Things not Seen, on the Advantage of Believing, the Enchiridion to 
 Laurentius, or concerning Faith, Hope, and Charity. Fcap. 8vo., cloth. 
 VTWe'n’WTTTTQ T T*RT1ffirTffQTC! 
 
 FOR THE ANTIQUITY AND UNIVERSALITY OF THE CA- 
 
 THOLIC FAITH against the Profane Novelties of all Heretics, Latin and 
 English. New Edition, Fcap. 8vo., 3s. 
 
 SPENCER L. HOLLAND. 
 
 A SUMMARY OF THE ECCLESIASTICAL COURTS COM- 
 MISSION’S REPORT: and of Dr. Stubbs’ Historical Reports; together 
 with a Review of the Evidence before the Commission. By Spencer L. Hol- 
 land, Barrister-at-Law. Post 8vo. , cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 REV. J. DODD, M.A. 
 
 A HISTORY OF CANON LAW IN CONJUNCTION WITH 
 
 OTHER BRANCHES OF JURISPRUDENCE: with Chapters on the 
 Royal Supremacy and the Report of the Commission on Ecclesiastical Courts. 
 By the Rev. J. Dodd, M.A., formerly Rector of Hampton Poyle, Oxon. 8vo., 
 cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 [1183.3.50.] 
 
2 
 
 THEOLOGICAL WORKS, ^c. {continued). 
 
 THE LORD BISHOP OF SALISBURY. 
 
 THE ONE RELIGION : Truth, Holiness, and Peace desired by tbe 
 
 Nations, and revealed by Jesus Christ. EIGHT LECTURES delivered before 
 tbe University of Oxford, in the Year 1881. By the Right Rev. tbe Lord 
 Bishop ok Lincoln. 8vo., clotli, 10s. 6d. 
 
 UNIVERSITY SERMONS ON GOSPEL SUBJECTS. By the 
 
 Rev. John Wordsworth, M.A. Fcap., clotli, 2s. 6d. 
 
 REV. CANON HOLE. 
 
 HINTS TO PREACHERS, with SERMONS and ADDRESSES. 
 
 By S. Reynolds Hole, Canon of Lincoln. Second Edition. Post 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 ARCHDEACON DENISON. 
 
 NOTES OP MY LIFE, 1805 — 1878. By Geoege Anthony 
 
 Denison, Vicar of East Brent, 1845; Archdeacon of Taunton, 1851. Third 
 Edition. 8vo., cloth, 12s. 
 
 BISHOP OF BARBADOS. 
 
 SERMONS PREACHED ON SPECIAL OCCASIONS. By John 
 
 Mitchinson, late Bishop of Barbados. Crown 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 THE LATE BISHOP WILBERFORCE. 
 
 SERMONS PREACHED ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS. With a 
 
 Preface by the Lord Bishop of Ely. 8vo., cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 REV. E. F. WILLIS, M.A. 
 
 THE WORSHIP OF THE OLD COVENANT CONSIDERED 
 
 MORE ESPECIALLY in RELATION to that of the NEW. By tlie 
 Rev. E. F. Willis, M.A. Post 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 THE LATE REV. J. KEBLE, M.A. 
 
 STUDIA SACRA. COMMENTARIES on the Introductory Verses 
 
 of St. John’s Gospel, and on a Portion of St. Paul’s Epistle to the Romans ; with 
 other Theological Papers by. the late Rev. John Keble, M.A. 8vo., cl., 10s. 6d. 
 
 OCCASIONAL PAPERS AND REVIEWS. By the late Rev. 
 
 John Keble, Author of “ The Christian Year.” Demy 8vo., cloth extra, I2s. 
 
 LETTERS OF SPIRITUAL COUNSEL AND GUIDANCE. By 
 
 the late Rev. J. Keble, M.A., Vicar of Hursley. Edited by R. F. Wilson, 
 M.A., Vicar of Rowuhams, &c. Cheap Edition. Post 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 OUTLINES OF INSTRUCTIONS OR MEDITATIONS FOR THE 
 
 CHURCH’S SEASONS. By John Keble, M.A. Edited, with a Preface, by 
 R. F. Wilson, M.A. Second Edition. Crown 8vo., toned paper, cloth, 5s. 
 
 THE LATE BISHOP OF BRECHIN. 
 
 AN EXPLANATION OF THE THIRTY-NINE ARTICLES. 
 
 With an Epistle Dedicatory to the Rev. E. B. Pusey, D.D. By^ A. P. 
 Forbes, D.C.L., Bishop of Brechin. Second Edition. Crown 8vo., cloth. 12s. 
 
 A SHORT EXPLANATION OF THE NICENE CREED, for the 
 
 Use of Persons beginning the Study of Theology'. By Alexander Penrose 
 Forbes, D.C.L., Bishop of Brechin. Second Edition. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 THE LATE LORD BISHOP OF SALISBURY. 
 
 THE ADMINISTRATION OF THE HOLY SPIRIT IN THE 
 
 BODY OF CHRIST. The Bainpton Lectures for 1868. By George Moberly, 
 D.C.L., Lord Bishop of Salisbury. Third Edition. Crown Svo., cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 SERMONS ON THE BEATITUDES, with others mostly preached 
 before the University of Oxford. By the same. Third Edition. Crown 8vo., 
 cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 REV. WILLIAM BRIGHT, D.D. 
 
 ^ HISTORY OF THE CHURCH, from the Edict of Milan, a.d. 
 
 J13, to the Council of Chalcedon, a.d. 451. Second Edition. Post 8vo., 10s. 6d. 
 
THTIOLOQICAIj works, S(c. {continued). 
 
 3 
 
 AN INTRODUCTION TO THE HISTORY OF THE SUCCES- 
 SIVE REVISIONS OF THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER. By 
 James Parker, Hon. M.A. Oxon. Crown 8vo., clotli, 12s. 
 
 THE FIRST PRAYER-ROOK OF EDWARD YI., COMPARED 
 
 with the Successive Revisions of the Book of Common Prayei' ; with a Concordance 
 and Index to the Rubrics in the several editions. By the same Autlior. New 
 Edition. Crown 8vo., clotli, 12s. 
 
 A Cheaper Edition of THE FIRST PRAYER-BOOK of the Second 
 
 Year of King Edward VI. Fifth Thousand. 24mo., Is. Also of SECOND 
 PRAYER-BOOK OF EDWARD VI. Issued 1532. Third Thousand. 
 24mo., Is. 
 
 CATENA AUREA. A Commentary on the Four Gospels, collected 
 out of the Works of the Fathers by S. Thomas Aquinas. Uniform with the 
 Library of the Fathers. Re-issue. Complete in 6 vols. 8vo., cloth, £,'1 2s. 
 
 THE LAST TWELYE YERSES OF THE GOSPEL ACCORDING 
 
 TO S. MARK Vindicated against Recent Critical Objectors and Established, 
 by John W. Buboon, B.D., Dean of Chichester. With Facsimiles of Codex M 
 and Codex L. 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 THE EXPLANATION op the APOCALYPSE by YENERABLE 
 
 BEDA, Translated by the Rev. EDW. MARSHALL, M.A., F.S.A., formerly 
 Fellow of Corpus Christ! College, Oxford. 180 pp. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 A COMMENTARY ON THE EPISTLES AND GOSPELS IN 
 
 THE BOOK OF COMMON PRAYER., Extracted from Writings of the 
 Fathers of the Holy Catholic Church, anterior to the Division of the East and 
 West. With an Introductory Notice by the Dean of St. Paul’s. In Two 
 Vols., Crown 8vo., cloth, lOs. 6d. 
 
 THE PRINCIPLES OF DIYINE SERYICE ; or, An Inquiry con- 
 
 cerning the True Manner of Understanding and Using the Order for Morning and 
 Evening Prayer, and for the Administration of the Holy' Communion in the 
 English Church. By the late Ven. Philip Freeman, Archdeacon of Exeter. 
 A New JEdition. 2 vols., 8vo., cloth, 16s. 
 
 THE CATHOLIC DOCTRINE OF THE SACRIFICE AND 
 
 PARTICIPATION OF THE HOLY EUCHARIST. By George Trevor, 
 D.D., M.A., Canon of York; Rector of Beeford. Second Edition, revised and 
 enlarged. Crown 8vo., cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 THE HISTORY OF CONFIRMATION. By William Jackson, M.A., 
 
 Queen’s College, Oxford; Vicar of Heathfield, Sussex. Crown 8vo., cl., 2s, 6d. 
 
 CHRISTIANITY AS TAUGHT BY S. PAUL. The Bampton 
 
 Lectures for 1870. To which is added an Appendix of the Continuous Sense 
 of S. Paul’s Epistles; with Notes and Metalegomena. By the Rev. W. J. 
 Ieohs, D.D., &c. Second Edition, with New Preface, 8vo., with Map, cloth, 9s. 
 
 CHARACTERISTICS OF CHRISTIAN MORALITY. The Bamj.- 
 
 ton Lectures for 1873. By the Rev. I. Gregory Smith, M.A. Second ^Edition. 
 Crown 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 APOLLOS ; or, THE WAY OF GOD. A Plea for the Religion of 
 
 Scripture. By A. Cleveland Coxe, Bishop of New York. Crown 8vo., cl., 5s. 
 
 BEDE’S ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY OF THE ENGLISH 
 
 NATION. A New Translation by the Rev. L. Gidley, M.A., Chaplain oi 
 St. Nicholas’, Salisbury. Crown 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 RICHARD BAXTER ON THE SACRAMENTS: Holy Orders, 
 
 Holy Baptism, Confirmation, Absolution, Holy Coinmuiiion. 18mo., cloth, 1 . 
 
4 
 
 ANCIENT DOCTRINAL TREATISES, ^c. 
 
 BE FIDE ET SYMBOLO. New Edition. See p. 1. 
 
 THE TEACHING OF THE TWELVE APOSTLES. See p. 1. 
 
 S. AURELIUS AUGUSTINUS; de Catechizandis Rudibns. See p. 1. 
 VINCENTIUS LIRINENSIS. See p. 1. 
 
 S. PATRIS NOSTRI S. ATHANASII ARCHIEPISCOPI ALEX- 
 ANDRIA! DE INCARNATIONE VERB!, ejusque Corporali .ad nos Ad- 
 ventu. With an English Translation by the Rev. I. Ridgwav, B.D., Hon. 
 Canon of Christ Church. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 THE DEFINITIONS OF THE CATHOLIC FAITH and Canons of 
 
 Discipline of the first four General Councils of the Universal Church. In Greek 
 and English. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 THE PASTORAL RULE OF ST. GREGORY. Sancti Gregorii 
 
 Papae Regulaa Pastoralis Liber, ad Johannem Episcopum Civitatis Ravennae. 
 AVith an English Translation. By the Rev. H. R. Bramley, M.A., Fellow of 
 Magdalen College, Oxford. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 A CRITICAL HISTORY OF THE ATHANASIAN CREED, by 
 
 the Rev. D. Waterland, D.D. Edited by the Rev. J. R. King, M.A. Fcap. 
 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 THE CONSTITUTIONS AND CANONS ECCLESIASTICAL OF 
 
 THlt CHURCH OF ENGLAND, Referred to their Original Sources, and 
 Illustrated with Explanatory Notes. By the late Mackenzie E. C. Walcott, 
 B.D., F.S.A. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 2s. Gd. 
 
 OXFORD SERIES OF DEVOTIONAL WORKS. 
 
 Fcap. 8vo., printed in Red and Black, on toned paper. 
 
 The Imitation of Christ. 
 
 FOUR BOOKS. By Thomas a Kem- 
 pts. Cloth, 4s. — Pocket Edit., 32mo., cl.. Is. 
 
 Andrewes’ Devotions. 
 
 DEVOTIONS. By the Right Rev. 
 
 Father in God, Lacncelot Andrewes. 
 Translated from the Greek and Latin, and 
 arranged anew. Antique cloth, 5s. 
 
 Taylor’s Holy Living. 
 
 THE RULE AND EXERCISES 
 OF HOLY LltTXG. By Bishop Jeremy 
 Taylor. Antique cloth, 4s.— Pocket Edi- 
 tion, 32mo., cloth. Is. 
 
 Taylor’s Holy Dying. 
 
 THE RULE AND EXERCISES 
 OF HOLY DYIXG. By Bishop Jeremy 
 Taylor. Antique cloth, 4s. — Pocket Edi- 
 tion, 32mo., cloth. Is. 
 
 Taylor’s Golden Grove. 
 
 THE GOLDEN GROVE; a Choice 
 Manual, containing what is to be Believed, 
 Practised, and Desired, or Prayed for. By 
 Bishop Jeremy Taylor. Printed uniform 
 with “Holy Living and Holy Dying.” An- 
 tique cloth’, 3s. 6d. 
 
 Sutton’s Meditations. 
 
 GODLY MEDITATIONS UPON 
 THE MOST HOLY SACR.4MEXT OF THE 
 LORD’S SUPPER. By Christopher Sdt- 
 TOK, D.D., late Prebend of Westminster. 
 A new Edition. Antique cloth, 5s. 
 
 Laud’s Devotions. 
 
 THE PRIVATE DEVOTIONS of 
 Dr. William Laud, Archbishop of Canter- 
 bury, and MartjT. Antique cloth, 5s. 
 
 Spinckes’ Devotions. 
 
 TRUE CHURCH OF ENGLAND 
 M.AN’S COMPANION IN THE CLOSET; 
 or, a complete Manual of Private Devotions, 
 collected from the Writings of eminent Di- 
 vines of the Church of England. Antique 
 cloth, 4s. 
 
 Ancient Collects. 
 
 ANCIENT COLLECTS and OTHER 
 PR.AYERS. Selected for Devotional use 
 from various Rituals. By Wm. Bright, 
 D.D. Antique cloth, 5g. 
 
 Devout Communicant. 
 
 THE DEVOUT COMMUNICANT 
 
 exemplified in his Behaviour before, at, and 
 after the Sacrament of the Lord’s Supper : 
 Practically suited to all the Parts of that 
 Solemn Ordinance. 1th Edition, revised. 
 Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 4s. 
 
 ElKHN BA21AIKH. 
 
 THE PORTRAITURE OF HIS 
 SACRED MAJESTY KING CHARLES I. 
 in his Solitudes and Sufferings. New Edition, 
 with Pteface hy C. M. Phillimoee [On the 
 evidence that the book was written by 
 Charles I., and not by Gauden]. Antique 
 cloth, 5s. 
 
DEVOTIONAL. 
 
 5 
 
 DEVOTIONAL WORKS. 
 
 DAILY STEPS TOWAEDS HEAVEN ; or, Practical Thoughts on 
 
 the Gospel History, for every day in the year. With Titles and Character of 
 Christ. Newly printed with antique type. 32mo., roan, gilt edges, 2s. 6d. ; 
 morocco, 5s. 
 
 LAEGE TYPE EDITION. Square crown 8vo., cloth 
 
 antique, red edges, 5s. 
 
 ANNUS DOMINI. A Prayer for each Day of the Year, founded on 
 
 a Text of Holy Scripture (addressed to the Second Person in the Trinity, and 
 therefore supplementary to other devotions). By Christina G. Rossetii. 
 32mo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 STEAY THOUGHTS ; For Every Day in the Year. Collected and 
 
 arranged by E. L. 32mo., cloth gilt, red edges. Is. 
 
 THE HOUES ; being Prayers for the Third, Sixth, and Ninth 
 
 Hours; with a Preface, and Heads of Devotion for the Day. Seventh Edition. 
 32mo., in parchment wrapper. Is. 
 
 PEAYEES EOE MAEEIED PEESONS. From Various Sources, 
 
 chiefly from the Ancient Liturgies. Selected and edited by Charles Ward, 
 Rector of Maulden. Third Edition, with red lines on toned paper, 24mo., 
 cloth, 4s. 6d. — Cheap Edition, on white paper. 24mo., cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 MUSINGS ON THE PSALM (CXIX.) OF DIVINE ASPIEA- 
 
 TIONS. Second Edition. 32mo., cloth, 2s. 
 
 DEVOTIONS BEFOEE AND AFTEE HOLY COMMUNION. 
 
 With Prefatory Note by Keble. Sixth Edition, in red and black, on toned 
 paper, 32mo., cloth, 2s. — With the Service, 32mo., cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 PEIVATE PEAYEES FOE A WEEK. Compiled by William 
 
 Bright, D.D., Canon of Christ Church, Oxford. 96 pp., Fcap. 8vo., limp 
 cloth, Is. 6d. 
 
 FAMILY PEAYEES FOE A WEEK, with Additional Collects 
 
 and other Prayers, compiled by William Bright, D.D., Canon of Christ 
 Church, OxforA 68 pp., Fcap. 8vo„ limp cloth. Is. \_Just published. 
 
 THE PASTOE IN HIS CLOSET ; or, A Help to the Devotions 
 
 of the Clergy. By John Armstrong, D.D., late Lord Bishop of Grahamstown. 
 Third Edition. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 2s. 
 
 MEDITATIONS FOE THE FOETY DAYS OF LENT. With 
 
 a Prefatory Notice by the Aechbishop of Dublin. ISuio., cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 THOUGHTS DUEING SICKNESS. By Eobert Brett, Author of 
 
 “ The Doctrine of the Cross,” &c. Fcap. 8vo., limp cloth. Is. 6d. 
 
 BEEVIATES FEOM HOLY SCEIPTUEE, arranged for use by the 
 
 Bed of Sickness. By the Rev. G. Arden, M.A., Rector of Winterborne-Came ; 
 Domestic Chaplain to the Right Hon. the Earl of Devon. 2nd Ed. Fcap. 8vo., 2s. 
 
 DEVOTIONS FOE A TIME OF EETIEEMENT AND PEAYEE 
 
 FOR THE CLERGY. New Edition, revised. Fcap. 8vo., cloth. Is. 
 
 PEAYEES IN USE AT CUDDESDON COLLEGE. Third Edition, 
 
 revised and enlarged. Fcap. 8vo., 2s. 
 
 INSTEUCTIONS ON THE HOLY EUCHAEIST, AND DEVO- 
 TIONS FOR HOLY COMMUNION, being Part V. of the Clewer Manuals, 
 by Rev. T, T. Carter, M.A., late Rector of Clcwcr. 18mo., cloth, 2s. 
 
6 
 
 SERMONS AND BIOGRAPHIES. 
 
 SERMONS, &c. 
 
 ILLUSTEATIOWS OF FAITH. Eight Plain Sermons, by the 
 
 late Rev. Edward Monro. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 Uniform, and hy the same Author, 
 
 Plain Seemons on the Book of Com- 
 mon Peatee. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 Seemons on New Testament Chaeac- 
 TEES. Fcap. 8vo., 4s. 
 
 Histoeical and Peactical Seemons 
 
 ON THE SUEFEEINGS AND ReSIJE- 
 EECTION OF OHE LOED. 2 vols., Fcap. 
 8vo., cloth, 10s. 
 
 CHPISTIAH SEASONS. — Short and Plain Sermons for every Sunday 
 
 ami Ilolyday throughout the Year. 4 vols., Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 10s. — Second 
 Series, 4 vols., Fcap. 8vo., cloth, lOs. 
 
 SHORT SERMONS FOR FAMILY READING, following the 
 
 Order of tlie Christian Seasons. By the Rev. J. W. Burgon, B.D. 2 vols., 
 Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 8s. — Second Series, 2 vols., Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 8s. 
 
 PAROCHIAL SERMONS AND SERMONS FOR FASTS AND 
 
 FESTIVALS. By the late Bp. Armstrong. Fcap. 8vo., 5s. each volume. 
 
 SERMONS ON VARIOUS OCCASIONS. By the late Rev. J. 
 
 Keble, M.A. 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 THE AWAKING SOUL, as Sketched in the 130th Psalm. Ad- 
 dresses delivered in Lent, 1877. By E. R. Wilberforce, M.A. [the Rt. Rev. 
 the Lord Bishop of Newcastle]. Crown Svo., limp cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 OXFORD LENT SERMONS, 1857-60, 63, 65-69, 70-71. Cloth, 
 
 5s. each. 
 
 XX. SHORT ALLEGORICAL SERMONS. By B. K. W. Peakse, 
 
 M.A.. and W. A. Gray, M.A. Sixth Edition. Fcap. 8vo., sewed. Is. 
 
 SERMONS AND ESSAYS ON THE APOSTOLICAL AGE. By 
 
 the late Very Rev. Arthur Penrhyn Stanley, D.D. Third Edition, revised. 
 Crown 8vo., cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 BIOGRAPHIES. 
 
 A MEMOIR OF THE REV. JOHN KEBLE, M.A., late Vicar of 
 
 Hursley. By the Right Hon. Sir J. T. Coleridge, D.C.L. Fifth Edition. 
 Post 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 LIFE OF JOHN ARMSTRONG, D.D., late Lord Bishop of Grahams- 
 
 town. By the Rev. T. T. Carter, M.A., Rector of Clewer. With an Intro- 
 duction by Samuel, Lord Bishop of Oxford. Third Edition. Fcap. Svo., 
 with Portrait, cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 THE LIFE OF THE RIGHT REVEREND FATHER IN GOD, 
 
 THOMAS WILSON, D.D., Lord Bishop of Sodor and Man. Compiled chiefly 
 from Original Documents, by the late Rev. John Keble, M.A., Vicar of 
 Hursley. In Two Parts, 8vo,, cloth, £1 Is. 
 
 THE SAINTLY LIFE OF MRS. MARGARET GODOLPHIN. 
 
 16mo., Is. 
 
 FOOTPRINTS ON THE SANDS OF TIME. Biographies foe 
 
 Young People. Fcap., limp cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
ENGLISH DIVINES. 
 
 7 
 
 ISorh of the <^tandard fin^Iish Jitiiites, 
 
 PUBLISHED IN THE LIBBABY OF ANGLO-CATHOLIC THEOLOGY, 
 
 AT THE FOLLOWING PKICES IN CLOTH. 
 
 ANDEEWES’ (BP.) COMPLETE WOEKS. 11 vols., 8vo., £3 7s. 
 
 The Sekmons. (Separate.) 5 vols., £1 15s. 
 BEYEEIDGE’S (BP.) COMPLETE WOEKS. 12 vols., 8vo., £4 4s. 
 
 The English Theological Works. 10 vols., £3 10s. 
 BEAMHALL’S (ABP.) WOEKS, WITH LIFE AND LETTEES, &c. 
 
 5 vols., 8vo., £1 15s. (Vol. 2 cannot be sold separately.) 
 
 BULL’S (BP.) HAEMONT ON JUSTIFICATION. 2 vols., 8vo., 10s. 
 
 ^ DEFENCE OF THE NICENE CEEED. 2 vols., 10s. 
 
 JUDGMENT OF THE CATHOLIC CHUECH. 5s. 
 
 COSIN’S (BP.) WOEKS COMPLETE. 5 vols., 8vo., £1 10s. 
 CEAKANTHOEP’S DEFENSIO ECCLESI.^ ANGLICANiE, 
 
 8vo., 7s. 
 
 FEANK’S SEEMONS. 2 vols., 8vo., 10s. 
 
 FOEBES’ CONSIDEEATIONES MODESTH]. 2 vols., 8vo., 12s. 
 GUNNING’S PASCHAL, OE LENT FAST. 8vo., 6s. 
 HAMMOND’S PEACTICAL CATECHISM. 8vo., 5s. 
 
 MISCELLANEOUS THEOLOGICAL WOEKS. 5s. 
 
 THIETY-ONE SEEMONS. 2 Parts. 10s. 
 
 HICKES’S TWO TEEATISES ON THE CHEISTIAN PEIEST- 
 
 HOOD. 3 vols., 8vo., 15s. 
 
 JOHNSON’S (JOHN) THEOLOGICAL WOEKS. 2 vols., 8vo., lOs. 
 
 ENGLISH CANONS. 2 vols., 12s. 
 
 LAUD’S (ABP.) COMPLETE WOEKS. 7 vols., (9 Parts,) 8vo., 
 
 £2 17s. 
 
 L’ESTEANGE’S ALLIANCE OF DIYINE OFFICES. 8vo., 6s. 
 MAESHALL’S PENITENTIAL DISCIPLINE. (This volume 
 
 cannot be sold separate from the complete set.) 
 
 NICHOLSON’S (BP.) EXPOSITION OF THE CATECHISM. (This 
 
 volume cannot be sold separate from the complete set.) 
 
 OVEEALL’S (BP.) CONYOCATION-BOOK OF 1606. 8vo., 5s. 
 PEAESON’S (BP.) vindicih: EPISTOLAEUM S. IGNATII. 
 
 2 vols. 8vo., 10s. 
 
 THOENDIKE’S (HEEBEET) THEOLOGICAL WOEKS COM- 
 PLETE. 6 vols., (10 Parts,) 8vo., £2 10s. 
 
 WILSON’S (BP.) WOEKS COMPLETE. With LIFE, by the 
 
 late Rev, J. Keble. 7 vols., (8 Parts,) 8vo., £3 3s. 
 
 A complete set, 80 Vols. in 88 Parts, £21. 
 
POETRY, ^c. 
 
 THE AUTHORIZED EDITIONS OF 
 THE CHRISTIAN YEAR, 
 
 With the Author’s latest Corrections and Additions. 
 
 NOTICE.— Messrs. Parker are the sole Publishers of the Editions of the 
 “ Christian Year” issued with the sanction and under the direction of the 
 •Author’s representatives. All Editions without their imprint are unauthorized. 
 
 Small 4to. Edition s. 
 
 d. 
 
 32mo. Edition. 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 Handsomely printed on toned 
 
 
 Cloth boards, gilt edges . 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 paper, with red border lines 
 and initial letters. Cloth 
 
 
 Cloth, limp .... 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 extra . . . .10 
 
 6 
 
 48mo. Edition. 
 
 
 
 Demy 8vo. Edition. 
 
 
 Cloth, limp .... 
 Roan ..... 
 
 0 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 6 
 
 Cloth . , . . .6 
 
 Foolscap 8vo. Edition. 
 
 0 
 
 Facsimile of the 1st Edi- 
 
 
 
 
 tion, with a list of the 
 
 
 
 Cloth 3 
 
 24mo. Edition. 
 
 6 
 
 variations from the Origi- 
 nal Text which the Author 
 
 
 
 
 made in later Editions. 
 
 
 
 Cloth, red lines . . ,2 
 
 6 
 
 2 vols., 12mo., boards 
 
 7 
 
 6 
 
 The above Editions (except the Facsimile of the First Edition) are "kept in 
 a variety of bindings, which may be ordered through the Trade, or direct from 
 the Publishers. The chief bindings are Morocco plain, Morocco Antique, Calf 
 Antique, and Vellum, the prices vary ing according to the style. 
 
 By the same Author. 
 
 LYE. A IHTN’OCENTITJ^I. Thoughts in Terse on Christian Chil- 
 
 dren. Thirteenth Edition. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 24mo., cloth, red lines, 3s. 6d. 
 
 48mo. edition, limp cloth, 6d.j cloth boards. Is. 
 
 MISCELLAKEOUS POEIIS BY THE EEV. JOHH KEBLE, M.A., 
 
 Vicar of Hursley. [With Preface by G. M.] Third Edition. Fcap., cloth, 6s. 
 
 THE PSALTEE, OE PSALHS OE DAVID: In EngHsh Verse. 
 
 Fourth Edition. Fcap., cloth, 6s. 
 
 — 18mo., cloth, Is. 
 
 The above may also be had in various bindings. 
 
 A COHCOEDAHCE TO THE “ CHEISTIAH YEAE.” Fcap. 
 
 8vo., toned paper, cloth, 4s. 
 
 MUSIHGS OH THE “CHEISTIAH YEAE;” tvith GLEAHIHGS 
 
 FROM Thirty Years’ Intercourse with the late Rev. J. Keble, by CHAR- 
 LOTTE M. YONGE; to wldch are added Recollections of Hursley, by 
 FRANCES M. WILBR.\H AM. Second Edition. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 MEHOIE OF THE EEV. J. KEBLE, H.A. By Sir J. T. Cole- 
 ridge. Fourth and Cheaper Edition. Post 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 THE CHILD'S CHRISTIAN YEAR. Hymns for every Sunday 
 
 and Holyday throughout the Year. Cheap Edition. 18mo., cloth. Is. 
 
CHURCE POETRY, AND PAROCHIAL. 
 
 9 
 
 (Ctjurcij ^Poetrg, 
 
 Uniform Edition of Rev. iSAAC WILLIAMS' POEMS, 
 3'2mo., cloth, each 2s. 6d. 
 
 THE CATHEDEAL; or, The 
 
 Catholic and Apostolic Church in 
 England. Also Ecap. 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 THE BAPTISTEKY; or, The 
 
 Way of Eternal Life. Also Fcap. 
 8vo., with Plates by Boetius a Bols- 
 WERT, cloth, 7s. 6L 
 
 THE SEVEN DAYS OE THE 
 
 Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 THE CHEISTIAN SCHOLAE. 
 
 Also Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 HYMNS FKOM THE PAEISIAN 
 
 BREVIARY. 
 
 THOUGHTS IN PAST YEAES. 
 OLD AND NEW CEEATION. 
 
 CHEISTIAN BALLADS AND POEMS. By Akthtte Cleveland 
 
 CoxE, D.D., Bishop of Western New York. A New Edition, in Red and Black, 
 24mo., cl.. 2s. 6d. — Cheap Edit., Is. — Also selected Poems in a packet, 32mo., Is. 
 THE TEMPLE. Sacred Poems and Private Ejaculations. By 
 George Herbert. A New Edition, in Red and Black, 24mo., cloth, 2s. 6d. — 
 Cheap Edition, Is. 
 
 THE BELLS OF BOTTEYILLE TOWEE; A Christmas Story in 
 
 Verse: and other Poems. By Frederick G. Lee, Author of “ The Martyrs of 
 Vienne and Lyons,” “ Petronilla,” &c. Fcap. 8vo., with Illustrations, cloth, 4s. 6d. 
 
 HYMNS ON THE LITANY, by Ada Cambeidge. Fcap. 8vo., cl., 3s. 
 THE INNEE LIFE. Hymns on the “ Imitation of Christ,” by 
 Thomas A’Kempis. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 3s. 
 
 ParocljtaL 
 
 THE CONFIEMATION CLASS-BOOK: Notes for Lessons, with 
 
 Appendix, containing Questions and Summaries for the Use of the Candidates. 
 By E. M. Holmes, LL.B. Fcap. 8vo., limp cloth, 2s. 6d. 
 
 Also, The Questions and Summaries separate, 4 sets. Is. each. 
 
 THE CATECHIST’S MANUAL ; with an Introduction by the late 
 Samuel Wilberfoece, D.D., Lord Bishop of Winchester. By the same. 
 Sixth Thousomd, revised. Crown 8vo., limp cloth, 5s. 
 
 SUNDAY-SCHOOL EXEECISES, Collected and Eevised ifom 
 
 Manuscripts of Burghclere School-children, under the teaching of the Rev. W, 
 R. Barter, late Rector of Highclere and Burghclere; Edited by his Son-in-law, 
 the Bishop OF St. Andrew’s. Second Edition. Crown 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 A MANUAL OF PASTOEAL VISITATION, intended for the Use 
 
 of the Clergy in their Visitation of the Sick and Afflicted. By a Parish Priest. 
 Dedicated, by permission, to His Grace the Archbishop of Dublin. Second 
 Edition. Crown 8vo., limp cloth, 3s. 6d. ; roan, 4s. 
 
 SHOET HEADINGS FOE SUNDAY. By the Author of “Foot- 
 prints in the Wilderness.” With Twelve Illustrations on Wood. Third Thou- 
 sand. Square Crown 8vo., cloth, 3s, 6d. 
 
 FABER’S STORIES FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT. With Four 
 
 Illustrations. Square Crown 8vo., cloth, 4s. 
 
 A SERIES OF WALL PICTURES illustrating the New Testament. 
 
 The Set of 16 Pictures, size 22 inches by 19 inches, 12s. 
 
 COTTAGE PICTURES FROM THE OLD TESTAMENT. 
 
 A Series of Twenty-eight large folio Engravings, brilliantly coloured by hand. 
 The Set, 7s. 6d.— Also from THE NEW TESTAMENT. A Series of Twenty- 
 eight. Uniform. The Set, 7s. 6d. 
 
 Upwards of 8,000 Sets of these Cottage Pictures have been sold. 
 
 TWELVE SACRED PRINTS FOR PAROCHIAL USE. Printed 
 
 in Sepia, with Ornamental Borders. The Set, One Shilling; ox each. One Penny, 
 Upwards o/ 100,000 of these Prints have already been sold. 
 
10 
 
 UISCELLANEO US. 
 
 R. GODFREY FADSSETT, M.A. 
 
 THE SYMMETRY OE TIME : being an Outline of Biblical Chron- 
 ology adapted to a Continuous Succession of Weeks of Years. From the 
 Creation of Adam to the Exodus. By R. Godfeey Faussett, M.A., Student 
 of Clirist Church. Demy 4to., in wrapper, 10s. (Id. 
 
 THE ELEMENTS OF PSYCHOLOGY. 
 
 THE ELEMENTS OE PSYCHOLOGY, ON THE PRINCIPLES 
 
 OP BEN EKE, Stated and Illustrated in a Simple and Popular Manner by 
 De. G. Batje, Professor in the Medical College, Philadelphia ; fourth Edition, 
 considerably Altered, Improved, and Enlarged, by Johann Gottlieb Deess- 
 XEB, late Director of the Normal School at Bautzen. Translated from the 
 German. Post 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 REV. CANON GREGORY. 
 
 ARE AYE BETTER THAN OHR FATHERS ? or, A Comparative 
 
 View of the Social Position of England at the Revolution of 1688, and at the 
 Present Time. FOUR LECTURES delivered in St. Paul’s Cathedral. By 
 Robeet Geegoey, M.A., Cauon of St. Paul’s. Crown 8vo., 2s. 6d. 
 
 PROFESSOR GOLDWIN SMITH. 
 
 IRISH HISTORY AND IRISH CHARACTER. Cheap Edition. 
 
 Fcap. 8vo., sewed. Is. 6d. 
 
 LECTURES ON THE STUDY OP HISTORY. Delivered in 
 
 Oxford, 1859 — 61. Second Edition. Crown 8vo., limp cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 THE REORGANIZATION OE THE UNIA'ERSITY OE OXEORD. 
 
 By Goldwin S.mith. Post Svo., limp cloth, 2s. 
 
 THE EMPIPcE. A Series of Letters published in “ The Daily 
 
 News,” 1862, 1863. Post 8vo., cloth, price 6s. 
 
 MRS. ALGERNON KINGSFORD. 
 
 ROSAMUNDA THE PRINCESS : An Historical Romance of the 
 
 Sixth Century; the Crocus, Water reed. Rose and Marigold, Painter of 
 Venice, Noble Love, Romance of a Ring, and other Tales. By Mrs. Alger- 
 non Kingsford. 8vo., cloth, with Twenty-four Illustrations, 6s. 
 
 THE AUTHOR OF “CHARLES LOWDER,” “LIFE OF S. TERESA,” &c. 
 
 THE EXILE FROM PARADISE, translated by the Author of the 
 
 “ Life of S. Teresa.” Fcap., cloth, Is. 6d. 
 
 VILHELM THOMSEN. 
 
 THE RELATIONS BETALEEN ANCIENT RUSSIA AND SCAN- 
 
 DINAV 1 A, and the Origin of the Russian State. THREE LECTURES de- 
 livered at the Taylor Institution, Oxford, in May, 1876, by Dr. Vilhelm 
 Thomsen, Professor at the University of Copenhagen. Small 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 BERNARD BOSANQUET, M.A. 
 
 ATHENIAN CONSTITUTIONAL HISTORY, as Represented in 
 
 Grote’s “ History' of Greece,” critically' examined by G. F. Schomann: Trans- 
 lated, with the Author’s permission, by Bernard Bosanqult, M..4., Fellow 
 and Tutor of University College, Oxford. Svo. , cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 E. C. PHILLIPS. 
 
 THE ORPHANS. By E. C. PniLLirs. Author of “ Bunchy,” 
 “Birdie and her Dog,” “Hilda and her Doll,” “ Meyrick’s Promise,” Ac. 
 Third Edition, revised by the Author, with eight full-page Illustrations. 
 Square crown Svo., cloth, 4s. 
 
ARCEITECTURE AND ARCRASOLOOY. 
 
 11 
 
 REV. S. R. WIGRAM, M.A. 
 
 CHRONICLES OF THE AEBEY OE ELSTOW. By the Rev. 
 
 S. R. WiGRAM, M.A., of Balliol College, Oxford: with some NOTES ON THE 
 ARCHITECTURE OF THE CHURCH, by M. J. C. Buckley. 8vo., cloth, 
 with 14 Illustrations, 7s. 6d. 
 
 REV. J. C. BLOMFIELD, M.A. 
 
 HISTORY OE THE PRESENT DEANERY OE BICESTER, 
 
 OXON. Compiled by J. 0. Blomfield, M.A., Rector of Lauiiton, and Rural 
 Dean. Part I. 84 pp. Medium 4to., in wrapper, with Plans and Woodcuts, 5s. 
 
 SIR G G SCOTT ESA 
 
 GLEANINGS EROH WESTMINSTER ABBEY. By Sir George 
 
 Gilbert Scott, R.A., F.S.A. With Appendices supplying Further Particu- 
 lars, and completing the History of the Abbey Buildings, by the late William 
 Burges, and others. Second Edition, enlarged, containing many new Illustra- 
 tions by O. Jewitt. Medium 8vo., cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 THE LATE CHARLES "WINSTON. 
 
 AN INQUIRY INTO THE DIFFERENCE OE STYLE OBSERV- 
 ABLE IN ANCIENT GLASS PAINTINGS, especially in England, with 
 Hints on Glass Painting, by the late Charles Winston. With Corrections and 
 Additions by the Author. 2 vols.. Medium 8vo., cloth, jgl 11s. 6d. 
 
 M. VIOLLET-LE-DUC. 
 
 THE MILITARY ARCHITECTURE OE THE MIDDLE AGES. 
 
 Translated from the French of M. Viollet-le-Duc, by M. Macdermott, Esq., 
 Architect. With 151 original French Engravings. Second Edition, with a Pre- 
 face by J. H. Parker, C.B. Medium 8vo., cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 JOHN HEWITT. 
 
 ANCIENT ARMOUR AND WEAPONS IN EUROPE. By John 
 
 Hewitt. 3 vols., 8 vo., £1 11s. 6d. 
 
 THE BISHOP OF CHESTER. 
 
 THE TRACT “DE INVENTIONE SANCT^ CRUCIS NOSTRiE 
 IN MONTE ACUTO ET DE DUCTIONE EJUSDEM APUD WALT- 
 HAM,” now first printed from the Manuscript in the British Museum, with In- 
 troduction and Notes by William Stubbs, M.A. Royal 8vo., 5s. ; Demy 8vo., 
 3s. fid. 
 
 THE PRAYER-BOOK CALENDAR. 
 
 THE CALENDAR OF THE PRAYER-BOOK ILLUSTRATED. 
 
 (Comprising the first portion of the “Calendar of the Anglican Church,” with 
 additional Illustrations, an Appendix on Emblems, 8tc.) With Two Hundred 
 Engravings from Medieval Works of Art. Sixth Thousand. Fcap. 8vo., cl., 6s. 
 
 OUR ENGLISH HOME: 
 
 Its Early History and Progress. With Notes on the Introduction of 
 
 Domestic Inventions. New Edition. Crown 8vo., cloth, 3s. fid. 
 
 PARISH CHURCH GOODS IN A.D. 1552. 
 
 INVENTORIES OF FURNITURE and Ornaments remaining in 
 
 certain of the Parish Churches of Berks in the last year of the reign of King 
 Edward the Sixth : Transcribed from the Original Records, with Introduction and 
 Explanatory Notes by Walter Money, F.S.A. Crown 8vo., limp cloth, 3s. fid. 
 
 INVENTORY OF FURNITURE and Ornaments in HERTFORD- 
 SHIRE, in the last year of the Reign of Edward VI. By J. E. Cussans. 
 Crown 8vo., limp cloth, 4s. 
 
12 
 
 ARCHITECTURE AND ARCHMOLOQY. 
 
 JOHN HENRY PARKER, C.B., F.S.A., HON. M.A. OXON. 
 
 AN INTllODUCTION TO THE STUDY OE GOTHIC AECHI- 
 
 TECTURE. Sixth Edition, Revised and Enlarged, with 200 Illustrations, 
 with a Topographical and Glossarial Index. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 5s, 
 
 A CONCISE GLOSSAEY OF TERMS USED IN GRECIAN, 
 ROMAN, ITALIAN, AND GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE. A New 
 Edition, revised. Fcap. 8vo., with 470 Illustrations, in ornamental cloth, 7s. 6d. 
 
 A B C OF GOTHIC ARCHITECTURE. Third Edition, with 
 
 Index, square l6mo., with 200 Woodcuts, cloth, 3s. 
 
 “ Architectural History can only be understood by the eyes— either by seeing the buildings 
 themselves, or accurate representations of them arranged m chronological order : — this lattM' 
 has been attempted in the present work.” 
 
 AN ATTEMPT TO DISCRIMINATE THE STYLES OF AR- 
 CHITECTURE IN ENGLAND, from the Conquest to the Reformation; 
 with a Sketch of the Grecian and Roman Orders. By the late Thomas Rick- 
 man, F.S.A. Seventh Edition, with considerable Additions, chiefly Historical. 
 8vo., cloth, 1 6s. 
 
 DOMESTIC ARCHITECTURE OF THE MIDDLE AGES, FROM 
 
 THE CONQUEST TO HENRY VIII. By the late T. Hudson Turner 
 and John Henry Parker, C.B. Second Edition. 4 vols., 8vo., profusely 
 Illustrated with nearly 400 Wood and Steel Engravings, full General and Topo- 
 graphical Indices, &c., cloth, gilt top, £3 12s. 
 
 THE ARCHEOLOGY OF ROME. 
 
 AVith Plates, Plans, and Diagrams. 
 
 Part 1. PRIMITIA^E FORTmCATIONS. Second Edition, 8vo., 
 
 with 59 Plates, cloth, 21s. 
 
 Part 2. AVALLS AND GATES. Second Edition, 59 Plates, 8vo., 
 cloth, 21s. 
 
 Parts. CONSTRUCTION OF AN'ALLS. Second Edit., nearly ready. 
 
 Part 4. THE EGYPTIAN OBELISKS. Second Edition, 8 Plates, 
 8vo., cloth, 5s. 
 
 Part 5. THE FORUAI ROMANUM ET MAGNUM. Second Edit., 
 
 Revised and Enlarged, 41 Plates. 8vo., cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 Part 6. THE AHA SACRA, was originally published with Part 5; it 
 
 is now separated, and to the New Edition is .added a complete account of the 
 Excavations in Rome from a.d. 1485 to the Present Time. Second Edi- 
 tion, Revised and Enlarged, 35 Plates, 8vo., cloth, 12s. 
 
 Part 7. THE COLOSSEUM. 36 Plates, 8yo. Second Edit., in the Frees. 
 Part 8. THE AQUEDUCTS OF ANCIENT ROME. 21 Plates, 
 
 8vo., cloth, 15s. 
 
 Part 9. TOMBS IN AND NEAR ROME, and 10. FUNEREAL 
 
 AND EARLY CHRISTIAN SCULPTURE. 39 Plates, 8vo., cloth, 15s. 
 
 Part 11. CHURCH AND ALTAR DECORATIONS AND MOSAIC 
 
 PICTURES IN ROME. 20 Plates, 8vo., cloth, 10s. 6d. 
 
 Part 12. THE CATACOMBS OF ROME. 37 Plates, 8vo., cloth, 15s. 
 Part 13. EARLY AND MEDIEVAL CASTLES. Nearly ready. 
 Part 14. THE MEDI^A^AL CHURCHES. Nearly ready. 
 
 THE ARCHITECTURAL HISTORY OF THE CITY OF ROME, 
 
 abridged from Mr. Parker’s “ Archa“o'og}' of Rome.” For Students. Second 
 Edition. Post 8vo., cloth, with Plan of Rome, and 36 ]>p. of Illustrations, 6s. 
 
NEW AND STANDARD EDUCATIONAL WORKS. 
 
 13 
 
 THE ANNALS OF ENGLAND. An Epitome of English History. 
 
 From Cotemporary Writers, the Rolls of Parliament, and other Public Records, 
 A LIBRARY EDITION, revised and enlarged, with additional Woodcuts. 
 8vo., half-bound, 12s. 
 
 THE SCHOOL EDITION OF THE ANNALS OF ENGLAND. 
 
 In Five Half-crown Parts. 1. Britons, Romans, Saxons, Normans. 2. The 
 Plantagenets. 3. The Tudors. 4. The Stuarts. 5. The Restoration, to the 
 Death of Queen Anne. Fcap. 8vo., cloth. 
 
 THE NEW SCHOOL - HISTOEY OF ENGLAND, from Early 
 
 Writers and the National Records. By the Author of “ The Annals of England.” 
 , Crown 8vo., with Four Maps, limp cloth, 5s.; Coloured Maps, half roan, 6s. 
 
 A HISTOEY OF THE ENGLISH CHHECH from its Foundation 
 to the Reign of Queen Mary. By M. C. Staplet. Fourth Edition, revised. 
 Crown 8vo., cloth boards, 5s. 
 
 POETAEUM SCENICOEHM GE^COEUM, ^schyli, Sophoclis, 
 
 Euripidis, et Aristophanis, Fabulae, Superstites, et Perditarum Fragmenta. Ex 
 recognitione GUIL. DINDORFII. Editio Quinta. Royal 8vo., cloth, £I Is. 
 THUCYDIDES, with Notes, chiefly Historical and Geographical. 
 By the lateT. Arnold, D.D. With Indices by the late Rev. R. P. G. Tiddeman. 
 Eighth Edition. 3 vols., 8vo., cloth lettered, £1 16s. 
 
 JELF’S GEEEK GEAMMAE. — A Grammar of the Greek Language, 
 chiefly from the text of Raphael Kiihner. By Wm. Edw. Jelf, B.D. Fifth 
 Edition, with Additions and Corrections. 2 vols. 8vo., £l 10s. 
 
 MADVIG’S LATIN GEAMMAE. A Latin Grammar for the Use 
 
 of Schools. By Professor Madvig, with ad_ditions by the Author. Translated 
 by the Rev. G. Woods, M.A. New Edition, with an Index of Authors. 8vo., 
 cloth, 1 2s. . , 
 
 EEASMI COLLOQUIA SELECT A: Arranged for Translation and 
 
 Re-translation ; adapted for the Use of Boys who have begun the Latin Syntax. 
 By Edward C. Lowe, D.D., Canon of Ely, and Provost of the College of 
 SS. Mary and John, Lichfield. Fcap. 8vo., strong binding, 3s. 
 
 POETA LATINA : A Selection from Latin Authors, for Translation 
 
 and Re-Translation ; arranged in a Progressive Course, as an Introduction to 
 the Latin Tongue. By Edward C. Lowe, D.D., Editor of Erasmus' “Collo- 
 quies,” &c. Fcap. 8vo., strongly bound, 3s. 
 
 A GEAMMATICAL ANALYSIS OF THE HEBEEW PSALTEE; 
 
 being an Explanatory Interpretation of Every Word contained in the Book of 
 Psalms, intended chiefly for the Use of Beginners in the Study of Hebrew. By 
 .Toana Julia Greswell. Post 8vo., cloth, 6s. 
 
 A FIEST LOGIC BOOK, by D. P. Chase, M.A., Principal of 
 
 St. Mary Hall, Oxford. Small 4to., sewed, 3s. 
 
 NEW AND OLD METHODS OF ETHICS, by F. Y. Edgewoeth. 
 
 8vo. sewed, 2s. 
 
 Uniform with the Oxford Pocket Classics. 
 
 LAWS OF THE GEEEK ACCENTS. By John Griffiths, D.D., 
 
 late Warden of Wadham College, Oxford. Sixteenth Edition. 16mo., price 6d. 
 
 EUDIMENTAEY EULES, with Examples, for the Use of Beginners 
 in Greek Prose Composition. By Bishop Mitchixson, D.C.L., late Head Master 
 of the King’s School, Canterbury. l6mo., sewed. Is. 
 
 TWELVE EUDIMENTAEY EULES FOE LATIN PEOSE COM- 
 POSITION : with Examples and Exercises, for the use of Beginners. By the 
 Rev. E.MooEE,D.D.,Principalof St. Edmund Hall, Oxford. SecondEdit.l&w\o.,Qd. 
 
 THE ACCIDENCE or the GEEEK VEEB TAUGHT THEOUGH 
 
 INFLEXIONS AND ANALYSIS. By S. J. Hulme, M.A., formerly Fellow 
 and Tutor of Wadham College, Oxford; Rector of Bouiton - on-ilie -Water, 
 Gloucestershire. 126 pp. IGino., in wrapper. Is. 
 
14 
 
 OXFORD FOCKFT CLASSICS. 
 
 A SERIES OF GREEK AND LATIN CLASSICS 
 
 FOR THE USE OF SCHOOLS, 
 
 GREEK POETS. 
 
 
 Cloth. 
 
 
 Cloth. 
 
 
 s. d. 
 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 yEschylus .... 
 
 3 0 
 
 Sophocles ... 
 
 . 3 
 
 0 
 
 Aristophanes. 2 vols. . 
 
 6 0 
 
 Homeri Ilias 
 
 . 3 
 
 6 
 
 Euripides. 3 v.ols. 
 
 6 6 
 
 Odyssea 
 
 . 3 
 
 0 
 
 Tragoedioe Sex 
 
 3 6 
 
 
 
 
 GREEK 
 
 PROSE WRITERS. 
 
 
 
 Aristotelis Ethica 
 
 2 0 
 
 Thucydides. 2 vols. 
 
 . 5 
 
 0 
 
 Demosthenes de Corona, et \ 
 
 0 n 
 
 Xenophon tis Memorabilia 
 
 . 1 
 
 4 
 
 jEschines in Ctesii)hontem ) 
 
 
 Anabasis 
 
 . 2 
 
 0 
 
 Herodotus. 2 vols. 
 
 6 0 
 
 
 
 
 LATIN 
 
 POETS. 
 
 
 
 Horatius .... 
 
 2 0 
 
 Lucretius 
 
 . 2 
 
 0 
 
 Juvenalis et Persius 
 
 1 6 
 
 Phoedrus 
 
 . 1 
 
 4 
 
 Lucanus .... 
 
 2 6 
 
 Virgilius 
 
 , 2 
 
 6 
 
 LATIN PROSE WRITERS. 
 
 Csesaris Commentarii, cum Sup- 
 plementisAuliHirtii et aliorum 2 6 
 
 Commentarii de Bello 
 
 Gallico . . . .16 
 
 — de Bello Civili 1 G 
 
 Cicero De Officiis, de Senectute, 
 et de Amicitia . . .20 
 
 Ciceronis Tusc. Disp. Lib. V, 
 Ciceronis Orationes Selects . 
 Cornelius Nepos . 
 
 Livius. 4 vols. 
 
 Sallustius . . . . 
 
 Tacitus. 2 vols, . 
 
 2 0 
 3 6 
 
 1 4 
 6 0 
 
 2 0 
 5 0 
 
 TEXTS WITH SHORT NOTES. 
 
 UNIFORM WITH THE SERIES OF “OXFORD POCKET CLASSICS.” 
 
 GREEK WRITERS. TEXTS AND NOTES. 
 
 SOPHOCLES. 
 
 
 3, 
 
 d. 
 
 
 s. 
 
 d. 
 
 Ajax ( Text and Notes) 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Antigone (Text and Notes) 
 
 , 1 
 
 0 
 
 Electra ,, 
 
 . I 
 
 0 
 
 Philoctetes ,, 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 CEdipus Rex ,, 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Trachini.® ,, 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 (Edipus Coloneus „ 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 
 
 
 The Notes only, in 
 
 one Tol., cloth, 3s. 
 
 
 
 
 ^SCHYLUS. 
 
 
 
 Pers.® { Text and Notes) . 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Choephor^; (Text and Notes) 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Prometheus Yinctus „ 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Eumenides ,, 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Septem Contra Thebas ,, 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 SuFPLICES ,i 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 Agamemnon „ 
 
 . 1 
 
 0 
 
 
 
 
 The Notes only, in one vol., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 ARISTOPHANES. 
 
 The Knights (Teo-t and Xotes) 1 0 [ Achav.hiavs (Text and Notes) 1 0 
 
 The Birds (Text and Notes) 1 0 
 
gw 
 
 n:ew series of enolisr notes. 
 
 15 
 
 BCUBA {Tei't and Notes) 
 
 EDEA II 
 
 -Orestes h 
 
 Hippolytus II 
 
 EURIPIDES. 
 
 s. d. 
 
 . 1 0 
 . I 0 
 
 5. d. 
 
 Vn(S,tnssM {Text and Notes) . ! 0 
 
 Alcestis II .10 
 
 The above, Notes onlyi in one vol., cloth, 3s. 
 
 Bacch.® 
 
 1 0 
 
 DEMOSTHENES. 
 
 De Corona {Text and Notes) . 
 
 HOMERUS. 
 
 Ilias, Lib. i. — vi. {Text and 
 Notes) ..... 
 ^SCHINES. 
 
 In Ctesiphontem {Text and 
 Notes) .... 
 
 2 0 1 Oi.YNTHiAC Orations . .10 
 
 XENOPHON. 
 
 Memorabilia {Text and Notes) 
 
 2 0 ARISTOTLE. 
 
 De Arte Poetica {Text and 
 Notes) . clotli,2s. ; sewed 1 
 2 0 De Re Publica „ 3s. ,, 2 
 
 2 6 
 
 LATIN WKITERS. TEXTS AND NOTES. 
 
 VIRGILIUS. 
 
 JivcohicA {Text and Notes) . 1 0 j tEneidos, Lib. i. hi. {Text 
 
 Georgica II . 2 0 1 and Notes) . . .10 
 
 HORATIUS. 
 
 Q ARMi^ &c. {Text and Notes) 2 0 I Epistolte ET Ars Poetica ( Tea-t 
 
 Satire „ . 1 0 | and Notes) . . .10 
 
 The Notes only, in one vol., cloth, 2s. 
 
 SALLUSTIUS. 
 
 J UGVRJH A {Text and Notes) . 1 6 \ Catilin a {Text and Notes) . 1 0 
 
 M.T. CICERO. 
 
 In Q. C-ecilium — Divinatio 
 
 
 
 In Catilinam {Text and Notes) 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 {Text and Notes) 
 
 1 
 
 0 ' 
 
 Pro Plancio „ ,, 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 In Verrem Actio Prima ,, . 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 Pro Milone ,, ,, 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 Pro Lege Manilia, et Pro 
 
 
 
 Pro Roscio ,, ,, 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 Archia „ . 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 Orationes Philippic.®, I., II. ,, 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 The above. Notes only, in one vol., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 
 
 DcSENECTUTEetDE Amicitia ,, 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 Epistol® Select®. Pars I. ,, 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 C^SAR. 
 
 
 
 PHrEDRUS, 
 
 
 
 De Bello Gali.ico, Lib.i. — iii. 
 
 
 
 F abvlje {Text and Notes) 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 {Text and N otes) . 
 
 1 
 
 0 
 
 
 
 
 CORNELIUS NEPOS. 
 
 
 
 PLATO. 
 
 
 
 Lives {Text and Notes) 
 
 1 
 
 6 
 
 The Republic [Text and Notes) 
 
 
 
 LIVIUS. 
 
 
 
 [In the Press. 
 
 Lib. XXI. — xxiv.{Text and Notes) 
 
 
 
 TACITUS. 
 
 
 
 sewed ..... 
 
 4 
 
 0 
 
 The Annals. Notes only, 2vols., 
 
 
 
 Ditto in cloth .... 
 
 4 
 
 6 
 
 \6mo., cloth .... 
 
 7 
 
 0 
 
 Portions of several other Authors are in preparation. 
 
 Uniform loitTi the Oxford Pocket Classics, 
 
 THE LIVES OF THE MOST EMINENT ENGLISH POETS, 
 WITH CRITICAL OBSERVATIONS ON THEIR WORKS. By Sa- 
 muel Johnson. 3 vols., 24'nno., cloth, 2s. 6d. each. 
 
 THE LIVES OF DRYDEN AND POPE, with Critical Observations 
 
 on their Works. By Samuel Johnson. 24mo., cloth, Is. 6d. 
 
 THE SIX CHIEF LIVES OF THE POETS : MILTON, DRYDEN, 
 
 SWIFT, ADDISON, POPE, and GRAY. By S Johnson. 24mo„ cloth, 3s. 
 
 CHOICE EXTRACTS FROM MODERN FRENCH AUTHORS, 
 
 for the use of Schools. 18mo., cloth. Is. 
 
16 
 
 BOOKS RELATING TO OXFORD, Sfc. 
 
 SELECTIONS from the EECOEDS of the CITY OF OXFOED, 
 
 with Extracts from other Documents illustrating the Municipal History: 
 Henry VIII. to Elizabeth [1509 — 1583]. Edited, by authority of the Cor- 
 poration of the City of Oxford, by the late William H. Turner, of the 
 Bodleian Library; under the direction of Robert S. Hawkins, late Town 
 Clerk. Royal 8vo., cloth, £1 Is. 
 
 A HANDBOOK FOE VISITOES TO OXFOED. Illustrated with 
 
 numerous Woodcuts by Jewitt, and Steel Plates by Le Keux. A New Edition, 
 8 VO., cloth, 12s. 
 
 THE VISITOR’S GUIDE TO OXFORD. With 110 lUustrations 
 
 and a coloured Plan. Post 8vo., in ornamental wrapper. Is. 
 
 THE OXFOED TEN-YEAR BOOK: A Complete Register of Uni- 
 versity Honours and Distinctions, made up to the end of the Year 1870. 
 Crown 8vo., roan, 5s. 
 
 WYKEHAMICA : a History of 'Winchester College and Commoners, 
 
 from the Foundation to the Present Day. By the Rev. H. C. ADAMS, M.A., 
 late Fellow of Magdalen College, Oxford. Post 8vo., cloth, 508 pp., with 
 Nineteen Illustrations, 10s. 6d. 
 
 HISTORICAL TALES 
 
 Illustrating the Chief Events in Ecclesiastical History, British and Foreign, 
 
 29 Numbers at One Shilling each, limp cloth ; or arranged in 
 Six Volumes, cloth lettered, 3s. 6d. each. 
 
 ADDITIONAL VOLUMES TO THE SERIES. 
 
 ENGL.\ND : Mediaval Period. Containing The Orphan of Evesham, or The 
 Jews and the Mendicant Orders. — Mark’s Wedding, or Lollardy. — The White 
 Rose of Lynden, or The Monks and the Bible. — The Prior’s Ward, or The 
 Broken Unity of the Church. By the Rev. H. C. Adams, Vicar of Dry Sand- 
 ford; Author of “ Wilton of Cuthbert’s,” “Schoolboy Honour,’’ &c. With Four 
 Illustrations on Wood. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 THE ANDREDS-WEALD, or THE HOUSE OF MICHELHAM : A Tale of 
 the Norman Conquest. By the Rev. A. D. Crake, B.A., Fellow of the Royal 
 Historical Society ; Author of “ jEmilius,” “ Alfgar the Dane,’’ &c. With Four 
 Illustrations by Louisa Taylor. Fcap. 8vo., cloth, 3s. 6d. 
 
 CHEAPER ISSUE OE TALES FOR YOUNG MEN 
 AND M'OMEN. 
 
 In Six Half-crown Vols., cloth. 
 
 Vol. I. contains F. E. Paget’s Mother and Son, Wanted a W’ife, and Hobson’s 
 Choice. 
 
 Vol. II. F. E. Paget’s Windycote Hall, Squitch, Tenants at Tinkers’ End. 
 
 Vol. III. W. E. Heygate’s Two Cottages, The Sisters, and Old Jarvis’s Will. 
 Vol. IV. W. E. Heygate’s James Bright the Shopman, The Politician, Ir- 
 revocable. 
 
 Vol. V. R. King’s The Strike, and Jonas Clint; N. Brown’s Two to One, and 
 False Honour. 
 
 Vol. VI. J. M. Neale’s Railway Accident ; E. Monro’s The Recruit, Susan, 
 Servants’ Influence, Mary Thomas, or Dissent at Evenly ; H. Hayman’s Caroline 
 Elton, or Vanity and Jealousy. 
 
 Each Yolume is hound as a distinct and complete worTc, and sold 
 separately for Presents. 
 
GETTY CENTER LIBRARY 
 
 3 3125 00750 9769